Apple Surpasses 2 Billion App Store Downloads

[BongoBanger]

Yes, Nokia is way out ahead. Sheer force of numbers, even though we're talking Symbian here. Yikes.

Symbian itself isn't bad - in fact it's very good. S60 - which is the UI layer - needs a total rewrite though.

 

[deconstruct60]

. At the moment it's in no way threatening Nokia though - remember half of those sales are in the US where Nokia has no presence.

No presence? Both AT&T and Verzion have long sold Nokia phones (some with keyboard and limited web ) . Not a dominating player for sure... but no presence is a stretch. The higher end "smarter" phones, yes (no takers from the larger phone service providers) ... those haven't hit the US with any substantive push.

 

[twoodcc]

wow, great for apple and the iphone! now how many of those are free apps?

 

[BongoBanger]

No presence? Both AT&T and Verzion have long sold Nokia phones (some with keyboard and limited web ) . Not a dominating player for sure... but no presence is a stretch. The higher end "smarter" phones, yes (no takers from the larger phone service providers) ... those haven't hit the US with any substantive push.

Sorry - I should have been clear I was talking about the smartphone market which is the one Apple competes with Nokia in.

 

[DMann]

No, that's what fanboys want to believe, that all mighty Apple never makes mistakes. When Apple says : "Who watches video on an iPod ?", they mean it. When they turn around and release a video iPod, it's not because it's been planned all along, it's because that's what consumers demanded and they simply changed their plans.

Are you implying, then, that when SJ made this statement in 4/04, he was unaware of the development which lead to the release of the first video iPod in 10/05? Seems the intent of his statement was more about subterfuge than anything else.

So you're saying that you know more than even Steve Jobs himself ? The facts are Steve himself said Web Apps were going to power to the iPhone, and that was going to be it as far as 3rd parties were concerned. The Phone was introduced as a : "Phone, iPod, Internet device".

Also a fact is they had the SDK internally is of course a given, what with the native apps Apple wrote for the initial launch (Safari, Maps, Calendar, Mail).

And finally, the fact they announced the SDK quite a bit after the homebrew scene had started reverse engineering the platform and making apps for it, outside the scope of Web Apps.

You'll deny all those facts, just because you can't believe that's how it happened ? I'm sorry, but ignoring fact shows well who's being delusional here. As far as what's in the media and in keynotes, it's clear Apple didn't intend on an app store or a native SDK with the iPhone and market pressure changed their strategy (for the better).

However, this viewpoint also goes both ways - as Apple was keenly tuned-into the "Jailbreak App" culture, do you really believe that they had no intention of building upon this, from the outset? The truth is, we really do not know, for sure, what their long term plan was, and the past mistake in judgement made by Coke does not prove that an App Store was not originally intended as a stage of this process. Attempting to proclaim that a company is flawless would be one thing, but vying to point out errors based on conjecture is quite another.

 

[*LTD*]

Back to RIM. It really depends how you look at it. Currently, RIM is ahead. Aside from the iPhone's explosive growth, there's another thing to consider.

Sure, +8M phones sold is good. 3.8M new customers is good too.

But, this is exactly how uninformed investors get clobbered in the market.

The smart phone market grew 27% year over year, the Blackberry didn't come close to that. That means the market is moving away from the Blackberry in favor of its competitors. Further, the only way RIM increased earnings was from massive cost cutting efforts. They did not come from increasing top line sales or by increasing gross margins.

Top Line Sales down, Gross Margin Percent down, Average Sales Price down, Unit Sales Growth did not match Industry Unit Growth.

These are all clear signs that the market is rejecting RIM's offerings, and that portends a very disagreeable future for RIMM Unless they make a shift toward a content-rich experience the likes of which is offered by the iPhone.

 

[KnightWRX]

These are all clear signs that the market is rejecting RIM's offerings, and that portends a very disagreeable future for RIMM Unless they make a shift toward a content-rich experience the likes of which is offered by the iPhone.

Or could it just be that a new market segment has emerged ? Look at what RIM is doing, it's doing entreprise phones, for business type people doing business type things.

iPhone is a smartphone, but it's aimed at a different demographic, people who just want to have access to information for entertainment (be it music, videos, games or a night out on the town).

So perhaps, it's not so much that RIM is getting rejected, but more that RIM hasn't yet produced a product for the new segment and demographic that is now purchasing smartphones instead of dumb phones.

However, this viewpoint also goes both ways - as Apple was keenly tuned-into the "Jailbreak App" culture, do you really believe that they had no intention of building upon this, from the outset? The truth is, we really do not know, for sure, what their long term plan was, and the past mistake in judgement made by Coke does not prove that an App Store was not originally intended as a stage of this process. Attempting to proclaim that a company is flawless would be one thing, but vying to point out errors based on conjecture is quite another.

If you want to remove all conjecture from the discussion, then only the facts remain. And the fact is, straight from the horse's mouth, that the iPhone never was to have a 3rd party developer culture built around it.

Anything else is conjecture and speculation on what was going on behind the scenes.

 

[LagunaSol]

The facts are Steve himself said Web Apps were going to power to the iPhone, and that was going to be it as far as 3rd parties were concerned.

History has shown that what Steve Jobs says publicly does not always reveal his true intentions. Again, to think that Apple originally planned to rely on Web Apps to power this significant new platform (possibly the most important platform Apple has ever created) is absurd. It makes no sense for a commoner like you and I, and it certainly makes no sense for a long-term-vision company like Apple who knows exactly where they want to go 6 months, 1 year, and 5 years from now.

Hey, he fooled you I guess.

I bet there will never be an Apple tablet either, since Steve has said there is no market for them.

 

[xIGmanIx]

To me, until apple makes their business portion of the iPhone OS, it will continue to be what i call a multimedia phone and not a smart phone. Nothing wrong with that, and with the rapid public adoption and now expectation of these devices - music/video, camera, applications, strong web browser, that possibly another category will open up all together. However, i have a work BB, and i never think i am being short changed at work because i can't load apps or that the web browser doesn't cut it. Its a smart phone that allows me to do most work away from my workstation. To me, i think the way the iphone is engineered right now, RIM and Apple aren't really competing for the business users, consumers? yes

Back to RIM. It really depends how you look at it. Currently, RIM is ahead. Aside from the iPhone's explosive growth, there's another thing to consider.

Sure, +8M phones sold is good. 3.8M new customers is good too.

But, this is exactly how uninformed investors get clobbered in the market.

The smart phone market grew 27% year over year, the Blackberry didn't come close to that. That means the market is moving away from the Blackberry in favor of its competitors. Further, the only way RIM increased earnings was from massive cost cutting efforts. They did not come from increasing top line sales or by increasing gross margins.

Top Line Sales down, Gross Margin Percent down, Average Sales Price down, Unit Sales Growth did not match Industry Unit Growth.

These are all clear signs that the market is rejecting RIM's offerings, and that portends a very disagreeable future for RIMM Unless they make a shift toward a content-rich experience the likes of which is offered by the iPhone.

Or could it just be that a new market segment has emerged ? Look at what RIM is doing, it's doing entreprise phones, for business type people doing business type things.

iPhone is a smartphone, but it's aimed at a different demographic, people who just want to have access to information for entertainment (be it music, videos, games or a night out on the town).

So perhaps, it's not so much that RIM is getting rejected, but more that RIM hasn't yet produced a product for the new segment and demographic that is now purchasing smartphones instead of dumb phones.



If you want to remove all conjecture from the discussion, then only the facts remain. And the fact is, straight from the horse's mouth, that the iPhone never was to have a 3rd party developer culture built around it.

Anything else is conjecture and speculation on what was going on behind the scenes.

 

[KnightWRX]

History has shown that what Steve Jobs says publicly does not always reveal his true intentions. Again, to think that Apple originally planned to rely on Web Apps to power this significant new platform (possibly the most important platform Apple has ever created) is absurd. It makes no sense for a commoner like you and I, and it certainly makes no sense for a long-term-vision company like Apple who knows exactly where they want to go 6 months, 1 year, and 5 years from now.

Actually, the Web apps comment makes a lot more sense than you might want to let on. Back in 2007, Web apps were a big buzz. Things like Gmail, Google docs and other "In the Cloud" services were just picking up and were promising to be the next best thing (and still are today).

A device that would be cloud enabled and connect to the cloud was just what analysts were pointing to. All computing was to be done in the cloud, as was storage of data.

So the Web apps comment, in that vision of things, isn't so far fetched at all. However, a lot of people aren't ready for the cloud just yet, which led to what we have now. A cloud connected device that can also execute local apps.

So the "Internet device" thing makes a lot of sense if you believed in the marketing/industry hype of cloud computing. I personally don't think I would ever be comfortable in such a scenario, but it's nothing new and the industry has been wanting to move to things like software as a service, network computers (a new breed of thin clients) for close to a decade now.

So it's not as clear cut as you let on.

 

[DMann]

...And the fact is, straight from the horse's mouth, that the iPhone never was to have a 3rd party developer culture built around it.

Anything else is conjecture and speculation on what was going on behind the scenes.

Statement's such as this might have been intended to merely spur WebApp development, for all we know, being that Apple had initially "claimed" that an SDK would not be made available. Statements made "straight from the horse's mouth" have, in the past, been intentionally deceptive i.e. "Who watches video on an iPod?" It is inconceivable that the iPhone OS, designed to run full capacity apps, would have been relegated to WebApps only, supplemented by a few in-house apps. Taking into account the relative speed at which the App Store emerged, it is more difficult to imagine that it had not been in development all along.

 

[silentnite]

Hats off to apple & all the creative developers, we salute you. I have a few request, may I have a camera in my next Ipod Touch please. I'd also like a little more power and perhaps wifi N. Thank You! that will be all.

 

[deconstruct60]

Back to RIM. It really depends how you look at it.
....
But, this is exactly how uninformed investors get clobbered in the market.

The smart phone market grew 27% year over year, the Blackberry didn't come close to that. That means the market is moving away from the Blackberry in favor of its competitors.

As others have pointed out, your hidden assumption here is that the smartphone market didn't expand in scope. You try to assert both. One that there is a 'new' major subsegment in the smartphone market where it is "play" rather than "work" is the focus. Second, that RIM is being rejected in something they aren't perusing. (exactly when did it become RIM's objective to be a great video iPod? )

Further, the only way RIM increased earnings was from massive cost cutting efforts. They did not come from increasing top line sales or by increasing gross margins.

Just like vast majority of other suppliers into the business equipment market. The major forcing component to that is the jacked up world economy. Not Apple nor the iPhone.

Top Line Sales down,

Like every other major business equipment supplier.

Gross Margin Percent down, Average Sales Price down,

just Like Macs huh? Who have thought? *cough*

Unit Sales Growth did not match Industry Unit Growth.

Year over year same targeted market sales?
This is the same hocus pocus that retailers play when you don't track year-over-year same store sales.

These are all clear signs that the market is rejecting RIM's offerings,

Except for perhaps the last... not really. If you want to spin doctor it that way perhaps. However, you have completely thrown away all the macroeconomic context in which these results are being reported in. As if that was a non factor.

and that portends a very disagreeable future for RIMM Unless they make a shift toward a content-rich experience the likes of which is offered by the iPhone.

So RIM's answer is to compete most heavily in a sub market segment where Apple has a decided advantage. Yeah, brilliant strategy. *cough*




if there was a margin shifting thing to copy from Apple it would be to start charging folks more money for OS software updates. That's where Apple's margin differences primarily are. They are selling more system software than RIM is.

Clean up the models proliferation a bit. [ e.g., fewer models. Like flip phones... why (unless it was a large screen) ? ]


Not so much of an issue with the app store. That isn't the huge margin differentiator.

 

[kdarling]

How can it be a "misstep" if they never shipped an iPhone with a plastic screen?

If you were around, you'd know that Apple intended to ship it with a plastic screen. But so many people complained that the screen, especially a touch one, would get very scratched, that Apple changed to glass just before sales launch.

Ah, the old "only idiots buy iPhones" chestnut. I assume all the tech sophisticates are buying...Windows Mobile devices? Hilarious.

I never said that, you did. Please don't put words in other people's mouths. You only reveal your own mindset.

I meant that people were willing to let a lot of missing items go at first, but over time they will demand more features. What works in the beginning, does not work forever.

I think Apple is targeting the consumer almost-perfectly with their iPhone/iPod touch strategy. Would I like to see more? Of course. But you certainly can't fault their business strategy thus far (except for the AT&T exclusivity - perhaps a good move at launch, but that ball and chain needs to be cut loose and pronto).

No one disagrees with that. What we find ridiculous, is the childish concept that Apple always planned for things to go the way they did. A lot of experienced people on this forum have spent too many decades in similar circumstances, not to be able to instantly spot an unplanned switch in direction.

Are you implying, then, that when SJ made this statement in 4/04, he was unaware of the development which lead to the release of the first video iPod in 10/05? Seems the intent of his statement was more about subterfuge than anything else.

There are definitely cases where Jobs misdirects. For example, he never said that video was a bad idea. In fact, he said that they could be working on it at the moment. What he DID say, was that he didn't believe that viewing full length feature movies on a tiny screen would sell well. So they came out with one intended mostly for TV shows and music clips.

However, this viewpoint also goes both ways - as Apple was keenly tuned-into the "Jailbreak App" culture, do you really believe that they had no intention of building upon this, from the outset?

If you recall from interviews, Jobs originally winked at the jailbreakers. I think he was just happy at first that people were paying so much attention to the iPhone.

You could hear and see this attitude change dramatically when Apple had to admit at the 4Q07 earnings call that something like 18% of sales were being unlocked. Not just jailbroken, mind you, but unlocked to other carriers with no revenue sharing agreement.

The smart phone market grew 27% year over year, the Blackberry didn't come close to that.

The smartphone market grew 27% in TOTAL. It is a sum of the gains of all the companies involved.

RIM's part of the smartphone world in 2008 was 17.3%, so they needed only to grow that much of the total 127% to meet their part of the increase, or just under 5% growth. They did better than that, with 8%.

 

[kdarling]

It is inconceivable that the iPhone OS, designed to run full capacity apps, would have been relegated to WebApps only, supplemented by a few in-house apps.

Inconceivable? "You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means." (The Princess Bride)

Have you ever developed a vertical application? It's quite common to use a powerful OS simply to allow for in-house native apps.

Especially so in this case, where Jobs originally pointed out to the New York Times in Jan 2007 that he felt the iPhone was "more like an iPod than a computer" (an attitude that visibly changed later on).

“We define everything that is on the phone,” Jobs said. “You don’t want your phone to be like a PC. The last thing you want is to have loaded three apps on your phone and then you go to make a call and it doesn’t work anymore. These are more like iPods than they are like computers.”

Taking into account the relative speed at which the App Store emerged, it is more difficult to imagine that it had not been in development all along.

You're right, it was. Just not for mass third party apps.

Jobs originally stated that they intended to sell at least some new software apps (from them, or Google, or a select few partners). So they would've developed at least the basis of such a store.

Still, it didn't open until nine months after he announced it, which isn't that quick.

 

[inkswamp]

Niiice. I can see the next Apple commercial:

"2B (shows iPhone, iPod Touch and some apps) or not 2B (shows Zune, other phones), that is the question. Apple, now with over 2 Billion apps downloaded."

Meh... I think it's very bad form to poke fun at a smaller competitor in an ad. I don't mind Apple doing it with the Mac (since the Mac's numbers are dwarfed by Windows PCs) but it would be tacky if they poked fun at the Zune or some other smart phone in an ad.

That, btw, is why I think the laptop hunter ads are so pathetic.

 

[LagunaSol]

If you were around, you'd know that Apple intended to ship it with a plastic screen. But so many people complained that the screen, especially a touch one, would get very scratched, that Apple changed to glass just before sales launch.

Or perhaps Apple found during the development process that glass was better than plastic? Perhaps the change to glass wasn't a last minute haphazard decision based on the whims of the punditry?

I love how Apple is even criticized for what the naysayers theorize they might have done wrong. "They would have screwed this up, but then they didn't." Uh huh. Unbelievable.

 

[KnightWRX]

You're right, it was. Just not for mass third party apps.

Jobs originally stated that they intended to sell at least some new software apps (from them, or Google, or a select few partners). So they would've developed at least the basis of such a store.

Still, it didn't open until nine months after he announced it, which isn't that quick.

Not to mention it's basically using the same infrastructure as the iTunes Music store which was all readily available. It's not like they had to build the thing from the ground up, they already had a very solid foundation for an online store in place, they already had an internal SDK for their in-house apps.

All in all, 9 months is a short time to market if you have nothing to build on. If everything is just ready, 9 months to polish and ship is a pretty long time.

I don't see why people are still arguing this point. The facts are Apple had a Web app strategy at first. Everything else is speculation on what was going on behind the scenes.

And again I say to all those arguing that Apple had a master plan : the fact they didn't have a master plan and still pulled off this reversal is pretty postive and shows the corporate culture at Apple is very able to adjust to market pressure effectively. This is a good thing. We're not Apple naysayers, on the contrary, we're praising them on a job well done.

 

[jonnysods]

Wow, that's a lot of bandwidth. I wonder if that's what the huge server farm in North Carolina is for - Mobile Me, and billions of iTunes downloads.

 

[DMann]

These are all clear signs that the market is rejecting RIM's offerings, and that portends a very disagreeable future for RIMM Unless they make a shift toward a content-rich experience the likes of which is offered by the iPhone.

Your observations are insightful - one might surmise, then, that the outlook for RIMM seems to be becoming increasingly (G)RIMM.

 

[*LTD*]

The writing's on the wall.

http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/320245/lloyds_international_banking_iphone?fp=16&fpid=1

 

[BongoBanger]

While the rollout is dependent on policy development and approval from head office in the UK

That'll be tough. I work for LTSB - or LBG as we are now - and it's a Blackberry shop through and through. That said, International is a small arm of the core business so you never know.

 

[KnightWRX]

The writing's on the wall.

http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/320245/lloyds_international_banking_iphone?fp=16&fpid=1

If your only proof for the "writing on the wall" is this, then I got news for you. Linux is the big winner for desktop entreprise use :

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1000000121,39171380,00.htm

According to your own graphics, RIM is still gaining market share :

And iPhone recently got a big negative hit in the entreprise market, when it was discovered the device was lying about it's encryption capabilities in order to connect to Exchange in a secured installation :

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-10354209-37.html.

So seriously, you might just want to tone it down a bit.