Yep, no other visual medium affords you the ability to show the world your talents and get called a "gaywad" by a twelve year old.
The flipside of that is me watching videos by 12 year olds on how to do specific things in Xcode/iOS. My self-confidence isn't helped by getting assistance kids whose voices haven't yet cracked.
The flipside of that is me watching videos by 12 year olds on how to do specific things in Xcode/iOS. My self-confidence isn't helped by getting assistance kids whose voices haven't yet cracked.
Didn't Apple bring a kid up on stage once to demo how easy it was to code in a language they'd created? Maybe that was NeXT…
I am not even going to bother reading the article because the title doesn't make sense at all - You cannot buy "iOS" just like you cannot buy "Andriod OS" - But, yes you can buy Window OS. So, please go fix your title and possibly your article also, as I bet it is comparing Apple and Oranges.
"Apple is losing market share worldwide and sales (numbers) are not growing at the pace of others. "
it's usual business for Apple.
-
anyway, the new Windows is Android. Same business, Same road, Same boring stuff.
In a way you are correct, but you have to factor that not all versions of Android are equal as they all get modified to a certain degree so Samsung's version of Android is different than HTC's versions. Plus, both Windows and Android are probably fragmented whereas Apple is less fragmented as to which version is actually used. Apple gets their user base up to the latest version MUCH faster than both Windows and Android. I guess since Android is the King of malware for mobile OSs, and Windows was/is the King of malware for a desktop OS, they share that same ability. Plus Android is OEM'd OS whereas iOS isn't. The thing is, Apple is STILL opening up new markets, they JUST started shipping to T-Mobile customers, so that's going to represent an increase in customer base, they plan on opening up US Cellular, which should open up another few million users. They STILL have to sign on China Mobile which will represent hundreds of millions of users over the span of a few years. So, Apple hasn't opened up all of the markets that Android has. So, Apple does have a lot of growth potential in the next few years just by signing more carriers.
Either way, Apple just needs to get some added features and enhancements. Once Apple gets a larger screen size going and figures out how they want to approach the lower end market, they'll do just fine, even if they don't own 93% market share. Apple still has lots of stuff planned to keep them healthy with a substantial market share.
1. No one but Apple has made money selling iDevices.
2. As for Android not being profitable, I didn't realize that charity was such a strong motivating factor for hardware companies. My opinion of human nature is increased.
Android is free.
Other companies are trying to make money with android but they're failing.
Silly of you to take my comment arguing for a more affordable iPhone as "cheap" as in low quality. You know exactly what I meant so why not rebut my actual point instead of debating a straw man that doesn't exist Apple can make a more affordable iPhone without making a "cheap" low quality version and still make a nice profit. Better to make a slightly lower profit margin than lose the customer to another company completely. Cheaper doesn't mean cheap and Apple are perfectly capable of making a high quality lower priced iPhone and still make a nice profit. Besides which the existence of products like the Mac Mini, Nano, and Shuffle prove your assertion is just factually wrong.
How can Apple make a low cost iPhone without sacrificing the "iPhone"?
Mac mini doesn't come with anything. Does Apple want an iPhone with no screen?
Mini and nano are smaller iPods. How can you shrink the iPhone? Might as well use the 4.
Shuffle has no screen and limited functionality. Definitely not the way for the iPhone.
I am not even going to bother reading the article because the title doesn't make sense at all - You cannot buy "iOS" just like you cannot buy "Andriod OS" - But, yes you can buy Window OS. So, please go fix your title and possibly your article also, as I bet it is comparing Apple and Oranges.
Well if you don't read it, how can you complain about it?
iOS will never reach the sort of ubiquity that Windows represents because Apple does not license iOS. Because of this, the platform is limited by the form factors that Apple feels are in its best interest to produce. In pure numbers Apple will be overwhelmed by Android. Android holds something like 70% of the smartphone market. Apple is more profitable, and will continue to thrive, but it ain't no monopoly.
Android went from about 53% market share q4 2011 to 70% market share q4 2012. Huge growth.
"Android boasted a broad selection of smartphones, and an equally deep list of smartphone vendor partners. Finding an Android smartphone for nearly any budget, taste, size, and price was all but guaranteed during 2012. As a result, Android was rewarded with market-beating growth."
Apple has a great product, no doubt, but one company simply can not hit as many price points and form factors as the combined might of the entire rest of the industry.
This is why comparing iOS to Windows is way off the mark. Clueless consumers will tend to buy Android phones because there are simply more of them, and they are (and probably will continue to be) cheaper than the iPhone. This is especially true now with the trend towards pre-paid service, because the true cost of the phone is becoming more obvious.
The Mac/PC era is over. It has been replaced by the cloud era. Operating systems are becoming less important because everything is now expected to inter-operate via the internet.
So, if the internet is like a highway, in that it gives access to information, and operating systems/platforms are like cars, then Apple is perhaps like BMW or maybe Acura. High quality, very successful, not going anywhere. Not a monopoly.
Apple's share of the tablet market slipped from just under 60% to just under 40% between 2011 and 2012. This is mostly because Android tablets that people actually want to use are finally coming to market. And again there are many different form factors, price points and "methods of monetization" being explored by all of Apple's competitors. For example, the Kindle Fire, which is essentially an Android tablet, is sold at a loss with the expectation that Amazon will make money on media sales. There are also a ton of "white box" no-name brand Android tablets hitting the markets from China.
In the end, the OS doesn't really matter. No one is making money from sales of Android or of iOS. Hardware manufacturers (which Apple very much is) make money from selling hardware. The only concern would be if iOS became such a minor player that developers stopped writing apps for it. This is highly unlikely because there's a huge installed base, and the existence cross-platform app frameworks based on web technology.
Linux "occupies every form and price range under the sun" but did not ever become as "dominant or as ubiquitous as Windows."
The thing is tho, Linux is useful for specific tasks where you want flexibility you hand craft (servers, dedicated devices) and you don't want to pay for somebody else's integration. Linux hasn't become very popular on PCs because the integration work Microsoft did was more valuable than the ~$15 it charged OEMs.
In smartphones, the integration work Apple does is generating far greater profits. That model is also supporting Mac sales, which are holding up a lot better than Windows PCs and not losing any ground to Linux. In fact, if you want to do Linuxy things, you can buy a Mac and use the command line for your technical needs, then return to a well mannered desktop to run apps and games. Once that became a reality, the Linux PC market essentially disappeared. Nobody want to fiddle with a desktop PC, and certainly not a notebook, running DIY software.
In mobile devices, Apple's integration is even more valuable. Android offers very little price competition on comparable hardware to end users, and to licensees, the additional fees paid patent holders who own the IP Google casually appropriated means that using Android isn't free at all.
If Linux couldn't gain traction on the PC where it offered a significant savings over paying Microsoft for Windows, how is Android going suddenly start allowing OEMs to make any profits now that its more expensive than ever?
Also, do a mental comparison between the profitability of generic PC makers selling against the Mac and generic phone makers selling against the iPhone and iPad.
Furthermore android can easily be forked so the android found in many devices may not be the one developed by google.
I believe in time to come those who forked android will continued to improve their branch for their devices.
Apple's share of the tablet market slipped from just under 60% to just under 40% between 2011 and 2012. This is mostly because there are so many Android tablets finally coming to market.
The analogy is false. The Windows platform always meant cut-throat competition both for hardware and for software. Hardware and software vendors had to struggle to make a profit, while users got a large number of hardware and software offerings to choose from. For better or worse, Android is clearly the new Windows.
Recent research shows the Android platform already has more download potential for developers and revenue is I think less but also catching up. The revenue element is obviously most important, but that will very likely exceed the iOS platform by next year.
Android users spend very little money on apps, compared to iOS users. Furthermore, the high number (over 1000) of Android display sizes, DPIs, and H to W ratios make for some ugly-looking apps. If that's not enough the developers have to write for an OS that's a couple years old since a huge portion of the available users are not able to upgrade their OS. Finally, now we learn that Samsung's prime new phone has a terrible limit on RAM for storing apps. No matter how you slice it, the Android platform is not attractive to developers.
The analogy is false. The Windows platform always meant cut-throat competition both for hardware and for software. Hardware and software vendors had to struggle to make a profit, while users got a large number of hardware and software offerings to choose from. For better or worse, Android is clearly the new Windows.
Competition on the App Store is pretty fierce isn't it?
Android went from about 53% market share q4 2011 to 70% market share q4 2012. Huge growth.
"Android boasted a broad selection of smartphones, and an equally deep list of smartphone vendor partners. Finding an Android smartphone for nearly any budget, taste, size, and price was all but guaranteed during 2012. As a result, Android was rewarded with market-beating growth."
Apple has a great product, no doubt, but one company simply can not hit as many price points and form factors as the combined might of the entire rest of the industry.
This is why comparing iOS to Windows is way off the mark. Clueless consumers will tend to buy Android phones because there are simply more of them, and they are (and probably will continue to be) cheaper than the iPhone. This is especially true now with the trend towards pre-paid service, because the true cost of the phone is becoming more obvious.
The Mac/PC era is over. It has been replaced by the cloud era. Operating systems are becoming less important because everything is now expected to inter-operate via the internet.
So, if the internet is like a highway, in that it gives access to information, and operating systems/platforms are like cars, then Apple is perhaps like BMW or maybe Acura. High quality, very successful, not going anywhere. Not a monopoly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by graxspoo
You were probably thinking of "tablet" market share. Apple's share is actually slipping.
Apple's share of the tablet market slipped from just under 60% to just under 40% between 2011 and 2012. This is mostly because Android tablets that people actually want to use are finally coming to market. And again there are many different form factors, price points and "methods of monetization" being explored by all of Apple's competitors. For example, the Kindle Fire, which is essentially an Android tablet, is sold at a loss with the expectation that Amazon will make money on media sales. There are also a ton of "white box" no-name brand Android tablets hitting the markets from China.
In the end, the OS doesn't really matter. No one is making money from sales of Android or of iOS. Hardware manufacturers (which Apple very much is) make money from selling hardware. The only concern would be if iOS became such a minor player that developers stopped writing apps for it. This is highly unlikely because there's a huge installed base, and the existence cross-platform app frameworks based on web technology.
You made so many false assertions that I won't even try to refute them.
I think of Android being like Windows in that it is hard to do things on it. Even finding an app that runs well on the hardware of choice is no fun. And then there's that malware that often comes free with most purchases... just like Windows.
Also, the more you know about how Apple analyzes business opportunities and technologies, the less impress you are by startups and rival companies that pop up for a minute with a good idea and then fall apart before they can implement it.
Many of those startup stay around just long enough for Google to waste some tens of millions buying them up. :-)
Comments
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
There are a comments section and it's easier for the content owner to judge how the viewer reacts…
Yep, no other visual medium affords you the ability to show the world your talents and get called a "gaywad" by a twelve year old.
The flipside of that is me watching videos by 12 year olds on how to do specific things in Xcode/iOS. My self-confidence isn't helped by getting assistance kids whose voices haven't yet cracked.
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
The flipside of that is me watching videos by 12 year olds on how to do specific things in Xcode/iOS. My self-confidence isn't helped by getting assistance kids whose voices haven't yet cracked.
Didn't Apple bring a kid up on stage once to demo how easy it was to code in a language they'd created? Maybe that was NeXT…
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
for Microsoft. BAZINGA
Quote:
Originally Posted by oomu
"Apple is losing market share worldwide and sales (numbers) are not growing at the pace of others. "
it's usual business for Apple.
-
anyway, the new Windows is Android. Same business, Same road, Same boring stuff.
In a way you are correct, but you have to factor that not all versions of Android are equal as they all get modified to a certain degree so Samsung's version of Android is different than HTC's versions. Plus, both Windows and Android are probably fragmented whereas Apple is less fragmented as to which version is actually used. Apple gets their user base up to the latest version MUCH faster than both Windows and Android. I guess since Android is the King of malware for mobile OSs, and Windows was/is the King of malware for a desktop OS, they share that same ability. Plus Android is OEM'd OS whereas iOS isn't. The thing is, Apple is STILL opening up new markets, they JUST started shipping to T-Mobile customers, so that's going to represent an increase in customer base, they plan on opening up US Cellular, which should open up another few million users. They STILL have to sign on China Mobile which will represent hundreds of millions of users over the span of a few years. So, Apple hasn't opened up all of the markets that Android has. So, Apple does have a lot of growth potential in the next few years just by signing more carriers.
Either way, Apple just needs to get some added features and enhancements. Once Apple gets a larger screen size going and figures out how they want to approach the lower end market, they'll do just fine, even if they don't own 93% market share. Apple still has lots of stuff planned to keep them healthy with a substantial market share.
Other companies are trying to make money with android but they're failing.
How can Apple make a low cost iPhone without sacrificing the "iPhone"?
Mac mini doesn't come with anything. Does Apple want an iPhone with no screen?
Mini and nano are smaller iPods. How can you shrink the iPhone? Might as well use the 4.
Shuffle has no screen and limited functionality. Definitely not the way for the iPhone.
Well if you don't read it, how can you complain about it?
Originally Posted by graxspoo
Android holds something like 70% of the smartphone market.
I thought Apple had 40 and climbing.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-57569402-94/android-ios-combine-for-91-percent-of-market/
Android went from about 53% market share q4 2011 to 70% market share q4 2012. Huge growth.
"Android boasted a broad selection of smartphones, and an equally deep list of smartphone vendor partners. Finding an Android smartphone for nearly any budget, taste, size, and price was all but guaranteed during 2012. As a result, Android was rewarded with market-beating growth."
Apple has a great product, no doubt, but one company simply can not hit as many price points and form factors as the combined might of the entire rest of the industry.
This is why comparing iOS to Windows is way off the mark. Clueless consumers will tend to buy Android phones because there are simply more of them, and they are (and probably will continue to be) cheaper than the iPhone. This is especially true now with the trend towards pre-paid service, because the true cost of the phone is becoming more obvious.
The Mac/PC era is over. It has been replaced by the cloud era. Operating systems are becoming less important because everything is now expected to inter-operate via the internet.
So, if the internet is like a highway, in that it gives access to information, and operating systems/platforms are like cars, then Apple is perhaps like BMW or maybe Acura. High quality, very successful, not going anywhere. Not a monopoly.
You were probably thinking of "tablet" market share. Apple's share is actually slipping.
http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS24093213
Apple's share of the tablet market slipped from just under 60% to just under 40% between 2011 and 2012. This is mostly because Android tablets that people actually want to use are finally coming to market. And again there are many different form factors, price points and "methods of monetization" being explored by all of Apple's competitors. For example, the Kindle Fire, which is essentially an Android tablet, is sold at a loss with the expectation that Amazon will make money on media sales. There are also a ton of "white box" no-name brand Android tablets hitting the markets from China.
In the end, the OS doesn't really matter. No one is making money from sales of Android or of iOS. Hardware manufacturers (which Apple very much is) make money from selling hardware. The only concern would be if iOS became such a minor player that developers stopped writing apps for it. This is highly unlikely because there's a huge installed base, and the existence cross-platform app frameworks based on web technology.
Furthermore android can easily be forked so the android found in many devices may not be the one developed by google.
I believe in time to come those who forked android will continued to improve their branch for their devices.
Quote:
Originally Posted by graxspoo
You were probably thinking of "tablet" market share. Apple's share is actually slipping.
http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS24093213
Apple's share of the tablet market slipped from just under 60% to just under 40% between 2011 and 2012. This is mostly because there are so many Android tablets finally coming to market.
Fixed that for you...
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredD
Recent research shows the Android platform already has more download potential for developers and revenue is I think less but also catching up. The revenue element is obviously most important, but that will very likely exceed the iOS platform by next year.
Android users spend very little money on apps, compared to iOS users. Furthermore, the high number (over 1000) of Android display sizes, DPIs, and H to W ratios make for some ugly-looking apps. If that's not enough the developers have to write for an OS that's a couple years old since a huge portion of the available users are not able to upgrade their OS. Finally, now we learn that Samsung's prime new phone has a terrible limit on RAM for storing apps. No matter how you slice it, the Android platform is not attractive to developers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by twebpass
The analogy is false. The Windows platform always meant cut-throat competition both for hardware and for software. Hardware and software vendors had to struggle to make a profit, while users got a large number of hardware and software offerings to choose from. For better or worse, Android is clearly the new Windows.
Competition on the App Store is pretty fierce isn't it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by graxspoo
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-57569402-94/android-ios-combine-for-91-percent-of-market/
Android went from about 53% market share q4 2011 to 70% market share q4 2012. Huge growth.
"Android boasted a broad selection of smartphones, and an equally deep list of smartphone vendor partners. Finding an Android smartphone for nearly any budget, taste, size, and price was all but guaranteed during 2012. As a result, Android was rewarded with market-beating growth."
Apple has a great product, no doubt, but one company simply can not hit as many price points and form factors as the combined might of the entire rest of the industry.
This is why comparing iOS to Windows is way off the mark. Clueless consumers will tend to buy Android phones because there are simply more of them, and they are (and probably will continue to be) cheaper than the iPhone. This is especially true now with the trend towards pre-paid service, because the true cost of the phone is becoming more obvious.
The Mac/PC era is over. It has been replaced by the cloud era. Operating systems are becoming less important because everything is now expected to inter-operate via the internet.
So, if the internet is like a highway, in that it gives access to information, and operating systems/platforms are like cars, then Apple is perhaps like BMW or maybe Acura. High quality, very successful, not going anywhere. Not a monopoly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by graxspoo
You were probably thinking of "tablet" market share. Apple's share is actually slipping.
http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS24093213
Apple's share of the tablet market slipped from just under 60% to just under 40% between 2011 and 2012. This is mostly because Android tablets that people actually want to use are finally coming to market. And again there are many different form factors, price points and "methods of monetization" being explored by all of Apple's competitors. For example, the Kindle Fire, which is essentially an Android tablet, is sold at a loss with the expectation that Amazon will make money on media sales. There are also a ton of "white box" no-name brand Android tablets hitting the markets from China.
In the end, the OS doesn't really matter. No one is making money from sales of Android or of iOS. Hardware manufacturers (which Apple very much is) make money from selling hardware. The only concern would be if iOS became such a minor player that developers stopped writing apps for it. This is highly unlikely because there's a huge installed base, and the existence cross-platform app frameworks based on web technology.
You made so many false assertions that I won't even try to refute them.
I think of Android being like Windows in that it is hard to do things on it. Even finding an app that runs well on the hardware of choice is no fun. And then there's that malware that often comes free with most purchases... just like Windows.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections
Also, the more you know about how Apple analyzes business opportunities and technologies, the less impress you are by startups and rival companies that pop up for a minute with a good idea and then fall apart before they can implement it.
Many of those startup stay around just long enough for Google to waste some tens of millions buying them up. :-)