Apple could grow some balls and responsibly choose to do business with a responsible company.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Android Tops 50% Share of Smartphone Sales, But Apple Still Dominating Profits
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Apple could grow some balls and responsibly choose to do business with a responsible company.
But not sufficient, as was said in the same sentence. Both parts function together, obviously.
To put it simply: sales are an important indicator, but by themselves are not sufficient.
----------
If you're willing to pay more for Apple gear, then by all means . . .
And I assume you would apply the same "ball growing" stricture to these companies as well?
Foxconn's customers (apart from Apple):
Amazon.com (United States)
Asus (Taiwan)
ASRock (Taiwan)
Intel (United States)
Cisco (United States)
Hewlett-Packard (United States)
Dell (United States)
Nintendo (Japan)
Nokia (Finland)
Microsoft (United States)
MSI (Taiwan)
Motorola (United States)
Sony Ericsson (Japan/Sweden)
Vizio (United States)
Yeah, but they are necessary. They NEED to be there. Wet ground is necessary indicator of rain. If the ground is not wet, it can't be raining. If there are no sales, then NeXT, Newton, Lisa can't be innovative.
Time to put that Apple innovation to work then! *Snicker*
Also, fanboys are willing to pay anything for Apple gear.
At one point, Nokia and Blackberry were putting out one great product after another. Three years ago, a beaten and bruised RIM would've been nigh unimaginable. Yet here they are, hanging on to life by the merest of threads.
Businesses tend to flock to whatever works best with the least amount of trouble, and the public sector is fickle at the best of times, always moving on to the next best thing. Just because Apple is the darling of the tech industry today doesn't mean they will be tomorrow.
Consider how Apple jealously guards their tech roadmaps to the point of paranoia, and their unwillingness to concede a point when it comes to their products. These facts alone make it hard for them to be truly embraced by the IT sector.
What about their current ambivalent attitude towards the creative pro sector? The demographic that made them as a company? I'm hardly a business guru here, but it doesn't seem a wise idea to abandon your core market, comparatively small as it is.
And all for what? Embracing the consumer sector? A demographic that will drop you like a hot potato as soon as the next big thing arrives on store shelves?
All it takes is one big mistake for the IT crowd to get rid of you. Just look at Blackberry to see evidence of that. And what about Nokia? They didn't keep up with the times, and are now a practically unheard of brand in the US. Do you really think Apple is immune to the same ills that have recently plagued these companies? No. They're not. If they don't keep the iPhone flashy enough, secure enough, flexible enough, then they'll lose out to the next guy with a bright idea, just like these other companies.
Necessary, but not sufficient.
I agreed with what appears to be a contradictory statement. But it's exactly that contradictory nature which communicates that the connections between innovation and sales are more complex. So the (paradoxical) statement is actually very good, whoever suggested it.
Yes, sales need to be there, but they are not actually a sufficient indicator of innovation. Hence, the room for exceptions.
----------
RIM and Nokia failed to re-invent their business.
Apple thrives on re-inventing their business. Who is to say they won't continue. At this point, it's their MO. Apple's greatest fear is not change (they, after all, are the ones creating most of it), but stagnation. The very basis of Apple's business is differentiation.
If they stop this, we can surmise they'll be in trouble. But for now, this is just another "what if" scenario.
Necessary, but not sufficient.
I agreed with what appears to be a contradictory statement. But it's exactly that contradictory nature which communicates that the connections between innovation and sales are more complex. So the (paradoxical) statement is actually very good, whoever suggested it.
Yes, sales need to be there, but they are not actually a sufficient indicator of innovation. Hence, the room for exceptions.
It's not contradictory. It's logic 101, day 1.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_implication
The lack of a necessary indicator means that quality is IMPOSSIBLE to be satisfied.
If the ground is not wet, then there is no chance there is rain.
Likewise:
If there are no sales, NeXT, Lisa, Newton have no chance to be innovative.
There is no "room" as you'd like to interpret it.
----------
Then get them to reinvent themselves out of China.
By whose demand?
Certainly not that of consumers. Since that demand does not actually exist among them. If it does, then constantly demanding and buying more Apple gear is sending a rather conflicting message. They're hardly boycotting Apple.
Are you sure that the "problems" at Foxconn are as bad as you think they are? Maybe they don't rise to a certain collective standard that actually registers.
The demand of doing different, or some social responsibility, or is that gone like your sense of logic?
By what standard of "social responsibility"?
Evidently, there is no universally-agreed standard.
Where are the mass boycotts of Apple?
You admit to having a Macbook Pro here:
https://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=13003903&#post13003903
Where was your sense of "social responsibility" when you made that purchase? Or was it alright then to contribute to and consent to Apple's alleged social irresponsibility.
You want Apple to get out of China? No problem.
Stop buying their gear.
Now, if you sell me your MBP (or better yet, just give it to me) then your sense of "social responsibility" can be redeemed. You will have done your part as a consumer. Deal?
The tech industry is a perpetual what-if scenario. What's here today is gone tomorrow, and 3 years is an age gone by.
Apple has reinvented themselves once thus far, in 2001 when they began rolling out the iDevices. Though a complete and resounding success, it hardly points towards them "thriving" on constant reinvention.
And what of other companies reinventing themselves? They can do it just as easily as Apple has. All it takes is the right product at the right time. Even a company in dire financial straits can work a small miracle and become the next mainstay of the industry. You know, like Apple.
LTD is just rehashing things we have read over and over. Google is an ad company first. Android is their Trojan to push more ads in the mobile space. They are fulfilling their main objective by winning in volume sales after only three years. The fact they succeeded over Symbian which deals with cheap phones too shows me Android is in it for the long haul and is hardly a failure. Apple is fulfilling their bottom line. Whether some folks want to compare quantity vs quality, neither company cares. They are both winners fulfilling their own objective.
I don't understand why some have to choose sides? I recently read Christina Hendricks (the redhead from Mad Men with the big knockers) loves texting on her G2. She hated texting on an iPhone that she used to own and needed a physical keyboard. Understandable for girls with long fingernails. Phones are like clothes, a bra. Not one size can fit all. For every reason some will ridicule Android's clunkiness or fragmentation, there are folks doing the same thing with iOS on how restrictive it can be or how boring the UI has become.
After a month owning Android, I have grown to enjoy it and think it can be a solid alternative to iOS. A pirate's paradise. Google the app's name with apk and bam! You have it free. And xHamster is enjoyable on a mobile phone thanks to Flash. I would rather have Android than BB OS7 or the latest Symbian at least. Tomorrow, I might purchase a WP7 phone to complete the trifecta of major modern mobile OSes that look to rule for the next five years. I plan to live in third world country that is known to steal, so I need as much backup as I can! While I live in a MULTI-platform world, I will sit back and watch fanboys argue over the most trivial things to justify their purchases and force feed their superiority upon us even if smartphones are like desktop computers essentially doing the same things nowadays. It isn't like most people will weep if they can't have that novelty app when most of the basics are covered. The perception that iOS is clearly the best and ONLY good choice out there died months ago. That is either biased fanboy talk or LIMITED experience with other platforms.
I don't understand why some have to choose sides? I recently read Christina Hendricks (the redhead from Mad Men with the big knockers) loves texting on her G2. She hated texting on an iPhone that she used to own and needed a physical keyboard. Understandable for girls with long fingernails. Phones are like clothes, a bra. Not one size can fit all. For every reason some will ridicule Android's clunkiness or fragmentation, there are folks doing the same thing with iOS on how restrictive it can be or how boring the UI has become.
After a month owning Android, I have grown to enjoy it and think it can be a solid alternative to iOS. A pirate's paradise. Google the app's name with apk and bam! You have it free. And xHamster is enjoyable on a mobile phone thanks to Flash. I would rather have Android than BB OS7 or the latest Symbian at least. Tomorrow, I might purchase a WP7 phone to complete the trifecta of major modern mobile OSes that look to rule for the next five years. I plan to live in third world country that is known to steal, so I need as much backup as I can! While I live in a MULTI-platform world, I will sit back and watch fanboys argue over the most trivial things to justify their purchases and force feed their superiority upon us even if smartphones are like desktop computers essentially doing the same things nowadays. It isn't like most people will weep if they can't have that novelty app when most of the basics are covered. The perception that iOS is clearly the best and ONLY good choice out there died months ago. That is either biased fanboy talk or LIMITED experience with other platforms.
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks. Now I'm certain I can quote you on NeXT, Lisa and Newton being non-innovative.
WP7 isn't doing well because those that appreciate a closed eco-system ( I am not trash talking, I see the benefit ) will pick iOS every single day. Those that love to tinker and appreciate a highly customizable UI will always pick Android. WP7 is not a bad phone OS whatsoever, but it is trying to enter into a market with heavily entrenched sides and there is nothing particularly innovative about it either. I pick Android because I love the customizability of the OS, I love widgets, I love the power that an open source eco-system provides. If I was totally entrenched in Apple's eco-system I would go with an Iphone, I think Apple makes some very nice, well designed products, and some of the accessories are awesome too. At the end of the day however, it is the high-end Android devices that are really pushing the limits of phone innovation, Apple has been taking the safe route for a while now. Yes Siri is "innovative" to a certain degree, but for myself, I find voice commands largely do what I need on Android, and I find most of Siri's functionality to be superficial at best (though it is still a neat feature, just kind of gimmicky).
There were many other choices other than the vulgar, sexist one that you chose.
And since brassiere's are clothing, your first two overlap.
(ps: Be careful calling a woman a "girl" - it's only occasionally appropriate.)
Chess vs. Checkers
Android is to Chess as iOS is to Checkers.
One is fairly complicated; open to infinite possibilities and multi-levels of operation and customization, and one is fairly simple, with set possibilities - operating on just one or two basic, but well known levels.
One is the most popular mobile OS to the under 35 and the more tech savvy users, and one is the OS of choice for those who just want things to work, without ever having to think, or bother about how, or why "it just works".
One can easily be customized and highly personalized -- allowing it's users to get under the hood of the OS, or replace it with a alternative one, and one allows it users a single dominant "portal" option (iTunes) that must be passed through for all of their actual, or potential OS content.
One is the future for the majority of mobile OS platform users -- most especially for younger (under 35) and more technically sophisticated consumers -- growing in it's overall market share by the day, and one is currently the most profitable and "integrated" (closed) mobile OS platforms - that will likely remain an "unified" and powerful option for those who prefer their tech devices and experiences to be basic, top-down, and incredibly simple to operate and interface with.
Hence....Chess vs. Checkers....
Android is to Chess as iOS is to Checkers.
One is fairly complicated; open to infinite possibilities and multi-levels of operation and customization, and one is fairly simple, with set possibilities - operating on just one or two basic, but well known levels.
One is the most popular mobile OS to the under 35 and the more tech savvy users, and one is the OS of choice for those who just want things to work, without ever having to think, or bother about how, or why "it just works".
One can easily be customized and highly personalized -- allowing it's users to get under the hood of the OS, or replace it with a alternative one, and one allows it users a single dominant "portal" option (iTunes) that must be passed through for all of their actual, or potential OS content.
One is the future for the majority of mobile OS platform users -- most especially for younger (under 35) and more technically sophisticated consumers -- growing in it's overall market share by the day, and one is currently the most profitable and "integrated" (closed) mobile OS platforms - that will likely remain an "unified" and powerful option for those who prefer their tech devices and experiences to be basic, top-down, and incredibly simple to operate and interface with.
Hence....Chess vs. Checkers....
Last edited:
I'm curious, what did you find vulgar or sexist about his post?
" She hated texting on an iPhone that she used to own and needed a physical keyboard. Understandable for girls with long fingernails. Phones are like clothes, a bra. Not one size can fit all."
I'm curious, what did you find vulgar or sexist about his post?
" She hated texting on an iPhone that she used to own and needed a physical keyboard. Understandable for girls with long fingernails. Phones are like clothes, a bra. Not one size can fit all."
It was edited by one of the mods.
I'm curious, what did you find vulgar or sexist about his post?
I believe the original/pre-edited post had some colorful language for a part of a woman's anatomy
I'm not sure why you have such hate for the ZTE & Blade but it isn't a bad phone at all for the price.
Regarding ZTE's share (which you seem so hung up on), out of the top smartphone vendors that use Android, ZTE only represents 9% of the top and Huawei represent a further 7. Yes there will be some Bada and WP7 sales in there but judging by those numbers but collectively, the premium Android manufacturers sell more phones than the lower end brands at the moment.
That leaves the other 84% of top selling android manufacturers with higher end, more expensive offerings.
Android's success isn't entirely dependent on the low-end sales by ZTE.
Attachments
LTD. Here's what I think is going to happen in long term. There will be hundreds of phones you don't like made by companies you don't like who stay in business because other people support their products. In the meantime you will enjoy your iPhone and talk crap about everything else non-apple. See. I can predict the long term future of technology too
