Why Apple Should Be Scared

[Cha]

Why don't Car makers, TV makers, Watch makers, Clothing designers, house builders, etc etc, all just make 1 model then?

Might is be that humans are not all robots, we don't all act and think the same and have the same likes, dislikes, needs and wants.

Piggie... I kinda get what you are saying... but in the comparison you are picking more macro comparisons and comparing to a micro situation. Apple is a computer/tech company, thus they produce a wide variety of products from the Mac Pro, Macbooks, and iPads... etc to speak to different segments of the population...

Now if you are speaking about the content... that a different story and the above comparisons do not quite fit in this micro situation. Even though the usage of the iPad may seem to be limited. But I am sure my use of the iPad is drastically different from you and other people. Thus the iPad is speaking to a wide array of people for different reasons. But Apple is trying to limit the experience to certain facets, so unfortunately some segments of the population will be unhappy. Only time will tell how this approach will work in the long term.

 

[maflynn]

I think Verizon just shot that theory to hell.

I disagree, while vzw's iphone rollout was extremely popular that doesn't mean that everyone on vzw will be shedding their android phone.

 

[57004]

Just take a look at some of the utter nonsense being "offered" by upcoming Android tablets: 3D video recording. 1080 video playback. A freaking barometer.

I totally agree with your argument on the 3D cams, that would be useless.

But I would see one good use for a barometer: Better navigation. A barometer is basically just an air pressure meter. That can be used as an altimeter, after calibration using GPS and known ground-level. GPS can also show altitude but it requires very good reception and even then it's more inaccurate than its longitude and latitude positioning. And without calibration an air pressure meter is still very useful tracking vertical speed rather than precise position.

I can see that being interesting for hikers, aviation purposes etc. Like the compass that the iPad 3G already has, it could help improve GPS location tracking in the same way AGPS and the compass do.

It would be a niche thing but it's also a very cheap sensor to add so if Apple would like to stimulate navigation use for the iPad I could see them add it.

 

[Cha]

Maybe people should be complaining about the terrible .pdf apps then instead of thinking iOS needs a filesystem. Who on Earth is using 5 different video apps, thinking the solution is fundamentally revamping iOS to accommodate that kind of inefficiency?

Just as iOS does away with filesystems, so too it won't be long until we do away with thinking of files as these discrete objects to load up devices with. It's antiquated thinking about how to interact with content.

I agree with you. That is an old way of dealing with content. But currently as long as there is a dependency on the actually physical artifact with the action of delivering the content inside the artifact there will be a need to deal with "antiquated" structure. As the cloud computing and other aspects matures I definitely can see the shift in the thinking.

 

[maccompaq]

Apple is the leader and does not have to fear anyone.

 

[fertilized-egg]

Why don't Car makers, TV makers, Watch makers, Clothing designers, house builders, etc etc, all just make 1 model then?
...
We can then all buy the same cloths, eat the same food, and watch the same TV shows on our identical TV's

Did you see Apples' 1984 Advert a few years ago?

Piggie... I kinda get what you are saying... but in the comparison you are picking more macro comparisons and comparing to a micro situation.

Exactly Cha. Apple makes all sorts of different computers ranging from servers to ultraportable laptops on top of iPods, iPads, and iPhones. In fact Steve Jobs compared the desktop computers to trucks of automobiles.

Also with computers what's more important is the OS APIs and apps that use them: you achieve your tasks using different apps and your computer changes its usage depending on the app you use. With cloth, food, cars, etc the same theory doesn't apply. You're stuck with what you have.

Funny thing is, even though Google'll boast how new Honeycomb will offer "choices," what "choices" do you exactly get?

All use similar ~10" screen
All use similar processors if not identical because many Tegra2 is popular
All use similar looking cases with similar looking bezels
All use the same OS, perhaps with different bloatware thrown in.

It's puzzling. Some people accuse Apple of being monopolizing and making everything look the same. At the same time, they have no problem of everyone using the same Google OS and wish every Android device has the same Google OS version and appearance. They wish everyone was using the same Google services such as Gmail. Yet they have no problem accusing Apple of being so very much "1984"???

I don't know about them but personally I'd be much much more afraid of a company that sell others' information for ad revenue and try to be as omnipresent as possible everywhere through data mining, both virtual and real life. Yet some think a hardware maker like an Apple who try to concentrate their effort into a small selection of models while asserting a total control over their own hardware products is more threatening than Google's business model.

 

[DeathChill]

No but like the android phones, the android tablets in total will exceed what apple sells.

I am curious why this has to be. Phones are sold in a 100% different manner than tablets. Android has no advantage of buy-one-get-one free deals or select carrier offerings, so competition is on a much more even playing field.

Thus far Android devices are even having trouble competing on the lower price front because Apple has left little wiggle room. Anything priced below the iPad at the moment is pretty awful (Nook Color excluded, but only after much hacking and fiddling).

 

[foiden]

I still find it amazing that people are defending the fact that they need to charge their phone once a day.

It's amazing to think people accept this.

Years ago people would think you are mad for making a phone that would have to be charged every single day.

We have really gone backwards on this one.

A few years back, we had cheap phones like Boost Mobile. Which, also, if you didn't remember to charge it everyday, might die on you sometimes the next day.

 

[tuatha]

I am curious why this has to be. Phones are sold in a 100% different manner than tablets. Android has no advantage of buy-one-get-one free deals or select carrier offerings, so competition is on a much more even playing field.

Much like the 'one carrier' argument this is pretty easily disproven by the UK and European markets.

In the uk the iPhone is available on multiple carriers, for free on an 18 month contract, and as far as I'm aware there are no bogo offers on android phones. Yet android is still outselling iOS in that market.

People need to get it out of their heads that people are just buying android devices due to low prices or a lack of alternatives. People are buying them because they're a compelling alternative. I know this because I chose to pay €180 for an Android phone when I could have had an iphone for €99! I know more people with high end androids than iPhones (and we're talking regular guys and gals here, not geeks).


However... I do agree that pricing will be more important to the relative success of the tablets. Very few people will pay 699 plus monthly fees for a xoom when they can have a wifi ipad for 500.

 

[Cha]

I am curious why this has to be. Phones are sold in a 100% different manner than tablets. Android has no advantage of buy-one-get-one free deals or select carrier offerings, so competition is on a much more even playing field.

DeathChill that's not quite true... There is wiggle room the Android markets can have. They can play with the margin (of profit) they make on each device. Apple makes a nice margin, but the competition can play with that aspect. Just like you are seeing in the phone and PC side. The companies can make additional profits by loading the OS with apps that they have deals with to promote their products. For example, if you buy a Dell PC, you'll see all sorts of additional demos or "free" trials to "help" the user. While on Macs you will not see as much, if any.

It is all relative on the importance on market share... It's amusing how it's Apple vs an whole groups of companies (with the Android platform)...

 

[fertilized-egg]

People need to get it out of their heads that people are just buying android devices due to low prices or a lack of alternatives. People are buying them because they're a compelling alternative.

Low price and availability are is the biggest factors driving up Android I think. If people were really buying up many high end Android phones instead of buying iPhone as you've claimed, then guys like Motorola, Samsung, HTC all should be making killings and Apple wouldn't be taking up nearly half the profit of the phone market with their relatively low volume. Then there's the fact much of the phone market volume increase came from guys like ZTE and Huawei, two companies that are rapidly pumping out cheap Android phones.

Sure many people buy Android phone even if it's more expensive than the iPhone, but looking at the whole market, the number of people who are doing that is relatively small as seen in the numbers. Besides let's not forget that Apple has practically sold all iPhone they've made.

 

[tuatha]

Low price and availability are is the biggest factors driving up Android I think. If people were really buying up many high end Android phones instead of buying iPhone as you've claimed, then guys like Motorola, Samsung, HTC all should be making killings and Apple wouldn't be taking up nearly half the profit of the phone market with their relatively low volume. Then there's the fact much of the phone market volume increase came from guys like ZTE and Huawei, two companies that are rapidly pumping out cheap Android phones.

Well, they are actually making a killing. HTC's earnings have doubled in the last year and Samsung has sold close to 15 million of their Galaxy S range, which are arguably the best Android handsets available. Motorola has finally returned to profitability in the last year, despite the fact that they don't even bother to release many of their handsets, including the Droid X, outside of the US (and the ones they do release they don't bother to support!).

You're never going to see any one of these companies overtake the iPhone in terms of sales of individual handsets, though. The Android market is too crowded, with too little differentiation between devices, for any one OEM to dominate in the way Apple does.

 

[MrWillie]

I disagree, while vzw's iphone rollout was extremely popular that doesn't mean that everyone on vzw will be shedding their android phone.

Never said that.

Extremely popular doesn't do it justice. Between 0300 & 0500 EASTERN time, they sold more iPhones than they did any other phone on roll out day. (That's all day, and it includes all the Android phones.) It only took two hours. And it was limited to people that were already VZW, not new customers.

So yes, there were quite a few that didn't have iPhones because they were not available on their carrier. So there is no reason to be 'beyond' that.

 

[wakemed2L]

I dunno, I feel that Google's Android fragmentation problem is going to multply when it comes to tabs..

 

[ufkdo]

I have read so many articles like that so far. "why apple should scare", "why apple should change it" etc. But at the and, Apple was the winner

 

[fertilized-egg]

Well, they are actually making a killing.
...
You're never going to see any one of these companies overtake the iPhone in terms of sales of individual handsets, though. The Android market is too crowded, with too little differentiation between devices, for any one OEM to dominate in the way Apple does.

I don't doubt that many of the Android companies are doing well, but even combined they cannot match Apple's profit. Your original premise was that Android is competitive even if it wasn't any cheaper than iPhone. If Android was truly competitive against the iPhone sans their value proposition as you've asserted, why does Apple alone have such an extraordinary amount of profit all by itself despite having lower volume? A simple logic would be that much of the increased volume of Android was from the low-end sector of the market.

 

[yodaxl7]

Much like the 'one carrier' argument this is pretty easily disproven by the UK and European markets.

In the uk the iPhone is available on multiple carriers, for free on an 18 month contract, and as far as I'm aware there are no bogo offers on android phones. Yet android is still outselling iOS in that market.

People need to get it out of their heads that people are just buying android devices due to low prices or a lack of alternatives. People are buying them because they're a compelling alternative. I know this because I chose to pay €180 for an Android phone when I could have had an iphone for €99! I know more people with high end androids than iPhones (and we're talking regular guys and gals here, not geeks).


However... I do agree that pricing will be more important to the relative success of the tablets. Very few people will pay 699 plus monthly fees for a xoom when they can have a wifi ipad for 500.

Do you have a link showing sale numbers to prove that android is outselling the iPhone in the UK? I think android is outselling the iPhone in US, China and India. Every where else, iPhone is winning! This is about to change of course.

As for the tablet war, it is a different ball game. It can be carrier depended if you want a subsidized tablet and be on a contract for 2 years. Most people hate this idea. Plus, apple has iPad already fed into to chains like Target, Walmart, Bestbuy, apple store, amazon online, etc. Plus, iPad 2 is coming out march or april. Who knows how many versions of iPad will be available: mini-7 in iPad, iPad2, last year model iPad and "one more thing". Apple has over 70,000 apps by launch day. Big game companies like: activision, EA, Capcom,etc. are making games campanion to major console games like Dead Space 2. Apple will have the content. Android will, too, but much later in the year.

 

[Apple OC]

Why Apple Should Be Scared ...

Scared? ... these are the Xgames baby! ... Apple fears none

 

[vrDrew]

In the uk the iPhone is available on multiple carriers, for free on an 18 month contract, and as far as I'm aware there are no bogo offers on android phones. Yet android is still outselling iOS in that market..

That's not completely true. For instance, on O2, a 16gb iPhone costs £250 on the lowest monthly paid 24 month plan. An equivalent HTC Android phone is free with the same plan. Obviously the out-of-pocket costs are going to vary, but it certainly implies that the mobile providers are subsidizing Android phones more than they are Apple ones, or that the market perceives a greater value in the Apple product.

Given that, at this stage, a tablet device is going to be seen as much more of a "luxury" item than a smartphone, and it appears unlikely that large numbers of consumers are going to opt for a data package, then I maintain that Android is going to have a much, much harder time approaching the iPad's marketshare.

 

[mKTank]

I don't doubt that many of the Android companies are doing well, but even combined they cannot match Apple's profit. Your original premise was that Android is competitive even if it wasn't any cheaper than iPhone. If Android was truly competitive against the iPhone sans their value proposition as you've asserted, why does Apple alone have such an extraordinary amount of profit all by itself despite having lower volume? A simple logic would be that much of the increased volume of Android was from the low-end sector of the market.

Not hard to make a ton of money when you overprice everything to hell.

 

[DeathChill]

Not hard to make a ton of money when you overprice everything to hell.

Hey you might want to talk to Samsung and ask how their Tab is doing!

We're talking about phones and tablets here. Both of which Apple is competitive with in terms of pricing.

 

[St. Germain]

Not hard to make a ton of money when you overprice everything to hell.

If it was truly overpriced, it wouldn't sell so well.

 

[Carouser]

Not hard to make a ton of money when you overprice everything to hell.

If they were overpriced to hell then nobody would buy them. This is basic economics. Higher price negatively affects demand, all else being the same. Otherwise Coke could just charge 20 bucks a liter and make a ton of money.

Edit: lol owned three times in a row

 

[mKTank]

Hey you might want to talk to Samsung and ask how their Tab is doing!

We're talking about phones and tablets here. Both of which Apple is competitive with in terms of pricing.

It's pretty obvious that Apple devices are generally more hyped. Apple's marketing is probably the best out there given what they convince people to buy sometimes. Samsung was never known for their advertising..hell I've never even seen a Galaxy Tab commercial or ad anywhere.

The Tab was running a phone OS. Let the XOOM show Apple how it's done, I suppose.

This same sense of security existed in 2009 when the iPhone was rising up to be a dominant star. Well, latest statistics sure wiped those grins off, didn't they?

 

[mKTank]

If they were overpriced to hell then nobody would buy them. This is basic economics. Higher price negatively affects demand, all else being the same. Otherwise Coke could just charge 20 bucks a liter and make a ton of money.

Edit: lol owned three times in a row

Not quite. The higher price gives off the illusion that the product is in some way premium. That, coupled with the iDevices' history for having excellent build quality, completes the illusion. Unfortunately, what people aren't told is that iOS is quite a gimped OS, and that the price to performance ratio is a downright outrage, specifically with the MacBook and iMac lineup. A shiny case warrants an extra 3 thousand dollars? I doubt it. As for the iDevices and iOS being gimped, on a phone it's understandable but on a tablet, it's just stupidity. I can't do half the things my 'clunky' netbook could do. Hell, some cheap chinese tablet is more functional. No filesystem, no Flash, no proper multitasking, no widgets, etc etc.