Page 17 of 22 FirstFirst ... 71213141516171819202122 LastLast
Results 321 to 340 of 431
Like Tree137Likes
  1. #321  
    Quote Originally Posted by C-Note View Post
    But I think that is the point. The dominated the PC market with a 'better' product but got jobbed by the Microsoft / Intel duopoly who produced an adequate product but a very good marketing plan.

    I fear the same thing will happen in phones. One can argue they have a better product, but the flood of choices and channels on the Android side will leave the in a distant second place. That is what swamped Apple on the PC side back in the 80's and early 90's.

    HP's webOS was not perfect, but adequate, but their marketing choices (hardware, product identity, and the market segment targeted) accentuated the negative rather than their strengths

    C
    Android commands 55% of the smartphone market and rising. All others, including Apple are being eclipsed. We can argue over who has the better product all day and it doesn't matter. Android is winning because it is every where. There are more manufacturers making Android products and Apple can't take on all of them, even with a superior product. Android targets the low, mid, and high end of the market all at once.

    Is there room for another player like webOS? I think so. I believe there are two factors that will help:

    1) Android users don't pay for apps as much as webOS and Apple users do. I'm not talking price, I'm talking frequency. Developers like to get paid and Android is not paying out as much as others do. If webOS users can continue the trend of actually paying for apps in high numbers, developers will start to take notice (some of them already have).

    2) Google has too many legal issues with Android. Android hardware makers are getting sued and losing to Apple and Microsoft. Microsoft is extorting $5-15 dollars per Android device, depending on the company, and forcing Android makers to make Windows Mobile devices also. If open source webOS can avoid the legal troubles of Android it will start looking like a viable alternative

    I think the hardware issues with webOS will also be fixed by open source. Will there still be crappy webOS hardware down the line, yes. Will we have other flops, yes. However, there will be more choices to chose from.
  2. #322  
    Quote Originally Posted by jrstinkfish View Post
    Ok, I'm veering dangerously off-topic, but ... they are definitely fun to drive, especially the stick, but make sure you take a seat in the back and decide whether or not you can live with people bonking their heads on the rear glass I've got a 145 pound mastiff-mix that I have to tote around, so the Genesis Coupe probably was not gonna happen anyway.
    Thanks! Better options may be available in 3 years when we need to get another car.
  3. #323  
    Quote Originally Posted by k4ever View Post
    Android commands 55% of the smartphone market and rising. All others, including Apple are being eclipsed. We can argue over who has the better product all day and it doesn't matter. Android is winning because it is every where. There are more manufacturers making Android products and Apple can't take on all of them, even with a superior product. Android targets the low, mid, and high end of the market all at once.
    Good point. The thing an upstart has to do to make headway is give as many other a financial incentive to support them as possible. That will perpetuate growth. Microsoft created an entire industry around Windows, from peripherals, to schools offering training, to (the master stroke) techs who had invested thousands in their MCSE and the like and therefore had a financial incentive to make sure that MS products were used in any place they worked.

    The Android OS model provides incentive for both the phone manufacturers and the carriers to push Android brand phones. Apple will need to figure out how to do the same. Their expanding multiple carriers and selling iPads in places unimaginable 2 years ago shows that they are feeling the heat.

    webOS will need to provide similar incentive to compete.

    C
    "Sometimes I feel like an OS-less child..."
    (with apologies to Billie Holiday )
  4. #324  
    Quote Originally Posted by inertia1 View Post
    Does it matter to you that even with the lower sales numbers, Apple makes much more profit in the PC business than HP?

    ____
    After all, while HP may be the worldwide leader in PC sales with massive revenues, their actual profit from those sales has already been far surpassed by Apple. Further, while overall PC growth continues to contract, Appleís Mac sales continue to grow and have outpaced the rest of the PC industry for 21 consecutive quarters. Thatís over five consecutive years. Thatís certainly another way to interpret ĒPost-PC world

    HP To Apple: You Win. | TechCrunch
    _____
    You make a good point. But how long will can they hold on? Their margins will shrink as the competition heats up and tablets become a commodity. If the PC sales figures for Apple is counting tablets, it means they are not doing nearly as well in the traditional PC / laptop market.

    As long as they can stay ahead of the pack in the tablet world, that are in great shape. But they seemed unassailable in phones too until the second half of 2011.

    The plethora of lawsuits show that they are concerned.

    PS: I am NOT an Android fan.

    C
    "Sometimes I feel like an OS-less child..."
    (with apologies to Billie Holiday )
  5. #325  
    Android is an OS. Motorola makes phones. Samsung makes phones. Apple makes phones.
  6. #326  
    Quote Originally Posted by inertia1 View Post
    Does it matter to you that even with the lower sales numbers, Apple makes much more profit in the PC business than HP?

    ____
    After all, while HP may be the worldwide leader in PC sales with massive revenues, their actual profit from those sales has already been far surpassed by Apple. Further, while overall PC growth continues to contract, Apple’s Mac sales continue to grow and have outpaced the rest of the PC industry for 21 consecutive quarters. That’s over five consecutive years. That’s certainly another way to interpret ”Post-PC world

    HP To Apple: You Win. | TechCrunch
    _____
    No, it doesn't matter for Apple's profits but it does matter for software applications (everything is made for Windows and there is some software not available for OS-X) and hardware (same, some drivers may not be available for OS-X). However, if Apple's PCs can continue to trend up, riding the coat tails of its halo products (iPod, iPhone, iPad), some major Windows clone players may exit the business seeking higher profit margins somewhere else. IBM has left and HP has already tried to leave, as your post dicates.
  7. gbp
    gbp is offline
    gbp's Avatar
    Posts
    2,506 Posts
    Global Posts
    2,543 Global Posts
    #327  
    Quote Originally Posted by SnotBoogie View Post
    on point 1)

    as for point 2) One thing to note is PSG was 1/3 of HP revenue but was, for quite some time, years, a declining percentage of their profits. People think HP's problems started with Leo but HP had been having issues before Hurd even got their. Every quarter wasn't bad but psg was declining. From the questionable decision to buy compaq to the mere fact that people where simply buying less computers. Couple that with the declining economy and they had a division that looked kinda like RIMM in the since that it wasn't unprofitable but it was headed in the wrong direction. It was like a boat with a dead engine slowly drifting towards a waterfall. I mean even RIMM can go on for a long time even declining because people still by a crap load of blackberries. They just don't buy them like they buy iphones and Android has stolen their market share. HP just wanted something to stop PSG from bleeding profits. What the didn't want was some 5 year multibillion dollar investment with no guarantee of profit.

    But as for your questions i think HP read the tea leaves for the most part i just don't think there is anything they can do about declining pc sales a bad economy any more the Best Buy can get people to buy more CDs now. Well other then the obvious which is make sexier laptops but that's not gonna cure everything.
    Good post. However I kind of scratch my head when I hear "declining business". Its the old GE mantra that started all following by the cooing of the brains at MBAs.

    IBM wanted to get rid of PC business. Sam Palmisano tells everyone and his neighbor how smart he was in 2003. Guess what IBM, Lenovo is still alive and kicking.

    When a company grows bigger and cannot innovate they fall behind others. CEO's of these big corporations use the "declining business" story to exit out rather than do the hard work i.e. "innovation". The top brass is lazy to put up a fight.

    This is how it goes on exec meeting.
    The CEO asks " I think its declining business what do you think? "
    The top crew "Yes we think the same too"
    The CEO goes like "Lets find someone to buy it"
    The exec leading the division is the only person who is worried. But as long as he gets a bump in salary or some special money from the sell off, he is fine.

    HP is not loosing money in PSG, their profit is shrinking. Here are some small things a commoner like me can think of future


    Creating laptops which which can last a day on single charge
    Making strong all weather laptops at cheaper price ( don't need a Panasonic toughbook)
    Bring the prices down by using SSD hard drives ( HP is already doing it)
    and
    Embed a Pico projector in a business laptop for easy presentations

    If HP wants to innovate there are many things they can do rather than just sell everything.
    k4ever likes this.
  8. gbp
    gbp is offline
    gbp's Avatar
    Posts
    2,506 Posts
    Global Posts
    2,543 Global Posts
    #328  
    This thread is going strong,
    After hearing all the arguments from all sides here are my .02 to the judge

    Palm did not have the money and HP did not want to spend any more.
    C-Note likes this.
  9. #329  
    Quote Originally Posted by gbp View Post
    Good post. However I kind of scratch my head when I hear "declining business". Its the old GE mantra that started all following by the cooing of the brains at MBAs.

    IBM wanted to get rid of PC business. Sam Palmisano tells everyone and his neighbor how smart he was in 2003. Guess what IBM, Lenovo is still alive and kicking.

    When a company grows bigger and cannot innovate they fall behind others. CEO's of these big corporations use the "declining business" story to exit out rather than do the hard work i.e. "innovation". The top brass is lazy to put up a fight.

    This is how it goes on exec meeting.
    The CEO asks " I think its declining business what do you think? "
    The top crew "Yes we think the same too"
    The CEO goes like "Lets find someone to buy it"
    The exec leading the division is the only person who is worried. But as long as he gets a bump in salary or some special money from the sell off, he is fine.

    HP is not loosing money in PSG, their profit is shrinking. Here are some small things a commoner like me can think of future


    Creating laptops which which can last a day on single charge
    Making strong all weather laptops at cheaper price ( don't need a Panasonic toughbook)
    Bring the prices down by using SSD hard drives ( HP is already doing it)
    and
    Embed a Pico projector in a business laptop for easy presentations

    If HP wants to innovate there are many things they can do rather than just sell everything.
    To add to your list:

    Come up with a mobile strategy that actually works and does not make you just another commodity (Android, Windows) player

    Invest time and money (not just 1 year throwing $3 billion into a platform and throwing in the towel after 2 months on the market) in producing tablets, phones, and expand into other markets. Your competitors are doing it and will soon make you irrelevant as these devices displace traditional PCs.
    C-Note likes this.
  10. #330  
    Quote Originally Posted by kalel33 View Post
    You mean like expandable memory, battery replacement, FM radio, able to play multiple formats, cheaper than $400, Windows compatible(first gen was not), USB compatible for those who don't own firewire. onboard recording, and equalizer. Other players out there had all that, which the Ipod did not have. It goes both ways when you make statements like that.
    Except people chose ease of use, awesome user interface, large screen, and the fact that it just worked over a bunch of random features that they may not use.

    Oh, and I think Apple has proven overwhelming that the masses don't care about the ability to change out batteries. They don't care that they can't upgrade the memory. They definitely don't care about an FM tuner.
  11. #331  
    Windows is the most used OS in personal computing. Why has this not translated into mobile OS success?

    People are familiar with it yet it hasn't received much traction.
  12. #332  
    Quote Originally Posted by k4ever View Post
    I want webOS to succeed because I believe it is a good OS that has some good features no other OS has. Problem is I don't think you or some of the others here do. That's alright, that's your opinion but please respect the opinion of others. There shouldn't be fights on webOS Nation every time someone says they like something about webOS. This is a webOS community. It has a narrowed focus, not narrow minded people. We want to see it grow and take constructive criticism on the OS.


    ---Sent from my HP TouchPad using Communities (a great webOS app!)
    I don't think anyone is taking that away from anyone. What I see is that people talk about the good features that WebOS has that no other OS has, BUT you want to ignore the problems that exist that are bigger turn offs for the masses.

    Or, people come up with every excuse for Apple being successful and refuse to admit that Apple simply does a better job of building products that the masses want better than the competition.

    Someone earlier used a fishbowl example in describing Apple's success and it's a very good analogy.
  13. #333  
    Quote Originally Posted by k4ever View Post
    Ha! I love it. People will pay more for an item if there is a "perceived" value in it, not necessarily a real value. I can't fault Apple because people want to pay more for their devices then they are worth. I just get tired of those people trying to convince me that the device is worth more than it is. Then call me a hater when I don't buy it. I just think they are trying to make themselves feel better about their purchase. We all do that. I like the look and feel of OS-X, except for the button placement. I always set up my Linux desktop to look like it.

    I made a comment that webOS users need to be more like Apple users, just without the pretentiousness. Apple users will buy Apple products regardless of whether or not there is something cheaper or better available. They are loyal to Apple and that loyalty is reciprocated. When they lined up for the iPhone, they started a revolution in the mobile industry.

    Also, I saw a nice red Genesis Coupe at the Hyundai dealership. My wife and I were entertaining the thought of owning one. We plan on giving the car we purchased to our daughter after she graduates from high school and we didn't want her speeding around in the Genesis Coupe. It was real nice though!
    There is added value in buying a Mac over a cheap generic PC. You just don't see the value in it because the added value that the Mac offers is not important to you.

    Just like I don't see the value in buying an expensive watch from Breitling, Rolex, Patek Philippe, etc when my Casio watch works just fine for me. BUT, I am not going to tell someone that owns one of those expensive watches that they are idiots, sheep, etc for buying them.
  14. #334  
    Quote Originally Posted by C-Note View Post
    But I think that is the point. The dominated the PC market with a 'better' product but got jobbed by the Microsoft / Intel duopoly who produced an adequate product but a very good marketing plan.

    I fear the same thing will happen in phones. One can argue they have a better product, but the flood of choices and channels on the Android side will leave the in a distant second place. That is what swamped Apple on the PC side back in the 80's and early 90's.

    HP's webOS was not perfect, but adequate, but their marketing choices (hardware, product identity, and the market segment targeted) accentuated the negative rather than their strengths

    C
    You totally ignore that Apple takes over 50% of all smart phone profits. If Android was 90% and the iPhone was 10%, But, Apple was still making the majority of the profit, Apple wouldn't care.

    Corporations want to make money, not worry about who sells the most.

    Not to mention that you are comparing Apple to how many Android manufacturers instead of the more logical of how is Apple doing compared to Samsung or how is Apple doing compared to HTC. I think I stated that earlier, but people still want to use that over the top metric.

    I guess Ferrari should shut down their company because they don't sell nowhere near as many cars as the whole auto industry. That's you logic, right?
  15. #335  
    Quote Originally Posted by C-Note View Post
    Enjoyed your response. But I'm wondering if this is just the future of modern consumer electronics. When you are first with something new you make a mint. If you are not, its just another commodity.

    Big screen TV's, VHS, DVD players, MP3 players, Phones, have all gone through this evolution. HP and everyone else had better get used to it. It's why I gave them at least partial credit for attempting to get out of the consumer market all together.
    So, you're saying when Apple brings out an actual TV it's going to be a cheap commodity product?

    I think we all know the answer to that one.
  16. #336  
    When you buy a PC there is Windows Home, Professional or Ultimate.

    With Apple there is simply OSX Lion.

    In some cases PCs are cheaper because you are buying a stripped down model.
  17. #337  
    Quote Originally Posted by k4ever View Post
    Here is a snip from your original post:






    You never set a time limit. Besides Apple still sells personal computers today. If we were to use the breakdown figures for each company, Apple is still so far behind it's sad. Here are the figures for 2010 (don't think 2011 figures are out yet):

    Apple Ranks Third in Global PC Sales With iPad Included - Mac Rumors

    Noticed that you have to add iPad sales (cheat) for Apple to even rank in the top 4. Without iPad sales they would be in single digits. With iPad sales they barely make 11%. Apple was decimated by the Windows clones in the '80s and Apple made better products, they just priced themselves out of the market.

    Two things I want to point out:

    1) HP is still the highest ranked Windows clone with 17.7% of the market, without TouchPad or any other tablet sales.

    2) I need to adjust my figure for Apple's market share from 1998-2010 down. They actually dipped far below 4% during that time period. However, they are on the rise, slightly:

    Apple computer sales grow faster than PC sales for five years - but why? | Technology | guardian.co.uk
    As I already said, how is Apple doing in the markets that they compete in? Apple does not sell cheap $299 computers, so how can you put them in the same category as HP that does sell a ton of cheap computers?

    In any other industry similar products are compared. BUt, in the PC world it's premium Apple versus all the generic, CHEAP PC makers.

    You know this, but you want to ignore it. Apple is an extremely successful company and they make a ton of money. They don't care how many of something they sell, they care about the profit margin they are making on each device they sell.
  18. #338  
    Quote Originally Posted by inertia1 View Post
    Does it matter to you that even with the lower sales numbers, Apple makes much more profit in the PC business than HP?

    ____
    After all, while HP may be the worldwide leader in PC sales with massive revenues, their actual profit from those sales has already been far surpassed by Apple. Further, while overall PC growth continues to contract, Appleís Mac sales continue to grow and have outpaced the rest of the PC industry for 21 consecutive quarters. Thatís over five consecutive years. Thatís certainly another way to interpret ĒPost-PC world

    HP To Apple: You Win. | TechCrunch
    _____
    This post should be a sticky somewhere for those people that want to keep shouting market share and ignoring everything else. It applies for the "Android market share is larger", too.
  19. #339  
    Quote Originally Posted by k4ever View Post
    Android commands 55% of the smartphone market and rising. All others, including Apple are being eclipsed. We can argue over who has the better product all day and it doesn't matter. Android is winning because it is every where. There are more manufacturers making Android products and Apple can't take on all of them, even with a superior product. Android targets the low, mid, and high end of the market all at once.
    Android marketshare is made up of individual parts: HTC, Samsung, LG, Asus, Kyocera, Huawei, Motorola, T-Mobile, Sony, Verzo Kinzo, ZTE Libra and others. And that's just phones. Here is a tablet site: SlateDroid
    How many of those individual parts are doing well? Market share is nice, but when you divide it up between all the parts, how many beside maybe Samsung and Motorola are making any real money? At the end of the day, the goal is profit, whether that is through market share and flooding the market or through other means. It's profits that keep a product going. Webos and the Touchpad are good examples of what happens when you don't have either. 55% of the market and less than half the mobile profits. Maybe market share is not all it's cracked up to be. Something is very wrong with this picture.

    Quote Originally Posted by k4ever View Post
    snip...
    1) Android users don't pay for apps as much as webOS and Apple users do. I'm not talking price, I'm talking frequency. Developers like to get paid and Android is not paying out as much as others do. ...snip
    Is there proof of this claim? Seems there was some gnashing of the teeth over Splashtop remote on these very boards. I use that as an example because that is a high profile app. The link you previously posted about some obscure Norwegian gaming company with 10 games making a comment about Weobs users buying more games than Android users is not proof of this claim. Webos users have less choice so it could be Android users passed over this company because they have better options.

    Quote Originally Posted by k4ever View Post
    2) Google has too many legal issues with Android. Android hardware makers are getting sued and losing to Apple and Microsoft. Microsoft is extorting $5-15 dollars per Android device, depending on the company, and forcing Android makers to make Windows Mobile devices also. If open source webOS can avoid the legal troubles of Android it will start looking like a viable alternative . ...
    It seems unlikely Google will go down without a fight. They have been acquiring patents left and right. Didn't Apple just lose a major patent case to Motorola?
    Last edited by sinsin07; 01/06/2012 at 05:35 PM.
  20. #340  
    Quote Originally Posted by nusome4 View Post
    You totally ignore that Apple takes over 50% of all smart phone profits. If Android was 90% and the iPhone was 10%, But, Apple was still making the majority of the profit, Apple wouldn't care.

    Corporations want to make money, not worry about who sells the most.

    Not to mention that you are comparing Apple to how many Android manufacturers instead of the more logical of how is Apple doing compared to Samsung or how is Apple doing compared to HTC. I think I stated that earlier, but people still want to use that over the top metric.

    I guess Ferrari should shut down their company because they don't sell nowhere near as many cars as the whole auto industry. That's you logic, right?
    The only problem with your stat is that you don't give any basis. 50% over all history, over the last 5 years or over the last 6 months. And more importantly, what are the projections going forward? We all know Apple has been a beast in the past, but will they continue to dominate? Problem is when you let the competition get an edge on you in any way, it puts them in striking distance.

    The problem with your Ferrari analogy is that I have no beef with their cars, but I'd rather own the Toyota corporation than Ferrari. At the end of the year I'd rather make $25 per hour and work 40 hours a week than make $50 an hour and work 10 hours a week.

    Quote Originally Posted by nusome4 View Post
    So, you're saying when Apple brings out an actual TV it's going to be a cheap commodity product?
    Apple has to get the TV thing right before we can have the conversation about it being a commodity product. No guarantees that they will.

    But the phone sales numbers are starting to change. That is a fact. And I have no preference for either company. I wanted to see Palm be a player... but that isn't happening

    Remember, the early arguments were "Apple sells way more phones than anyone else"

    Now it's "Apple makes more money than any one else".

    Next it will be "Apple makes more money per phone than anyone else".

    Finally it will be, "Apple only sells to discriminating consumers"

    C

    PS - I can guarantee you that corporations worry about BOTH - money and who sells the most in their industry.
    Last edited by C-Note; 01/06/2012 at 06:53 PM.
    "Sometimes I feel like an OS-less child..."
    (with apologies to Billie Holiday )

Posting Permissions