Apple Becomes Fourth-Largest Mobile Phone Vendor

[gnasher729]

Only a small fraction of those smartphones were N-Series devices.
N-Series are Nokia's real smartphones.

In this graph, it is the purple line that represents devices that are competitive with Blackberry/Android and iPhone. The red line represents "numbered" devices which are rarely used to move data. Putting these in the smartphone category is misleading. People who want smartphone do not go out and buy them.

C.

So it seems Nokia has introduced some new phones that are officially "smart phones" but are really cheap and bought by people who have no use for a smart phone at all ("I just want to buy a phone to make phone calls, but I don't want to buy the cheapest phone in the shop" -> buys a very cheap smartphone). That explains the 61% growth (plenty of people not wanting a smart phone now end up buying one by accident) and the huge decline in average sale price (these 61% buy phones that are really cheap).

Counting them as smartphone users is as misleading as counting me as a Linux user (because my TV runs Linux, my hard disc recorder runs Linux, my TomTom runs Linux, and my router runs Linux, and if I buy a new microwave, that will probably run Linux, too. And I have a suspicion my car stereo might run Linux. ) It seems that Nokia is behind both Apple and RIM in "real" smart phones and they are definitely far behind these two in smart phone revenue.

Just wondering: How did you find that graph?

 

[gorgeousninja]

Having these devices grouped in the same category as Blackberries, iPhones and Android devices is stupid.

C.

errmm it's a global survey of PHONES...all phones, smart-phones, dumb-phones, analogue, rotary, you know...phones!.... Nokia has the largest percentage of the mobile phone market, Apple is fourth...not that hard really.

 

[skeep5]

Wow!

 

[Carniphage]

errmm it's a global survey of PHONES...all phones, smart-phones, dumb-phones, analogue, rotary, you know...phones!.... Nokia has the largest percentage of the mobile phone market, Apple is fourth...not that hard really.

Wow, you are right!
(apart from rotary)

That makes Nokia look even worse.

C.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

yet next quarter Apple will fall back below Rim. 3Q is meaning less right now. Apple gets a massive spike in sales and Rim tends to not release much during the 3Q. The Touch was only on AT&T during 3Q and just starting getting on the rest world wide. Also Rim tends to roll out its new stuff in 4Q and 1Q

 

[Carniphage]

Just wondering: How did you find that graph?

Good at googling.

I typed "Nokia converged"

C.

 

[Doctor Q]

Apple's next efforts should be to figure out how to (1) sell more than one mobile phone to each customer and (2) sell phones for babies. After all, their iPhone sales are currently limited to the population of the earth, not including infants!

 

[SandynJosh]

Wow!! RIM had an impressive 45% growth, which is very respectable, normally, only to be leapfrogged by Apple's 90% growth!

Apple and RIM are doing very well in spite of only selling smart phones to even be listed in a list of companies that sell utility phones as well as smart phones. It is interesting to be that those two companies had the greatest growth rates this quarter too. It says something as to where the market is headed.

Poor Moto, to have sunk into the "others" category. Who'd have expected that even five years ago?

 

[claus1225]

I think this result is actually biased against Apple because it essentially just makes 1 model of cellphone.

All other vendors listed have at least multiple models in production.

It's like comparing Lamborghini or Ferrari with Toyota.

 

[Carniphage]

Wow!! RIM had an impressive 45% growth, which is very respectable, normally, only to be leapfrogged by Apple's 90% growth!

RIM are suffering from quite rapidly declining profit-per-unit. Which I think is worrying sign.

C.

 

[aegisdesign]

Only a small fraction of those smartphones were N-Series devices.
N-Series are Nokia's real smartphones.

In this graph, it is the purple line that represents devices that are competitive with Blackberry/Android and iPhone. The red line represents "numbered" devices which are rarely used to move data. Putting these in the smartphone category is misleading. People who want smartphone do not go out and buy them.

C.

Total rubbish. They all run the same software (more or less - there's different versions of course - it's Nokia after all) and generally have the same features from a cheap £80 PAYG 5230 to the £429 N8.

You get better hardware and more bundled software on the higher end models but even the 5230 comes with Ovi Maps, email, Facebook app and a web browser.

The problem with the N series is that the cheaper phones have just got better and the N series didn't. There was no differentiation. That's why the graph looks like that and why Nokia's Average Selling Point has gone down. People realised you could get a smartphone for much less and there was little point getting an N-Series.

Nokia realised this which was why they were saying earlier in the year that the N8 was the last N series with Symbian and going forward it was to be MeeGo. I'm not sure they'll still do that though. MeeGo is 6-9 months off and They've changed plans on Symbian, ditching Symbian^4 (which was 6 months late) for continuous updates to Symbian^3 as a base.

 

[Truffy]

Nokia and Samsung must be crapping themselves with Apple so close on their heels

 

[Carniphage]

Total rubbish. They all run the same software (more or less - there's different versions of course - it's Nokia after all) and generally have the same features from a cheap £80 PAYG 5230 to the £429 N8.

No one. And I mean no one, who needs a smartphone, goes out and buy one of these numbered devices. They might buy an Android handset. They might buy a Blackberry or an iPhone. If they have had a mild cranial blow they might even buy an N8. But these shovelware smartphones are commercially irrelevant.

If we look at global internet traffic, we get to see what platforms are actually being used as Smartphones.

Yep. All those millions of Nokia smartphones are used for making calls. And nothing else.

C.

 

[Carniphage]

Nokia and Samsung must be crapping themselves with Apple so close on their heels

I'd image the self-crapping came to a bit of a climax when Apple passed them in revenues. I think they are more in the cleaning-up and sobbing stage now.

C.

 

[Truffy]

Not bad for a company that has only made 4 different models of phones (and 2 of those look virtually identical)

Rather more like one model of phone that they've updated/upgraded. They never have more than two current at the same time. So it's like VW's Golf, rather than the full VW range. Now, Nokia and Samsung offer a range of models at any given time.

 

[aegisdesign]

Apple sells their iphones for roughly 600 $, Nokia sells their phones for 60 $. So Apple's market share in value (14 MM * 600 = 8.4 B$) is actually above Nokia's (110 MM * 60 = 6.6 B$). An that's not even talking about the profits

Why bother picking figures out your ass when you can go straight to the actual figures?

http://www.nokia.com/press/press-releases/showpressrelease?newsid=1453008

Net Sales were 7.2 billion Euro (About 10 billion US$) from 110m units. Average Selling Price per handset was 65 Euro (about $90)

Apple don't release figures for just the iPhone other than unit numbers so you can't actually work out their ASP. Where are you pulling 600$ from?

 

[Carniphage]

Why bother picking figures out your ass when you can go straight to the actual figures?

http://www.nokia.com/press/press-releases/showpressrelease?newsid=1453008

Net Sales were 7.2 billion Euro (About 10 billion US$) from 110m units. Average Selling Price per handset was 65 Euro (about $90)

Apple don't release figures for just the iPhone other than unit numbers so you can't actually work out their ASP. Where are you pulling 600$ from?

$600 is pretty close I think. Remember you have to use the unsubsidised price. For every $200 phone sold. Apple get a further $400 from the carrier (or thereabouts).

Can you work out Nokias profit per handset from the figures you have?

C.

 

[ikir]

Why should this be a joke - its my personal preference.

Firstly, iPhone SDK keeps you at arms length which limits the potential software, I'll give you two examples: You cannot utilize Bluetooth fully - for example, Bluetooth data transfer - i.e., files and syncing ( iSync ). Wireless syncing is far more convenient than wired. If I want to transfer a large file, I'll use wired.

Yes, this is right but not a big deal since bt is available for anything else, just not file transfer between non-iOS to iOS. Calbe sync is ok, wifi will come but again you can be right in this. BTW using mobile me or other services like exchange is much more convenient, you synch only for big files and you will do it with cable anyway.

Nokia also comes with OVI Maps.. which is great - as a replacement SatNav - voice guided too.. free including map updates. Maps are stored on the phone... cell phone coverage isn't 100%, a consideration if your app is pulling maps remotely.

Tried OVI and isn't anything special. Navmii is available for 3€. For iPhone you have about 150.000 free apps most Nokia don't have (or don't have for free). 3€ for a gps apps with maps and voice and it is better than Ovi Maps. PS: i use and love navigon, it cost much more but i think it is awesome.

Also, I tether my computer quite a lot - so I get the option of using WIFI ( or for long periods, a USB cable which uses less power ), also tether iPod quite a lot too.

Tethering is free, it depends on carrier. Here in italy i can tether for free my my phone (3 Ita carrier). Don't blame iPhone. You can do it without limitation with Nokia just for 1 reason: few cares about Nokia data, since 99% (i work in IT tech) will not use a Nokia for more than a phone call or sms. And believe me 1% is optimistic. Do you think Apple don't want everyone to use tethering if operators agree?

I don't like the Apple walled garden - if you do , great but I don't. Personal preference.

I own like 6 Nokias, apps are crap on all of them, always been.

I also multitask a lot - which is unrestricted multi-tasking ( unlike iPhone's limited version ) which doesn't degrade the battery life very much at all ( application dependant of course - if your running an app that uses GPS in the background the battery life will degrade faster )

I think and most devs i know agree, iPhone multistaking is the best approach. Anyway agree or not, you have here too. And it was already fine for few app when you had only push notification.

QuickOffice was free - so I can edit documents on the go, which I do occasionally ( also available for iPhone ).

i paid 3€ for it in promo, and it deserve that money, i would have donated if it was a free app. You have other 100 app to see and edit documents on iPhone, some free. QuickOffice is pretty cool on iPhone, much more better than Nokia version at least last time i've tried 1 year ago.

People dismiss Symbian but its due to lack of understanding - it is very efficient - including its power management and a very mature smartphone OS. An unfortunate side of Symbian it has been - up until recently - a bitch to develop for. However, its getting far easier due to QT and better development tools.

All users i know with Nokia, says their cellphone is crap and nodoby i've ever know at work, in my shop, in IT company were i did tech assistance, parents and friends ever send an email with a Nokia. But all says menu, users interface, stability is crap. And i have to agree.

 

[aegisdesign]

So it seems Nokia has introduced some new phones that are officially "smart phones" but are really cheap and bought by people who have no use for a smart phone at all ("I just want to buy a phone to make phone calls, but I don't want to buy the cheapest phone in the shop" -> buys a very cheap smartphone). That explains the 61% growth (plenty of people not wanting a smart phone now end up buying one by accident) and the huge decline in average sale price (these 61% buy phones that are really cheap).

Are you serious?

Plenty of people want a smartphone but aren't prepared to pay the ridiculous prices Apple charge.

Plenty of people buy iPhones because they are cool, not because they actually need a smartphone, and then never use the smartphone features. I know loads of people that do that. They also have Range Rovers even though they've no intention of going off-road.

It seems that Nokia is behind both Apple and RIM in "real" smart phones and they are definitely far behind these two in smart phone revenue.

How on earth is a Blackberry more advanced than a Symbian based phone? Even Nokia's S40 phones are more advanced.

Apple occupy the high end price wise yet are missing so many features it's funny. Bluetooth file transfer? OTA syncing? Wireless syncing? SIP support? Real multitasking? The list goes on and on. Sure, they have a nice UI.

Nokia earned around $10 billion from their smartphones last quarter alone. RIM $4.62 billion. Apple don't release figures but lets take the earlier guess at 14.1*$600 = about $8.4 billion. So, Nokia is still quite far AHEAD in smart phone revenue. Profit of course is a different matter. Nokia don't have the margins Apple have as their phones cost less and they spend way too much on R&D.

 

[Enigma55]

Obviously from these numbers most people agree that the iPhone is the way to go for a smartphone purchase. Nothing else seems to be able to compete with it. I predict that Apple will eventually have 90% of the total smartphone market. Regular cell phones are quickly being shoved into a small niche of people anyway (ie for emergency use only, disposable use, etc).

 

[aegisdesign]

No one. And I mean no one, who needs a smartphone, goes out and buy one of these numbered devices.

You're serious aren't you?

Not one of those 15 million people a quarter thought "I'd like a cheap smartphone that does acceptable email, passable browsing, facebook and has excellent sat nav and I'm only prepared to pay about £100 tops and £10-15 a month". No one?

They might buy an Android handset. They might buy a Blackberry or an iPhone. If they have had a mild cranial blow they might even buy an N8. But these shovelware smartphones are commercially irrelevant.

Not to Nokia who earned about $4 billion selling them.

If we look at global internet traffic, we get to see what platforms are actually being used as Smartphones.

Yep. All those millions of Nokia smartphones are used for making calls. And nothing else.

C.

Those are AdMob stats from one mobile advertising firm. It doesn't show internet usage, it shows which platform shows the most advertising on AdMob's network.

Please read http://mobithinking.com/blog/ad-network-mobile-metrics-reports-head2head

If I wanted to show Nokia in a good light I could use InMobi's stats...

"According to research from InMobi, Nokia smartphones are more popular than Apple's iPhone as a platform for mobile advertising. InMobi found 48 per cent of all its display ad impressions were carried on Nokia handsets in July, while Apple had 8 per cent of the market."

Source: http://www.networkworld.com/news/2010/092310-inmobi-nokia-leads-apple-in.html?hpg1=bn

 

[CFreymarc]

How is Nokia at the top. Honestly I don't think i've ever seen someone that doesn't have a blackberry/iPhone.

Nokia is in the cherished or infamous (considering how your view it) position of "owning the bottom" of an industry. You want a cheap / no thrills or a phone with just text messaging, Nokia has the most offering for that.

At various conferences, Nokia has admitted they totally missed out on the smart-phone trend. Some inside considered smart-phones a nice market looking at how exotic the devices like the original Treo devices were and that is not mentioning price.

These smart-phones going mainstream and supplementing laptop field use totally caught them by surprise.

 

[firewood]

Easier to develop for than either iOS or Android now IME since it's C++ and Qt is nice. No awful ObjectiveC syntax.

It's so awful and difficult that a number of pre-teens, including at least one 12 year old, have written Objective C apps that are good enough to sell in the iTunes App store.

And C++ syntax is far more awful than Objective C, especially if you want to understand all the language's features, options and corner cases enough to read anybody's code.

 

[aegisdesign]

Nokia is in the cherished or infamous (considering how your view it) position of "owning the bottom" of an industry. You want a cheap / no thrills or a phone with just text messaging, Nokia has the most offering for that.

At various conferences, Nokia has admitted they totally missed out on the smart-phone trend. Some inside considered smart-phones a nice market looking at how exotic the devices like the original Treo devices were and that is not mentioning price.

These smart-phones going mainstream and supplementing laptop field use totally caught them by surprise.

Nokia have been producing smartphones since the 1990s. Other than a weird IBM thing in the early 1990s, they pretty much defined what a smartphone was for over a decade with the Communicator line and early N and E series phones.

What they missed out on is the high end touchscreen trend as defined by Apple and the great UI and rich development environment Apple brought to the smartphone. They've been very, very slow to compete and their first attempt was poor by comparison.

 

[aegisdesign]

It's so awful and difficult that a number of pre-teens, including at least one 12 year old, have written Objective C apps that are good enough to sell in the iTunes App store.

And C++ syntax is far more awful than Objective C, especially if you want to understand all the language's features, options and corner cases enough to read anybody's code.

Personally, I find C++ more readable and easier to understand but then I'm an ancient 41 year old programmer with bad habits, not a 12 year old.

Saying that, there's plenty of talent in 12 year olds...

http://conversations.nokia.com/2010/10/12/app-developer-at-12-years-old/