Why Android Is Gaining Ground on Apple 88 comments
-
Font Size:
-
Print
- TweetThis
I recently switched from a Windows Mobile telephone to an Android-based mobile phone. When I was making the switch, I had to decide whether I was going with the iPhone, which my wife uses. or to run with Blackberry or Android, a Google (GOOG)-centric operating system (Symbian, which runs Nokia (NOK) phones, and the Palm (PALM)-based OS look like losers and I don’t want to get caught with limited app choice or upgradeability).
I liked the iPhone but the lack of keyboard made Blackberry look inviting. In the end, what sealed the deal for me was the apparently anti-competitive behavior of Apple (AAPL) and AT&T (T) in declining to accept Google Voice as an App for the iPhone.
- Apple Is Growing Rotten To The Core: Official Google Voice App Blocked From App Store
- FCC Takes On Apple And AT&T Over Google Voice Rejection
- Why The FCC Wants To Smash Open The iPhone
- Andy Kessler: WSJ: Why AT&T Killed Google Voice
- Apple Isn’t Even Bothering To Lie Anymore
Why should I reward companies which are engaging in this type of behavior with my business? Apple is already acting anti-competitively by tying iTunes to the iPhone and iPod. So I went elsewhere.
Android is an open-source software system, which means that the code is available for everyone to see, which gives developers maximum flexibility. It also means that Google can’t win the OS war by making your life more difficult and tying you into their system like Microsoft (MSFT) and Apple do. Instead, they must compete to be the best at what they do.
And they are doing that well. The video below from Bloomberg features Nicholas Thompson of Wired Magazine telling us why Android is gaining ground on Apple.
Related Articles
|
-
The Seeking Alpha 100
See allThe top 100 stock
market authors
selected for publication
Seeking Alpha 100 » -
Fastest Climbers
Authors with the largestSee all
increase in followers
in the last 7 days
Fastest Climbers » -
Top Commenters
Top commenters,See all
as ranked by their peers
Top Commenters » -
Top Instabloggers
The 100 most active
Instabloggers.-
1
David Fry
-
2
TraderMark
-
3
Don Dion
-
4
Cliff Wachtel
-
5
Mike Havrilla
Top Instabloggers » -
1
-
Top StockTalkers
TopSee all
StockTalkers.
Top StockTalkers »
This article has 88 comments:
Good luck with the lack of apps on Android and glut of Android phones to confuse the consumer to death
C'mon. Get over yourself
Are android phones selling like hotcakes ? I don't think so. The G1 and G2 haven't sold much. They are just wannabes that fell by the wayside. Now Motorola has announced phones with and there are other who have announced android phones. They haven't even started selling them yet. So how are they gaining ground ??? How exactly are they gaining market share ????
This is all just marketing FUD created by google. We'll see when the numbers come out in a couple of quarters.
Looks like a replay of the Apple-PC battle for the desktop; open source vs. managed source, interesting to see who "wins" this time
....boo hoo for PALM & Nokia didn't even get a look (if you were open minded I would've thought you'd at least try it out)
......race not even close to the backstretch, more like just out of the gate......look to LTE & Wimax as the quarter pole
But if you start with 0 phones and you then sell any at all, by definition you will "gain ground."
I think people should keep in mind that iPhone is the leader NOT because it is "iconic" but because it is the leader in innovation and customer satisfaction. If your product continually "exceeds expectations" then you will be a leader.
Personally, I will never trust a company that wants to (or ever wanted to) look at my personal communications for marketing data - or for any reason at all. I just do not trust Google and will never have a gmail account for that reason.
All u naysayers out there are the same who said the iPod 2001 would fail and the same naysayers who said that the iPhone 2007 would FAIL. After 2 Billion downloads and 85,000 Apps available I would LOVE to hear your arguments as to exactly HOW Android will create such a seamless user experience as Apple.
iJah420 over and out... AAPL long $250 by end of year 2010...
Just keep naysaying people, while I laugh all the way to the BANK!!!
all we know now is why YOU chose android ('cuz it uses anticompetitive behavior? hehe!! Google meet Ed. Ed, this is Google. snuggle up by the fire and read a book together, fellas. there. isn't that just so nice, warm and cozy Ed?).
and no evidence (like real, actual numbers for instance) that supports your pointless point. cheers!
Mac OS X is just phenomenal and I do not trust anything else out there! Applications for Mac? Do you know what? I don´t hate windows! but ... the problem is that I don´t like windows applications at all!
Bye!
PS.. I have no mobile phone.... and no interest in getting one. If I'm not at home.. i'm busy and don't want to be called.
BTW, all you Apple fanboys are really entertaining. Especially this:
"Good luck with the lack of apps on Android and glut of Android phones to confuse the consumer to death "
First, name an app for iPhone for which an analog does not exist for Android. iPhone may have 50000 "Im rich" and "Pull my finger" apps. But I am yet to find an important function for my G1 that there is not an app for. (Plus no emulators on iPhone)
And a choice of phones means more people using Android. People want the new hotness, not the same old phone that was cool last year and everybody has already. Apple should at least make some different colors or something. Being the first of 10 people to have an iPhone was awesome, being the 10th makes you feel like a chump.
On Oct 14 11:26 AM cral wrote:
> "Apple is already acting anti-competitively by tying iTunes to the
> iPhone and iPod." So is it anti-compeitive by tying the BigMac to
> only MacDonalds resaurants???
Does it exisit on Android...?....... or for that matter any Android remote for ANY music app on any platform that controls your music library...Does it exist and is it as easy to install and use....?
Yes it does... BUT take a good look and give me your feedback.. Does this look EASY to use and set up? Seriously.... Is there Cover flow for iTunes on Android....? I mean its a gimmick.... notice too... he's controling a Mac.. I would love to c it on Windows.
www.remotedroid.net/
Remote start for your car on Android......? it may happen down the road but the fact remains iPhone - iPod Touch user base is Big and getting Bigger every day.
Google thrives on hyper-innovative applications, such as the Google Maps Street View, which no one has been able to figure out how Google does it. Compared to Google, Apple is like the cool guy, Research in Motion is like a email addict lying in death bed clutching his broken blackberry, and Google is like the high flying goggle wearing geek!
Cool guys don't care much about sharing or not sharing unless it is iPod or iPhone stuff. Email addicts are thumbing their QWERTY keyboards crossing red traffic lights. Geeks live to deliver very geeky stuff like fantastic search engines and share them! To not share is to not be geek!
BTW, IT is geekdom!
My knowlege and experience tell me that Google Android is going to capture the hearts of all the geeks in the world like wildfire. That means the IT departments of the world are going to push for the Android platform, thousands of geeky applications and utilities are going to be written in Android and deployed across enterprises, already the enterprises are earmarking 10% or more of IT budgets for developing mobile apps using Android, you only need to look up dice.com, monster.com, workopolis.com or your IT buddies to know that there are millions of IT jobs for Android coming up this year. How would you like to earn $70000 a year writing Android programs for Citi, Proctor & Gamble, Ford? It may be geeky, but it's fun and it pays very well.
Of course, since enterprises are going Google Android for mobile, some one has to go, and that means Research in Motion will be out of the American Enterprises door to make room for Android.
Google makes Research in Motion obsolete for American enterprises. There is no doubt.
Apple is on a different path than Google, for one thing, you will not see a search engine coming out from Apple.
to be more OPEN and less greedy with collecting a share of all their app income as I understand Android does not do. I. e., I will go with whatever system works best and costs less!
IF Android develops into another DVD or Wii market with region
restrictions (can't buy a foreign DVD or Wii game and play it on your device since the Gods decided this was better for us consumers = WRONG) or other restrictions even inside USA I am clearly sticking with General Apple, who at least makes things working together and smooth. IF Android is truly OPEN and simple worldwide like the CD market there will very soon be more than 85000 apps and no General to say NO to a good app, Flashplayer, etc.!
IF not, I predict Android will be less succesful and I will stick with my iPhone.
I think Android has a good chance to be one of the leaders, given its recent upgrade to its OS and the traction it's got already.
The author's belief that Google Voice is a must-have is reasonable. Let's hope there's a way to get it onto the iPhone, or that Apple can come up with something equivalent. I suspect they're working on it.
This is not true. Most developers of applications want:
1- A well-documented, logical, development language,
2 -An easy to use, development environment (i.e. good tools),
Apple provides this. Their SDK (dev environment) is noted as being superlative. I have heard that Android also has a good environment but would be unable to judge personally how the two compare.
Open-source means that the actual code for the OS itself is open and available for both improving (and submitting improvements back to Google) and also available for "tinkering under the hood" - i.e. changing the OS itself.
This means that a handset mfg can actually change the basic operating system to suit its needs. This is powerful. It sounds cool, but doing so has its drawbacks. Most importantly is the fact that if you significantly change the OS then all applications written for the "Vanilla-Android" may no longer work with your version - or they may work but differently from how the developers intended. This is definitely NOT GOOD. Developers most assuredly do not want to develop special code for device X.
So- having open-source is of little import to Android as a development system.
- feel they MUST have a physical keyboard
- will not move to ATT
- they prefer the look & feel of handset X
- they hate Apple
- etc, etc.
All these are valid for the individual user. Most of these people were not going to consider an iPhone anyway (unless iPhone goes to other carriers). So as soon as other options become available, these people will purchase them. This is good in my opinion (as big Apple fan and stock-holder), as it keeps Apple on their toes. It is also true, however, as I noted in my first post here, that as soon as these become available, by definition they are growing share - even if phone Z sells only 100 units that is still more than none. Heck, when the Yugo was introduced to USA, its market share increased very rapidly, from 0% to whatever. But it didn't last long. :)
1. They do not allow it right.... So people BITCH... I can run Flash on this or that..... or other than iPhone... WELL if SO.. GO !@#$%ing buy that handset and stop ur Whining!!! we don't need you.
2. IF AAPL we to allow Flash on iPhone??? Now you have those same BITCHERS & WHINERS saying THE BATTEY LIFE ON iPhone SUCKS!! & ON & ON!!!! THIS AND THAT....
See it is a no win.... SO...
Apple made the right move not to allow Flash on iPhone. Its a resource HOG in the mobile space and is unnecessary.
Better native Apps with the SDK can & will be developed that will make Flash on iPhone obsolete.
Now WHEN and IF there is an Apple Tablet that is a different story.
But mark my words people will BITCH & WHINE about the Apple tablet IF it every sees the light of day...
If you don't like it DON'T BUY iPHONE and go with Android. No loss to AAPL they are doin' Just Fine.. ;)
seekingalpha.com/artic...
iPhone is number 1 in meeting business and individual expectations as reported by AJ Powers, that means blackberrys and Android fail to meet expectations as we know today.
It is expected that blackberrys will fail even more in meetings expectations, and Android to meet their expectations better over time.
iPhone had exceeded expectations and will continue to push the envelope as Apple is the clear industry leader surely to expand its market share.
Android stands to gain market share at Research in Motion's expense.
It's rather simple, and straight forward.
As for Apple, I own an iPod, use iTunes and we have two iPhones. Their products are wonderful. But, Jobs is using the same tactics he used when he was CEO last time - namely protecting his moat by limiting others from integrating fully. Last time he lost the market share battle. This time he is winning it and, as Microsoft has shown, he can continue to win for a long time.
I just think Apple is being anti-competitive with Skype over Google and trying to keep the Palm Pre from syncing with iTunes. Eventually, this sort of thing will be ruled on by the FTC.
On Oct 14 12:05 PM CGP wrote:
> the AAPL camp is quite defensive...
>
> Looks like a replay of the Apple-PC battle for the desktop; open
> source vs. managed source, interesting to see who "wins" this time
>
>
> ....boo hoo for PALM & Nokia didn't even get a look (if you were
> open minded I would've thought you'd at least try it out)
>
> ......race not even close to the backstretch, more like just out
> of the gate......look to LTE & Wimax as the quarter pole
But, it is amazing how defensive the Apple people are to this post. The fact is Apple has a chosen strategy that is anti-open source. It failed in the 1990s for them but was a success for Microsoft. But, we have to recognize that Apple wants a largely closed system so that it can control things. There are lots of arguments why one might do this (design or technology integrity for one). But, right now, Apple has crossed the line into anti-competitive activity.
Whether Google has the goods is another story - and have been plenty 'evil' themselves in other regards. As one commenter noted, it's easy to gain ground when you start from zero. But Android is a worthy competitor. Let's see how it develops.
Don't shoot the messenger.
Open source is not the be all and end all.
On Oct 14 03:46 PM jmmx wrote:
> I think that some people who praise that "Android is an open-source
> software system" do not fully understand what that means. It appears
> that some people believe that it is easier for developers to program
> or "understand" because it is open source.
>
> This is not true. Most developers of applications want:
> 1- A well-documented, logical, development language,
> 2 -An easy to use, development environment (i.e. good tools),
>
> Apple provides this. Their SDK (dev environment) is noted as being
> superlative. I have heard that Android also has a good environment
> but would be unable to judge personally how the two compare.
>
> Open-source means that the actual code for the OS itself is open
> and available for both improving (and submitting improvements back
> to Google) and also available for "tinkering under the hood" - i.e.
> changing the OS itself.
>
> This means that a handset mfg can actually change the basic operating
> system to suit its needs. This is powerful. It sounds cool, but doing
> so has its drawbacks. Most importantly is the fact that if you significantly
> change the OS then all applications written for the "Vanilla-Android"
> may no longer work with your version - or they may work but differently
> from how the developers intended. This is definitely NOT GOOD. Developers
> most assuredly do not want to develop special code for device X.
>
>
> So- having open-source is of little import to Android as a development
> system.
I'd love to hear your thoughts about this.
On Oct 14 05:52 PM Edward Harrison wrote:
>
> As for Apple, I own an iPod, use iTunes and we have two iPhones.
> Their products are wonderful. But, Jobs is using the same tactics
> he used when he was CEO last time - namely protecting his moat by
> limiting others from integrating fully. Last time he lost the market
> share battle. This time he is winning it and, as Microsoft has shown,
> he can continue to win for a long time.
>
> I just think Apple is being anti-competitive with Skype over Google
> and trying to keep the Palm Pre from syncing with iTunes. Eventually,
> this sort of thing will be ruled on by the FTC.
iTune is an Apple product and Apple can control who can access it. As of this writing, there are many software that allows non-iPods access to iTune material. I do not understand how this is anti-competitiveness, you have not provided concrete logic for it. It is just your opinion.
You seem to imply that Palm should have the right to synchronize with iTune using Apple's vendor's ID to masquerade Pre as an iPod. This after Palm supposedly joined an organization whose guideline expressed prohibit use of another vendor's ID.
So your value proposition in this narrow scope is suspect because you claim Apple to be anti-competitive without proof but chose to say nothing about Palm's blatant disregard for an implicit agreement it made with a trade organization. So again, this is your opinion, not a message.
As for Google Voice, again, right or wrong, Apple can dictate what can run on its device. We may not like it but it is what it is. Is it anti-competition? ATT laid out a good case why it is not. Google is not subject to the same rules as ATT but it wants to play in the same sandbox. We will see what the Feds have to say.
Again, you shared you own opinion, based on your own bias. You did not lay out any rules and regulations or concrete proof to support your positions.
SO we are not shooting any messenger at all, we may not even be Apple fans, we just disagree with your position and called that out.
I am a UNIX, XP, VISTA and Leopard users. Not yet moved to Snow Leopard fully. Waiting to receive my System 7 boxes.
On Oct 14 06:01 PM Edward Harrison wrote:
> And for the record, I have been a fan of Apple for nearly 20 years,
> having used a Mac from the mid-1980s on and bought at least 6 or
> 7 iPods and iPhones. I am well aware of the quality of their products
> and ease o use.
>
> But, it is amazing how defensive the Apple people are to this post.
> The fact is Apple has a chosen strategy that is anti-open source.
> It failed in the 1990s for them but was a success for Microsoft.
> But, we have to recognize that Apple wants a largely closed system
> so that it can control things. There are lots of arguments why one
> might do this (design or technology integrity for one). But, right
> now, Apple has crossed the line into anti-competitive activity.<br/>
>
> Whether Google has the goods is another story - and have been plenty
> 'evil' themselves in other regards. As one commenter noted, it's
> easy to gain ground when you start from zero. But Android is a worthy
> competitor. Let's see how it develops.
>
> Don't shoot the messenger.
On Oct 14 03:46 PM jmmx wrote:
> I think that some people who praise that "Android is an open-source
> software system" do not fully understand what that means. It appears
> that some people believe that it is easier for developers to program
> or "understand" because it is open source.
>
> This is not true. Most developers of applications want:
> 1- A well-documented, logical, development language,
> 2 -An easy to use, development environment (i.e. good tools),
>
> Apple provides this. Their SDK (dev environment) is noted as being
> superlative. I have heard that Android also has a good environment
> but would be unable to judge personally how the two compare.
>
> Open-source means that the actual code for the OS itself is open
> and available for both improving (and submitting improvements back
> to Google) and also available for "tinkering under the hood" - i.e.
> changing the OS itself.
>
> This means that a handset mfg can actually change the basic operating
> system to suit its needs. This is powerful. It sounds cool, but doing
> so has its drawbacks. Most importantly is the fact that if you significantly
> change the OS then all applications written for the "Vanilla-Android"
> may no longer work with your version - or they may work but differently
> from how the developers intended. This is definitely NOT GOOD. Developers
> most assuredly do not want to develop special code for device X.
>
>
> So- having open-source is of little import to Android as a development
> system.
I bought my phone (G1) and switchd from AT&T to T-mobile to do so. I immediately rooted the phone (jailbreak equivalent) and installed CynagenMod to give me more flexibility than a locked down phone requires (I need to use the phone with a Vodafone SIM card in Europe for one). I have since used it for a month and I would say I am generally happy.
That said, my wife's new iPhone 3GS is faster and the virtual keyboard is significantly more accurate. This G1 phone does pretty much everything I need but from a usability standpoint it lags the iPhone IMO.
The earlier comment about what open-source really is was a good one because it points to why Android could fail: "balkanasation." Because hardware manufacturers can change the code of the OS, this means different Android forks will develop, which may create problems for developers in terms of compatibility. Its early days right now so we'll see how this develops.
Google's deal with Verizon promises to be a signpost of what the future holds.
On Oct 14 04:07 PM GSlusher wrote:
> A question for the author, if you're using your Android phone on
> Sprint or Verizon: If you're on a call, can you access the internet
> or send/receive email at the same time, without quitting the call?
Apple and Unix Linux will flourish, Rim and others will not survive.
Android presently has very limited enterprise support, I think has 1 device with basic Exchange ActiveSync support. I think maybe one vendor has announced their middleware will support Android (at some point Q1 2010) so keep me posted on the exodus to all these platforms for enterprise that provide 25% of the security, management of Blackberry server. I've been waiting for a LONG time for something equal to come out. And please somehow the TCO will be cheaper then BES too right James - heck it's even free since it uses Exchange ActiveSync policy!
Apple's biggest failure will be how much they love that fat $400 subsidy at&t gives them .. raking in the profit so why even bother going else where it will be a lot less and they'd have to deal with Verizon's control issues, insistentance to validate and certify everything so how again will iPhone OS updates work? They takes MONTHS after other carriers get the same OS so I just don't ever see that happening. So Apple will go where? Sprint? T-Mobile (even less of a 3G presence). My gut is they stay with at&t until LTE has suffient build out - so 2012 likely but they'll pray mid 2011 to match their summer release schedule.
Android just feels like Windows Mobile all over again, different hardware manufactors, different OS builds, etc. On one hand it offers something for everyone but it's just a mess at the end and for enterprise - which model do you support? Right now Hero looks like the better device.
If Apple found a way to prevent jailbreak they fixed one of their glaring security risks for enterprise, now get your encryption FIPS certified and maybe they can put some heat on RIM.
But the overriding concern from an antitrust perspective has to be the limited number of broadband network providers in any jurisdiction. The telcos and cable operators have de facto monopoly power in that only one or two providers are available in most areas. The question then becomes, given this power, how should the companies behave/be forced to behave. This is the same question that was at stake with Microsoft and operating systems.
I believe the telcos networks have to be controlled as dumb pipes in the way utilities are. I pay AT&T to provide me network access, not to provide me services that use that access. This is true for cell phone networks as much as it is for internet connections.
Regulators understood this with the old AT&T. Yet, AT&T continued to abuse its market position as the communications landscape changed, so it was broken up. Those same difficulties have not gone away and regulators must be vigilant both in regards to AT&T in this case and Apple regarding cellphone handsets.
On Oct 14 06:52 PM Dialectical Materialist wrote:
> You may be right about some of the problems with protecting your
> moat, but I want to focus on a more specific issue. Do you really
> think it is anti-competitive for a phone company to not want (and
> try to prevent) folks calling other people using their communication
> network without paying for it? I think the internet should be free
> as much as the next techno geek, but if I sat outside your home and
> used your bandwidth for free to do all my Netflix streaming, wouldn't
> you feel I was using something of yours which you were renting and
> that I was getting for free? We are now at a place where technology
> creates many of these free holes and exploits. Just because Google
> CAN write an app that allows me to call for free over the internet,
> does that mean others SHOULD be allowed to do so. To call AT&T's
> attempt to protect the use of their network "anti-competitive" oversimplifies
> a complex issue that the courts will ultimately be sorting out for
> years.
>
> I'd love to hear your thoughts about this.
>
> On Oct 14 05:52 PM Edward Harrison wrote:
I'd say RIM's security is what gives its a very large portion of it's enterprise business, the same reason why Apple cannot even get a foot into enterprise (other then employee owned) Is there any company in the states deploying large number of Nokia devices?
They can bring them all they want, ActiveSync is disabled for everyone so good luck to them getting access to enterprise data other then web based email as it's not happening until Apple decides to care about security we require.
James we are just Yin and Yang .. We each feel the other is wrong but try and not be so outlandish with some of your remarks as they have no logic and do not represent enterprise support.
"I recently switched from a Windows Mobile telephone to an Android-based mobile phone. "
Android will gain some ground in the low end, taking out WinMo. Apple's going for the high-end: Rimm customers; technology early-adopters. There's room for both. Theres' NO room left for WinMo; Rimm (and other keyboard phones-- Pre, etc.); Symbian
Most stunning is you purport that Android is "gaining ground" on Apple and say the video shows why. Well it doesn't. They say on the video that lots of Android phones are coming out, that nobody knows how well Android is selling, and in fact they say Android cannot catch up with the iPhone. Man I'm laughing right now at how bad this piece of yours is.
On Oct 14 10:29 PM Edward Harrison wrote:
> Dialectical, I will have to write up a post on this issue. The core
> of the issue is whether the phone companies' network are dumb pipes
> or whether they have the right to 'control' traffic. Indeed, this
> is a complicated issue.
>
> But the overriding concern from an antitrust perspective has to be
> the limited number of broadband network providers in any jurisdiction.
> The telcos and cable operators have de facto monopoly power in that
> only one or two providers are available in most areas. The question
> then becomes, given this power, how should the companies behave/be
> forced to behave. This is the same question that was at stake with
> Microsoft and operating systems.
>
> I believe the telcos networks have to be controlled as dumb pipes
> in the way utilities are. I pay AT&T to provide me network access,
> not to provide me services that use that access. This is true for
> cell phone networks as much as it is for internet connections.<br/>
>
> Regulators understood this with the old AT&T. Yet, AT&T continued
> to abuse its market position as the communications landscape changed,
> so it was broken up. Those same difficulties have not gone away
> and regulators must be vigilant both in regards to AT&T in this
> case and Apple regarding cellphone handsets.
Given nobody is expecting any robust economic recoveries anytime soon, it makes no sense to beef up iPhone's security features in the near future because enterprises are NOT even upgrading their blackberrys!!
With Rim falling to number 2 while Apple rises to number 1 in JD Powers' survey in business user satisfaction, it is only a matter of time for Apple to vastly beef up its iPhone security features to make the iPhone the number 1 enterprise mobile device for American enterprises in due time, most likely when stronger economic recoveries start coming in.
Google can eat Rim alive and raw today. All it takes is for the American enterprises to work out their modern security needs as well as app needs with Google and it is time to say goodbye to Rim.
I think the Android world will be too chaotic to develop much in the way of a useful App Store.
"Nokia Posts Third-Quarter Loss of 559 Million Euros (Update1)
By Diana ben-Aaron Oct. 15 (Bloomberg) --
"Nokia Oyj, the world’s biggest maker of mobile phones, posted an unexpected third-quarter loss, reversing a profit in the year-earlier period as demand slid. The company reported a net loss of 559 million euros ($833.9 million), from a profit of 1.09 billion euros in the year-earlier period. Analysts in a Bloomberg survey had expected on average a profit of 367 million euros."
On Oct 14 11:09 AM Doom Bloggers s**** wrote:
> This is hearsay and complete jealousy of Apple.
>
> Good luck with the lack of apps on Android and glut of Android phones
> to confuse the consumer to death
This is actually NOT correct. The iPhone syncs DIRECTLY to the the MS EXchange/Outlook server with NO extra intermediary server (like the Blackberry server) sitting in between.
On Oct 15 04:43 AM lucky lenny wrote:
> My understanding is that Research in Motion’s Blackberry is the still
> best choice for business. With the BB, companies can manage the device,
> e.g., wipe the data clean if the smartphone is lost. RIMM’s Blackberry
> Enterprise Server, which syncs up with theMSFT Outlook server, just
> can’t be matched by ipod, android or any of the other platforms.
> Given that security and privacy issues are the top concerns for business,
> am I correct that companies won’t start replacing Blackberrys with
> Androids anytime soon?
www.businessweek.com/t...
Basically what I stated yesterday.. yet not so much as a rant.
Android WILL become a fractured MESS.
Have a grateful day. Apple @ $250 year end 2010
Apple has a great User Interface, many Apps with a superb App creation program. Biggest disadvantage is the iPhone's battery enclosure is inaccessible to the user.
Microsoft's OS is far too heavy, dated, and handles WiFi connectivity poorly.
RIM is now a dated solution as most smartphones can be easily linked into the office email system. The device's antenna is poorly positioned at the rear of the device which a user covers with their hand when making a call, affecting call quality.
Nokia's smooth & polished OS powered them into market leadership and has kept them there but it now needs some extra bells and whistles to match Apple's iPhone. All Nokia handsets are well engineered.
The Android OS is nowhere near ready for the market.
Problem for all the above is they are more expensive than they need to be, but that's the consumer's choice.
My handsets are dual mode, 802.11 + GSM, on a Linux platform with 'best of breed' Open Software programmes, including touch screen, all tightly interlinked by my software. Multinationals use my Smartphone so that all their offices are interconnected via The Internet and their worlwide employees are accessible by a simple extension number with all calls at virtually zero cost to the Company. All users get to keep their own GSM numbers operational on my Smartphone and have Voice Call Continuity (VCC) implemented for imperceptable transfers between 802.11 and GSM - a world first. mazingo.tv
Palm OS is far better than Symbian; however, the Palm cell phone is far behind its competitors. Palm is having a hard time catching up with its competitors in hardware technology, including imaging, sound, etc etc... I suppose Palm will have to merge with some large tech companies or it will simply die in a few years.
I am glad that Android serves as a major competitor of MS mobile. An open source OS means that more computer geeks will be writing more free apps and tweaks that will benefit "cheap" people like myself! :-)
Repeat:
I am not an Android, I am actually human. Do not call me "Android" it is inappropriate.
Repeat:
I am not an Android, I am actually human. Do not call me "Android" it is inappropriate.
Repeat:
I am not an Android, I am actually human. Do not call me "Android" it is inappropriate.
Repeat:
I am not an Android, I am actually human. Do not call me "Android" it is inappropriate.
Repetition is competitive and a behavior of similar as previous.It is brainwashing and commercials are the same.
On Oct 14 11:11 AM Doom Bloggers s**** wrote:
> And since when does a company not have the right to defend their
> proprietary technology. What they spend millions to develop their
> phone software and interface and they let Google swoop in and take
> the thing over like a freaking cancer with their free crap.
>
> C'mon. Get over yourself
On Oct 15 08:25 AM T_ wrote:
> A former windows mobile user??? I thought those reports were simply
> fantasy... Dude, having been a windows mobile user disqualifies
> you from having an opinion on which product is best! The fact you
> stuck with a loser platform for as long as you did, puts into question
> whether you have any idea :)
That has been copied. The Big Boy is just like the BigMac... And McDonalds doesn't take claim on beef. McD is the perfect example of being competitive and how to be competitive.
Try another example.
On Oct 14 11:26 AM cral wrote:
> "Apple is already acting anti-competitively by tying iTunes to the
> iPhone and iPod." So is it anti-compeitive by tying the BigMac to
> only MacDonalds resaurants???
On Oct 15 09:31 AM James Beswick wrote:
> Defend proprietary technology isn't the point: tying it exclusively
> to a network to create a monopoly, and blocking legitimate Internet
> applications is the issue here. When Microsoft starting with this
> approach, people went nuts - now Apple is doing exactly the same
> thing and their loyal supporters rant against anyone who complains.
>
>
> On Oct 14 11:11 AM Doom Bloggers s**** wrote:
Two completely different business models. Google is taking on M$ for trying to compete in search, by offering a free Mobile OS alternative to manufacturers. They will succeed. Good for consumers.
Apple iPhone is a managed device, which simply means, everything about it will continue to work as well as the company manages & implements it. Since Apple has a great track record in putting out excellent products, this also is a good for consumers.
RIM BB, Palm Pre & Windows Mobile is managed source as well, however, Windows Mobile has not been managed well, and Palm Pre, we have yet to see, while the BB is the only solid competitor to Apple in this segment.
The point is, people vote with their wallets. The fact that Apple has sold more phone in two years then Windows Mobile has in ten years, makes me a bullish investor for Apple.
If you don't get it, think of it in real terms: RIM HAS a successful platform with the BB. Apple HAS a successful platform with the iPhone. Palm is attempting a successful platform with the Pre. All of the above make BOTH the hardware & the OS. They are successful because the entire user experience is managed well. People vote with their wallets. All other handset manufactures only own half the nut, and previously had to depend on M$ for the other half. Nokia, HTC, and other the other handset manufacturers desperately need a competitive OS. Google Android to the rescue. If Android is successful, this actually HELPS Apple, RIM, and Palm. However, it kills Windows Mobile, Linux, & Symbian for this platform segment.
Cheers!
On Oct 14 12:17 PM harney22 wrote:
> Wow, Ed. Looks like you sure pissed off the AAPL folk. It truly is
> amazing how angry/defensive they become when you attack their precious
> Iphone. I like the argument for the android and really think that
> open source software keeps its opportunities many. Idk about other
> people, but I myself have become ADD with phones. I seem to switch
> at least once every year.
Investors that invest on emotion go broke... so buyer beware, don't follow this guy in investing.
There is a reason Apple has (in a down economy) continued to be a company (and stock) that continues to skyrocket.
From an investor perspective, Android makes no short term money for Google... maybe long term, if it somehow ties adds to the platform. They may, in the future, if the OS gets established, introduce an Ad version that is free, and a paid version... I doubt it though. This will tick off too many people. What Google is really doing, is attempting to take down Microsoft, for daring to come at them in search and advertising. Again I ask, how does Android, under this present model directly affect Google's stock or bottom line? The simple answer, it doesn't. Indirectly- maybe, but only time will tell.
If your beef is that Apple didn't accept Google Voice, I'm with you... however, you are ignoring the fact that you over 15,000 other Apps to CHOOSE from. No other platform even comes close. Once Android has the Apps, then we'll see.
My recommendation to you: iPhone like your wife and be happy. Once Android gets established, then check it out.
As far as Apple's real reason for "holding" Google Voice in purgatory... they will eventually approve it. However, they are and will be introducing the same features within Apple's MobileMe service. Apple would be foolish to allow GV siphon off people from MobileMe enhancements soon to be introduced.
Last, GV works fine as a Web App. Sure, no local data stored on the phone, but it still works nonetheless. And since GV depends on an internet connection- whether or not it's a native App or a Web App makes little difference to me at this point.
That brings me to another point: BESIDES the tens of thousands of native Apps out there for iPhone... how about the burgeoning WebApps, which are completely un-policed, that are becoming available?
On Oct 15 09:44 AM Edward Harrison wrote:
> LOL. That's hilarious. Those reports were NOT fantasy. Don't ask
> me why I stuck with Windows Mobile for so long. I have escaped the
> imprisonment now!
Apple greatest achievement was making the smartphone accessible to all - you want apps - you download them straight to the phone - nice and simple.
Basing your decision on one act of so called anti-competitive behaviour rather than looking at satisfying your actual needs shows more about your ability to make decisions than any reflection on Android.
Yes: Palm develops the hardware and software for Pre.
Yes: RIMM develops the hardware and software for BB.
Yes: Apple develops the hardware and software for iPhone & iPod Touch. Right?
I always come to this same conclusion time and time again.....of ALL these companies name ONE that owns and has developed a Desktop (Laptop) OS that is certified UNIX which ALSO possesses a SDK that is seamless between the 3 spaces ie. Desktop, Laptop & Mobile handset?
and as far as price goes......in the netbook vs laptop sector... a Macbook can be had for under $700. You just need to know where to look. Apple too has a plan to be competitive in the netbook space.
Those who laughed @ Apple in the mobile phone space ie.
A refresher PEOPLE!!
Monday, November 20, 2006 1:29:45 PM
Responding to questions from New York Times correspondent John Markoff at a Churchill Club breakfast gathering Thursday morning, Colligan laughed off the idea that any company -- including the wildly popular Apple Computer -- could easily win customers in the finicky smart-phone sector.
"We've learned and struggled for a few years here figuring out how to make a decent phone," he said. "PC guys are not going to just figure this out. They're not going to just walk in.'"
WELL!! what do have to say about AAPL entering in the netbook Space?
They will FAIL here TOO!!!! RIGHT NAYSAYERS. GMAFB.
AAPL $250 end of year 2010
Nokias Q3 Report was SPECTACULAR!!!!! and just ponder the FACT that Nokia is blaming the downside to GET THIS!!
Supply Chain Issues!!!! Yeah OK!
Keep ur head in the sand much longer Nokia and you will soon be swallowed up by the high tide coming in called Apple.
It is very different this time around, they have the perfect balance of openness with a solid well supported platforms, something that Open Source products can't match.
Most OS projects have an erratic path of advancements and a much higher rate of bugs.
On Oct 15 12:37 PM Kanji wrote:
> You Apple people have your heads in the sand - history repeats itself.
> This is Apple MacIntosh (hot product, great features, premium price
> and demographic, etc. etc.) vs. WinTel PCs all over again! The same
> closed platform OS and sales channel strategy that killed Apple before
> (with early PC competition) and limited its market share (the premium,
> uber cool anti-ubiquity strategy) will hurt Apple again with the
> Iphone. Why are they making the same mistake twice and with new management
> (or is it same management with Jobs)?!? It will take some time but
> I would bet on anyone other than Apple, they are one mistake away
> from failure once again.
What would that be? You ask...
2 Words... Wireless Broadband. DID NOT exist back then DUH.
Apps no longer need to be pressed, printed, boxed, warehoused, inventoried and or any other archaic form of software delivery of years gone past. Today is an entirley diffent playing field and Apple has the 2 star quarterbacks called iTunes and App store.
nuff said...
Please: Name any other online App store that has 85000 Apps and GROWING!
Some People You Just Can't reach.
The spurned lover comment (I used to be an ardent Apple fan and thought Apple was going to be above board) seems on the mark here (he said sheepishly).
That said, I might have something slightly more substantive to say about strategy - time permitting - given the beating I am taking here in the comments.
On Oct 15 10:15 AM winindthedust wrote:
> Good for you Ed. Unfortunately, this article in no way helps investors.
>
>
> If your beef is that Apple didn't accept Google Voice, I'm with you...
> however, you are ignoring the fact that you over 15,000 other Apps
> to CHOOSE from. No other platform even comes close. Once Android
> has the Apps, then we'll see.
>
> My recommendation to you: iPhone like your wife and be happy. Once
> Android gets established, then check it out.
>
> As far as Apple's real reason for "holding" Google Voice in purgatory...
> they will eventually approve it. However, they are and will be introducing
> the same features within Apple's MobileMe service. Apple would be
> foolish to allow GV siphon off people from MobileMe enhancements
> soon to be introduced.
>
> Last, GV works fine as a Web App. Sure, no local data stored on
> the phone, but it still works nonetheless. And since GV depends
> on an internet connection- whether or not it's a native App or a
> Web App makes little difference to me at this point.
>
> That brings me to another point: BESIDES the tens of thousands of
> native Apps out there for iPhone... how about the burgeoning WebApps,
> which are completely un-policed, that are becoming available?
I have preferred Apple products since 1985, because I find that seamless integration and tighter security results is smoother operation, less downtime, and in the end, lower cost when all factors are considered. I have not felt that I have suffered to any material degree from fewer choices. Apple provides software and hardware that have always worked fine (and reliably) for my purposes.
Anyone arguing with Apple's strategy since Jobs took over after the company was in a death spiral should look at the results in terms of operations, product development, and the behavior of Apple stock. Also, like back in history to the number of time Apple was written off by analysts and so-called industry experts. It's been pretty constant,and always wrong, wrong, wrong.
IBM had the name. They FOOLISHLY gave it to Microsoft when Bill got permission to sell DOS directly. That was it. Windows was nothing more than a shell on top of DOS until Win95 came out. That didn't stop business users, they were already comfortable with DOS.
This is entirely different. Apple now has the name. Ask literally anyone who makes the best computer. If he is not a died in the wool PC geek, he will tell you that it's Apple. Used to be, people thought they would be going out on a limb to get a Mac. Not anymore. Most people who don't get one say that it was only because it was too expensive (not knowing a cheap PC or anything about processors, etc... they are at a loss how to compare systems). Most of them will tell you that they 'wish they could afford a Mac' etc...
With iPhone, it's even better. iPhone is the GOLD STANDARD for phones. Everyone wants one unless they just hate Apple or want GV. Apple will outdo GV in time.
Ed, you might want to let your wife pick out your cell phone next time, I think she has a better handle on it. I do like some of your followup comments though.
Only Apple users get bashed for pointing out FACTS and also accused of being in a cult, etc... The truth is that it's the Windows /Rim/Nokia crowd that is worried, not the Apple 'people'.
>You Apple people have your heads in the sand - history repeats
>itself. This is Apple MacIntosh (hot product, great features, premium
>price and demographic, etc. etc.) vs. WinTel PCs all over again!
So, if you're long NOK, you really should be worrying about the reported loss and NSN performance or network business in general - but if you're trying to prove or predict anything about mobile phone business and/or Nokia's demise by superficial financial analysis of Nokia, I suggest to dig a little deeper.
On Oct 15 06:54 AM Roger Knights wrote:
> 15 hours ago I commented above, "I think it's a good call that Nokia
> and Palm aren't going anywhere." Now there's this:
>
> "Nokia Posts Third-Quarter Loss of 559 Million Euros (Update1) <br/>By
> Diana ben-Aaron Oct. 15 (Bloomberg) --
>
> "Nokia Oyj, the world’s biggest maker of mobile phones, posted an
> unexpected third-quarter loss, reversing a profit in the year-earlier
> period as demand slid. The company reported a net loss of 559 million
> euros ($833.9 million), from a profit of 1.09 billion euros in the
> year-earlier period. Analysts in a Bloomberg survey had expected
> on average a profit of 367 million euros."
HE THEN GOES ON:
"Apple is already acting anti-competitively by tying iTunes to the iPhone and iPod. So I went elsewhere" ---
'
--- What the hell is anti-competitive about that? iTunes has ALWAYS been tied to the ipod, itunes is the program that stores your music that you transfer to your ipod. I bet you didn't have a problem with itunes or the ipod when the first generation came out 7 years ago.
I dislike the iPhone business model. It does not allow me to write and distribute the apps I want to. It limits users to certain hardware types. I lets Apple pull customer unfriendly tricks like closing the battery compartment and banning applications, and restricting the phone to one service provider.
Yes I know that you can get better usability with this approach but the price for this is too high. Ultimately the Android type of approach will attract more applications and end users because the variety of hardware choices will be able to address more use cases than the closed iPhone platform will.
Whether or not Android will dethrone the iPhone is an open question, but what is not an open question is that sooner or later an operating system that runs on multiple hardware platforms from different vendors will become the preferred platform for smart phone customers.
As far as open source goes, as a developer I prefer working on an open source platform but that doesn't mean that I necessarily think that an open source platform is the key to phone operating system success. If Android succeeds it won't be because of open source so much as the business opportunities it offers developers and phone makers.
BTW: Google is investing $10sm in Android because it wishes to sell contextual ads that are relevant to the time of day, location and presence of the user.
I just saw the Sprint HERO. This phone is impressive. It does literally everything - you name it, short of transforming itself to anther object. It is google, knowledge, relational based. It is google mobile. On top of all this, it has a G-Sensor and Compass. I have seen the mobile extensions of the G-Sensor -- too cool!!!
In the end, each cell phone type is dependant on the kind of user you are. The stats are about consumption rates; so, don't be too hard on those who express their opinion, subjective input is perfectly legal and useful.
www.htc.com/www/produc...
I have long said that the problem with Apple Mac is that they never opened their hardware, and the problem with Win/PCs is that they DID.
MS winning the PC wars is a complex issue and the "openness" of the HW just one small aspect. As for Apple software being "open source" - once again it appears to me you do not quite understand what this means.
To begin with - Apple is indeed open source - the very bottom layer of Max OSX is open source BSD Unix, an effort to which Apple has contributed greatly. Additionally, OpenCL, the new software library that allows easy access to GPU and other computing hardware, is also open and Apple has contributed greatly.
HOWEVER! If Apple's intent is to provide a great experience to their customers, then one of the aspects is reliability. To allow a developer to mess with the OS code is absolutely absurd.
I do not argue that Android may be good, or cool, or the phones may or may not be great - BUT
-- Open source is a total non-issue here!
----
Then there is the Skype vs Google Voice question. There is no logical reason that I can see that Apple would have any fundamental problem with an app like GVoice. It has absolutely no effect on their revenue. They claimed ot have problems with some interface issues - this may or may not be legitimate. It seems to me that either:
1- they were trying to cover for ATT which does have revenue issues. or
2- they really are trying to work out the interface isues that they mentioned.
Otherwise -what is their motivation???
To me - this is just another tempest in a teapot.
This article provides the complete Apple response to FCC:
www.techcrunch.com/200.../
On Oct 14 05:52 PM Edward Harrison wrote:
≥ But, Jobs is using the same tactics
> he used when he was CEO last time - namely protecting his moat by
> limiting others from integrating fully. Last time he lost the market
> share battle. This time he is winning it and, as Microsoft has shown,
> he can continue to win for a long time.
>
> I just think Apple is being anti-competitive with Skype over Google
> and trying to keep the Palm Pre from syncing with iTunes. Eventually,
> this sort of thing will be ruled on by the FTC.