Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I think they're just positioning themselves, & probably with the encouragement of the Chinese Gov't, for when China makes a move on Taiwan.

At that point, Apple will (need to ?) pull out of China.

And the Chinese Gov't knows that's a possibility, & will want some local company to point to keep it's High-End consumers satisfied.

Russia & China have teamed up, that should be obvious to anyone who follows world news !

Russia will first make a play for the Ukraine, & then shortly after, China will make a play for Taiwan.

Red Storm Rising ! ...
 
Prove me wrong by beyond saying the same. ;)
I could only find smart phone data going back to 2013. Fewer than 35% of adults, or about 25% of the population had a smart phone then in the United States, and the US had the heaviest cell phone penetration. If you went worldwide, I would guess that 25% would be far, far fewer considering the US makes up only 5% of the world population. If I were to guess, it would be fewer than 5% who had smart phones and that's in 2013. Going back to 2007, it would be significantly fewer than that.
 
I think they're just positioning themselves, & probably with the encouragement of the Chinese Gov't, for when China makes a move on Taiwan.

At that point, Apple will (need to ?) pull out of China.

And the Chinese Gov't knows that's a possibility, & will want some local company to point to keep it's High-End consumers satisfied.

Russia & China have teamed up, that should be obvious to anyone who follows world news !

Russia will first make a play for the Ukraine, & then shortly after, China will make a play for Taiwan.

Red Storm Rising ! ...
Uh no. Apple is already making moves with pulling out of Taiwan to build exclusively in China. They’re not going to leave China. They’re funneling half a trillion dollars to build exclusively in China. Apple is all in on the Chinese front. They’re not going anywhere. Apple is all about profits. If you think Apple would pull out of China if they overtake Taiwan, you really aren’t paying attention.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 0924487
I could only find smart phone data going back to 2013. Fewer than 35% of adults, or about 25% of the population had a smart phone then in the United States, and the US had the heaviest cell phone penetration. If you went worldwide, I would guess that 25% would be far, far fewer considering the US makes up only 5% of the world population. If I were to guess, it would be fewer than 5% who had smart phones and that's in 2013. Going back to 2007, it would be significantly fewer than that.


Really? A simple google search provided me with RIM’s yearly sales going back to 2000….

You are literally guessing….not sure how to respond to that.
 
Their camera software lags terribly, within 6 months of updates focus will take about 5 seconds to take a picture and shutter button another 3-4sec, it's so bad sometimes you can't even catch the desired moment. Quality video stabilization forget about it.
 
Apple did not basically invent the smartphone.
Yeah I always laugh when I see this. I had a Treo 650 two years before the iPhone came out. Very much a smartphone and the UI was similar to iOS in a few ways.

The iPhone was an evolution of the smartphone, and the one that finally went fully mainstream. But smartphones themselves predate the iPhone by a few years.
 
Yeah I always laugh when I see this. I had a Treo 650 two years before the iPhone came out. Very much a smartphone and the UI was similar to iOS in a few ways.

The iPhone was an evolution of the smartphone, and the one that finally went fully mainstream. But smartphones themselves predate the iPhone by a few years.


I think a big part of what iPhone did was re-invent(to use our favorite buzz word)what mainstream meant for the smartphone space. Pre-iPhone mainstream meant business, military, tech. Now it’s pre-teens Haha
 
Really? A simple google search provided me with RIM’s yearly sales going back to 2000….

You are literally guessing….not sure how to respond to that.
You have even less data. Yes, the last portion was a guess since smart phone penetration data only went back to 2013 where only 35% of American adults had smart phones. Accounting for age, that puts it around 25% of Americans in 2013. I even said going back earlier were extrapolations. You have no percentage data at all. How much did RIM account for world-wide? Sounds like your $200 million figure is pretty tiny for 2006 and is pretty meaningless. What is that, 1 million phones worldwide for a population of around 6 billion back then, or about 0.016%? Assume Microsoft did the same. That's a whopping 0.032% worldwide? That's not that many phones. Apple sells over 200 million PHONES a year, let alone $200 million. I would define a fraction of a percent as niche.
 
You have even less data. Yes, the last portion was a guess since smart phone penetration data only went back to 2013 where only 35% of American adults had smart phones. Accounting for age, that puts it around 25% of Americans in 2013. I even said going back earlier were extrapolations. You have no percentage data at all. How much did RIM account for world-wide? Sounds like your $200 million figure is pretty tiny for 2006 and is pretty meaningless. What is that, 1 million phones worldwide for a population of around 6 billion back then, or about 0.016%? Assume Microsoft did the same. That's a whopping 0.032% worldwide? That's not that many phones. Apple sells over 200 million PHONES a year, let alone $200 million. I would define a fraction of a percent as niche.

No, I have data. Period. I can provide more but why bother if you are just going to guess?


You are choosing a weird hill to die on my friend.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech
No, I have data. Period. I can provide more but why bother if you are just going to guess?


You are choosing a weird hill to die on my friend.
You're not even providing numbers beyond a revenue number. $200 million worldwide is a pretty tiny figure. Even you have to admit that $200 million is not very many phones. It's proof positive not many people bought smart phones in 2006 if RIM only did $200 million. The funny thing is you're trying to die on a hill over the definition of niche. Where's your threshold on where niche ends? 1%? 2%? 20%? 50%? For me, your figures prove my point that it's significantly less than 1% worldwide. That, my friend, is very niche.
 
I could only find smart phone data going back to 2013. Fewer than 35% of adults, or about 25% of the population had a smart phone then in the United States, and the US had the heaviest cell phone penetration. If you went worldwide, I would guess that 25% would be far, far fewer considering the US makes up only 5% of the world population. If I were to guess, it would be fewer than 5% who had smart phones and that's in 2013. Going back to 2007, it would be significantly fewer than that.

According to IDC research, smartphones accounted for 5.1% of all mobile phones shipped in the U.S. in 2006. That percentage more than doubled in 2007.

The three biggest smartphone brands in the U.S. in Q1 2008 were BlackBerry (which dominated with around 45% of the market), followed by Apple (19%) and then Palm.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BF1M
You're not even providing numbers beyond a revenue number. $200 million worldwide is a pretty tiny figure. Even you have to admit that $200 million is not very many phones. It's proof positive not many people bought smart phones in 2006 if RIM only did $200 million. The funny thing is you're trying to die on a hill over the definition of niche. Where's your threshold on where niche ends? 1%? 2%? 20%? 50%? For me, your figures prove my point that it's significantly less than 1% worldwide. That, my friend, is very niche.
200 million is tiny compared to today, sure. But it’s not insignificant. And that is just ONE player in the space back then.
 
16 billion is a lot of money to spend on what will be surely nothing more than an iPhone knock off
If a company other than Apple can produce a true iPhone equivalent, that’s a remarkable achievement and milestone already.

To surpass, you need to catch up first. To catch up, you need to mimic. Then you decide what to do next.
 
According to IDC research, smartphones accounted for 5.1% of all mobile phones shipped in the U.S. in 2006. That percentage more than doubled in 2007.

The three biggest smartphone brands in the U.S. in Q1 2008 were BlackBerry (which dominated with around 45% of the market), followed by Apple (19%) and then Palm.

I miss my Palm Centro with Touchstone…it was like living in the future.

Edit: I think it was a Pre actually, not Centro.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech
Xiaomi makes some AMAZING products, I had few of them and loved them! Mi 6 and Mi 9 , Mi Mix and Mi Mix Ceramic white.


I still have and use the Mi Mix 2, one of the best looking phone i have ever had.

Xiaomi needs Apple, or else who will they copy ?
They do copy a lot, but they also create some innovative products.

The first mi mix was staggering and the under the screen earpiece was nice.
 
with 1.4b in China, yeah very much possible. Be scared Apple the great hope of western society
 
Doesn’t Xiaomi copy all of their competitor’s designs? Half the things they produce are Apple clones.

Of course they would want to ride Apple‘s coattails to the top of the smart phone rankings.
 
According to IDC research, smartphones accounted for 5.1% of all mobile phones shipped in the U.S. in 2006. That percentage more than doubled in 2007.

The three biggest smartphone brands in the U.S. in Q1 2008 were BlackBerry (which dominated with around 45% of the market), followed by Apple (19%) and then Palm.
Thank you!
 
I hope he realises that if this endeavour gets vaguely successful, the US will find a reason to nip it in the bud. We'll hear about links with the Chinese army, corruption, whatever and Xiaomi would end up going the way of ZTE and/or Huawei in no time. Stay humble, stay longer.
Their endeavour will take a long time, and by then, China would have had the time to restructure the auxiliary supply chain to withstand a Huawei-level US sanction. It would take about 10 years from 2018.
 
Jokes aside, setting up a company with a mantra or mission statement of destroying another company is a recipe for failure. The problem with Xiaomi is they're not even sure what their raison d'etre is to begin with beyond making money. Start with Why as Simon Sinek would say.
Remember Apple was created to take on IBM?

The hammer commercial Steve made?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.