Except 1. No, and 2. The Mac is over 10 percent of the market (over 15 in the US and western countries). It's not 1999 anymore.
Not true.
According to IDC and Gartner, Mac computer sales (not including iPad, but your post states "The Mac") account for either 10% of the US market (IDC) or 11.6% (Gartner).
Globally, Apple isn't in the top 5 of PC vendors and has a marketshare of around 5-6%.
Of course, Apple might have 15% market share in other countries - I'd suspect Denmark and Norway might be around 15% apple, but i'm not too sure, and there don't appear to be statistics on those countries available online.
1. I see the example of a superior device selling less units than an average device was lost on you.
2. Who said anything about iOS, Mac, Blackberry, or Apple?
Yeah I got your "logic". And who said anything about iOS, Mac, Blackberry or Apple. I did. If you are looking for the motoring forum, you are in the wrong place.
Ferrari are crap because they sold less units than Ford.
Except that Ferraris aren't superior products. They're just expensive, not better. Motorweek said the 458 Italia was the first Ferrari they've ever tested that didn't have interior bits falling off during the test and fit and finish problems abound. That's superior? Ford GT had no such problems and outran the Ferrari 430, which was its competition at the time, for less money. Besides, they're not practical at all. But I digress...
I will say that despite my needs for a larger screen, I'll be probably upgrading to the iPhone 5 soon. I was waiting for a possible June launch but apparently it was in vane... It's just a better phone all around. I had 2 coworkers messing with their Samsung Galaxies, one trying to help the other figure it out and get something working. I showed them how simple the iPhone was compared to the Android phones and they were astonished. Nothing is hidden. Nothing is hard to get to. It's all right there for you.
Except that Ferraris aren't superior products. They're just expensive, not better. Motorweek said the 458 Italia was the first Ferrari they've ever tested that didn't have interior bits falling off during the test and fit and finish problems abound. That's superior? Ford GT had no such problems and outran the Ferrari 430, which was its competition at the time, for less money. Besides, they're not practical at all. But I digress...
I will say that despite my needs for a larger screen, I'll be probably upgrading to the iPhone 5 soon. I was waiting for a possible June launch but apparently it was in vane... It's just a better phone all around. I had 2 coworkers messing with their Samsung Galaxies, one trying to help the other figure it out and get something working. I showed them how simple the iPhone was compared to the Android phones and they were astonished. Nothing is hidden. Nothing is hard to get to. It's all right there for you.
And all that does not change the fact that a 5" iphone with the same quality would be better for browsing gaming videos reading etc, the things people do more and more.
Apple thinks people will buy an iPad for that, but guess what... for millions a galaxy note is sufficient.
Can we agree that if the goal is iOS dominance for the next few years apple needs another iphone line with a bigger screen and/or a cheaper device? So 3 iphone models max.
Can we agree that if the goal is iOS dominance for the next few years apple needs another iphone line with a bigger screen and/or a cheaper device? So 3 iphone models max.
Why would Apple would use likely inaccurate or invalid analyses in their conference calls? Obviously, if they're using this source in their own conference calls, they believe it's generally accurate/valid.
Do they have any other choice? If all that is available is something like IDC, what should they do? (Oppenheimer has complained about the paucity of good data on volumes in prior conference calls.)
Apple is doomed, because 28,283 phones from 200 companies cumulatively have managed to get more combined global marketshare than a single phone line from a single company.
I like how the only way to try and make iPhone look bad is not to compare it to any other phone- but to compare it to all other phones combined. Apple has an insane marketshare considering they release exactly ONE new phone a year.
In any case, it does not take fancy methodology to tell that Apple's market share is dropping: they are guiding top line down in a growing market, while not (as far as I know) drastically dropping prices.
This is a fair point.
It still begs the question of why none of these other guys provide channel data or volume data if their sales volumes and market shares are growing and as high as people say. Samsung used to report it, but not any more. In addition, this share data is inconsistent with other collateral data (e.g., web shares, app revenues, ad impressions).
The combination of these factors makes me quite suspicious.
I am willing to concede that I could be wrong, but I'd need to see actual data, not estimates (conflated with actuals).
The iPhone has become a bit boring. There hasn't been a significant (in terms of looks) redesign since the iPhone 4. iOS is looking dated, it's not that it lacks features but it's a dated mess style wise.
I dare you to say that about your wife's/girlfriend's/significant other's looks.
It still begs the question of why none of these other guys provide channel data or volume data if their sales volumes and market shares are growing and as high as people say. Samsung used to report it, but not any more. In addition, this share data is inconsistent with other collateral data (e.g., web shares, app revenues, ad impressions).
The combination of these factors makes me quite suspicious.
I am willing to concede that I could be wrong, but I'd need to see actual data, not estimates (conflated with actuals).
...because "Android" consists primarily of cheap low end phones, in spite of all the rubbish about Apple having to "keep up" with the Android high end.
People have short memories, iPhones have always been "behind" Android phones for a variety of reasons (SD cards, micro USB, screen resolution, "openness", customisation, etc) which has been the relentless and remorseless story pounded into blogs all over the Internet for years.
These arguments are childish. Peter Openheimer referenced IDC in the conference call when he argued that Apple with a small decline in Macs outpaced the market which had a 14% yoy decline according to IDC.
Deal with the stats.
Now what should be done? Answer - a cheaper iPhone.
These arguments are childish. Peter Openheimer referenced IDC in the conference call when he argued that Apple with a small decline in Macs outpaced the market which had a 14% yoy decline according to IDC.
Deal with the stats.
Now what should be done? Answer - a cheaper iPhone.
There are no 'stats' to deal with. Just guesses (for all non-Apple products) confounded with actuals (for Apple).
If anything is childish, it's the way they produce their data. They should at least try to be consistent and provide estimated numbers for all (with a transparent methodology). Otherwise it's not terribly believable. Not that there's a law against believing it.
You kids and your wacky definitions for words that have absolutely no reflection on reality.
No, making one-word insulting comments without any justification whatever, and whose only purpose is to bully people is heckling. Reasoned disagreeing is just that.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Except 1. No, and 2. The Mac is over 10 percent of the market (over 15 in the US and western countries). It's not 1999 anymore.
Not true.
According to IDC and Gartner, Mac computer sales (not including iPad, but your post states "The Mac") account for either 10% of the US market (IDC) or 11.6% (Gartner).
Globally, Apple isn't in the top 5 of PC vendors and has a marketshare of around 5-6%.
Of course, Apple might have 15% market share in other countries - I'd suspect Denmark and Norway might be around 15% apple, but i'm not too sure, and there don't appear to be statistics on those countries available online.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR
1. I see the example of a superior device selling less units than an average device was lost on you.
2. Who said anything about iOS, Mac, Blackberry, or Apple?
Yeah I got your "logic". And who said anything about iOS, Mac, Blackberry or Apple. I did. If you are looking for the motoring forum, you are in the wrong place.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR
This just in:
Ferrari are crap because they sold less units than Ford.
Except that Ferraris aren't superior products. They're just expensive, not better. Motorweek said the 458 Italia was the first Ferrari they've ever tested that didn't have interior bits falling off during the test and fit and finish problems abound. That's superior? Ford GT had no such problems and outran the Ferrari 430, which was its competition at the time, for less money. Besides, they're not practical at all. But I digress...
I will say that despite my needs for a larger screen, I'll be probably upgrading to the iPhone 5 soon. I was waiting for a possible June launch but apparently it was in vane... It's just a better phone all around. I had 2 coworkers messing with their Samsung Galaxies, one trying to help the other figure it out and get something working. I showed them how simple the iPhone was compared to the Android phones and they were astonished. Nothing is hidden. Nothing is hard to get to. It's all right there for you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruel24
Except that Ferraris aren't superior products. They're just expensive, not better. Motorweek said the 458 Italia was the first Ferrari they've ever tested that didn't have interior bits falling off during the test and fit and finish problems abound. That's superior? Ford GT had no such problems and outran the Ferrari 430, which was its competition at the time, for less money. Besides, they're not practical at all. But I digress...
I will say that despite my needs for a larger screen, I'll be probably upgrading to the iPhone 5 soon. I was waiting for a possible June launch but apparently it was in vane... It's just a better phone all around. I had 2 coworkers messing with their Samsung Galaxies, one trying to help the other figure it out and get something working. I showed them how simple the iPhone was compared to the Android phones and they were astonished. Nothing is hidden. Nothing is hard to get to. It's all right there for you.
And all that does not change the fact that a 5" iphone with the same quality would be better for browsing gaming videos reading etc, the things people do more and more.
Apple thinks people will buy an iPad for that, but guess what... for millions a galaxy note is sufficient.
Can we agree that if the goal is iOS dominance for the next few years apple needs another iphone line with a bigger screen and/or a cheaper device? So 3 iphone models max.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pedromartins
Can we agree that if the goal is iOS dominance for the next few years apple needs another iphone line with a bigger screen and/or a cheaper device? So 3 iphone models max.
at least
Do they have any other choice? If all that is available is something like IDC, what should they do? (Oppenheimer has complained about the paucity of good data on volumes in prior conference calls.)
I like how the only way to try and make iPhone look bad is not to compare it to any other phone- but to compare it to all other phones combined. Apple has an insane marketshare considering they release exactly ONE new phone a year.
This is a fair point.
It still begs the question of why none of these other guys provide channel data or volume data if their sales volumes and market shares are growing and as high as people say. Samsung used to report it, but not any more. In addition, this share data is inconsistent with other collateral data (e.g., web shares, app revenues, ad impressions).
The combination of these factors makes me quite suspicious.
I am willing to concede that I could be wrong, but I'd need to see actual data, not estimates (conflated with actuals).
Originally Posted by pedromartins
Can we agree that if the goal is iOS dominance for the next few years apple needs another iphone line with a bigger screen and/or a cheaper device?
Not in the slightest.
I dare you to say that about your wife's/girlfriend's/significant other's looks.
So does AppleInsider Staff.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
I dare you to say that about your wife's/girlfriend's/significant other's looks.
Why, do you know her?
I'm sure Wall Street wasn't whining about anything 'jobsian' when they were making easy money off the AAPL cash machine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
This is a fair point.
It still begs the question of why none of these other guys provide channel data or volume data if their sales volumes and market shares are growing and as high as people say. Samsung used to report it, but not any more. In addition, this share data is inconsistent with other collateral data (e.g., web shares, app revenues, ad impressions).
The combination of these factors makes me quite suspicious.
I am willing to concede that I could be wrong, but I'd need to see actual data, not estimates (conflated with actuals).
...because "Android" consists primarily of cheap low end phones, in spite of all the rubbish about Apple having to "keep up" with the Android high end.
People have short memories, iPhones have always been "behind" Android phones for a variety of reasons (SD cards, micro USB, screen resolution, "openness", customisation, etc) which has been the relentless and remorseless story pounded into blogs all over the Internet for years.
This forum would run better if moderators actually made arguments rather than heckles.
Deal with the stats.
Now what should be done? Answer - a cheaper iPhone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd
These arguments are childish. Peter Openheimer referenced IDC in the conference call when he argued that Apple with a small decline in Macs outpaced the market which had a 14% yoy decline according to IDC.
Deal with the stats.
Now what should be done? Answer - a cheaper iPhone.
There are no 'stats' to deal with. Just guesses (for all non-Apple products) confounded with actuals (for Apple).
If anything is childish, it's the way they produce their data. They should at least try to be consistent and provide estimated numbers for all (with a transparent methodology). Otherwise it's not terribly believable. Not that there's a law against believing it.
Originally Posted by asdasd
This forum would run better if moderators actually made arguments rather than heckles.
Note to self: disagreeing = heckling.
You kids and your wacky definitions for words that have absolutely no reflection on reality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Note to self: disagreeing = heckling.
You kids and your wacky definitions for words that have absolutely no reflection on reality.
No, making one-word insulting comments without any justification whatever, and whose only purpose is to bully people is heckling. Reasoned disagreeing is just that.