Apple is doing just fine, sure, but calling their products "wildly successful" or "top dog" is way, way too much of a stretch. "Influential" might be a better word.
There were 260 million iPods ever produced, total. Add 50 million of iPhones (which are also iPods of course) ever produced, and you have 310 million; total, ever (how many in operation?). Now, that is in the range of the number of mobile media players just one other manufacturer, Nokia, sells annually (then there's Samsung, LG, dedicated, et al). Hey, considering that mobile phones with audio playback debuted at the same time as the iPod; and they overtook all dedicated music players, combined, in 2005 or 2006. As for strictly iPhone, "top dog" with 2% of sales and around 1% usage share (end of 2007 - 3.3 billion mobile subsribers, end of 2009 - 4.6 billion, so now probably close to 5 billion), right.
Except for a very few, highly "visible" markets, Apple almost doesn't exist. Hell, I can probably count on fingers of one hand the number of iPods I have ever seen here (a number excluding my iPod of course...), and that's in a reasonably prosperous late EU memberstate. A long time ago, Chinese "S1" mp3 players were the norm; for a few years it's mobile phones (mainly so called "feature phones" - though I can't help but wonder about the classification: many of them, SE ones for example, have full multitasking of installed apps). Guess the world at large. Effects of scale might again marginalise Apple, eventually.
And BTW, Microsoft probably did save Apple in the second half of '90s, when they were in very poor shape & desperately needing cash (and MS needed competition, in light of monopoly probe)
"Cheated"? MeeGo/Maemo is available on ARM since inception, Intel knew perfectly well what they're getting into.
And anyway, Symbian is the powerhouse on which Nokia will ride for a long time; MeeGo is a quite periphery project / expect experimentation and some shifts in direction.
If it will be only "on par", what difference does the x86 make? (well, besides waiting for huge improvements in battery technology and process shrinkage to have the same level of experience, of course)
Battery life on iPhone is almost a separate issue in itself - mutlitasking might harm it even more of course, but even without that it's less than stellar.
And you realize of course than phones also can have a virtual memory / "swap" (working decently nice, considering flash storage), right?
Re:It's still mostly used for calls...
on
iPhone 4 News Roundup
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
...Perhaps Apple has been paying attention to this area? That would help explain why a prototype was found in the wild.
Yeah, a prototype which was tested inside a thick casing made of dielectric material.
iPhone seems to be flaky with many networks worldwide. It might work well when there's great coverage, I'm sure; but it "loses" comparison with many phones if there's any sign of trouble.
And, uhm..."Almost everyone on the bus/train in Sydney is using an iPhone now" riiight.
How "other platforms" becomes suddenly Google/Android here?
As for limiting what one can (not must) do - should we start to wonder again why iPhone is a "smartphone"? "Hiding all the complexitities" isn't new, and some so called "feature phones" have the same essential functionality (hell, and some even full multitasking; SE ones for example)
Android, perhaps - it's interesting to note how many Google I/O Android sessions focus on power, asynchronous programming and performance. But some "other platforms" have those things adressed for many years.
Re:Multitasking as the dev's responsiblity. Common
on
iPhone 4 News Roundup
·
· Score: 1
NMaybe on Android, but not "on other mobile OS'es" ("...like Android"? Huh?)
Re:Can you find a high end phone with zero problem
on
iPhone 4 News Roundup
·
· Score: 1
Though Apple sets itself as a nice target for such critique, with all the PR about how iPhone is, essentially, a new wonder of the world...
And really, problems with phone functionality / reception? Mobiles for $30 (yes, price without contract) manage to have it right.
Why would I be talking about anything else than a price without contract? Why would you throw the US here, when we (other posters & me) established it's not about this quite atypical market, it's about the world.
Yes, a large chunk of mid-range phones can be had for somewhat above $100, unlocked and without contract. So called "feature phone" segment, basically (but really, when you look at the essentials of the features, they aren't that far from so called "smartphones"). And yes, low-range means totally basic handsets, 20-50 for example (btw, there are some noticeably better ones than F3 - this one has quite dreadful UI, for starters). As for smartphones which could fall under "mid-range" - I'd guess Nokia 5230 is pretty damn close (can be had by me right now for $145; Symbian, touchsceen, really free (offline) turn-by-turn GPS, you name it), and it's not even the cheapest one from Nokia. $277 cannot be considered as being in the same league, not when it means whole months salary.
In larger countries too, I live in one such. Accidentally, a place where 3G licenses weren't insane... (and the carrier most rocking the boat was established long after the insanity with those 3G licenses)
There are at the least carriers giving the same rates while calling abroad, within the EU; I believe that also extends to roaming in some cases. Voice can be cheap, too.
And generally...whoa, you are supposed to present an evidence that any possible cartels are via patents; for starters. Me - I'm only showing that pointing fingers at existence of any cartel at all is probably unfounded. Common interests at most, but without real colluding. And with cheap alternatives available. Which doesn't stop people from using, en masse, much more expensive carriers. Hell, differences in price of data transfers can be more than order of magnitude apart...and yet the more expensive offer is still widely used by people. Why? I have no idea. But choice is there.
I see, so you think one needs a pen for resistive touchscreen device... (and it's now also about the style of the casing? Well, not only other manufacturers don't necessarily follow it - Apple doesn't innovate much)
Me hearing only about the ones in the US would be a bit weird considering I haven't really ever ventured even on the general Western hemisphere part of the planet...
That phone you link to is still at least two times more expensive than what can be comfortably called mid-range. Not far from an order of magnitude more expensive than low-end. And you know it.
I don't really share you observations. Perhaps you really want to look at a very small part of the issue (omitting how the 10+ year old infrastructure is in constant upgrade; or how exorbitant 3G licenses often were)...or apparently you don't realise how cheap mobile services have become here, in the EU, in some places (what, they have "patent moratorium"? Riiight...)
Yes, the cartel might be the problem. But if patents were behind it, no carrier would be able to get away and start a pricewar. Which does happen.
Android OTOH is present both at the high-end and at the mid-range.
That's...probably going a bit too far. "Present both at the highest-end and at the high-end (entry-high-end?)" more accurately describes the situation. Especially since you're talking about the world.
...think back to what cell phones were like before the iPhone came out...
Hm, yeah; I can think of Ericsson R380, from 2000 (not a "true" touchscreen smartphone since one can't install apps; but by that measure iPhone wasn't one either, in 2007). Or similar one from...1993. But if necessarily "true" touchscreen smartphone - SE P800 does fine. Did in 2002, actually. Five years of difference (sort of six, if looking at apps)
Oh, I get it, you're talking about waiting until absolutelly every piece of "tech surroundings" is firmly in place for some time? Plus nice marketing in a visible, to you, market?
Slashdot Mirror
...unless the initial design and flash filesystem used takes that into account.
What they're doing is just an awkward, slow and very limited way of what WAP was doing over a decade ago, also via channels used for SMS.
Something like this, and properly integrated, was on the market over a decade ago. Many phones are still compatible. It's called WAP.
So they essentially rediscovered WAP? Great work...
Also:
http://conversations.nokia.com/2008/11/05/nokia-life-tools-opens-side-door-to-the-internet-in-rural-india-and-beyond-via-sms/
http://conversations.nokia.com/2009/11/19/nokia-life-tools-a-life-changing-service/
http://conversations.nokia.com/2010/05/07/ovi-life-tools-lands-in-china/
(and related on above pages)
Apple is doing just fine, sure, but calling their products "wildly successful" or "top dog" is way, way too much of a stretch. "Influential" might be a better word.
There were 260 million iPods ever produced, total. Add 50 million of iPhones (which are also iPods of course) ever produced, and you have 310 million; total, ever (how many in operation?). Now, that is in the range of the number of mobile media players just one other manufacturer, Nokia, sells annually (then there's Samsung, LG, dedicated, et al). Hey, considering that mobile phones with audio playback debuted at the same time as the iPod; and they overtook all dedicated music players, combined, in 2005 or 2006.
As for strictly iPhone, "top dog" with 2% of sales and around 1% usage share (end of 2007 - 3.3 billion mobile subsribers, end of 2009 - 4.6 billion, so now probably close to 5 billion), right.
Except for a very few, highly "visible" markets, Apple almost doesn't exist. Hell, I can probably count on fingers of one hand the number of iPods I have ever seen here (a number excluding my iPod of course...), and that's in a reasonably prosperous late EU memberstate. A long time ago, Chinese "S1" mp3 players were the norm; for a few years it's mobile phones (mainly so called "feature phones" - though I can't help but wonder about the classification: many of them, SE ones for example, have full multitasking of installed apps). Guess the world at large.
Effects of scale might again marginalise Apple, eventually.
And BTW, Microsoft probably did save Apple in the second half of '90s, when they were in very poor shape & desperately needing cash (and MS needed competition, in light of monopoly probe)
"Cheated"? MeeGo/Maemo is available on ARM since inception, Intel knew perfectly well what they're getting into.
And anyway, Symbian is the powerhouse on which Nokia will ride for a long time; MeeGo is a quite periphery project / expect experimentation and some shifts in direction.
If it will be only "on par", what difference does the x86 make? (well, besides waiting for huge improvements in battery technology and process shrinkage to have the same level of experience, of course)
Battery life on iPhone is almost a separate issue in itself - mutlitasking might harm it even more of course, but even without that it's less than stellar.
And you realize of course than phones also can have a virtual memory / "swap" (working decently nice, considering flash storage), right?
...Perhaps Apple has been paying attention to this area? That would help explain why a prototype was found in the wild.
Yeah, a prototype which was tested inside a thick casing made of dielectric material.
iPhone seems to be flaky with many networks worldwide. It might work well when there's great coverage, I'm sure; but it "loses" comparison with many phones if there's any sign of trouble.
And, uhm..."Almost everyone on the bus/train in Sydney is using an iPhone now" riiight.
How "other platforms" becomes suddenly Google/Android here?
As for limiting what one can (not must) do - should we start to wonder again why iPhone is a "smartphone"? "Hiding all the complexitities" isn't new, and some so called "feature phones" have the same essential functionality (hell, and some even full multitasking; SE ones for example)
Android, perhaps - it's interesting to note how many Google I/O Android sessions focus on power, asynchronous programming and performance. But some "other platforms" have those things adressed for many years.
NMaybe on Android, but not "on other mobile OS'es" ("...like Android"? Huh?)
Though Apple sets itself as a nice target for such critique, with all the PR about how iPhone is, essentially, a new wonder of the world...
And really, problems with phone functionality / reception? Mobiles for $30 (yes, price without contract) manage to have it right.
Why would I be talking about anything else than a price without contract? Why would you throw the US here, when we (other posters & me) established it's not about this quite atypical market, it's about the world.
Yes, a large chunk of mid-range phones can be had for somewhat above $100, unlocked and without contract. So called "feature phone" segment, basically (but really, when you look at the essentials of the features, they aren't that far from so called "smartphones"). And yes, low-range means totally basic handsets, 20-50 for example (btw, there are some noticeably better ones than F3 - this one has quite dreadful UI, for starters).
As for smartphones which could fall under "mid-range" - I'd guess Nokia 5230 is pretty damn close (can be had by me right now for $145; Symbian, touchsceen, really free (offline) turn-by-turn GPS, you name it), and it's not even the cheapest one from Nokia. $277 cannot be considered as being in the same league, not when it means whole months salary.
There's a problem when free riders want their ideas to be protected, of course...
In larger countries too, I live in one such. Accidentally, a place where 3G licenses weren't insane... (and the carrier most rocking the boat was established long after the insanity with those 3G licenses)
There are at the least carriers giving the same rates while calling abroad, within the EU; I believe that also extends to roaming in some cases. Voice can be cheap, too.
And generally...whoa, you are supposed to present an evidence that any possible cartels are via patents; for starters.
Me - I'm only showing that pointing fingers at existence of any cartel at all is probably unfounded. Common interests at most, but without real colluding. And with cheap alternatives available. Which doesn't stop people from using, en masse, much more expensive carriers. Hell, differences in price of data transfers can be more than order of magnitude apart...and yet the more expensive offer is still widely used by people.
Why? I have no idea. But choice is there.
I see, so you think one needs a pen for resistive touchscreen device... (and it's now also about the style of the casing? Well, not only other manufacturers don't necessarily follow it - Apple doesn't innovate much)
Me hearing only about the ones in the US would be a bit weird considering I haven't really ever ventured even on the general Western hemisphere part of the planet...
That phone you link to is still at least two times more expensive than what can be comfortably called mid-range. Not far from an order of magnitude more expensive than low-end. And you know it.
I don't really share you observations. Perhaps you really want to look at a very small part of the issue (omitting how the 10+ year old infrastructure is in constant upgrade; or how exorbitant 3G licenses often were)...or apparently you don't realise how cheap mobile services have become here, in the EU, in some places (what, they have "patent moratorium"? Riiight...)
Yes, the cartel might be the problem. But if patents were behind it, no carrier would be able to get away and start a pricewar. Which does happen.
Their "shadesr" are perhaps quite non-standard?
Android OTOH is present both at the high-end and at the mid-range.
That's...probably going a bit too far. "Present both at the highest-end and at the high-end (entry-high-end?)" more accurately describes the situation. Especially since you're talking about the world.
patents on the GSM stack are why we pay so much for mobile data and calls
You...seriously...believe that?...
...think back to what cell phones were like before the iPhone came out...
Hm, yeah; I can think of Ericsson R380, from 2000 (not a "true" touchscreen smartphone since one can't install apps; but by that measure iPhone wasn't one either, in 2007). Or similar one from...1993. But if necessarily "true" touchscreen smartphone - SE P800 does fine. Did in 2002, actually. Five years of difference (sort of six, if looking at apps)
Oh, I get it, you're talking about waiting until absolutelly every piece of "tech surroundings" is firmly in place for some time? Plus nice marketing in a visible, to you, market?
Yeah, "inevitable" in 2007...
Not a surprise really, since it was there in 2004: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia_7710
(a bit sooner really via UIQ devices; and many others, really)
Oh wait, or was it 1993? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Simon