I reckon people think that ignoring it and pretending it hasn't happened will make it go away. Or, it simply highlights that they were wrong and don't want to admit it.
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.
Apple's iPhone Continues to Outpace Smartphone Industry Growth
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I reckon people think that ignoring it and pretending it hasn't happened will make it go away. Or, it simply highlights that they were wrong and don't want to admit it.
Anti-fanboyism is just as bad as fanboyism. You are twisting and ignoring the facts in order to make your flawed argument work. Reminds me very much of LTD.
So: you are taking Q309 numbers to counter numbers from Q409 and, even more astounding, the whole of 2009? Who do you think you are going to fool with that?
Did you read that part of the news:
Q numbers are worthless to compare iPhone against competitors, because they have only one release date in the middle of the year. You need take numbers from a longer period of time.
This coming from the person that thinks this has any relevance on what is a smartphone?
Do you realise you can chuck your simcard with it's "data plan" from the network into any other GSM phone and it doens't change to core function of the phone at all?
Come on then, enlighten us all, what is the industry wide standard definition of a smartphone?
Is that free -- or is it spreading the cost of the phone over a 18/24 month period? I think the buy one, get one free is a little different.
He said the first iPhone can not install 3rd party application. This is plainly wrong. Why didn't you catch it?
OK tzeshan, where in that page does it say Symbian powered devices are NOT smartphones?
We can post links to Wikipedia all day but I'd like you to specify where a Symbian device falls short of being a (as you put it earlier in hyphens) 'smartphone'.
Like I said in the beginning, my definition will depend on how end user uses the phone. If the user does not use it as a smartphone then it is not a smartphone.
I earlier posted this breakdown...
The N-series phones are top-end devices like the N-97 which are often compared to the iPhone. And they are *priced* like the iPhone. (unlocked)
The E-series phones are mid-range devices. And sell for much less.
The Numbered Symbian devices are often called Musicphones. In Europe, such phones are free with a mid-
priced contract.
Nokia are out-performing Apple at the mid and low-end. Apple is outselling Nokia at the profitable top end.
C.
The N-series phones are top-end devices like the N-97 which are often compared to the iPhone. And they are *priced* like the iPhone. (unlocked)
The E-series phones are mid-range devices. And sell for much less.
The Numbered Symbian devices are often called Musicphones. In Europe, such phones are free with a mid-
priced contract.
Nokia are out-performing Apple at the mid and low-end. Apple is outselling Nokia at the profitable top end.
C.
Well thankfully your definition has no relevance on the industry or how sales are calculated.
Say I have a PS3 with PS2 backwards compatibility then say that I only use it to play PS2 games.
Is it a PS3 or a PS2 now?
From your own link :
Self-ownage much ?
Apparently, I need to take it slower with you Speedy (irony much ?) :
Apple sold 8.7 million phones in Q4 2009. That's more phones than Q3 2009 even though they were mid cycle and in a usually slow quarter for them. Heck it was the most iPhones they've shipped ever. Hence, the seasonnal influence was not there or at least, we can't deduce with certainty it was.
Now, even though they shipped more phones, their competitors also did, and very much so. The market grew more than Apple did. In Q3 they had 18.8 market share. In Q4, they had 16. Hence, they aren't closing the gap on RIM. RIM had a slight increase, Apple had a decrease.
I don't get how you can call me a "anit-fanboy" for stating facts. Even Macrumors reported on Apple's market share slip in Q4. This is fact.
That people want to sweep it under the rug and call the iPhone the best "smartphone" ever is not based on fact, it's based on denial.
I am not anti-Apple. I love them. If you really want to call me anti- something, call me anti-fanboy. I hate fanboys who refuse to see the reality behind the success or lack thereof of something. iPhone is 3rd in the market. That's pretty good. But it's not the best. I doubt we can call any phone "the best" seeing how there are so many different models available for different kinds of needs.
I don't know if that story's true, but it wouldn't surprise me. iPhones are, just like Macs, a rarity in the corporate environment. As an external contractor I've seen a lot of different companies, big and small, and it's all Nokia or Blackberry. (Generally)
(And HP or Dell desktops).
I love this! The iPhone is simply a better (overall) product than the rest.
A fine example proving the point of my post. Better overall product that is 3rd and has a dipping market share. Yeah, sounds so credible.
I guess all those consumers just don't know any better right ? There's no good reason to choose other models ...
Unfortunately that doesn't really hold much weight in reality. Is a car not a car when you don't drive it? Is a bookcase not a bookcase when it has no books in it? It's patently absurd to say a smartphone is only a smartphone if it is being used as a smartphone, which as you've shown, has no universally accepted definition! By definition, that would mean no phone is a smartphone! Hehe.
It is an old marketing trick, invented by John Sculley when he was still at PepsiCo (before Apple): Make sure that the numbers that are reported make your competitors believe they are ahead, even when they aren't. In the Cola wars, Sculley found out that his competitor counted the numbers of bottles sold, and not the ounces of drinks sold. Therefore PepsiCo switched to selling larger bottles, making Coca Cola believe that they were ahead (they sold more bottles) when they actually weren't (they sold less drinks).
The same here. It may be annoying for the fans of Apple, but as long as Nokia believes they are selling almost three times as many smartphones as Apple does, they don't fight back as hard as they could, which benefits Apple. In a similar way, I think Apple will try to keep iPad sales out of the statistics for "computers sold", so Acer and friends will think that Apple is no threat to their netbook sales. And Apple is probably happy about those statistics that count number of computers sold, showing Apple in the worst possible light, because all the other manufacturers are lead to believe they are still far ahead.
Limited only to Verizon and maybes Sprint(to lazy to check to see if sprint ran it as well) and RIM was not the one backing the plane. Verizon was the one forking out the cash for it. Blackberries still sold very well on ATT, T-Mobile. Neither of which ran a BOGO on blackberries.
You do know that RIM has been phasing out all the phones that can not upgrade to OS 5.0. ALL of the BOGO phones from Verizon are able to upgrade to OS 5.0. They upgrade the curve 83xx and 85x line to be able to upgrade to 5.0. Curve 8900 always has been able to go 5.0 and it is effectively what will replace the 83xx.
The pearl (81xx line) already has it 3G replacement in the line and due out before the end of 2Q and I want to say it might even be out by the end of 1Q.
You should check out the smart phone Round Robin that ran for the past 6 weeks on the sum up comments from the iphone blog about what Crackberry site stated and agrees with what Crackberry Kevin said about the BB vs iPhone. They are yin and yang. They are both very good at 2 different things. Conductivity BB wins. Multimedia iPhone wins.
Fact is that Apple's numbers are all over the place from one quarter to the next, going up and down like crazy depending on what is just released, so we are in the unfortunate situation that anybody can "prove" whatever they want by picking carefully which quarter they choose. In three years time we can look back, find a smooth trend line that fits all the data, and can discuss how things went. Today we can't.
Then of course there is the definition about what a "smartphone" is. Apple will at least for a very long time have a small percentage of total phones sold, and a much higher percentage of "high-end" phones, where the money is. But the low-end phones will become smarter and smarter, so in five years time probably every £30 pound phone will be a smartphone. Apple's percentage of "smartphone" sales will therefore drop, but it won't matter, because the percentage of "high-end phone" sales will only increase.
On the other hand the IDC report fails to address the remarkably strong effect adding new carriers has for Iphone sales. It's interesting to note that Nokia managed to increase unit shipments more that Apple even though they didn't get any new carrier to subsidy their models.