Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 171
  1. #21  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardfan View Post
    Personally, i think Apple peaked with the iphone 4. It's been a killer ride for Apple though who could do nothing wrong until antenna gate. I'd be very surprised if they can keep this ride going without making some changes.
    ...
    Especially as other platforms catch up in apps, eye candy, UI, and hardware that already have OS's with more potential.
    ....
    I can't believe I'm agreeing with you guys on so much of this.

    I don't count it a scientific survey at all, but of almost all of the IT folks I know (and I know a bunch), more have bypassed the iPhone 4 for Android devices. I don't see that trend abating with Apple's latest offerings.

    Even more telling, I'm seeing non-IT people moving away from their iPhones. Even my son-in-law, who as been a dyed in the wool Apple fan (he stood in line for hours to get iPhone 4s for hime and his wife) was working hard to convince me that I shouldn't wait on Palm's next device, that I should get - uhuh, an Android.

    I think he'd have already traded in his iPhone, but he's not eligible yet. That makes me wonder, how many iPhone 4 owners are looking at Androids now, and wishing they hadn't jumped so soon...
  2. #22  
    Quote Originally Posted by mikah912 View Post
    This is the sort of craziness that ensues when one starts with a conclusion and works backward to support it at all costs.
    QFT
  3. #23  
    Quote Originally Posted by dandbj13 View Post
    Yes. No phone has the customer satisfaction and repeat buyer percentage as the iPhone. The numbers are not even close. A much larger percentage of Android customers say they would not buy another Android phone compare to iPhone customers. So, yes. There would be a higher percentage of new customers buying Android phone, especially the price-consience, first-time smartphone buyer who looks at their options and sees they can get a hyped up superphone for free.

    Also, you seem to ignore the fact that the smartphone market is growing exponentially. It will not be defined by the current users, but the new users. Targeting new users with free phones is targeting the growth market. Android is definitely growing by offering free phones to the largest market: those new to smartphones. Verizon, or Moto, can't remember which one, admitted as much. I'll try to find the link later.
    Just a clarificaiton or two:

    Android is an operating system, and not a phone. There are MANY phones now, with one version or another of the Anrdroid OS on them.

    Google licenses Android to phone manufacturer's for free to put into their new phone models. Many of them alter the UI of Android when they make their phone models, like HTC (sense) or Motorolla (Motoblur).

    Lets be consistent here, for the sake of discussion and clarity: a Samsung Epic, ANY carrier version, is a phone model, just like the iPhone will be if Verizon or TMobile gets it next year.

    Android competes with iOS, Meego, Symbian, Windows Mobile, WebOS as an operating system however, since it is licensed for free, it costs the manufacturer less in overhead to use on thier smartphones, unlike Symbian or WinMo,who charge licensing/usage fees.

    In that regard, HP/Palm's business model appears to be similar to Apple's, however, it is my very firm opinion that non-exclusive, multicarrier wordwide launches will catapult them well into the worldwide market of over 3 billion cell phone users that do NOT have a smartphone, currently, but want one, or will want one.

    The smartphone market is not what it was 3 years ago, when the iPhones only real competition was the 7 year old, aintiquated (but still awesome, in itsownright!) Palm Treo line.
    "The more I learn, the more I realize just how little I really do know!" -Albert Einstein

  4. #24  
    Quote Originally Posted by mikah912 View Post
    ...
    This is the sort of craziness that ensues when one starts with a conclusion and works backward to support it at all costs.
    Maybe the thread should be renamed:

    A lot of excuses on iPhone competition, and what it means for nobody in particular
  5. #25  
    Quote Originally Posted by hparsons View Post
    Maybe the thread should be renamed:

    A lot of excuses on iPhone competition, and what it means for nobody in particular
  6.    #26  
    Quote Originally Posted by gmanvbva View Post
    EDIT: BTW I know exactly ZERO people (personally) that would be "new to smartphone consumers" that would purchase a phone from Walmart, and especially from Amazon and Wirefly. So that kinda ruins your theory as well.
    Well, when you put it that way... Because, clearly, If you don't know these people, they must not exist. Your right. That proves it.

    BTW, my dad bought his first smartphone from Walmart. It was an iPhone, no discount. We had to wait in a line of people buying smartphones.
  7. #27  
    You can pretty much only get these SUPER CHEAP PHONES on discount if you are a new customer.
  8. #28  
    Quote Originally Posted by dandbj13 View Post
    Well, when you put it that way... Because, clearly, If you don't know these people, they must not exist. Your right. That proves it.

    BTW, my dad bought his first smartphone from Walmart. It was an iPhone, no discount. We had to wait in a line of people buying smartphones.
    I thought walmart online store was a bit different from instore. No idea really since i've never used either.
  9. #29  
    Quote Originally Posted by dandbj13 View Post
    Now, you are just trying to change the definition of commonly used terms. Of course, a free phone costs something if you don't have a contract. But that has always been true. We have always called a phone "free" if you do not have to pay anything for the hardware upfront, as in point of sale.

    Also, free phones have always been considered downmarket from premium phones. Now that we have something like an iPhones\, people want to blur the line between free phones and premium so that they can have the appearance of competing.

    I don't know about today's world. But in the one, say, three years ago, the "sales" of free phones were not compared to premium phones. I am not the one changing the definition of words to suit my position.
    Speaking of definitions... and changing them...
    You seem to be failing to understand the retail business and trying to form your own definition of "free" in the retail cellular phone business and ignoring the blatantly obvious fact that there is still (as you even mention) "a point of sale". A "free" phone does not mean that there is some type of "free" bin at Walmart (with highend Android phones) and any Tom, **** or Harry can walk in, pick a phone out of the bin and walk right back out of the store. There is still a "point of sale" and transaction being conducted that can easily be tracked.

    You're argument is really pretty absurd.
  10.    #30  
    Quote Originally Posted by LCGuy View Post
    Just a clarificaiton or two:

    Android is an operating system, and not a phone. There are MANY phones now, with one version or another of the Anrdroid OS on them.

    Google licenses Android to phone manufacturer's for free to put into their new phone models. Many of them alter the UI of Android when they make their phone models, like HTC (sense) or Motorolla (Motoblur).

    Lets be consistent here, for the sake of discussion and clarity: a Samsung Epic, ANY carrier version, is a phone model, just like the iPhone will be if Verizon or TMobile gets it next year.

    Android competes with iOS, Meego, Symbian, Windows Mobile, WebOS as an operating system however, since it is licensed for free, it costs the manufacturer less in overhead to use on thier smartphones, unlike Symbian or WinMo,who charge licensing/usage fees.

    In that regard, HP/Palm's business model appears to be similar to Apple's, however, it is my very firm opinion that non-exclusive, multicarrier wordwide launches will catapult them well into the worldwide market of over 3 billion cell phone users that do NOT have a smartphone, currently, but want one, or will want one.

    The smartphone market is not what it was 3 years ago, when the iPhones only real competition was the 7 year old, aintiquated (but still awesome, in itsownright!) Palm Treo line.
    The only thing I would clarify in this post is that the Epic is not the same as the other Galaxy S phones. It has a keyboard and a few other features which make a different phone for a different audience. Lumping 4 different phones under one name to make the sales look better is a neat trick, but it is not honest. I don't know as much about the other phones, but the Epic should not be listed with them.

    As for the same phone on different carriers, I have no problem with that. A Verizon iPhone will be the same as an AT&T iPhone: one phone. the Galaxy S is not quite that.
  11. #31  
    Quote Originally Posted by dandbj13 View Post
    Well, when you put it that way... Because, clearly, If you don't know these people, they must not exist. Your right. That proves it.

    BTW, my dad bought his first smartphone from Walmart. It was an iPhone, no discount. We had to wait in a line of people buying smartphones.
    Oh they certainly do exist. But I think that just about any sane individual would agree that this type of customer is generally going to end up in a carrier store or BB mobile far more often than not. You seem to be trying to imply that a significant portion of the sales for the high-end Android phones are being given out free... which makes the numbers meaningless.

    Also, it's a bit Apples to Oranges to compare it to trying to purchase a iPhone near release since people were going to go to just about anywhere that sold iPhones and that they felt they had the best chance to have an opportunity to purchase one...

    But even by your own admission... your father certainly purchased his iPhone at Walmart because he is a "price sensitive, new to smartphone consumer" and received a significant discount by purchasing it there... right?

    PS: I'm still looking for a FREE Samsung Galaxy S phone that I can get or even one of the other "hyped Android smartphones".
    Last edited by gmanvbva; 08/31/2010 at 03:32 PM.
  12. #32  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardfan View Post
    I thought walmart online store was a bit different from instore. No idea really since i've never used either.
    It generally is. Although you can get some items shipped from Site-to-Store.
  13.    #33  
    Quote Originally Posted by gmanvbva View Post
    PS: I'm still looking for a FREE Samsung Galaxy S phone that I can get or even one of the other "hyped Android smartphones".
    Ten days ago: free.

    Twelve days ago: free.

    Both phones can still be had from $0.01 - $49.99.

    BTW, the Droid is free. So is the Sprint Pre and Pixi- from HP's website. There are free, and nearly free superphones everywhere you turn. The traditional free phone makers are getting squeezed out of the market, thanks to Android.

    Interestingly, none of these superphones, at any price, are outselling the $200 - $300 iPhone, not even close. Some comparison.

    In case it has gotten lost in the shuffle, my conclusion was about Palm's future strategy. Should they even try to sell in the premium priced market against the iPhone, or should they start out at cheap or free to better compete with Android offerings. Is it better to start high and be forced to a lower price, or start low and corner the market? That is the bit worth discussing.
  14. #34  
    At $0.01... it's not free and therefore would require a "point of sale" to be made?
    Wasn't that part of the whole argument you were attempting to make???

    And a "hyped Android smartphone" is the Droid??? You are using a nearly year old phone (in a market that is blazing atm) to make your point???
  15. #35  
    HPalm (or the carrier) doesn't need to offer the next gen webOS phone for free to compete in the market and they certainly (and obviously) don't need to take retail/business advice from dandbj13~~~.

    Regardless of pricepoint, they are going to be hard pressed to "corner the market".

    I mean you almost seem to be arguing against yourself. Android with it's huge (yes, huge) growth in the market over the past 12 months with "hyped smartphones" for free () can't even compete with Apple (according to you).
  16.    #36  
    Quote Originally Posted by gmanvbva View Post
    At $0.01... it's not free and therefore would require a "point of sale" to be made?
    Wasn't that part of the whole argument you were attempting to make???

    No. I consider a penny the same as free. Even free phones have POS contact as papers have to be signed. It is a contract, after all. Don't be silly to try to prove a point. Free and nearly free get about the same mileage for the purposes of this conversation.
  17. #37  
    Quote Originally Posted by dandbj13 View Post
    No. I consider a penny the same as free. Even free phones have POS contact as papers have to be signed. It is a contract, after all. Don't be silly to try to prove a point. Free and nearly free get about the same mileage for the purposes of this conversation.
    Quote Originally Posted by dandbj13
    The fact is, you have no idea how many units were actually sold as opposed to given away for free with contract. Samsung sure isn't saying, nor Google, nor the carriers, nor anyone else who would actually know. Still I don't see how any of this side argument about free vs. sold for money has anything to do with my conclusion.
    But wasn't part of your argument that they were "free" and that therefore "sales" numbers were not accurate????

    Quote Originally Posted by dandbj13
    Finally, the biggest con is that a million Galaxy S branded phones were "sold" at all. The sad fact is during much of that time, both phones could be had for free with contract. Even now, you can get them for free. Let me be clear, THESE ARE FREE PHONES! We will likely never know the number of phones they actually "sold".
    And "much of that time"???
  18.    #38  
    Quote Originally Posted by gmanvbva View Post
    HPalm (or the carrier) doesn't need to offer the next gen webOS phone for free to compete in the market...
    What makes you so confident of that? Google and their partners seem to think it is necessary to drop prices to free and nearly free to remain competitive. RIM has no problem with deep discounts and bogof offers. I see no reason to believe that the next Pre is going to buck the trend. If dropping the price gets more "sales", then why not start low to gain momentum? Why set yourself up as an iPhone competitor and be forced downmarket?

    If the Kin phones had started out life as free phones, they would probably be top sellers for Verizon today. Who knows what might have happened if the Pre started life out as free. Besides, everyone around here seems to believe that free is just as good as premium pricing.
  19. #39  
    Because carriers aren't selling them for free now.
    You are projecting a few sales on specific phones across an entire mobile platform and ignoring the fact that a far larger percentage of these devices are already selling at premium pricing. And selling very well. So much so that carriers and manufactures can't produce them fast enough.
  20.    #40  
    Quote Originally Posted by gmanvbva View Post
    But wasn't part of your argument that they were "free" and that therefore "sales" numbers were not accurate????
    No. My point was never that the sales numbers were inaccurate, but irrelevant. You don't lump free things with premium priced things, conflate the numbers, and compare them to another entirely premium priced thing. Once the price goes downmarket, you are no longer competing in the premium arena.

    You don't compare sales of Walmart, generic shoes to Nikes. Personally, I like the Walmart, generic shoes. They provide great value. But I am not foolish or dishonest enough to compare them to Nike sales. $200 netbooks should not be compare to $2000 Macbook Pros. Different markets.

    Android is the Linux of smartphones. It is a free OS placed on many free and nearly free phones. The iPhone is just as much in a class by itself today as it was when it first arrived on the scene. Android phones do not play in that arena for very long. They are the new free, and nearly free phone. The question is how should Palm position its next phone.
Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions