This is one of the better pieces I have read analyzing the playing field both past, future and present. Most writers are truly clueless whether pro or anti apple. Some, like this writer, seem to have been around long enough to learn the history and be able to see what is right in front of them. Most "analysts" fall flat when trying to understand these things. So I say very nice job to this writer for a well done article/analysis.
I have to add something very obvious and slightly off topic that apple should do (NOW) and once they do everyone will say "why didn't they, or anyone do this before?". Solve battery life. How? Use the new MacBook Air CPU clustering to cut down on power AND (this is the big one) put a larger battery on the phone. I use a mophie case to double my battery. A built in battery would bulk the phone up but it would be a fraction of the mophie case.
Give users and road warriors a choice here. Make a standard thin phone to show what you can do but add a millimeter or two and squeeze more lipo in those native iPhones. If you could double the battery life of an iPhone you would smoke everyone out there. The race is not to be the smallest/thinnest but for some to actually have enough battery so it is not a brick by 3PM. This is simple, easy and obvious. I'd dump my iPhone 5 for a new one in two seconds if it had nothing more than a larger battery. It would still be plenty thin, light and ergonomic. Would probably be no thicker or weigh more than the iPhone 4 did.
[quote name="alaska99801" url="/t/158310/editorial-can-apple-survive-2013#post_2355036"]I if I didn't know better, unlike most consumers, and with the beating the stock is getting (with no real reason, except speculation), would take my money elsewhere. [/QUOTE]
People are dumb, not that dumb.
[QUOTE]Did you have the curiosity to investigate why all of a sudden, one research company is telling us Apple new ad has failed? Doesn't that interest you as a so-called journalist, or whatever you call yourself?[/QUOTE]
Wouldn't matter. No one can prove that Samsung was behind it, even if they were.
AI needs to abandon this guy's editorials, or editorials in general. The article is as usual over wordy, incorrect on facts and knowledge, and ideologically driven. This week this is one nugget of sense
[B]Errors of Fact:[/B]
[QUOTE]"but Apple earns three quarters of the mobile industry's profits” [/QUOTE]
Apple didn’t licence in the “early 1990’s”, if it had it might have increased market share, it licenced in the late 1990’s after the plunge.
[B]Strawman:[/B]
The supposed problem with Apple Maps is just unfair comparisons with the look of the overfly, or 3D graphics. In reality the real problem with Maps is the data and the seeming inability to rectify this data. This problem has been flagged by Apple users, who are the only people who would count.
[B]Errors of logic:[/B]
[B]Google[/B]: Claim: Google has failed because it doesn’t have enough hardware sales:
[QUOTE]The only way to make Android look competitive against iOS is to bundle in a huge segment of feature phones under the now meaningless term "smartphone," and ignore profitability and platform success in order to focus only on unit shipments.[/QUOTE]
In fact Google is giving it away for free so they don't care about upfront profits, nor apps. What Google wants to do is get it’s OS on mobiles, so that its search engine and other services like Maps are out there. It originally set up this team to combat Bing on mobiles, and they saw the iPhone and decided that multi-touch was the future. This pissed off Apple, but Google were not really going after Apple - well except for Rubin who didn’t like Apple.
[B]Samsung[/B]
The article admitting that Samsung is successful in it’s hardware and systems, then it is argued to be at the mercy of Microsoft, or Google for the OS. Another way of saying "at the mercy off" is they are getting [I]free r+d[/I] from both companies. And Samsung can fork the OS for Google if it wants. Like Kindle did. No real argument there.
[B]Tiny nugget of vauge sense.[/B]
The only part that makes some kind of sense is the bit about iOS 7, he’s probably right about the transparency being there to differentiate between it and Android. That doesn’t look so successful yet, though, the jury is out. But it might, if so lower end Androids won't be able to do it.
The other thing missed about iOS 7, unsurprisingly since the ideology of this kind of head in the sand editorial is that everything is JUST FINE M’Kay, is that it probably augurs in an era of cheaper phones - the colors - and indeterminate screens, larger or smaller. After all, if buttons are now borderless text resizing your app takes no work, no designer needed.
Really, you needed that headline to sell your words? A bit whorish!
Imaging a consumer looking to buy an Apple device, and searching the web and finding your article, "Can Apple Survive 2013". And we are already only six months away from the end of 2013.
I if I didn't know better, unlike most consumers, and with the beating the stock is getting (with no real reason, except speculation), would take my money elsewhere. Why would anyone buy from a company that might go out of business this year?
You see, you think that most people understand your nuances, or read the piece. No, a headline is good enough for the regular consumer. Thank you very much for unknowingly (maybe, Samsung pays well) helping the competition.
Competition is great, but honest competition is.
Did you have the curiosity to investigate why all of a sudden, one research company is telling us Apple new ad has failed? Doesn't that interest you as a so-called journalist, or whatever you call yourself?
Tell me the last time Apple had to lie about their competition? Even Microsoft in their new ads use deceptive practices by photoshopping the look of the iPad vs. the Surface. Did you write about it? Has Apple ever had to hire people to protest in front of a competitor business?
Balance boy, balance. The difference between an honest man and an unscrupulous one.
I maintain that Apple's biggest challenges are expanding distribution and increasing production capacity to supply these new channels. Apple's growth has slowed a bit until this infrastructure is built out with new suppliers. This is precisely why Tim Cook is the perfect man to be running Apple right now. This expansion of the supply and distribution chains has been hampered by Samsung. Not due to Samsung's products but mostly by having to replace them as a supplier.
Samsung and Google could be backing themselves into a corner in the long term. Apple is strengthening Samsung's competitors on the supply side and as more and more services on the iPhone are moved away from Google services (particularly in overseas markets just as they are in Asian versions of Android) Google could find it hard to hold onto its data aquisition it needs to push its ad revenues. Samsung could see its vertical integration advantage collapse when it moves chip business to TSM and display business increasingly to Sharp.
These feature phones running Android will face pressure from Firefox OS and the like on the low end again depriving Google of data aquisition and Samsung of volumes it needs to drive capacity.
Apple will be fine in 2013. Apple will begin to surge again in 2014 and be in good position to pick up the pieces of Android when it falls apart in 2015!!!!
With colored plastic phones? One wonders. Especially if Apple prices these colored plastic phones at $450 off contract. I'll be curious to see how they market them and where they will sell them.
Or there won't be any "paid" Samsung critics of this article on this low volume, unimportant site on the internet. What would be nice is if the place wasn't run like a religious cult seeking out heretics, , or some trotskyite convention accusing some critics of selling out to the Bourgeoisie.
This DED guys is short on facts on logic, and fails to ever believe that Apple could make a mistake, or fumble a bit. With that being the editorial position of the once great - and once critical - AI, its no wonder the place has become a cesspool of semi-literate adhominens, accusations of trolling, and attempts at curtailing of debate.
Most tech journalists and geek bloggers don't get how Apple products are designed, and what design means. Design is something you can feel in the human-machine interaction. That can't be bullet-pointed on a features list. This is one of the reasons tech like NFC have floundered so far. Everyone is focusing on the tech, not the way we use it, the way it enhances our lives. We're still waiting for someone (Apple, presumably) to "get NFC right." Bumping phones to exchange playlists isn't it. And when Apple does get it right, their competitors will justify copying Apple's idea, even going so far as to tell Congress that Apple's inventions are "standards essential" or "too important" to be kept to one company.
Or there won't be any "paid" Samsung critics of this article on this low volume, unimportant site on the internet. What would be nice is if the place wasn't run like a religious cult seeking out heretics, , or some trotskyite convention accusing some critics of selling out to the Bourgeoisie.
This DED guys is short on facts on logic, and fails to ever believe that Apple could make a mistake, or fumble a bit. With that being the editorial position of the once great - and once critical - AI, its no wonder the place has become a cesspool of semi-literate adhominens, accusations of trolling, and attempts at curtailing of debate.Needs a clean out.
Perhaps you missed the paragraphs talking about what Apple did wrong in the 1990s. It's not Apple vs Google or Samsung, it's simple a matter of wise vs foolish. And you can see the pretty clear results of both, unless you're blindly hammering out an angry thesaurus full of personal attacks at the author instead of discussing the subjects raised.
Has nothing to do with liking something, merely recounting the phony, one sided portrayal of Apple in the media and satirically examining the threat posed by Android. You are free to keep using Android, you just won't have any good apps.
But that's not the article's fault. It's the platform's fault.
An excellent article giving a wide angle temporally inclusive perspective. It was also fun to read and even makes me inclined to believe that Australia can win the Ashes, go figger.
Has nothing to do with liking something, merely recounting the phony, one sided portrayal of Apple in the media and satirically examining the threat posed by Android. You are free to keep using Android, you just won't have any good apps.
But that's not the article's fault. It's the platform's fault.
You're talking bollocks and you know it.
I'm not an Android user but I've used the platform enough to know that there's plenty of qualityapps available these days. If you disagree then you're either ignorant, stupidly or a liar.
It would be fair to say that there's more good apps on iOS. But there's enough good apps that a lot of people are happy to use Android.
Enjoyed your article. Apple Insider appears to be Apples only defender in a sea of American media hatred of this iconic American company. Keep up the fight.
Check out articles by Philip Elmer DeWitt. He does actual journalism instead of push propaganda.
In my opinion, the only reason Android devices have any sort of popularity are because of Apple haters and people with lower income. I honestly believe it has nothing to do with user experience, because I can honestly say, owning my Nexus 7 for a year now.. Android is a horrid mess of features that don't seem to have an forethought or future planning in its design. I sold my Galaxy Note 10.1 last year (after owning it for a few months) simply because it didn't serve the purpose I bought it for.. for drawing. The (Android only) apps and OS were horrible and user unfriendly.. I'd almost go as far as user hostile.
Samsung just seems to throw shit (new models) at the wall to see what will stick, and they by are far and large the biggest Android device purveyor.
Regardless, my Nexus 7 was cheap enough for me to keep as a replacement for a magazine in the bathroom.
As soon as the new iPad5 shows up, I'll be grabbing one right away.
Not sure what the title had to do with the actual story or if sarcasm really served a purpose. The story also reads like a compilation of previous editorials here. I feel like I had deja vu and was reading a remix of the best hits from the past. It rehashed that Android is fragmented. It hinted that there is some discord among Google and Samsung and others. All of this has been said before so not really sure what new ground if any this article broke. Neither Android or Apple are going to implode and it is not a zero sum game.
Apple will continue to do well. Google seems fine with their ad revenue. Samsung also seems to be prospering. HTC, Motorola, Nokia, Sony, LG, Blackberry and the others seem to be left to pick over the crumbs. That doesn't seem likely to change anytime soon.
The only people who really have a valid reason to complain about fragmentation on Android are the developers. If they find it too tedious or that it is not worth their effort they will simply stop writing apps. Some (but not all) people presumably choose the phone that works based on their needs, desires, and budgets and perhaps even their carrier. It wasn't that long ago if you wanted an iPhone in the U.S. you could only choose AT&T. During that time many people on the other carriers bought Android because they had little other choice and just got used to it. iPhone sales have increased on the newer carriers but they are still not close to the percentages at AT&T.
The android is doomed mantra is just as silly and improbable as the Apple is doomed chant. Apple simply doesn't meet the needs of people looking for more affordable phones or ones with larger displays (yet). If they expand the line to address those two segments then I might join in the Android is doomed chorus with you. But not quite yet...
As an old apple supporter ans long tome ai follower, I find this article quite depresing. It's obviously biaised, in such a heavy way that anyone following the tech industry would wonder if apple will indeed survive 2013... I for one don't believe that apple is in such a bad shape that its rabid defender would need to dismiss it's competitor to prove the genius of the company. Such a behaviour is both depressing and intriguing, ans suite disapointing fromage ai.
Comments
I have to add something very obvious and slightly off topic that apple should do (NOW) and once they do everyone will say "why didn't they, or anyone do this before?". Solve battery life. How? Use the new MacBook Air CPU clustering to cut down on power AND (this is the big one) put a larger battery on the phone. I use a mophie case to double my battery. A built in battery would bulk the phone up but it would be a fraction of the mophie case.
Give users and road warriors a choice here. Make a standard thin phone to show what you can do but add a millimeter or two and squeeze more lipo in those native iPhones. If you could double the battery life of an iPhone you would smoke everyone out there. The race is not to be the smallest/thinnest but for some to actually have enough battery so it is not a brick by 3PM. This is simple, easy and obvious. I'd dump my iPhone 5 for a new one in two seconds if it had nothing more than a larger battery. It would still be plenty thin, light and ergonomic. Would probably be no thicker or weigh more than the iPhone 4 did.
Rant over :-) Listen up Cook!
People are dumb, not that dumb.
[QUOTE]Did you have the curiosity to investigate why all of a sudden, one research company is telling us Apple new ad has failed? Doesn't that interest you as a so-called journalist, or whatever you call yourself?[/QUOTE]
Wouldn't matter. No one can prove that Samsung was behind it, even if they were.
The article is as usual over wordy, incorrect on facts and knowledge, and ideologically driven. This week this is one nugget of sense
[B]Errors of Fact:[/B]
[QUOTE]"but Apple earns three quarters of the mobile industry's profits”
[/QUOTE]
[URL=http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2013/05/07/apple-samsung-profits-canaccord/]Wrong - 57 % and falling.[/URL] In fact that sharp drop off should cause concern to the “profit share” supporters, it may be caught by Samsung this year. Maybe this Q.
[QUOTE]“ and an even greater majority of the world's mobile app revenues.”[/QUOTE]
Wrong again. Apple earns[URL=http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2013/04/08/apple-google-mobile-apps-canalys/] exactly 75%. Not more[/URL].
[B]Apple Licensing.[/B]
Apple didn’t licence in the “early 1990’s”, if it had it might have increased market share, it licenced in the late 1990’s after the plunge.
[B]Strawman:[/B]
The supposed problem with Apple Maps is just unfair comparisons with the look of the overfly, or 3D graphics.
In reality the real problem with Maps is the data and the seeming inability to rectify this data. This problem has been flagged by Apple users, who are the only people who would count.
[B]Errors of logic:[/B]
[B]Google[/B]:
Claim:
Google has failed because it doesn’t have enough hardware sales:
[QUOTE]The only way to make Android look competitive against iOS is to bundle in a huge segment of feature phones under the now meaningless term "smartphone," and ignore profitability and platform success in order to focus only on unit shipments.[/QUOTE]
In fact Google is giving it away for free so they don't care about upfront profits, nor apps. What Google wants to do is get it’s OS on mobiles, so that its search engine and other services like Maps are out there. It originally set up this team to combat Bing on mobiles, and they saw the iPhone and decided that multi-touch was the future. This pissed off Apple, but Google were not really going after Apple - well except for Rubin who didn’t like Apple.
[B]Samsung[/B]
The article admitting that Samsung is successful in it’s hardware and systems, then it is argued to be at the mercy of Microsoft, or Google for the OS. Another way of saying "at the mercy off" is they are getting [I]free r+d[/I] from both companies. And Samsung can fork the OS for Google if it wants. Like Kindle did. No real argument there.
[B]Tiny nugget of vauge sense.[/B]
The only part that makes some kind of sense is the bit about iOS 7, he’s probably right about the transparency being there to differentiate between it and Android. That doesn’t look so successful yet, though, the jury is out. But it might, if so lower end Androids won't be able to do it.
The other thing missed about iOS 7, unsurprisingly since the ideology of this kind of head in the sand editorial is that everything is JUST FINE M’Kay, is that it probably augurs in an era of cheaper phones - the colors - and indeterminate screens, larger or smaller. After all, if buttons are now borderless text resizing your app takes no work, no designer needed.
[QUOTE]We don't need facts or logic.[/QUOTE]
Apparently not.
oh would you idiots read the actual arguments?
Samsung and Google could be backing themselves into a corner in the long term. Apple is strengthening Samsung's competitors on the supply side and as more and more services on the iPhone are moved away from Google services (particularly in overseas markets just as they are in Asian versions of Android) Google could find it hard to hold onto its data aquisition it needs to push its ad revenues. Samsung could see its vertical integration advantage collapse when it moves chip business to TSM and display business increasingly to Sharp.
These feature phones running Android will face pressure from Firefox OS and the like on the low end again depriving Google of data aquisition and Samsung of volumes it needs to drive capacity.
Apple will be fine in 2013. Apple will begin to surge again in 2014 and be in good position to pick up the pieces of Android when it falls apart in 2015!!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by AKaplan123
And, what will the paid Samsung "critics" say about this article?
More of the usual boring crap.
Or there won't be any "paid" Samsung critics of this article on this low volume, unimportant site on the internet. What would be nice is if the place wasn't run like a religious cult seeking out heretics, , or some trotskyite convention accusing some critics of selling out to the Bourgeoisie.
This DED guys is short on facts on logic, and fails to ever believe that Apple could make a mistake, or fumble a bit. With that being the editorial position of the once great - and once critical - AI, its no wonder the place has become a cesspool of semi-literate adhominens, accusations of trolling, and attempts at curtailing of debate.
Needs a clean out.
Most tech journalists and geek bloggers don't get how Apple products are designed, and what design means. Design is something you can feel in the human-machine interaction. That can't be bullet-pointed on a features list. This is one of the reasons tech like NFC have floundered so far. Everyone is focusing on the tech, not the way we use it, the way it enhances our lives. We're still waiting for someone (Apple, presumably) to "get NFC right." Bumping phones to exchange playlists isn't it. And when Apple does get it right, their competitors will justify copying Apple's idea, even going so far as to tell Congress that Apple's inventions are "standards essential" or "too important" to be kept to one company.
Perhaps you missed the paragraphs talking about what Apple did wrong in the 1990s. It's not Apple vs Google or Samsung, it's simple a matter of wise vs foolish. And you can see the pretty clear results of both, unless you're blindly hammering out an angry thesaurus full of personal attacks at the author instead of discussing the subjects raised.
AI has a pretty huge readership. Just ask Google.
Has nothing to do with liking something, merely recounting the phony, one sided portrayal of Apple in the media and satirically examining the threat posed by Android. You are free to keep using Android, you just won't have any good apps.
But that's not the article's fault. It's the platform's fault.
Most times whenever the headline is a question the answer is no. It's obviously not the case now, but I would've titled it 'Is Apple doomed in 2013?'
An excellent article giving a wide angle temporally inclusive perspective. It was also fun to read and even makes me inclined to believe that Australia can win the Ashes, go figger.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections
Has nothing to do with liking something, merely recounting the phony, one sided portrayal of Apple in the media and satirically examining the threat posed by Android. You are free to keep using Android, you just won't have any good apps.
But that's not the article's fault. It's the platform's fault.
You're talking bollocks and you know it.
I'm not an Android user but I've used the platform enough to know that there's plenty of quality apps available these days. If you disagree then you're either ignorant, stupidly or a liar.
It would be fair to say that there's more good apps on iOS. But there's enough good apps that a lot of people are happy to use Android.
Check out articles by Philip Elmer DeWitt. He does actual journalism instead of push propaganda.
In my opinion, the only reason Android devices have any sort of popularity are because of Apple haters and people with lower income. I honestly believe it has nothing to do with user experience, because I can honestly say, owning my Nexus 7 for a year now.. Android is a horrid mess of features that don't seem to have an forethought or future planning in its design. I sold my Galaxy Note 10.1 last year (after owning it for a few months) simply because it didn't serve the purpose I bought it for.. for drawing. The (Android only) apps and OS were horrible and user unfriendly.. I'd almost go as far as user hostile.
Samsung just seems to throw shit (new models) at the wall to see what will stick, and they by are far and large the biggest Android device purveyor.
Regardless, my Nexus 7 was cheap enough for me to keep as a replacement for a magazine in the bathroom.
As soon as the new iPad5 shows up, I'll be grabbing one right away.
Not sure what the title had to do with the actual story or if sarcasm really served a purpose. The story also reads like a compilation of previous editorials here. I feel like I had deja vu and was reading a remix of the best hits from the past. It rehashed that Android is fragmented. It hinted that there is some discord among Google and Samsung and others. All of this has been said before so not really sure what new ground if any this article broke. Neither Android or Apple are going to implode and it is not a zero sum game.
Apple will continue to do well. Google seems fine with their ad revenue. Samsung also seems to be prospering. HTC, Motorola, Nokia, Sony, LG, Blackberry and the others seem to be left to pick over the crumbs. That doesn't seem likely to change anytime soon.
The only people who really have a valid reason to complain about fragmentation on Android are the developers. If they find it too tedious or that it is not worth their effort they will simply stop writing apps. Some (but not all) people presumably choose the phone that works based on their needs, desires, and budgets and perhaps even their carrier. It wasn't that long ago if you wanted an iPhone in the U.S. you could only choose AT&T. During that time many people on the other carriers bought Android because they had little other choice and just got used to it. iPhone sales have increased on the newer carriers but they are still not close to the percentages at AT&T.
The android is doomed mantra is just as silly and improbable as the Apple is doomed chant. Apple simply doesn't meet the needs of people looking for more affordable phones or ones with larger displays (yet). If they expand the line to address those two segments then I might join in the Android is doomed chorus with you. But not quite yet...