Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Initial Sales of Original iPhone, Droid, and Nexus One Compared

bedifferent said:
Well, the topic I brought out wasn't addressed to you, it was addressed to someone who painted Apple=BAD, Google=GOOD, that was a quote from their page. You chimed in and made it about you. I addressed the issue, and here we are, round and round and round we go.
Click to expand...

I don't think the article said "Apple=BAD" - it said Apple's tightest control over iPhone was not healthy.

bedifferent said:
Truthfully, I've debated this topic - and others in the similar vein - (Windows BAD Apple GOOD or Windows MESSIAH Apple DEVIL) for years, and my carpal tunnel is flaring up, it's ooooold ;).
Click to expand...

Fair enough - we should not have discussed Google and its handling of Privacy and Windows market share at all - both of which were irrelevant to this discussion. We should have limited it to Google Phone vs Apple Phone. But anyway I think we all said what we wanted to.
 
bedifferent said:
I'd wager that your life would be fairly well represented through your surfing habits. You'd be surprised how much can be gathered regarding individuals over the course of a users online habits. Very surprised. If it wasn't the case, then marketers wouldn't be paying big bucks to purchase that information. ;)
Click to expand...

Not surprised at all, but then again I don't care that anyone knows that I am interested in (in no particular order) Apple, iPhones, Google, Nexus Ones, Android, Music, body building, Africa, Europe, and mostly PORNOGRAPHY. (And defifinitley not in that order) :D



bedifferent said:
You and I are exceptions to the rule as the average user isn't aware of "cookies" and Google's practices. The general internet/computer user is blissfully unaware that their information is being gathered and sold. Why isn't that option in big, bold letters on Google's main page?

http://www.google.com

Interesting that the "Privacy" link is the SMALLEST link of the Google page. Heck, I didn't even know it was there until you mentioned it. Interesting eh ;).
Click to expand...

The reason Google doesn't make it the biggest boldest thing on their home page is the same reason no business does anything like that. It's against their business interests to do so.

C'mon, how big are the warning signs on McDonald's telling you that eating their food will make you fat and kill you? How big are the warning signs on AT&T stores telling you that holding that cellphone to your head all day long will give you brain cancer? How big are the warning signs on your bank telling you that they're overcharging you interest? Don't hold Google to any higher a standard than other businesses.

I tend to agree with the post a few up from here that warn this line of divergence is going way off-topic. Perhaps we should start another Google is EVIL thread and post there, or move to any of the many others where the Google "haters" have hijacked the discussion. (NOT saying you're a hater of anything!!!)
 
bedifferent said:
Any time you search for something using Google, your searches and IP are recorded. For example, Google knows I have interests in Apple based systems and technology as I visit and search for those topics on a regular basis. Given that information, marketers are more than willing to pay top dollar in order to call my home or sell my information to corporations who then mail me flyers or magazines. Where do you think the incentive lies for telephone marketers and whom to target? Those marketers get their data from companies such as Google. It's a system, it works, whether you like it or not.
Click to expand...

Not on my system. Google is no longer my default browser on any of my Macs. Google is evil - pure and simple.

ChazUK said:
Those are carrier offers and absolutely nothing to do with HTC/Motorola. Verizon had paid for the handsets and got to charge a 2nd line for the 'free' phone.

What is the problem with that?:confused:
Click to expand...

The problem is that you're the one who is confused. The statement was that BOGO has helped Droid to sell more than it would have otherwise. Why would it matter whether the carrier paid for it or the phone manufacturer? The statement is clearly true either way.

parapup said:
How is Google controlling your Internet experience or your owning your information? Sure they make money off the Internet/advertising but I don't think they sell your private data nor do they dictate what sites you can visit or what software you can run on your computer or Phone.
Click to expand...

Yes, Google does sell your private information. Read their terms of service.
 
bedifferent said:
I don't. I haven't ever used BootCamp's drivers, I let Windows search for the drivers, or visited the device manufacturers main page to obtain them for me.

Sound: RealTek
Video: ATI
Bluetooth: Generic
AHCI: Intel
Eject: Right click, "Eject"
CD/DVD drivers: Generic

No need for Bootcamp. I may use Bootcamp to partition a drive, but I run Windows on a separate hard drive in my Mac Pro, so not needed. In the end, it's seamless. The best running Windows system has been on my Mac Pro, haven't has a BSoD ever :).
Click to expand...

I think you can get the "Keyboard Driver" for the eject button off the Mac OSX install disc.
 
distortedloop said:
C'mon, how big are the warning signs on McDonald's telling you that eating their food will make you fat and kill you?
Click to expand...

Lord I wish most would realize this reality. Driving cross country more than a few times, it amazes me the differences in health and physical appearance between the coastal cities and the mid-west. I wish more people would put down their iPhones and Big Mac's and pick up some weights and healthy food. Then again, the fast food industry makes bank off of selling low cost, super sized food items while the pharmaceutical companies back bigger bank in selling cholesterol control, diabetic oriented and other medications to those unhealthy individuals. God I hate corporate America sometimes LOL

As I mentioned earlier, my comment wasn't addressed to everyone but one person, then everyone saw fit to jump on me lol. I was simply pointing out the erroneous information in one users comment, that's all. A few hours later... :D
 
distortedloop said:
I thought the BB plan was $15 per month more. It would be easy for any of us to actually go to AT&T to check that out and post back. Any takers...? :confused:
Click to expand...

I just checked, it's $30/month, as is the data plan for other smart phones.

There may be an enterprise BlackBerry plan that allows you more access to business-type stuff that costs more, but it's not on their personal website, maybe it's on the business one.
 
distortedloop said:
But we're kind of drifting off topic at this point. :(
Click to expand...

parapup said:
Fair enough - we should not have discussed Google and its handling of Privacy and Windows market share at all - both of which were irrelevant to this discussion. We should have limited it to Google Phone vs Apple Phone. But anyway I think we all said what we wanted to.
Click to expand...

bedifferent said:
AMEN. Besides, my head hurts lol :p.
Click to expand...

distortedloop said:
I tend to agree with the post a few up from here that warn this line of divergence is going way off-topic...
Click to expand...

Well, we three came to same conclusion within a minute of each other, but those who haven't been keeping up are bound to jump in, so it's not going to stop any time soon! :D
 
bedifferent said:
As I mentioned earlier, my comment wasn't addressed to everyone but one person, then everyone saw fit to jump on me lol. I was simply pointing out the erroneous information in one users comment, that's all. A few hours later... :D
Click to expand...

That's just the nature of internet forums. I've gotten sucked into my fair share of debates I really hadn't intended to for doing the exact same thing. It goes with the territory, I guess.;)
 
jragosta said:
The problem is that you're the one who is confused. The statement was that BOGO has helped Droid to sell more than it would have otherwise. Why would it matter whether the carrier paid for it or the phone manufacturer? The statement is clearly true either way.
Click to expand...
Show me where the Motorola Droid (Not the Droid Eris) was on a BOGOF offer within the first 74 days of release (which the graph is counting) to solve my confusion!

Please do.... :eek:
 
my company picks up the tab on the BB, so i don't really have control over that per say. Plus they are super tight with data plans etc, so unless i could just swap sims and play dumb, i probably wouldn't do it right now. I did that before with my iphone and it worked for a while, but now i think AT&T blocks that some how, which is stupid because data is data.

yg17 said:
I just checked, it's $30/month, as is the data plan for other smart phones.

There may be an enterprise BlackBerry plan that allows you more access to business-type stuff that costs more, but it's not on their personal website, maybe it's on the business one.
Click to expand...
 
yg17 said:
I just checked, it's $30/month, as is the data plan for other smart phones.

There may be an enterprise BlackBerry plan that allows you more access to business-type stuff that costs more, but it's not on their personal website, maybe it's on the business one.
Click to expand...

Yeah, they charge more for accounts that access business email servers, I think.

One of the big things (yes, revolutionary, LagunaSol - LOL) for the iPhone was the significantly cheaper rates for unlimited data when it first came out, even when the 3G came out and they raised it from $20 to $30. I wonder when they brought other phone's plans into parity price-wise with the iPhone.

xIGmanIx said:
my company picks up the tab on the BB, so i don't really have control over that per say. Plus they are super tight with data plans etc, so unless i could just swap sims and play dumb, i probably wouldn't do it right now. I did that before with my iphone and it worked for a while, but now i think AT&T blocks that some how, which is stupid because data is data.
Click to expand...

AT&T knows within a few minutes that you've switched devices, and its reflected on the myaccount page if you log in.

I imagine that if you're accessing an exchange server, they assume you're a business user, and want you to pay business rates.

As for data is data, well, why charge less to business users when you can get away with charging more. I always found it interesting that landlines were substantially more expensive for business phones than residential, and business cable is more expensive than residential. Must mostly be a matter of they can get away with charging more to the businesses, or perhaps an assumption that business users will generate higher traffic on the network.
 
can't do that as it didn't happen. Droid had lower price point, the end. Apple could have changed their price point and they didn't end of story. enough with the "if apple had.....or if Google had....."

cocky jeremy said:
Compare prices of the phones. Droids are like $100. iPhones were what, $600? Imagine the original iPhone at the same price.. easily 2-3 million.
Click to expand...
 
i rocked the iphone for like a year before AT&T hit up my company that it wasn't a BB. Hopefully since they are paying for data anyways, the could let me use my own hardware and pay the difference which at most would only be like $120/YR

distortedloop said:
AT&T knows within a few minutes that you've switched devices, and its reflected on the myaccount page if you log in.
Click to expand...
 
dgree03 said:
All this shows is that if you do a advertising blitz, sell your phone in a B&M, put it on a larger carrier it will sell alot.

Frankly nexus one selling 135k WITHOUT a B&M or TV slots is incredible if you ask me!
Click to expand...

The Nexus One may not have had a lot of advertising money behind it, but there was a massive amount of buzz on the Web about this phone. There's no reason it shouldn't have had more sales. 135k is a disappointing launch for any device no matter how you spin it.

And I'd like to know if that 135k includes the thousands of freebies Google was rumored to have handed out shortly after the launch.
 
inkswamp said:
And I'd like to know if that 135k includes the thousands of freebies Google was rumored to have handed out shortly after the launch.

cmaier said:
Yes
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

So we're comparing announced sales numbers by Apple vs. Flurry's estimates that are based on surfing analytics. Take the Flurry numbers with a grain or two of salt, depending on how much you really trust them, I'm never sure I do.

For all we know, under some kind of SOX accounting rules, the Apple freebies to employees had to be accounted for as sold devices (Apple purchased them as gifts to employees?) and are polluting that number. Any real accountants that can comment on that?

Also bear in mind that any analytics numbers you might find in the archives for the iPhone would include the thousands of freebie units Apple gave to every Apple employee at the time of its launch.

What's the point? 135k is only 125k in actual sales? Are we so desperate to prove the Nexus One a sales flop that we're going to quibble over those two numbers? Frankly, either way, sales-wise, the iPhone is clearly the winner, great! Is there anyone that surprised by that? :confused:
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows CE; IEMobile 6.9) VZW:SCH-i760 PPC 240x320)

LagunaSol said:
AidenShaw said:
My advice is to never buy Apple hardware solely to run Windows - you are at Cupertino's mercy.
Click to expand...

Whoa, there's a shocker. You could just be honest and say "My advice is to never buy Apple hardware."
Click to expand...

But that would be inaccurate ,
since I have recommended Apples
to friends and relatives.
 
Who cares? I still want one. When my AT&T contract is up and when it is avail on Verizon network, I going to get one. :)
 
bedifferent said:
but Apple hasn't made their business successful through the sole purpose of selling user information as Google has done.
Click to expand...

That isn't true. Google is an advertising company. They make the bulk of their money by selling ads. (AdWord, search ad placement , etc. ). They may make an additional amount selling some aggregate info but buy and large they make it selling ads. Selling ads is not selling your personal info.

There is a pricing component to ads. If can say who showing ad to, some folks will pay more to place the ad. For example, people who are located in Cupertino a local flower Cupertino store might pay slightly more to have an ad show up to when you search for ' florist' or 'rose' . Likewise may want to know in aggregate how many times folks searched on that term in that area. However, none of the ad pricing is hooked to "Bob at 1 Infinite Loop searches for roses every mothers day" kinds of information. It isn't the raw data it is the refined (post blending in the data warehouse and/or aggregator) that is at issue.

The vast majority of all companies gather and grind data about their customers. it allows them to be better providers. If not doing it, not particularly following best business practices.

Similarly, people confuse privacy with anonymity. They are not the same thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back