Mobile phones & tablets thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Malbec

Oh dear, you're STILL not getting it.

Apple doesn't shift huge numbers because unlike many PC manufacturers it doesn't target corporate clients (except in a few small fields). You're criticising it for poor sales in a category it clearly isn't aiming for.

Apple targets the casual consumer for home use. That is why its first serious comeback product was the iPod, useless for the corporate environment but very attractive to home users. Ditto the iPhone although it is more useful for work than the iPod. And guess what? In the market its aiming at it is extremely successful to the point where rivals such as Sony and Microsoft, despite strong branding and resources have utterly failed to make a dent in the market (remember Zune?), and where its profitability is very high.

---

Again, your country doesn't account for the WHOLE world. As surprising as it may sound, there are other countries in this world apart from US and UK. I'm talking about the global scale, and it is where probably Apple is not doing as good as in US and the UK. Maybe in China, yes. Apple is doing very well in your country, yes, but that doesn't mean it is the preferred choice of the casual consumer in EVERY country!

In a lot of other countries, PC is the preferred choice for corporations AND the casual consumer. I have already said a lot of people buy separate PC components and assemble them themselves or get them assembled by somebody that knows how to. These would be the middle class clients, which is a HUGE portion of the consumer chunk who buys assembled PCs, who don't even buy from Dell or HP, let alone Apple. Those are a lot of sales that go unaccounted for in the PC vs Mac tally.

I have never denied that Apple is the clear leader in tablets, smartphones and MP3 players.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Malbec

What next? Are you going to call Ferrari and Porsche failures, after all they too have poor market share and near zero fleet sales?

---

Why do people keep comparing Apple with Ferrari? That's a bad example as I have already said a few pages ago. Let me quote myself to make it clearer:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CaptainRaiden

Ferrari can't be used as an example.

Ferrari makes some of the world's fastest performance cars, which have state of the art components made by Ferrari themselves, and their cars are generally the fastest on the track or do relatively well compared to similarly priced brands like Porsche, Lamborghini, Aston Martin and Mercedes etc.

Apple makes some of the world's most expensive computers and gadgets, which generally have a subset of inferior PC hardware, the OS isn't better than its nearest competitor, is continually beaten in benchmark tests by similarly priced PC brands like HP, Dell, Sony, Acer and Toshiba.

---

What people are also not realizing that small computer firms on every street in Asian countries like India sell and assemble thousands of PC components daily, and it is the same trend in some countries in Europe from what I have seen. Those sales don't account for PC sales, because they're not from a branded company, but they are in hundreds of thousands daily worldwide. And I'm talking about consumers, not corporations.

This is probably why Windows OS sees more than 75% and Mac OS only about 9% usage on the global stats based on how many computers connected to the internet in 2012.

As surprising as it may sound to some, yes, some people do pay more attention to what goes inside their computer. Hardly any of the middle class folks buy ready-made desktop PCs from electronic stores. They don't even go as far as thinking about pre-assembled PCs or Dells or HPs, let alone Apple. Almost everybody in the middle class buys the components and gets them assembled. Better flexibility and versatility, and you get what you want this way, no compromises.

So, is Apple really a true competitor to PC? No. Will it ever be? No. Is it a luxury brand with premium products that appeals to a niche market and the wealthy? Yes! I accept this, then why is it hard for people to accept that iMacs and Macbooks, on a global level, are not a true competitor to PCs and laptops??

This statement from a Chinese website regarding Apple sales says a lot:

Quote:

---

Apple has been successful in raking in sales in China's wealthy first- or second-tier cities, but less so in the wider Chinese market, where overall income levels are still low.

Consumers with deep pockets generally see Apple as a premium product and status symbol, analysts say, and are willing to overlook certain drawbacks.

"I see everybody using an iPhone, so I decided to buy one," said a user whose surname is Zhou, who lives in China's wealthy coastal province of Jiangsu. "I love the screens and the applications are really sleek." She has switched iPhones within a year to keep up with Apple's latest gadgets.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CaptainRaiden

Again, your country doesn't account for the WHOLE world. As surprising as it may sound, there are other countries in this world apart from US and UK. I'm talking about the global scale, and it is where probably Apple is not doing as good as in US and the UK. Maybe in China, yes. Apple is doing very well in your country, yes, but that doesn't mean it is the preferred choice of the casual consumer in EVERY country!

---

Utterly irrelevant except for showing that you don't understand the point both Jag and I are making. Also you insist in claiming that people such as I have stated Apple is the 'preferred' choice. I don't think anyone on this thread has made this claim.... Targetting a particular market is not the same as being the preferred choice in it.

BTW Apple doesn't just enjoy success in the UK and the US, it has a larger market share in Japan than in the US and has decent sales across Europe, ie the more affluent the country the greater its market share. This is consistent with its product placement as a high end and premium product.

When you have a product, you target it at a specific part of the market. That should be clear enough. The problem is that you are using market share (ie sales volume) as an indicator of how good the product is. What you have consistently failed to grasp is that the indicator you have chosen doesn't differentiate between different parts of the market and that Apple have sacrificed market share to go for the premium home market.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CaptainRaiden

In a lot of other countries, PC is the preferred choice for corporations AND the casual consumer. I have already said a lot of people buy separate PC components and assemble them themselves or get them assembled by somebody that knows how to. These would be the middle class clients, which is a HUGE portion of the consumer chunk who buys assembled PCs, who don't even buy from Dell or HP, let alone Apple. Those are a lot of sales that go unaccounted for in the PC vs Mac tally.

I have never denied that Apple is the clear leader in tablets, smartphones and MP3 players.

---

And as markets like China and India gain in wealth and sophistication, people will likely stop buying things purely on technical specs and low cost and will start buying computer products for brand desirability. They are already doing so when it comes to watches and cars (especially in China which is a more advanced market) and other luxury items. Apple will then make inroads into the home computer market, perhaps other brands such as the Vaio range will be able to too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CaptainRaiden

Why do people keep comparing Apple with Ferrari? That's a bad example as I have already said a few pages ago. Let me quote myself to make it clearer:

---

Except your reasoning is wrong. Ferrari has often supplied inferior product to its rivals (Lamborghini Miura, Honda NSX, Porsche 911 and the Audi R8) whilst charging much higher prices successfully and adding value to its brand image regardless. It has only offered consistently better product in the last 10-15 years or so.

Well, to cut this incredible time wasting exercise short, and avoid going in circles again, I will just say that I will never understand why it is okay to pay more for Apple computers, when I know I can get much better value for money with a PC. Even if I was wealthy, I would probably not pay extra knowing that I am not getting my money's worth. Same way I wouldn't buy a Ferrari just for the brand name. I would rather give the extra money to charity.

BUT I respect the choice of Apple consumers and if they want to buy Apple products, it is their damn choice. Apple is obviously doing something right, and that's why they're seeing this solid, steady growth. This discussion has gone on in circles on countless other threads on thousands of blogs and forums all across the web. Nobody wins, there's only a big black hole of wasted time.

I'm just about at the edge of finishing my work and enjoying my BBQ-with-whiskey weekend, and if this goes on more, I'm afraid I might spend the weekend working, and in my breaks bash Apple some more. So, yeah, that's pretty much it from me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CaptainRaiden

Well, to cut this incredible time wasting exercise short, and avoid going in circles again, I will just say that I will never understand why it is okay to pay more for Apple computers, when I know I can get much better value for money with a PC. Even if I was wealthy, I would probably not pay extra knowing that I am not getting my money's worth. Same way I wouldn't buy a Ferrari just for the brand name. I would rather give the extra money to charity.

---

The best watch I ever had cost £5 (my parents bought it for me). It was a plastic digital Casio that served me well. Every single watch I've bought since has been progressively more inferior on a technical basis to that original watch. My current Seiko requires me to find a light if I want to read it in the dark and it loses a few seconds a day, something my Casio never did. Other people are willing to spend six figures on a watch thats equally technically inferior to my £5 Casio.

Technical specs and VFM aren't everything...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CaptainRaiden

A weird new ball like streaming device from Google. The Nexus Q:

Google Nexus Q review | from TechRadar's expert reviews of Media streaming devices

http://cdn4.mos.techradar.com///art/...413-380-75.JPG

http://cdn1.mos.techradar.com//art/a...442-900-90.JPG

Runs on an Android OS and can be controlled by several different Android phones or tablets through an app to stream media on a TV or other devices. Weird shape, a competitor to Apple TV, maybe interesting because multiple users can control it, but I don't think it will get a lot of buyers. Maybe the next version will be better.

---

Google learned the lesson, they make round objects in order not to get sued by Apple for patent infringement for daring to make a quadratic form object!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Malbec

The best watch I ever had cost £5 (my parents bought it for me). It was a plastic digital Casio that served me well. Every single watch I've bought since has been progressively more inferior on a technical basis to that original watch. My current Seiko requires me to find a light if I want to read it in the dark and it loses a few seconds a day, something my Casio never did. Other people are willing to spend six figures on a watch thats equally technically inferior to my £5 Casio.

Technical specs and VFM aren't everything...

---

That's a piss pour analogy (pun intended).

While you can read the time on a 5$ watch just as well as on a 1000000$ one, try to use a CAD software made to run on a 2000$ laptop on a 100$ laptop (same goes for a recent Adobe software suite and many other software), then we can have a serious discussion about what technical specs are worth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Malbec

When you have a product, you target it at a specific part of the market. That should be clear enough. The problem is that you are using market share (ie sales volume) as an indicator of how good the product is. What you have consistently failed to grasp is that the indicator you have chosen doesn't differentiate between different parts of the market and that Apple have sacrificed market share to go for the premium home market.

---

I was becoming concerned that maybe I was speaking Greek to a Roman (even though I don't speak Greek or Latin). But clearly, you (along with others here) get it. I feel redeemed. Thank you! :)

Although it wouldn't be 1:1, if Apple was as obsessed with market share as Captain feels they should be, they could easily begin producing some low cost Mac offerings that matched their PC counterparts feature for feature. They could even throw in a free copy of Parallels, so if you wanted to run Windows alongside the Mac OS, you could. And since Apple has greater supply chain strength than most any of them, they could probably offer the machines at a lower price than Dell, HP or whomever... and still make a greater profit than them. But I think you and I know that they will not do this. For one, these commodity machines would severely degrade the brand (as they have for Dell, HP, Lenovo, etc.), but even worse (even at a slight profit), they would degrade margins. He doesn't want to talk about Ferrari any linger, but this is why Ferrari doesn't (and probably will never) offer a low cost sports car. They could easily slap a Ferrari badge on something that FIAT makes. Remember the Dino? Remember what that did for the Ferrari brand? In fact, they even tried to make it so that the "Dino" was a brand within Ferrari... not really a Ferrari itself. :rolleyes: But as for Apple, in addition to major successes with the iPhone, iPad and iPod, Apple's personal computer business could easily be a stand-alone business. But that success and brand maintenance is based on providing a given number of higher end, higher spec, higher quality machines at a higher price (= higher margins). From a research paper that I read a few years ago, Dell had to sell almost 5 PC's to equal the nominal profit $ that Apple got from 1 Mac sale. And that was before the MacBook Air came out. So I suspect that the ratio might be even higher now vs. the generic PC OEM's.

So, would Apple switch places with Dell (HP, Lenovo or any of the others)? Heck no! But would Dell (HP, Lenovo or any of the others) like to be able to give up some market share and get 5 times the profit they're getting now? Some might say they're trying that strategy as we speak. Hey, look... an Ultrabook. :D


P.S. I once worked for the global division of a large international conglomerate that was the largest manufacturer of a certain product. My division was the biggest in the world. No other company was even close to us when it came to volume or market share. But then the Chinese came in, started offering similar, but cheaper products (though without the engineering support that we offered) and turned the business into a commodity business. The margins went straight to hell! Life got real ugly real fast. The conglomerate decided that it didn't want to play in that low margin environment, so they closed many of the factories and sold what was left of our division to a bunch of private equity vultures. The remnants of that division are now a sad shadow of what it once was. So when I talk about trying to survive in a low margin environment, it's not just some theory I picked up while getting my MBA. I lived it! I left before the curtain came down - I'm not one who believes that there's any honor in "going down with the ship". But I watched good friends of mine lose their jobs... jobs many of them had had since high school. So if I wanted to build a PC to run a racing simulator (for instance), sure, I might ask the Captain for advice. But on the question of margins and market share, I can't see that he truly comprehends what this issue is all about. PC advice? Yes. You'd certainly ask him before you'd ask me. But business acumen? No. And I don't mean that to be at all insulting. Just an observation based on what I've seen here. We all have different strengths and weaknesses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

Well that is an area I have experience in and to be honest I can run SolidWorks on my 500 quid laptop as well as CS6. The arguement stemmed from the notion Apple computers have to be well specced and cost alot for you to run such programmes when in reality the cheapest MacBook Air will run CS6 no problem at all. Its par for the course at the end of the day and most consumers won't care whether they can run state of the art CAD software that costs 4 times what their laptop is worth anyway. You spec a computer for your needs at the end of the day, and pay what you wish to.

---

And you're not the only one so allow me to contradict you.
I guess you just start and shut down solid works, and you don't care if you watch the part turn by 2 frames every minute in case you want to see something on the other side of it.
I can certainly tell you that you can not make an assembly nor do any FEM calculations using for example Pro Engineer, or Solid Works for that matter, on a 500 quid laptop because it doesn't have the necessary performance for it, neither the computing power nor the graphics processing power and memory for displaying it properly).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jag_Warrior

P.S. I once worked for the global division of a large international conglomerate that was the largest manufacturer of a certain product. My division was the biggest in the world. No other company was even close to us when it came to volume or market share. But then the Chinese came in, started offering similar, but cheaper products (though without the engineering support that we offered) and turned the business into a commodity business. The margins went straight to hell! Life got real ugly real fast. The conglomerate decided that it didn't want to play in that low margin environment, so they closed many of the factories and sold what was left of our division to a bunch of private equity vultures. The remnants of that division are now a sad shadow of what it once was. So when I talk about trying to survive in a low margin environment, it's not just some theory I picked up while getting my MBA. I lived it! I left before the curtain came down - I'm not one who believes that there's any honor in "going down with the ship". But I watched good friends of mine lose their jobs... jobs many of them had had since high school.

---

Crap management was the reason there, really horrible job they've done on that one.