Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 51
  1. #21  
    Quote Originally Posted by CGK View Post
    I dunno I dunno - I notice RIMs most recent sales figures have been better than expected, suggesting a turn around. However, I think Android is going to keep hoovering up numbers because nobody else (besides Nokia and they aren't a force at the US) is going to be competiting at so many price points.
    they will IF they don't get plauged by being oversaturated (which most likely will happen, and will hender their sales), and IF Webos, and WP7 new devices in 2011 on the rest of the carriers don't appeal to the masses. Again this year was just Android, then Q3 iphone, then the later part of this Q WP7 on only GSM carriers. So Android had a free buffate of eating whatever consumer was presented to them, that was either anti AT&T or anti Apple. Next year (if all plays out for everyone else) they will not only have 2 to 3 more competitions from different OS's, but also their largest distributor of Android will most likely carrier their biggest threat to date (the Iphone). Again we all have to wait and see wont we.
  2. cgk
    cgk is offline
    cgk's Avatar
    Posts
    3,868 Posts
    Global Posts
    9,556 Global Posts
       #22  
    they will IF they don't get plauged by being oversaturated (which most likely will happen, and will hender their sales)
    Oversaturation happens to Markets, over-saturation will happen when the Smart-phone market is full, Android is a player *in* the market, it is not *the* market. This idea that the choice of android devices at multiple price points will hinder sales in the next two-five years (if the Smart-phone market continues to grown as expected) is frankly bonkers, I just don't understand where it is coming from.

    The easy availability of Android products does absolutely no favours for any of it's competitors, none.
    Last edited by CGK; 12/14/2010 at 09:22 AM.
  3. #23  
    Quote Originally Posted by barkerja View Post
    What exactly was this the opposite of what i was saying?

    I didn't say Verizon was seeing android success. I said, android is....300,000 activations per day.

    I'm sure its spread across all carriers but android and google are seeing success.
  4. #24  
    Quote Originally Posted by CGK View Post
    Oversaturation happens to Markets, over-saturation will happen when the Smart-phone market is full, Android is a player *in* the market, it is not *the* market. This idea that the choice of android devices at multiple price points will hinder sales in the next two-five years (if the Smart-phone market continues to grown as expected) is frankly bonkers, I just don't understand where it is coming from.

    The easy availability of Android products does absolutely no favours for any of it's competitors, none.
    bottom line its going to happen period.
  5. #25  
    for people who still dont understand why people have been, and are still screaming Googles oversaturation of the market, with dozens of devices will hender the company bad once the rest of the competition releases their next SINGLE FLAGSHIP DEVICE:

    Let’s face it: there are too many Google Android devices.

    On Monday, Google announced the availability of the Nexus S, the second iteration of the company’s own branded “Nexus” branch of the Android tree.

    The phone’s selling point is that it carries the latest version of the company’s operating system, Android 2.3 Gingerbread. Aside from that, it’s the usual internally, with a 1GHz Cortex A8 processor, 4-inch Super AMOLED touchscreen display (at 480×800 resolution) and enough sensors to make your head spin.

    In the announcement, Google noted that the first Android phone (the T-Mobile G1!) arrived to market in November 2008, and since then, “more than 100 different Android devices” have appeared on store shelves, both physical and digital.

    I remember the G1’s announcement, because I attended the launch event in New York City. At the time, it was a big to-do, with pomp, circumstance, awkward back-patting speeches and hors d’oeuvres.

    Since then, it’s been a steady growth trajectory: for every landmark Android handset like the Droid, Hero, DroidX and Evo, there have been — at first in equal numbers, and now far surpassing them — countless faceless Android handsets.

    Anyone remember the Motorola Backflip on AT&T?

    How about the T-Mobile Comet? Or the Samsung Behold II?

    (Come to think of it, T-Mobile has been a dumping ground for a lot of odd Android handsets — Motorola Charm, cough cough — but I digress.)

    If migrating to a smartphone from a feature phone wasn’t daunting (and expensive) enough, now the consumer must choose which of the countless flavors of Android handsets they want — even within a single carrier’s offerings.

    Carriers and manufacturers will insist that the proliferation of Android models gives the consumers choice. But so do consumer products makers about toothpaste.

    (I don’t know about you, but I waste 20 minutes of my life in the supermarket making a decision every time I need to restock. “Max Fresh”? “Total Advanced”? “Ultrabrite”? “Cavity Protection”? How about just “Clean”?)

    Consumers aren’t dumb. They know that phones, like toothpaste, are becoming a million minor variations on a common theme. And in doing so, they are diluting the message — the story, really — that each phone can convey to the consumer.

    We want our products to be personal. That’s why upscale restaurant menus tell you about “grass-fed beef.” It’s why Ford commercials show farmers piling hay in the back of an F-150. And it’s why Apple makes such high-quality (in terms of production value) videos painstakingly describing the process by which its major products — the MacBook, the iPhone, the iPad — are made.

    We all want a story. But like our inboxes at work, when there’s too much noise, it’s hard to care.

    I’ve warned ZDNet readers before about the dangers that fragmentation play from a software standpoint. This time, it’s not the many versions of Google’s mobile platform on the market I’m concerned with — rather, it’s the many handsets themselves.

    A device without a story is disposable. A subpar device without a story is even worse.

    The other day, I saw a commercial for an Android handset. I wasn’t especially paying attention, but when it was over, my fiancée asked me, “Which one is that? Is that any good?” And for the first time in my career covering gadgets at ZDNet, I had no idea.

    To be fair, I’m spending a lot more time over at SmartPlanet, ZDNet’s innovation-minded sibling, and less time here on the Toybox. But there was no peg on which to hang my familiarity about the device — no story, no distinguishing feature. Just “new.”

    Remember when the Droid first came out? Oh, how it was coveted! It was the best of the best. A lap ahead of other Android handsets, and the first true exercise in branding (with Verizon holding the purse strings).

    Verizon is still promoting its Droid (now family of) offerings, but not every carrier has been so diligent to deliver a captivating narrative.

    Bucking this trend, of course, is Apple’s iPhone, a single device with two variants. (No, I don’t consider memory options to be different models. The story’s the same.) So does the Palm Pre. And RIM’s BlackBerry family is actually nicely edited: the company has seven models across all carriers, each with distinguishing features.

    My point is that there’s no fat here, no redundancies. But in Android world, there are handsets trying to leap over each other at every level, from the highest (Droid 2 vs. Evo vs. Nexus S) to the lowest (T-Mobile myTouch 3G vs. LG Optimus T vs. Motorola Flipout vs. …well, does anyone care?).

    From a consumer standpoint, it’s very confusing, even if your carrier is already set in stone. If anything, it fosters the feeling of ambivalence — and that’s my point.

    The market share of smartphones based on the Google Android platform may be growing larger every day, but the value of each individual handset plummets further with each new release. Awareness and recognition of the platform may be increasing, but the buying decision is no longer met with anticipation.

    (I hope you’re taking notes, Microsoft.)

    Apple, RIM and Palm buyers do not have to ask the question, “Which one should I get next?”

    Why can’t the rest of us?


    google search it, there are a million articles from top anyalist, and journalist across the globe, they get why don't you.


    Android ambivalence: the plight of too many Google phones | ZDNet
  6. cgk
    cgk is offline
    cgk's Avatar
    Posts
    3,868 Posts
    Global Posts
    9,556 Global Posts
       #26  
    The point that article misses is that's how google want it - the smartphone market is going to be subject to commodification in the same way every other mass-market consumer marketplace is, everybody knows this. The factor that Android phones are now appearing at every price point and every element of the market isn't a sign of weakness, it's a sign they are winning. The shorter and shorter lifecycles of android handsets isn't a bad thing either, that's simply another expected nature evolution of the marketplace. High volume, low margin is where the action is going to be at and Google is winning that war (or rather OEMs like LG).

    Tech journalists concentrate on shiny things (your article is from a blog called "the toybox" which is about gadgets), I concentrate on economics.

    With dozens of devices will hender the company bad once the rest of the competition releases their next SINGLE FLAGSHIP DEVICE:
    Completely and utterly wrong - how does your single flagship device at $400 compete at the $100, £150 price point? - answer - it doesn't. How does it compete across your PAYG offering or contract? Answer it doesn't.
    Last edited by CGK; 12/14/2010 at 11:00 AM.
  7. cgk
    cgk is offline
    cgk's Avatar
    Posts
    3,868 Posts
    Global Posts
    9,556 Global Posts
       #27  
    Oh and if someone wants to explain why smartphones will not be subject to the normal movement of markets as a number of people are outlining here, I'd love to hear it.
  8. #28  
    Quote Originally Posted by CGK View Post
    The point that article misses is that's how google want it - the smartphone market is going to be subject to commodification in the same way every other mass-market consumer marketplace is, everybody knows this. The factor that Android phones are now appearing at every price point and every element of the market isn't a sign of weakness, it's a sign they are winning. The shorter and shorter lifecycles of android handsets isn't a bad thing either, that's simply another expected nature evolution of the marketplace. High volume, low margin is where the action is going to be at and Google is winning that war (or rather OEMs like LG).

    Tech journalists concentrate on shiny things (your article is from a blog called "the toybox" which is about gadgets), I concentrate on economics.



    Completely and utterly wrong - how does your single flagship device at $400 compete at the $100, £150 price point? - answer - it doesn't. How does it compete across your PAYG offering or contract? Answer it doesn't.
    Iphone are you blind to see one device, one form factor, and right now on one carrier succeeds. Your obviously one of the people whos infactuated by android and if so, please proceed to stage left (android central). Otherwise please explain why even this year alone apples iphone is up 62% only in the 3rd Q, and has cought VZ even with all the supposed Droid crap running alone for 3Q's before. Though your opinion is your own (even though I disagree badly WOW) and even with your response it holds no weight or understanding of what the author, anaylist, or even what I am saying. So NP Google is in your words "winning" smh.
  9. #29  
    I think its a theory. I don't agree with the theory and only time will tell, but i don't see how google will be harmed with a lot of devices.

    Even still, there are hero devices. The Evo? That is sprints phone. Thats what the Pre should've been.

    Verizon has a bit more on its plate but even then. How does it hurt google? It could hurt manufactures...but is google going to some how limit who can use an open source OS?

    Your OS is no longer open sourced.
  10. cgk
    cgk is offline
    cgk's Avatar
    Posts
    3,868 Posts
    Global Posts
    9,556 Global Posts
       #30  
    Quote Originally Posted by wellwellwell11 View Post
    Iphone are you blind to see one device, one form factor, and right now on one carrier succeeds.
    Brand Equity is your answer, which is why I keep saying to forget Apple when having these conversations because they operate in a different way to the rest and will not join in the race to the bottom (in the same way they don't in the PC marketplace). Maybe someone else will be able to differentiate by brand equity rather than price but I can't see it being HP (or Nokia for that matter, there was a point in the 1990s where they could have but they'd gone too far the other way now).

    Your obviously one of the people whos infactuated by android and if so, please proceed to stage left (android central).
    I couldn't give two hoots about Android or WebOS or WM7 or iOS, I'm interested in the smartphone marketplace as an entity. We have plenty of people to act as fans and cheerleaders, I'm not one of them - I don't care about any individual platform.
  11. cgk
    cgk is offline
    cgk's Avatar
    Posts
    3,868 Posts
    Global Posts
    9,556 Global Posts
       #31  
    Quote Originally Posted by wellwellwell11 View Post
    and even with your response it holds no weight or understanding of what the author, anaylist, or even what I am saying. So NP Google is in your words "winning" smh.
    I have no idea what you are saying, your posts are either too vague or use terminology in a way that is non-standard so it's impossible to work out what you are on about, because you don't seem to understand yourself the language you are using or what it actually means.
  12. #32  
    Well this puts everythign we just read on this thread differently....

    We would like to correct some assertions in your Verizon post.

    ITG Investment Research did not and does NOT receive any material nonpublic information from Verizon or any other company we cover.

    The information you were referring to comes from point-of-sale data at independent wireless retailers across the United States. To be clear, we do not misappropriate or improperly obtain nonpublic information.

    Our methodology is explained in more detail here: http://www.majesticresearch.com/inde..._manufacturers

    The original blogger who made the false claim about a "leak" has corrected their post - see here: Verizon Strikes Out in Smartphones [Updated] | asymco

    We would be grateful if you would address this matter, as the incorrect speculation that we would obtain and publish material non-public information from a public company is a serious matter.

    Please let me know if you have any additional questions.


    Regards,
    I mean, don't disregard it, but i thought this was off official verizon numbers. But as i've learned to do, rarely trust analyst as Its their jobs to sometimes manipulate the markets for their gain (while not lying plain and outright).

    Just suggesting things...
  13. #33  
    Quote Originally Posted by CGK View Post
    ...Completely and utterly wrong - how does your single flagship device at $400 compete at the $100, £150 price point? - answer - it doesn't. How does it compete across your PAYG offering or contract? Answer it doesn't.
    Wait a minute ... I'm no big Apple fan, but are you seriously trying to imply that Apple isn't successfully competing?

    Don't forget, a company's success isn't (necessarily) hinged on being all things to all people.
  14. #34  
    Quote Originally Posted by CGK View Post
    I have no idea what you are saying, your posts are either too vague or use terminology in a way that is non-standard so it's impossible to work out what you are on about, because you don't seem to understand yourself the language you are using or what it actually means.
    then you must know the english language too well. I would have no problem giving you work, but I dont want to get band on this site since Im for Webos as you are not. So if you don't understand anything, or can't make a valid, point then stay in your place and dont respond to anything I post. Easy isnt it, do you understand me now.
  15. #35  
    Quote Originally Posted by Brain Mantis View Post
    Well this puts everythign we just read on this thread differently....



    I mean, don't disregard it, but i thought this was off official verizon numbers. But as i've learned to do, rarely trust analyst as Its their jobs to sometimes manipulate the markets for their gain (while not lying plain and outright).

    Just suggesting things...
    thats true and a valid point, well said.
  16. #36  
    Quote Originally Posted by UntidyGuy View Post
    Oversaturation of Android in the marketplace will decrease any individual manufacturer's sales of tablets and will drive down prices. That will probably be good for all consumers of tablets. It even hurts other tablet platforms - particular the ones that don't have a defined user base for their tablets yet.

    With the plethora of Android tablets coming, the platforms that will be hurt will be the ones that haven't gotten started yet: RIM and HP. And, it will blunt some of the desire for Windows 7 tablets.

    Between RIM an HP, at least RIM still has their large user base of Blackberry users. HP has no mobile user base to speak of. They bought a zero percent mindshare mobile OS in Palm webOS. I believe webOS is the most questionable platform of the lot.

    all true, but we are talking in regards to smartphones only, since tablets at this point are still brand new. Even though we do already have alot of android tablets out there currently.
  17. #37  
    A couple of things that aren't being mentioned in this interesting discussion:

    • Google's business base for Android - is it sustainable? Will they continue to (or believe that they are) receiving enough revenue to continue updating and making fresh? Personally I doubt it; however, it may well be. Even if they don't though, there's the possiblity that since it's open source, it would continue to evolve. Unfortunately, if that happens though, that evolution will be much like Linux's evolution, very fragmented.
    • Oracle's Lawsuit - A win for Oracle, even an out of court settlement with them, could spell disaster for the OS. If phone manufacturers had to start paying licensing fees, throwing Android on everything might be less appealing. Might even mean a resurgence of feature phones.
  18. cgk
    cgk is offline
    cgk's Avatar
    Posts
    3,868 Posts
    Global Posts
    9,556 Global Posts
       #38  
    Quote Originally Posted by hparsons View Post
    Wait a minute ... I'm no big Apple fan, but are you seriously trying to imply that Apple isn't successfully competing?

    Don't forget, a company's success isn't (necessarily) hinged on being all things to all people.
    No it doesn't but Apple like in the PC marketplace aren't engaged in trying to compete on price and they can do that via brand equity. That's why when the market shakes out and they are maybe holding 13% or whatever it might be, they will be happy - because it will still be high margins. HP has no brand equity (expect as a shifter of grey boxes at high volume on long margins) so I can't see how they can do that in the Smartphone market, they will be competiting along with everyone else at multiple price points and with multiple devices.

    That doesn't mean that nobody can replicate Apple but I can't see any of the current crowd either a) trying or b) actually being able to pull it off. This is why I keep saying "forget Apple" when we have this type of discussions, they have an number of attributes that allows them to avoid the dogfight.
  19. cgk
    cgk is offline
    cgk's Avatar
    Posts
    3,868 Posts
    Global Posts
    9,556 Global Posts
       #39  
    Apple is definitely competing on price with their mobile devices. The iPhone 4 doesn't cost much more than any other smartphone.
    My new android device cost £70 with no contract - Apple is not competing on price, They have a product range that is comparable with the top end of the market and that's where they are going to stay. The last generation Iphone (3gs) sells for the same price as the current HTC HD Desire (a current hot phone in the uk), the 4g, well I can't find an android handset that is at the same price-point at the 16gb let alone the 32gb (£599).

    Maybe you are talking about the murky issue of Carrier subsidy?
  20. #40  
    Quote Originally Posted by CGK View Post
    No it doesn't but Apple like in the PC marketplace aren't engaged in trying to compete on price and they can do that via brand equity. That's why when the market shakes out and they are maybe holding 13% or whatever it might be, they will be happy - because it will still be high margins. HP has no brand equity (expect as a shifter of grey boxes at high volume on long margins) so I can't see how they can do that in the Smartphone market, they will be competiting along with everyone else at multiple price points and with multiple devices.

    That doesn't mean that nobody can replicate Apple but I can't see any of the current crowd either a) trying or b) actually being able to pull it off. This is why I keep saying "forget Apple" when we have this type of discussions, they have an number of attributes that allows them to avoid the dogfight.
    If you think HP doesn't have brand equity, it's because you are limited in your exposure to them. In certain arenas, they definitely have brand equity.

    If you're thinking intel based servers, high end printers; yes, they have brand equity. If you're thinking home computers, home-office printers and scanners, not so much.

    What they're doing with Palm is totally new to them. We don't know which way they plan on going, but don't write off "brand name" with HP so quickly. Your experience is not universal.
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions