Has Apple Lost It's Cool

[jroc]

So when it makes the iPhone look good, its fine....when it makes the iPhone look bad....its skewed, its not fair, its gotta be something wrong.....

Right.

 

[Darkseider]

Android sales are skewed when comparing to Apple based on the fact that Apple is relegated to one carrier and Droid is all over giving people different options.

For example, EVERYONE here in my town has Verizon. ATT is worthless here...completely. So everyone with a smartphone has a Droid or BB of some fashion (Moto, HTC I, Eris, etc).

If you released both phones into the open market I think you would see Apple regain any ground lost.

I can't count how many people own a Droid or Eris or something because they would rather have that than switch to ATT. But if you do a search to see just how many people would love to have the iPhone on Verizon....it would really hurt Droid. I bet my paycheck that if the iPhone was offered to Verizon it would be sold out for months and probably even outsell the iPad, Droid, and Incredible combined.

So I agree...if you want to judge a true phone to phone then the Droid of some fashion needs to knock off the iPhone with ONE device.

The iPhone a platform made by Apple and the fact that it is only offered on ONE carrier and is ONE device is a choice made by Apple. Google being Google made the choice to offer a platform and NOT a product. Google let the market dictate what it wanted in terms of hardware. It seems that Google made the right move as Apple is doing all it can to try and discredit Android, Google and anything NOT an iPhad device. Apple has proven by its' words and actions that it is scared and rightfully so.

 

[Matth3w]

I doubt they're scared. They just surpassed the Microsoft Corporation in capitalization today at about 245 a share.

 

[Darkseider]

I doubt they're scared. They just surpassed the Microsoft Corporation in capitalization today at about 245 a share.

They are also under two anti-trust investigations as well as an FCC investigation. When these investigations go full bore expect to see Apple's stock price plummet.

 

[Matth3w]

And Microsoft had the same issues, and yet here we are neck and neck.

 

[AsianBob]

Android sales are skewed when comparing to Apple based on the fact that Apple is relegated to one carrier and Droid is all over giving people different options.

For example, EVERYONE here in my town has Verizon. ATT is worthless here...completely. So everyone with a smartphone has a Droid or BB of some fashion (Moto, HTC I, Eris, etc).

If you released both phones into the open market I think you would see Apple regain any ground lost.

I can't count how many people own a Droid or Eris or something because they would rather have that than switch to ATT. But if you do a search to see just how many people would love to have the iPhone on Verizon....it would really hurt Droid. I bet my paycheck that if the iPhone was offered to Verizon it would be sold out for months and probably even outsell the iPad, Droid, and Incredible combined.

So I agree...if you want to judge a true phone to phone then the Droid of some fashion needs to knock off the iPhone with ONE device.

That's all nice and well, but what you're essentially doing is creating a controlled experiment. The real world isn't a controlled experiment. It's filled a never-ending amount of variables. For example, the town you're in. Some places AT&T is stronger, some places Verizon is stronger. You can't just magically make everything even across the board because you disagree with real world metrics.

True that many would want an iPhone on Verizon. But if it isn't available, then it isn't available. People move on and pick something else. If it happens to be an Android device, then fine. If they decide to jump to AT&T because they have to have the iPhone, then that's fine too.

All of these carrier issues and availability issues are part of the open market. No one is assigned a carrier and a device when they're born. We're free to move about between carriers and devices. Yes there are the contracts, but it's not a death sentence to break them.

 

[jsh1120]

People didn't deviate from the TRS-80, Micral N, Apple I, Apple II, 8086, 286, etc... They learned how to use them and the technology involved. In doing so more advanced, more powerful and easier to use technologies spawned from these very same people. Now that Apple has essentially created computing for idiots where is the desire to learn? The challenge and desire to improve that drove the industry to the point where it is at now. Don't get me wrong there are still those that love the challenge and strive to improve existing technologies. In doing so and essentially dumbing it down to the point of "button pushing" for the masses is it beneficial to future progress? Remember the masses are the ones that will some day be in the positions of those creating and improving said technology.

Buddy, the flaw in your argument is that your comparing apples to oldsmobiles. The computers you cite above all sold to tiny niche markets of early adopters, even the Apple II.

You seem to be promoting the value of technologies that appeal to sort of hackers and other early adopters who frequent boards like this. And I don't think you'll find any disagreement with that; certainly not from me and doubtfully from anyone else here.

But beyond that you seem to believe that such devices should/will dominate the much much broader consumer market. That's simply unrealistic. Had the Apple II not been replaced by the Macintosh it would have remained the computer of choice for members of the high school a/v club. Had DOS not been replaced by Windows, my house would be surrounded by a forest rather than the Microsoft campus.

It's simply a fact of life that if the Android o/s survives, it will be buried under simpler interfaces like Sense and Motoblur where the technology is hidden from the user. That is how the dissemination of technology works.

And that's not a bad thing. You seem to think that the point of technology is for users to learn about technology. It isn't. It can also be a tool for other purposes, including learning about other things. A novelist or historian who uses technology to do their work shouldn't be expected to learn how the technology itself works. The fact that it makes them more productive in what they choose to do is a good thing.

 

[Matth3w]

Android sales are skewed when comparing to Apple based on the fact that Apple is relegated to one carrier and Droid is all over giving people different options.

For example, EVERYONE here in my town has Verizon. ATT is worthless here...completely. So everyone with a smartphone has a Droid or BB of some fashion (Moto, HTC I, Eris, etc).

If you released both phones into the open market I think you would see Apple regain any ground lost.

I can't count how many people own a Droid or Eris or something because they would rather have that than switch to ATT. But if you do a search to see just how many people would love to have the iPhone on Verizon....it would really hurt Droid. I bet my paycheck that if the iPhone was offered to Verizon it would be sold out for months and probably even outsell the iPad, Droid, and Incredible combined.

So I agree...if you want to judge a true phone to phone then the Droid of some fashion needs to knock off the iPhone with ONE device.

That's all nice and well, but what you're essentially doing is creating a controlled experiment. The real world isn't a controlled experiment. It's filled a never-ending amount of variables. For example, the town you're in. Some places AT&T is stronger, some places Verizon is stronger. You can't just magically make everything even across the board because you disagree with real world metrics.

True that many would want an iPhone on Verizon. But if it isn't available, then it isn't available. People move on and pick something else. If it happens to be an Android device, then fine. If they decide to jump to AT&T because they have to have the iPhone, then that's fine too.

All of these carrier issues and availability issues are part of the open market. No one is assigned a carrier and a device when they're born. We're free to move about between carriers and devices. Yes there are the contracts, but it's not a death sentence to break them.

Ok, then even in the real world environment, where Apple has one carrier, one phone and Android has so many phones and carriers I've lost count, Apple is still ahead 2:1 in the US and 3.5:1 overall.

 

[AsianBob]

Ok, then even in the real world environment, where Apple has one carrier, one phone and Android has so many phones and carriers I've lost count, Apple is still ahead 2:1 in the US and 3.5:1 overall.

No complaints there. I actually expect that, seeing as they had a head start. Even though the original iPhone was missing much, it was a great device. It was backed by a company with a big name which pushed the ads for it and made it a household name. Android on the G1 was still a rough experiment and sold to T-Mobile, with a much smaller network. Kind of like how the Storm was to RIM (I know, I had one).

It wasn't until late last year with the Verizon Droids that Android really got onto the scene. Verizon did a lot to help push the name with their ads, which was something most of the phones before them were missing. Now you see more ads from the different carriers and manufacturers showing off Android phones.

But you can't deny that adoption of Android is ever increasing both in the US and the rest of the world. Android's got a steeper growth angle than the iPhone right now and will soon catch up and pass them in sales. I personally think that in the coming years, the smartphone market will end up like the feature phone market now.

 

[Sweettooth]

And that's not a bad thing. You seem to think that the point of technology is for users to learn about technology. It isn't. It can also be a tool for other purposes, including learning about other things. A novelist or historian who uses technology to do their work shouldn't be expected to learn how the technology itself works. The fact that it makes them more productive in what they choose to do is a good thing.

I'd likely have to agree and disagree with that. I made the statement that I believed people would deviate from more advanced devices because I have little faith in people and their enthusiasm to lead and break new ground. Technology will continue to advance toward a means to an end which is to simplify everything. Problem is, if we lay a pretty interface over everything, less and less people will ever see its true guts. So the question is will the thinkers and creators become endangered to a world of ignorance before A.I. can take over and destroy us all?

 

[zMd113]

I hATE apple.