Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 46
  1.    #1  
    Canalys has published their regular quarterly numbers, and it doesn't look too good for Palm. The market itself has grown 50%, while Palm only grew shipments 6%


    http://www.canalys.com/pr/2006/r2006071.htm

    When YoY growth is plotted from 2004 things dont look much better, and in contrast to their competitors who appear to be growing strongly their sales are pretty flat.



    Symbian if of course king, but most dont find them relevant to the US, and they kind of stretch the graph obscuring other numbers. Excluding Symbian things are clearer, but no better for Palm



    Here are the numbers for the last 3 years.



    So is it still OK to milk your loyal captive market, while turning away new customers with underwhelming devices?
  2. #2  
    Is there any breakout of Palm's numbers based on OS? If that is being accounted for it would show that they sold very little of the 700w.
    Main Phone: Treo 270/600/650/700w/700p/750v/Motorola Q/iPhone
    Tried but sold: Motorola Q/Nokia E61/700wx/HTC TyTN/Treo 680
  3.    #3  
    They do not break it out (and the bigger % it is of sales, the worse it is for Palm OS, as it would mean year on year decline in sales of PalmOS), but I'm sure Palm would prefer to be on the 45% growth curve than the 6% curve, as would their investors.

    Surur
  4. #4  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur
    Canalys has published their regular quarterly numbers, and it doesn't look too good for Palm. The market itself has grown 50%, while Palm only grew shipments 6%
    Surur, There's something wrong here. Broken down by vendor (first table in your post), Palm: 1,131,120. Broken down by OS (second table): 1,131,120, i.e. exactly the same number. This implies that Palm sold no WM devices at all! Is this this your mistake or Canalys's?
  5. #5  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur
    They do not break it out
    Ok. So in your second table above - 'Mobile OS' - Palm doesn't mean Palm OS but devices sold by Palm (Palm OS and WM5)? So the 700W is counted twice: in both the 'Palm' and 'WM' category?
  6.    #6  
    In short, yes.

    The longer version is that PalmOS and Palm used to be synonymous, I have numbers for POS AND Palm, with Palm being 90% of the POS market. Ive chosen to list only Palm here, to keep things cleaner, but obviously since January this year things have become complicated again. The only other major seller of POS is Garmin, and I am guessing Palm's sales of WM and Garmin's sale of POS devices probably balance out more or less. Canalys made no mention of POS in the most recent release.

    There can be no doubt that Palm sales would be lower without WM shipments.
    Surur
  7. ambtreo's Avatar
    Posts
    476 Posts
    Global Posts
    492 Global Posts
    #7  
    This analysis by Canalys is apples vs. oranges in my opinion. Nokia is primarily shipping "smartphones" through it's existing channels of distribution through Asia and Europe. This means people who previously purchased a Nokia phone are now purchasing a Nokia smartphone as that is the best of breed Nokia phone to choose from. How many Nokia smartphone users are there in the US? It is a limited group, the majority of which use Cingular.

    Palm competes with RIM, Audiovox, Motorola, etc. This analysis is not realistic in my opinion as it compares traditional cell fones utilizing symbian with treo's and BB's - apples to oranges.
  8. #8  
    Thanks. I notice your OS comparison data have gone now so here's something similar together with Q1 data.

    Worldwide total smart mobile device market Q1


    Symbian: Q1 2004 41%, Q1 2005 61%, Q1 2006 69%
    MS: Q1 2004 23%, Q1 2005 18%, Q1 2006 12%
    RIM: Q1 2004 6%, Q1 2005 7%, Q1 2006 8%
    PalmSource: Q1 2004 22%, Q1 2005 11%, Q1 2006 ??

    http://www.canalys.com/pr/2005/r2005041.htm
    http://www.canalys.com/pr/2006/r2006043.htm


    Worldwide total smart mobile device market Q2



    Symbian: Q2 2004, 41%, Q2 2005 63%, Q2 2006 67%
    MS: Q2 2004 23%, Q2 2005 16%, Q2 2006 15%
    RIM: Q2 2004, 8%, Q2 2005 7%, Q2 2006 6%
    PalmSource: Q2 2004 23%, Q2 2005 10%, Q2 2006 ??

    http://www.canalys.com/pr/2005/r2005071.htm
    http://www.canalys.com/pr/2006/r2006071.htm

    EDIT: Surur's data came back!
    EDIT 2: Added RIM Q2 data for 2004 and 2005
    Last edited by marcol; 07/27/2006 at 10:01 AM.
  9. #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by ambtreo
    Palm competes with RIM, Audiovox, Motorola, etc. This analysis is not realistic in my opinion as it compares traditional cell fones utilizing symbian with treo's and BB's - apples to oranges.
    Well, I think there is an accepted definition of a smartphone (or 'smart device') and I quite expect that the Symbian phones included by Canalys comply with this. I see what you're saying though. 'Smartphone' covers a huge array of devices and many of the Symbian phones wouldn't make very good Treo replacements (Nokia E61, SonyEricsson P series and M600i are obvious exceptions). It's probably also worth noting that the MS category will include both Pocket PCs and Smartphones. Many of the former might reasonably be considered Treo competitors but most of the devices running the WM5 Smartphone OS are more equivalent to some of the lower-end Symbian devices and aren't very Treo-like at all (the Moto Q and Samsung i320 would be considered exceptions by some). So yes it is a bit apples to oranges, but it's about the best we have I think.
  10.    #10  
    Actually we do have rimm's numbers, and I wonder if you will agree that recently Pamsource and Palm's numbers would be about the same, at least until the wm treo takes off (if that ever happens).

    [Q2]

    Symbian: Q2 2004, 41%, Q2 2005 63%, Q2 2006 67%
    MS: Q2 2004 23%, Q2 2005 16%, Q2 2006 15%
    RIM: Q2 2004, 8.2, Q2 2005 7.4, Q2 2006 6%
    PalmSource: Q2 2004 23%, Q2 2005 10%, Q2 2006 ??

    I think you will agree that compared to the Symbian juggernaut everyone looks bad, but also that before devices such as the E61 and M600, we do not really know if they are used as full converged devices or just fancy phones. I hope Nokia breaks out sales figures for the E61, as this will really tell us whats going on.

    Surur
    Last edited by surur; 07/27/2006 at 09:16 AM.
  11. #11  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur
    Actually we do have rimm's numbers,
    Thanks. Fixed above.

    Quote Originally Posted by surur
    and I wonder if you will agree that recently Pamsource and Palm's numbers would be about the same, at least until the wm treo takes off (if that ever happens).
    Hard to agree or disagree as I don't really have any data. As you say, for them to be the same, the number of 700Ws would have to be the same as the number of Palm OS devices not made by Palm, so the same as the number of Garmin iQues, GSPDA Xplores (and any other devices, Fossils etc, that might have recently moved from the shelves on which they had been languishing). Lists of Palm OS devices (some no longer being manufactured):

    http://www.palmsource.com/products/p...?Cat=Handhelds
    http://www.palmsource.com/products/p...at=Smartphones

    If had to guess (and it's no more than that) I would agree with you that the Palm and PalmSource numbers likely aren't very different because my guess is that not many non-Palm Palm OS devices are sold (as a proportion of the total) and the 700W doesn't make up a large proportion of Palm sales. The latter is what I'm most doubtful about - but it is only available in one country on one carrier and its target market (big business) may be rather conservative (lots of testing first etc) and slow to adopt.

    Quote Originally Posted by surur
    I think you will agree that compared to the Symbian juggernaut everyone looks bad, but also that before devices such as the E61 and M600, we do not really know if they are used as full converged devices or just fancy phones.
    If the criterion was use as a 'full converged device' I think the numbers
    in other categories (not just Symbian) would be very much lower! My understanding is that part the definition of 'smartphone' is that applications can be added. What proportion of the users of these devices never add an app?

    Quote Originally Posted by surur
    I hope Nokia breaks out sales figures for the E61, as this will really tell us whats going on.
    That would be nice, as would 700W sales figures.
  12. ambtreo's Avatar
    Posts
    476 Posts
    Global Posts
    492 Global Posts
    #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by marcol
    Well, I think there is an accepted definition of a smartphone (or 'smart device') and I quite expect that the Symbian phones included by Canalys comply with this. I see what you're saying though. 'Smartphone' covers a huge array of devices and many of the Symbian phones wouldn't make very good Treo replacements (Nokia E61, SonyEricsson P series and M600i are obvious exceptions). It's probably also worth noting that the MS category will include both Pocket PCs and Smartphones. Many of the former might reasonably be considered Treo competitors but most of the devices running the WM5 Smartphone OS are more equivalent to some of the lower-end Symbian devices and aren't very Treo-like at all (the Moto Q and Samsung i320 would be considered exceptions by some). So yes it is a bit apples to oranges, but it's about the best we have I think.
    I agree that it's the closest pool of data that we have, but that being said to me it's not a very meaningful comparison. But thanks for your perspective. And yes, the Q and the i320 are exceptions as they do compete directly with the Treo. To me these are the defining factors for what makes makes a "smartphone":

    1) Qwerty keyboard (or suretype ie. BB 7130)
    2) Functional email (either push or pull)
    3) Functional web access.

    The qwerty keyboard probably knocks out 60% of the Symbain phones, if not more. And that's an educated guess
  13.    #13  
    Quote Originally Posted by ambtreo
    I agree that it's the closest pool of data that we have, but that being said to me it's not a very meaningful comparison. But thanks for your perspective. And yes, the Q and the i320 are exceptions as they do compete directly with the Treo. To me these are the defining factors for what makes makes a "smartphone":

    1) Qwerty keyboard (or suretype ie. BB 7130)
    2) Functional email (either push or pull)
    3) Functional web access.

    The qwerty keyboard probably knocks out 60% of the Symbain phones, if not more. And that's an educated guess
    The QWERTY requirement would knock out the majority of WM PDA phones, especially the ones used in Asia, where soft keyboards and hand writing recognition are not just seen as sufficient, but desirable.

    Surur
  14. #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by ambtreo
    I agree that it's the closest pool of data that we have, but that being said to me it's not a very meaningful comparison. But thanks for your perspective. And yes, the Q and the i320 are exceptions as they do compete directly with the Treo. To me these are the defining factors for what makes makes a "smartphone":

    1) Qwerty keyboard (or suretype ie. BB 7130)
    2) Functional email (either push or pull)
    3) Functional web access.
    Here's what Wikipedia has to say:

    Quote Originally Posted by Wikipedia
    A smartphone or sphone is any electronic handheld device that integrates the functionality of a mobile phone, personal digital assistant (PDA) or other information appliance. This is often achieved by adding telephone functions to an existing PDA (PDA Phone) or putting "smart" capabilities, such as PDA functions, into a mobile phone. A key feature of a smartphone is that additional applications can be installed on the device. The applications can be developed by the manufacturer of the handheld device, by the operator or by any other third-party software developer.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smartphone

    Pretty much fits with my understanding and usage of the term 'smartphone' (Canalys's as well I suspect), but it's worth having look at the 'Definition and history' section too which notes the elusiveness of an adequate, agreed definition. Too late now perhaps, but it would be nice if we could distinguish 'dumb smartphones' (12 key Series 60 Nokias etc) and 'smart smartphones' (Treos etc). In defining the latter I'd pretty much agree with your three defining factors as requirements except I'd have touch screens as well as QWERTYs.

    Quote Originally Posted by ambtreo
    IThe qwerty keyboard probably knocks out 60% of the Symbain phones, if not more.
    More (in terms of % of different models) if this is anything to go by:

    http://www.symbian.com/phones/index.html

    Probably much, much more in terms of % device sales.
  15. #15  
    I disagree about the comparison being "apple and oranges". Just because most of the Nokia smartphones don't have keyboards doesn't make them any less of a smartphone than a Treo. They have internet and email capabilities and you can add 3rd party software. Granted the Treo is a much better smartphone. It would be like comparing cars sales in the world and saying that a Kia is not a car because it doesn't have the specs of a Bentley.

    It's apples to apples as far as I am concerned.

    Another point is if the Treo is by far the better smartphone, as I would agree, why are people around the world buying the "inferior" Symbian phones? I am guessing cost, simple useability and much more support from telco carriers.
  16. #16  
    Quote Originally Posted by Aussie Joe
    why are people around the world buying the "inferior" Symbian phones? I am guessing cost, simple useability and much more support from telco carriers.
    Don't forget reliability... Palm is not kicking a lot of **** in that department either. People are used to picking up a phone and having it work. They don't want to visit a forum to find out why the phone is turning off or why it will not sync with the computer anymore... what is activesyc?

    Plus, you have the expensive data rates from carriers. Heck, they charge the same price, if not more, for data on a phone vs. a broadband connection people can get at home. Of course, that is a double-edge sword as well, since if they drop the prices and smartphones fly off the shelf, the data rates would drop due to too many users.

    verizon.... $400 for the phone, $45 for voice, $40/$45 for data, and $15 if you want to connect to your computer.... Of course, sprint has a cheaper plan, if you can attempt to figure out what you actually get... too complicated.


    Moto has it right, they introduce a cheap competitor to the treo and take marketshare. My guess is they will introduce a touch screen later, and it will be cheap as well. Moto can do this since the phones they sale can actually float them while they get into this market. Moto is reporting that they make the devices cheap as well, so maybe they do not need the float.

    Palm is attempting to float by with the treo while just about abandoning the handheld market. As market share erodes I wonder how many developers will be able to stick this out without moving on to something else....
    01000010 01100001 01101110 00100000 01010100 01101000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 00100000 01000011 01110010 01100001 01110000 01110000 01100101 01110010 01110011 00100001
  17. ambtreo's Avatar
    Posts
    476 Posts
    Global Posts
    492 Global Posts
    #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by marcol
    Here's what Wikipedia has to say:


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smartphone

    Pretty much fits with my understanding and usage of the term 'smartphone' (Canalys's as well I suspect), but it's worth having look at the 'Definition and history' section too which notes the elusiveness of an adequate, agreed definition. Too late now perhaps, but it would be nice if we could distinguish 'dumb smartphones' (12 key Series 60 Nokias etc) and 'smart smartphones' (Treos etc). In defining the latter I'd pretty much agree with your three defining factors as requirements except I'd have touch screens as well as QWERTYs.


    More (in terms of % of different models) if this is anything to go by:

    http://www.symbian.com/phones/index.html

    Probably much, much more in terms of % device sales.
    Thanks for your input Marcol - I agree with your point of differentiating the "entry" stage smartphones from the "advanced" smartphones. The Treo, BB, Q's all fit into the advanced category for sure.

    Regarding the % of symbian phones, I was trying to be conservative in my estimates. Thx again.
  18. ambtreo's Avatar
    Posts
    476 Posts
    Global Posts
    492 Global Posts
    #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by Aussie Joe
    I disagree about the comparison being "apple and oranges". Just because most of the Nokia smartphones don't have keyboards doesn't make them any less of a smartphone than a Treo. They have internet and email capabilities and you can add 3rd party software. Granted the Treo is a much better smartphone. It would be like comparing cars sales in the world and saying that a Kia is not a car because it doesn't have the specs of a Bentley.

    It's apples to apples as far as I am concerned.

    Another point is if the Treo is by far the better smartphone, as I would agree, why are people around the world buying the "inferior" Symbian phones? I am guessing cost, simple useability and much more support from telco carriers.
    Aussie Joe -

    My primary point regarding Nokia's positioning as the leader in smartphone worldwide market share is that they have historically had the market leadership position in overall cell fone sales. As they have revamped and upgraded their product line from analog to digital phones during the last 10 years, they have roughly maintained their market leadership position. The fact that a majority of their phones happen to utilize symbian and provide entrly level smartphone functionality doesn't mean that they compete with Treo's. They have the smartphone market leadership position more as a result of their existing distribution channels for traditional cell fones than due to customer demand for Nokia's converged smart phone products. In this instance the cart has drawn the horse.

    Nokia's leadership position is a result of well established channels of distribution with international wireless carriers who have demanded a continued upgrade in Nokia's product SKU's. These carriers, plus secondary market distributors such as Brightpoint and Cellstar have a much bigger impact on the distribution of worldwide cell fone sales than the end use consumer does directly. Nokia has been able to convince research groups and analysts that their Symbian based phones are smartphones and they deserve credit for that. But if you are going to argue that these phones in anyway compete with a converged device such as a Treo or BB, your position doesn't hold water as the functionality of these converged devices are far superior, other than recent enhancements to their product line.
  19.    #19  
    Actually most of Nokia's phones are not symbian, in fact they shipped nearly 80 million phones last quarter, of which only 9 million (bit more than 10%) were smartphones. One can also not argue that keyboarded devices like their 900 series, with a 640x200 screen, were not proper smartphones.

    The thing is, Nokia must be needing Symbian for their more advanced handhelds for SOME reason, else why not use a cheaper in-house OS? And if a smart OS is needed to run the phone, its automatically a smartphone to me, no matter how little or much the user uses its capabilities.

    The real question should be, how can Palm, HP and the other OEM's emulate Nokia's success in moving devices. One answer is obviously branding, but the other is excelent and attractive hardware and features which attack buyers even if they dont know the OS. That of course means a lot of sexy advertising, Palm to lose the antenna and updating the design to look a bit more modern, and adding hardware features which people care about, such as better cameras and music capabilities (hard keys and synchonization software especially)

    My 2c at least.

    Surur
  20. #20  
    Why do we have Palm shipments (hardware maker) listed with shipments of WM (software) ? I am having trouble making useful comparisons this way.

    And if we ignore that for a second, why isn't tehre mention of MS's drop from 24% to 15%

    Finally, no mention of Linux ?

    http://news.com.com/2100-1041_3-6099...9688&subj=news

    Moto just sold 1 million units of their Ming phone in China....no where else but China !
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions