What Apple needs to start doing...

[Mr Hill]

Actually, I didn't mention the 4.8" screen and wasn't specifically referring to that one. All of the Android screens are in the 4+" range, I think most around 4.3-4.5, even at the low end of the price range. But of course there are a lot of phones which have a wide range of screen sizes and types, and the S3 is at the top end.

Apple does have a free phone (3GS) and a competitive cheap one (the 4 starts at $99), so if price was the main consideration we would see those sales going to Apple if all else was considered equal. The fact that Android is still gaining implies that other features, such as the screen among others, are compelling enough to sell the phone.

I figured the free 3GS would be brought up. The flaw in that argument is that it is only available on AT&T and the available rate plans on AT&T are still much higher than most people are willing to pay. Those low end free Samsung phones are available on EVERY carrier including the budget ones like Cricket, Virgin, Boost, Metro PCS, etc. Someone who just wants a smartphone can walk into Cricket and get one for free and only pay like $45 per month for service. Observe the customers that come into any cell carrier store for a day and the first thing most people ask is "what kind of free phones do you have?" For every carrier other than AT&T, it's usually an Android device. Now if Apple decided to throw the free 3GS to the low end carriers to compete with Android, then this would be a fair comparison. Won't happen though because their rate plans are too low for Apple.

I think people see those marketshare percentages and forget that there are tons of carriers other than AT&T/Verizon and Sprint that are for the most part Android only(Yes Cricket and Virgin have the iPhone now but it's damn near full price to get it, not free or even $99). T-Mobile alone has like 33 million customers and they're offerings are 90% Android.

 

[617aircav]

I figured the free 3GS would be brought up. The flaw in that argument is that it is only available on AT&T and the available rate plans on AT&T are still much higher than most people are willing to pay. Those low end free Samsung phones are available on EVERY carrier including the budget ones like Cricket, Virgin, Boost, Metro PCS, etc. Someone who just wants a smartphone can walk into Cricket and get one for free and only pay like $45 per month for service. Observe the customers that come into any cell carrier store for a day and the first thing most people ask is "what kind of free phones do you have?" For every carrier other than AT&T, it's usually an Android device. Now if Apple decided to throw the free 3GS to the low end carriers to compete with Android, then this would be a fair comparison. Won't happen though because their rate plans are too low for Apple.

I think people see those marketshare percentages and forget that there are tons of carriers other than AT&T/Verizon and Sprint that are for the most part Android only(Yes Cricket and Virgin have the iPhone now but it's damn near full price to get it, not free or even $99). T-Mobile alone has like 33 million customers and they're offerings are 90% Android.

On prepaid there are no free phones, you have to buy the phone.

 

[MLG]

I figured the free 3GS would be brought up. The flaw in that argument is that it is only available on AT&T and the available rate plans on AT&T are still much higher than most people are willing to pay. Those low end free Samsung phones are available on EVERY carrier including the budget ones like Cricket, Virgin, Boost, Metro PCS, etc. Someone who just wants a smartphone can walk into Cricket and get one for free and only pay like $45 per month for service. Observe the customers that come into any cell carrier store for a day and the first thing most people ask is "what kind of free phones do you have?" For every carrier other than AT&T, it's usually an Android device. Now if Apple decided to throw the free 3GS to the low end carriers to compete with Android, then this would be a fair comparison. Won't happen though because their rate plans are too low for Apple.

I think people see those marketshare percentages and forget that there are tons of carriers other than AT&T/Verizon and Sprint that are for the most part Android only(Yes Cricket and Virgin have the iPhone now but it's damn near full price to get it, not free or even $99). T-Mobile alone has like 33 million customers and they're offerings are 90% Android.

Well whose fault is that?

It's Apple's. The choose which carriers get which phones, and in AT&T's case at least, they influence the monthly cost. Apple gets a share of the monthly charges...something that has been very profitable for them but limited their appeal for those looking for the best deal. And the reality is that the 3GS doesn't hold up well in comparison to the other free smartphones with Android, anyway.

The iPhone 4 is available on the major carriers for a subsidized price starting at $99...so the point is that people are still choosing Android over iOS for reasons other than cost, such as large screens.

----------

What Apple really needs to do is start lurking at MacRumors to reap the benefits of all these awesome business pointers.

Yeah silly us...why would Apple want to listen to its consumers?

 

[MLG]

Apple is certainly capable of putting more features into their Iphone5 but why should they. Keep in mind they have hundreds of patents that have never seen the light of day in any device as yet, certainly they could integrate a few. But why should they. At this point in time they want to put less in and have more for later it seems. They have to maintain their profit margin and regardless of what they put in the Iphone5 the sales will be off the chart.

I have a problem with this...it goes against the spirit of capitalism. Stockpiling patents for the purpose of controlling the rate at which technology is released should be illegal, and in my mind sets up Apple for being taken down as a monopoly.

Apple has been withholding features for a while, and frankly if it wasn't for Android we still wouldn't have those features. Competition is good for the consumer, and now Apple is trying to eliminate the competition. People here should realize that blind loyalty to Apple helps Apple but hurts them (Apple AND the consumer). Would you still be ok with the iPhone not having MMS, copy&paste, wallpapers, and notifications?

Instead of just towing the company line and agreeing that Apple knows all because they have a big market cap, people should realize that companies do make mistakes all the time, especially when they become complacent...that's why companies are always growing and shrinking in a dynamic market. But the trend towards Android is pretty dramatic, and if Apple wants to stay competitive, the SMART thing would be to try to capture back some of the market share that they are losing to Android.

 

[Wrathwitch]

It's not uncommon now to see Android smartphones with screens at least 4.5 inches in size. Although iPhone 5 will probably have a 4 inch screen, I still don't think this is a big enough increase from 3.5 inches. They've also kept the width the same - probably so that it can be used with one hand. This is useful but hardly necessary since touch screens demand your complete attention anyway and its difficult to do other things whilst operating a touchscreen phone.

What I think Apple need to do is essentially expand the iPhone product line into three products.

1) iPhone 5. 4 inch screen as rumored.
2) iPhone mini. Keeps the 3.5 inch screen but with the same ratio as iPhone 5. Smaller form factor than iPhone 4S. Use of smaller components will allow more room for a similarly sized battery to the iPhone 4S, in conjunction with the continued use of the same processor as the iPhone 4S but with enhanced power management and optimisations and no 4G. Cost less than an iPhone 5 so to appeal to lower end of the market. This will eliminate the need to continue to sell older generation iPhones alongside iPhone 5.
3) iPhone Pro. 4.5 inch screen. Quad core A6 processor. 12 megapixel camera with xenon flash and larger aperture lens. Bigger battery than standard iPhone to offset higher power consumption.

I agree with you. If Apple had even HINTED at doing something like this, I MAY not have jumped ship to an S3. But I can't be sure about that. If I reflect on the reasons for me changing over, I think it is based more on wanting a change from the OS for a while. As well as exploring some of what Android has to offer.

I sure would have waited to see what they were offering though before switching.

 

[gnasher729]

Some people? The numbers don't lie. Apple has a 17% share of the smartphone market, compared to 68% for Android. That's a 4 to 1 advantage for the larger-screened Android phones, and this from an OS that was introduced well after the iphone. Still think that people don't want a larger screen? Apple is leaving millions and millions of sales on the table by not diversifying their line, and it's getting worse over time. People can stick their heads in the sand, but the market is speaking.

Android has 68% of the market share, Apple has 77% of the profits. Discuss.

Here's what you are missing: To Apple, smartphone market share is irrelevant. There is a phone market. The phone market covers a huge range of devices at all different prices. There is also a submarket for "high-end" phones which are really expensive, and where you find the iPhone 4GS. What has happened in the last year is that Android is now used on cheaper and cheaper phones, and more and more of the phone market now falls into the category "smartphone". However, that doesn't mean the makers are actually selling more. Except for the fact that companies have been eating up the sales that Nokia has been dropping, customers are just buying smart phones instead of feature phones from the exact same makers for the exact same price as before.

Apple sales are increasing every year (with some swings up and down because of seasonality, and introduction of new models). Apple's percentage in the total phone market is also increasing all the time. But "smart phones" is an artificial category that has become meaningless.

You say "Apple leaves millions and millions of sales on the table". Look at this table here:

http://www.asymco.com/2012/02/03/first-apples-rank-in-mobile-phone-profitability-and-revenues/

 

[tekno]

Meanwhile Samsung is KILLING them, out-selling 3-1 just with the S3.

Is this true? I've always understood Samsung are outselling Apple's phone but I thought it was partly because Samsung had so many models.

In fact, I thought Samsung hadn't released sales figures for the S3...

 

[tekno]

Android has 68% of the market share, Apple has 77% of the profits. Discuss.

Apple puts old technology into shiny cases and can therefore create greater profits per unit.

That wasn't too difficult.

 

[gnasher729]

Apple puts old technology into shiny cases and can therefore create greater profits per unit.

That wasn't too difficult.

I meant some intelligent discussion. What would stop Samsung, HTC or Nokia from "putting old technology into shiny cases and create greater profits per unit"?

 

[Sedrick]

Apple has stumbled on a tried and true formula (for them) of one current new phone. This creates demand and exclusivity and gives Apple the most profit for the least investment. They're smart that way.

A side effect of this is that only the middle of the road users are completely satisfied with the device while the rest are left wanting more and wondering why Apple, with all it's billions, won't deliver (See first point).

They will never introduce two (or three) phones at the same time. They don't need to, to keep massive profits rolling in.

Should the time come when their iPhone profits start looking dismal, that's when we'll see Apple targeting a more diversified customer base.

 

[allonym]

Here's what you are missing: To Apple, smartphone market share is irrelevant. There is a phone market. The phone market covers a huge range of devices at all different prices. There is also a submarket for "high-end" phones which are really expensive, and where you find the iPhone 4GS. What has happened in the last year is that Android is now used on cheaper and cheaper phones, and more and more of the phone market now falls into the category "smartphone". However, that doesn't mean the makers are actually selling more. Except for the fact that companies have been eating up the sales that Nokia has been dropping, customers are just buying smart phones instead of feature phones from the exact same makers for the exact same price as before.

Apple sales are increasing every year (with some swings up and down because of seasonality, and introduction of new models). Apple's percentage in the total phone market is also increasing all the time. But "smart phones" is an artificial category that has become meaningless.

It seems that there is truth in what you say:

Samsung: Q1 2012, 20.7% of the total phone market; Q1 2011, 16.1%; growth = 29%.

Apple: Q1 2012, 7.9%; Q2 2011, 3.9%; growth = 103%.

http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=2017015

For some of the manufacturers some of the growth in smartphone sales is offset by declining sales of other (non-smart) phones. That isn't so for Apple, as all of its phones are smartphones.

 

[SR45]

Apple has stumbled on a tried and true formula (for them) of one current new phone. This creates demand and exclusivity and gives Apple the most profit for the least investment. They're smart that way.

A side effect of this is that only the middle of the road users are completely satisfied with the device while the rest are left wanting more and wondering why Apple, with all it's billions, won't deliver (See first point).

They will never introduce two (or three) phones at the same time. They don't need to, to keep massive profits rolling in.

Should the time come when their iPhone profits start looking dismal, that's when we'll see Apple targeting a more diversified customer base.

I think you hit it right on the head. I'm one of those that falls in the middle as you mentioned. Those that want wider or perhaps some different appearances, will just have to go to the other offerings out there for the time being. Complaining about Apple not keeping up with the others will not push Apple in doing so. They are on their own track, and based on the past, they are not going to change as of right now. And we will continue to read threads from those that will complain, rant and hope for change.

 

[MLG]

Android has 68% of the market share, Apple has 77% of the profits. Discuss.

Here's what you are missing: To Apple, smartphone market share is irrelevant. There is a phone market. The phone market covers a huge range of devices at all different prices. There is also a submarket for "high-end" phones which are really expensive, and where you find the iPhone 4GS. What has happened in the last year is that Android is now used on cheaper and cheaper phones, and more and more of the phone market now falls into the category "smartphone". However, that doesn't mean the makers are actually selling more. Except for the fact that companies have been eating up the sales that Nokia has been dropping, customers are just buying smart phones instead of feature phones from the exact same makers for the exact same price as before.

Apple sales are increasing every year (with some swings up and down because of seasonality, and introduction of new models). Apple's percentage in the total phone market is also increasing all the time. But "smart phones" is an artificial category that has become meaningless.

You say "Apple leaves millions and millions of sales on the table". Look at this table here:

http://www.asymco.com/2012/02/03/first-apples-rank-in-mobile-phone-profitability-and-revenues/

I already answered this a few pages back.

Cliff notes: Apple has a higher margin per phone and has better deals worked out with the carriers, especially with AT&T where they actually get a share of the usage dollars. On top of it, they get huge profits from the App Store and iTunes, which are all integrated. They set it up well from the beginning.

But they do leave millions of sales on the table. Up to four times what their current sales are, in fact, based on that 68% share vs. 17%. You act like I'm attacking Apple. Can you really deny that they would make even more money if they sold more phones that appealed to more people?

 

[John Adams]

But they do leave millions of sales on the table. Up to four times what their current sales are, in fact, based on that 68% share vs. 17%. You act like I'm attacking Apple. Can you really deny that they would make even more money if they sold more phones that appealed to more people?

Come on now. Stop making sense.

 

[ucfgrad93]

Not quite sure how Apple has gotten to where they are without you.

Will never understand why people here think they know better than Apple what Apple should do. And this comes from a VP of Marketing.

Agreed.

 

[sulpfiction]

I think apple should also give away the iPhone 5 for free. After all, they have BILLIONS in the bank and can afford it. This will get them lots of new customers and great press! C'mon apple!

 

[Skika]

I think apple should also give away the iPhone 5 for free. After all, they have BILLIONS in the bank and can afford it. This will get them lots of new customers and great press! C'mon apple!

That would be HORRIBLE. Do you know what kind of statement that makes about the product?

 

[tomhut]

I think apple should also give away the iPhone 5 for free. After all, they have BILLIONS in the bank and can afford it. This will get them lots of new customers and great press! C'mon apple!

Not sure if sarcastic or not?

 

[LeandrodaFL]

Android is tring to win this war with "we have bigger screen, so we are better" but its not about that is it? Uts about iOS!

I actually have a phone with a screen smaller then the current iPhone and it serves me great, as I dont need a super phone, jut one to make calls.

I would like Apple to make diferent iPhones models too, but I would like the diference not to be simply in screen size, but actually diferent designs.

 

[onthecouchagain]

Android is tring to win this war with "we have bigger screen, so we are better"

I would like Apple to make diferent iPhones models too, but I would like the diference not to be simply in screen size, but actually diferent designs.

Android doesn't have different designs? : brain explodes :

 

[SR45]

I think apple should also give away the iPhone 5 for free. After all, they have BILLIONS in the bank and can afford it. This will get them lots of new customers and great press! C'mon apple!

Want something for free ? Must be a Socialist

New Customers ? That want everything for free = No sales, no money, no Apple company

What Apple needs to do is give away free the MacMini > Great press
What Apple needs to do is give away free the iPod > Great press
What Apple needs to do is give away free the Mac Pro > Great press
What Apple needs to do is give away free the Mac Air > Great press

Silly people every day.....

 

[Ayemerica]

Want something for free ? Must be a Socialist

New Customers ? That want everything for free = No sales, no money, no Apple company

What Apple needs to do is give away free the MacMini > Great press
What Apple needs to do is give away free the iPod > Great press
What Apple needs to do is give away free the Mac Pro > Great press
What Apple needs to do is give away free the Mac Air > Great press

Silly people every day.....

True Story

 

[chokem]

I think a larger screen would be great. I'm not really sold on the elongated 4S version if that's what we get with the new iPhone. I'd like to see it not only longer but wider as well. It doesn't have to as large as the Note or the S3, but I could stand it bigger than it is.

 

[takeshi74]

Will never understand why people here think they know better than Apple what Apple should do.

Every discussion forum site is chock full of armchair experts. Things are always simple when you're blissfully ignorant of the details involved. Clearly, what the OP personally wants overrides any market demand or anything practical like that.

 

[NewbieCanada]

2) iPhone mini. Keeps the 3.5 inch screen but with the same ratio as iPhone 5. Smaller form factor than iPhone 4S. Use of smaller components will allow more room for a similarly sized battery to the iPhone 4S, in conjunction with the continued use of the same processor as the iPhone 4S but with enhanced power management and optimisations and no 4G. Cost less than an iPhone 5 so to appeal to lower end of the market. This will eliminate the need to continue to sell older generation iPhones alongside iPhone 5.
3) iPhone Pro. 4.5 inch screen. Quad core A6 processor. 12 megapixel camera with xenon flash and larger aperture lens. Bigger battery than standard iPhone to offset higher power consumption.

To create the iPhone mini, Apple would have to spend just as much in development as they do for a new, high cost iPhone, without a way to recoup that investment because it will sell in smaller quantity at lower cost.

The iPhone Pro creates the same problem - new development costs for a phone that's going to sell in vastly smaller numbers.

----------

I have a problem with this...it goes against the spirit of capitalism. Stockpiling patents for the purpose of controlling the rate at which technology is released should be illegal, and in my mind sets up Apple for being taken down as a monopoly.

Fascinating. You don't think forcing companies to sell products they don't want to sell might just be a tiny bit contrary to the "spirit of capitalism?"