NO. You continue to make the same mistake as an ordinary, ignorant, self-centered US citizen. And if you REALLY had any idea of what the now-obsolete "third world" expression meant, you would spare us from your stupid jingoism, since most of Asia is still formed by poor, rural populations. In fact, at least 40 million "Americans" live in squalid ghettos and are poorer than those third world populations you talk about.
However, another FACT that you seem to ignore is that most of Apple's revenues come from abroad - the US is just a secondary market nowadays. We are talking here about Europe, Japan, China, Brazil and other huge domestic markets that apparently mean nothing to "Americans" since they normally can't even tell who their vice-president is. So again: if you have nothing relevant to say, just shut up or go read some GOOD geography books - the WWW was created in Europe and its users are all over the world; face it.
Thanks for taking on our resident professional jingoist. I say "professional" because he clearly knows exactly what he is doing, and he does it at every opportunity, whenever a global-market topic comes up. All this while professing absolute pro-Apple, anti-Android fandom, also with mechanical predictability.
I've said it several times here before: his purpose here is to stink up the rational atmosphere and to sabotage the common perception that Apple fans are generally progressive people. Whether he does this out of some perverse pleasure or if he's working for someone, the effect is the same: he makes American Apple fans look like idiots.
He says I've asked that he be banned. I don't think I ever have, because he's not obviously violating the rules of the forum. But it's depressing that he can say the things he does in 2013, and that people here find him to be sort of an amusing, harmless clown.
Your blanket discrimination against all Fandroids regardless of color, IQ, income-bracket, and basement location does break the monotony at times and gives me a chuckle, I will admit to that.
Except in this thread he is arguing against people - mostly non-Americans - who want Apple to have higher market share in their regions, and also accusing people who have been here far longer than he has of fandroidism.
Neither could be fandroids. I've taken to reporting these kind of posts - where a difference of opinion is dismissed as trolling or fandroidism, but it's as useful as tits on a bull.
If Europeans or Americans or anyone else cannot tell for themselves that there is an appreciable difference or doesn't appreciate that difference, Apple doesn't much care. You (they) are not their target market. Period. Again, I don't think it's Apple (but I don't know anything about their European marketing efforts). What I do know is that if Europeans buy lower build quality phones with more malware, less customer support, a less robust ecosystem, poorer update schedules and less resale value, then it's their problem, bad judgement, poor taste, what have you (and not Apple's problem). Apple is not trying to be all things to all people.
Having said all that, I think they will address these markets with a ~$400 unsubsidized iPhone. But guess what, then you'll have folks that'll wonder why they can't make a $200 iPhone. That is what is called a race to the bottom, which you should know will only result in a corporate death spiral.
Actually when Apple reduces it's prices and increases it's screen size those of you who said Apple don't care about market, will never reduce margin, or increase it's screen size will have been proven wrong; and those of us who argued for it will have been proven right.
However, in your own crazy heads you will have won the argument we never said - a $200 iPhone will free hookers, or some such nonsense.
@brlawyer Isn't Britain where the guy cut up a man in the street and someone interviewed him on camera while he waived the bloody weapon around bragging? How can you say anything about another country when that is going on in your country?
No, I am not.You are just to ignorand and plain stupid to comprehand a simple math.
No, you are. Let me explain..
1) Apple increased by 0.3%.
2) Samsung increased market share by 1.7%
3) Everybody else lost by 2.0% cumulatively. The chart doesn't show em all but its excluding "others" I assume.
Your claim is incorrect because Apple didn't lose share to anybody.
As for the actual quarter, it wasn't the quarter when the iPhone was released, and I believe it was the Quarter the S4 was released. This doesn't bode well for Samsung when the iPhone 5s comes out, and hopefully another lower cost iPhone. That Q will be a bloodbath for Sammy.
United states population Aprox 300,000,000 world population 7,000,000,000. = around 4.5% of the world population...Yeah stop thinking the US is the only market. Apple knows its not.
Except in this thread he is arguing against people - mostly non-Americans - who want Apple to have higher market share in their regions, and also accusing people who have been here far longer than he has of fandroidism.
Neither could be fandroids. I've taken to reporting these kind of posts - where a difference of opinion is dismissed as trolling or fandroidism, but it's as useful as tits on a bull.
Actually when Apple reduces it's prices and increases it's screen size those of you who said Apple don't care about market, will never reduce margin, or increase it's screen size will have been proven wrong; and those of us who argued for it will have been proven right.
However, in your own crazy heads you will have won the argument we never said - a $200 iPhone will free hookers, or some such nonsense.
I agree with the bolded paragraph there. I think Apple is going to reduce their costs as much as possible on a couple of world phones without sacrificing the desirability factors, and then flood the market with good, honest products. They will win by doing the right thing. At a good price, or at least a better price. It's in line with their stated mission to bring good stuff to people to enhance their lives.
Actually when Apple reduces it's prices and increases it's screen size those of you who said Apple don't care about market, will never reduce margin, or increase it's screen size will have been proven wrong; and those of us who argued for it will have been proven right.
I agree with the bolded paragraph there.
You should never agree with a paragraph so replete with atrocious crimes against the English language.
Like I've said multiple times, Samsung doesn't have to beat Apple they just need to beat everyone else, and that's exactly what they're doing.
I generally see and agree with your logic. But on this, I choose a different path.
At this point in time, Samsung HAS to beat Apple even if they don't beat everyone else. It's *personal*. Internally, they want the thermonuclear war more than Tim Cook does.
I generally see and agree with your logic. But on this, I choose a different path.
At this point in time, Samsung HAS to beat Apple even if they don't beat everyone else. It's *personal*. Internally, they want the thermonuclear war more than Tim Cook does.
I just don't see that ever happening, nor do I believe it's possible. Being 2nd isn't so bad especially when 3rd and 4th are so far behind. I'm actually pulling for Motorola to get it's act together but I don't think now that Google owns them that it'll happen.
I generally see and agree with your logic. But on this, I choose a different path.
At this point in time, Samsung HAS to beat Apple even if they don't beat everyone else. It's *personal*. Internally, they want the thermonuclear war more than Tim Cook does.
True or not true, it's an ugly thought to let pass through your fingers. Samsung's bad taste must not be allowed to prevail over Apple's good taste. The world would be much poorer for it. It would be as if News Corp. became the last extant publisher.
You should never agree with a paragraph so replete with atrocious crimes against the English language.
A couple of apostrophes = atrocious crimes?
British usage demands that "Apple" be a plural entity. Therefore, "Apple don't" is correct.
A semicolon can be used to separate two complete clauses that are closely related in meaning. The "and " is somewhat superfluous, but it isn't a crime.
Nah, they'll just hide slices from their pie chart to show less fragmentation.
In addition to not displaying Android devices which haven't contacted the Google Play store in three months, Google has now taken to using the same name for two different releases. The Google strategy to correct fragmentation is to delay, deny, disinform and disparage the competition.
British usage demands that "Apple" be a plural entity. Therefore, "Apple don't" is correct.
A semicolon can be used to separate two complete clauses that are closely related in meaning. The "and " is somewhat superfluous, but it isn't a crime.
What else?
Do you even understand what he is really trying to say? You can guess but you cannot be sure. Coincidentally, you infer it to agree with your opinion
BTW, I have heard about the British preference for referring to a company as a plural entity. But I don't see that in practice. Articles in the Guardian, Financial Times, etc. all use company names as singular entities.
Comments
Thanks for taking on our resident professional jingoist. I say "professional" because he clearly knows exactly what he is doing, and he does it at every opportunity, whenever a global-market topic comes up. All this while professing absolute pro-Apple, anti-Android fandom, also with mechanical predictability.
I've said it several times here before: his purpose here is to stink up the rational atmosphere and to sabotage the common perception that Apple fans are generally progressive people. Whether he does this out of some perverse pleasure or if he's working for someone, the effect is the same: he makes American Apple fans look like idiots.
He says I've asked that he be banned. I don't think I ever have, because he's not obviously violating the rules of the forum. But it's depressing that he can say the things he does in 2013, and that people here find him to be sort of an amusing, harmless clown.
I think he's playing with fire.
Except in this thread he is arguing against people - mostly non-Americans - who want Apple to have higher market share in their regions, and also accusing people who have been here far longer than he has of fandroidism.
Neither could be fandroids. I've taken to reporting these kind of posts - where a difference of opinion is dismissed as trolling or fandroidism, but it's as useful as tits on a bull.
Actually when Apple reduces it's prices and increases it's screen size those of you who said Apple don't care about market, will never reduce margin, or increase it's screen size will have been proven wrong; and those of us who argued for it will have been proven right.
However, in your own crazy heads you will have won the argument we never said - a $200 iPhone will free hookers, or some such nonsense.
Isn't Britain where the guy cut up a man in the street and someone interviewed him on camera while he waived the bloody weapon around bragging? How can you say anything about another country when that is going on in your country?
How's that for jumping off of the topic?
No, you are. Let me explain..
1) Apple increased by 0.3%.
2) Samsung increased market share by 1.7%
3) Everybody else lost by 2.0% cumulatively. The chart doesn't show em all but its excluding "others" I assume.
Your claim is incorrect because Apple didn't lose share to anybody.
As for the actual quarter, it wasn't the quarter when the iPhone was released, and I believe it was the Quarter the S4 was released. This doesn't bode well for Samsung when the iPhone 5s comes out, and hopefully another lower cost iPhone. That Q will be a bloodbath for Sammy.
It's obviously not dead, but it is fractured to the point where it should be (and likely is) a serious concern for Google.
I long ago blocked his posts!
I agree with the bolded paragraph there. I think Apple is going to reduce their costs as much as possible on a couple of world phones without sacrificing the desirability factors, and then flood the market with good, honest products. They will win by doing the right thing. At a good price, or at least a better price. It's in line with their stated mission to bring good stuff to people to enhance their lives.
Then again I could be dreaming.
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd
This vile Americanocentric, nationalist and often racist nonsense has to stop. start handing out bans or lose your international viewers, AI.
So are you denying the existence of people who can't afford iPhones, along with the availability of sub $50 Android handsets?
"Americanocentric" is the assumption that "Android" equals high end handsets.
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd
As for how safe this is - Blackberry once owned America. Now it is nowhere. A broadening of the base is required.
Nokia once owned Europe, fat lot of good that did them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cherrypop
"Android IS DEAD."
It's obviously not dead, but it is fractured to the point where it should be (and likely is) a serious concern for Google.
It is. They are trying hard to engineer their way out of this, but the root of the problem is not engineering.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
Nokia once owned Europe, fat lot of good that did them.
They owned a good chunk of Asia, too. But that too was another fat lot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd
Actually when Apple reduces it's prices and increases it's screen size those of you who said Apple don't care about market, will never reduce margin, or increase it's screen size will have been proven wrong; and those of us who argued for it will have been proven right.
I agree with the bolded paragraph there.
You should never agree with a paragraph so replete with atrocious crimes against the English language.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
Like I've said multiple times, Samsung doesn't have to beat Apple they just need to beat everyone else, and that's exactly what they're doing.
I generally see and agree with your logic. But on this, I choose a different path.
At this point in time, Samsung HAS to beat Apple even if they don't beat everyone else. It's *personal*. Internally, they want the thermonuclear war more than Tim Cook does.
I just don't see that ever happening, nor do I believe it's possible. Being 2nd isn't so bad especially when 3rd and 4th are so far behind. I'm actually pulling for Motorola to get it's act together but I don't think now that Google owns them that it'll happen.
True or not true, it's an ugly thought to let pass through your fingers. Samsung's bad taste must not be allowed to prevail over Apple's good taste. The world would be much poorer for it. It would be as if News Corp. became the last extant publisher.
A couple of apostrophes = atrocious crimes?
British usage demands that "Apple" be a plural entity. Therefore, "Apple don't" is correct.
A semicolon can be used to separate two complete clauses that are closely related in meaning. The "and " is somewhat superfluous, but it isn't a crime.
What else?
Quote:
Originally Posted by cherrypop
"Android IS DEAD."
It's obviously not dead, but it is fractured to the point where it should be (and likely is) a serious concern for Google.
Nah, they'll just hide slices from their pie chart to show less fragmentation.
This just in... Google refuts fragmentation by saying 100% of Android users use Android.
In addition to not displaying Android devices which haven't contacted the Google Play store in three months, Google has now taken to using the same name for two different releases. The Google strategy to correct fragmentation is to delay, deny, disinform and disparage the competition.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur
A couple of apostrophes = atrocious crimes?
British usage demands that "Apple" be a plural entity. Therefore, "Apple don't" is correct.
A semicolon can be used to separate two complete clauses that are closely related in meaning. The "and " is somewhat superfluous, but it isn't a crime.
What else?
Do you even understand what he is really trying to say? You can guess but you cannot be sure. Coincidentally, you infer it to agree with your opinion
BTW, I have heard about the British preference for referring to a company as a plural entity. But I don't see that in practice. Articles in the Guardian, Financial Times, etc. all use company names as singular entities.