Print 102 comment(s) - last by Oregonian2.. on May 4 at 9:28 PM

Six percent plan to buy iPhone, according to market research firm

Apple’s iPhone product is one of the most talked about pieces of kit in recent memory, but according to a survey conducted by market research firm Markitecture, the majority of those who know about the iPhone have no plans on buying it.

Markitecture said that it surveyed a nationally representative sample of 1,300 people who both owned their own cell phone and were responsible for the monthly payments. 77 percent of respondents were at least slightly familiar with the iPhone, and 41 percent had a good impression of the iPhone based on everything they had seen or heard.

Interestingly, familiarity with the iPhone is positively correlated with overall impression - strength of impression increases dramatically with increased exposure – 83 percent of those very familiar with the iPhone had an excellent or very good impression of the product.

Despite the relatively strong impression overall, six percent of those who were aware of the iPhone said they were likely to buy it within the next year. Two-thirds of the same group said that there was zero chance they would purchase the product.

For some industries, six percent market share is failure, but not so for mobile phones. Markitecture says that the highly successful Motorola RAZR after its launch in 2004 achieved a six percent market share at its peak.

As for reasons for not purchasing the iPhone, the $500-600 cost was cited as the top reason. The second issue was not specific to the iPhone however, as respondents cited carrier issues and/or contracts.

Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer already has his own forecast on Apple’s cell device, saying to USA Today, “There's no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance. It's a $500 subsidized item. They may make a lot of money. But if you actually take a look at the 1.3 billion phones that get sold, I'd prefer to have our software in 60% or 70% or 80% of them, than I would to have 2% or 3%, which is what Apple might get.”

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By Homerboy on 5/2/2007 1:47:05 PM , Rating: 5
the article talks about 6% of people asked would consider buying the phone. Then goes on to talking about how 6$ market share is great in the mobile phone business. These 2 "6%s" are not the same thing.

RE: confusing...
By retrospooty on 5/2/2007 2:02:28 PM , Rating: 5
ya, I agree 6% of the smartphone market is great, however Apple plans to sell 8 million of these in the 2008 fiscal year. THAT goal is absolutly rediculous with a $600 price with 2 year contract. Apple is skoking crack if they think that will fly.

If they could drop the price to $199 with contract they can sell 8 million... assuming it performs as well as Apple claims it will, and has no major bugs or high failure rate (which is a huge IF).

RE: confusing...
By MADAOO7 on 5/2/07, Rating: 0
RE: confusing...
By retrospooty on 5/2/2007 2:55:18 PM , Rating: 5
I didnt forget the ipod... this is NOT an ipod.

"And look at all the New York businessmen, big city workers, lawyers, and doctors that this appeals to. Instead of them buying a new Palm, RIM, or Blackberry, I think they'd turn to the iPhone."

These are the "bread and butter" customers of the smartphone market. They are 95% of the buyers and they will NOT flock to it because there is no keypad to quickly type emails. Watch and learn.

RE: confusing...
By Master Kenobi on 5/2/2007 4:05:50 PM , Rating: 5
Actually, the businessmen and whatnot rely on their company infrastructure to support it. If the iPhone does not natively work with Exchange and/or Lotus Domino then it is doomed.

Our company has no plans to ever buy the iPhone, it is not compatible with our email infrastructure and we will not change just for Apple.

RE: confusing...
By Nekrik on 5/2/2007 4:24:29 PM , Rating: 4
Yep, and as far as I've heard Apple isn't real excited about opening the platform up for third party developers, meaning they're not going to allow a third party app that is compatible with Exchange. This may have changed but I don't think it has.

This won't bother many of the Apple elite, they're the target market and they're used to living in such an environment.

RE: confusing...
By cheetah2k on 5/3/2007 4:33:12 AM , Rating: 3
So we should expect that the same % of Apple Mac owners will buy the iPhone? So thats about 2% of the market right?


RE: confusing...
By kelmon on 5/3/2007 9:59:45 AM , Rating: 2
True, but there is nothing to say that Apple doesn't release a 1st party Exchange compatible email client on the phone. I have no idea how well it works as an Exchange client since my company does not yet use Exchange (although it is coming, apparently) but Apple's Mail application supports Exchange so there is nothing to prevent this from working on the iPhone.

Never say never. Apple won't allow users to install 3rd party applications directly on the phone but that does not rule out development of applications that are approved and distributed by Apple.

RE: confusing...
By odiHnaD on 5/4/2007 1:47:22 PM , Rating: 1
Apple cannot release a first party exchange client, as it will have to be licensed from MS, in other words 3rd party technology.

RE: confusing...
By SiliconAddict on 5/2/2007 8:25:54 PM , Rating: 2
How many iPods did Apple sell prior to opening it up to the rest of the market? (Read: Windows) That and only a small handful of iPods have ever cost $600 or even $500 for that matter. Until:

1. Apple sells an unlocked iPhone
2. the iPhone drops into the price range of standard Smartphones.
3. Apple developed a rep for solid hardware. (Name me a absolutely new product that Apple has gone into that hasn't been bug ridden. And the AppleTV doesn't count because its basically a slimmed down PC.)

For me the deal killer is Crapular and the price. Neither of which is making me even consider giving up my WM system.

RE: confusing...
By theapparition on 5/3/2007 7:09:37 AM , Rating: 2
Completely agree.

Out of that 100million iPod's sold, very few were the 399 models. Also, many were re-purchased because the original died.

The iPhone will be a quick seller. Those who want one, will buy it the moment it comes out. Long term sales will be terrible, though. Just my prediction. Take it as you will.

RE: confusing...
By animedude on 5/3/2007 1:38:11 AM , Rating: 3
MP3 market at that time was unsaturated. The current cellphone market is saturated with competitors.

RE: confusing...
By tuteja1986 on 5/2/2007 6:16:36 PM , Rating: 1
Maybe they should have seen what happened to PS3 sales because of the high price point. They need it to around $300 to $400 to get to 8million sale mark.

RE: confusing...
By mars777 on 5/3/2007 3:35:17 AM , Rating: 2
Yes and they need it at 10$ to to to get to the 3 billion sale mark.

But they must make money and the phone costs around 250$ to produce.

Assuming 250$ of production cost and the price of 500$ - they are making 250$.
If they put it at 300$ they would make 50$.
In that case 2 million is better than 8 million :P

RE: confusing...
By skaaman on 5/3/2007 10:07:47 AM , Rating: 3
Lets not forget that ATT didn't get the exclusive on this just for the heck of it. You have to imagine Apple gets a kickback on the service plans its device generates as well.

Apple wants to be Apple
By rockyct on 5/2/2007 2:50:35 PM , Rating: 5
Apple built their image as the computer maker for non-conformists, people who didn't want a mainstream computer. I think that's exactly the path they are taking with this phone. It doesn't do anything more than a Windows mobile phone; in fact it does less. However, it does it with the Apple style and price tag. The iPod is so popular, it goes against the Apple brand, so I see this phone going back to the image they want.

Balmer is exactly correct. Microsoft would rather put software on the majority of phones sold, and Apple would rather sell 2% of the phones, but make a lot more per phone. It's the path these companies are familiar with.

RE: Apple wants to be Apple
By jmunjr on 5/2/2007 4:16:25 PM , Rating: 4
Even Apple users are conformists. They are just choosing to conform to a different group/stereotype. If they really wanted to be non-conformist they'd still be using OS2 Warp.

Heck just using Linux is non-conformist enough.

In my case I still use my EMPEG which was designed and market from 1999-2001 and it still blows the iPod away in features and functionality.. Only 4000 were made, so I'd say it is pretty non-conformist.

RE: Apple wants to be Apple
By darkpaw on 5/2/2007 5:11:22 PM , Rating: 5
Apple users aren't just conformists, they take it one step beyond conforming and are more like cultists.

Arguing about computers with an Apple fanatic is about as constructive as arguing about faith with a relegious fanatic.

RE: Apple wants to be Apple
By ira176 on 5/3/2007 1:33:58 AM , Rating: 4
My feelings exactly. I was talking to my brother-in-law's, father-in-law (does that sound right?)recently. He's literally crazy about Macs. I had to listen to a 1/2 hr lecture from him about how great OSX was, how it contained every software needed for the beginner, how all the hardware was made by apple, and how there are no viruses for Macs. I told him that I understood that Macs are great for animation and graphic design, but I play alot of games on a PC. Boy was that a mistake! He asked me why I had a PC, I told him because I like to play games. He asked me the same thing again, and I told him the same thing. He then said to me that If I really want to play games, then I should get a Mac, as they are better on a Mac, and they look better on one of the Mac cinema displays. At that point, I knew, there was no point in going round and round as there was no hope for him.

RE: Apple wants to be Apple
By Hare on 5/3/2007 2:11:26 PM , Rating: 2
Someone I know told me the same thing. Only substitute "Mac" with "nVidia card". Another friend said the same thing, only substitute "nVidia" with "Ati". Someone screamed the same thing, only substitute "Intel" with "AMD".. and the list goes on and on.

Every single brand has fanatic morons telling people how great this product "X" is. I agree, mac users are usually pretty bad but labeling all mac users is hardly needed. I know plenty of Mac users who use thinkpads etc and are happy with both.

RE: Apple wants to be Apple
By bubbacub616 on 5/3/2007 6:57:34 PM , Rating: 2
do you mean you were talking to your dad?

RE: Apple wants to be Apple
By bubbacub616 on 5/3/2007 6:58:58 PM , Rating: 1
ignore my post , i've had way too much to drink to think clearly.

RE: Apple wants to be Apple
By fic2 on 5/2/2007 6:02:35 PM , Rating: 3
Even Apple users are conformists.

I would say they are uber-conformists. I have never even heard of a customized apple product, but there is a whole market for that in the PC realm.

RE: Apple wants to be Apple
By Axbattler on 5/2/2007 10:13:13 PM , Rating: 2
What do you mean by 'customised apple product' here? If you mean pre-made customisation, at one time (not checked if it's still the case), you could get some words engraved onto your iPod if you buy straight from the Apple store. There are many online who messed about it. Not a huge deal, but I can't really expect too much customisation from just one company.

If you mean that the users uber-conformists because they never customise their toys... Well, I suspect it's because the market itself is much smaller.

But that's not to say there are no mods:

RE: Apple wants to be Apple
By Pythias on 5/3/2007 3:10:40 AM , Rating: 4
Apple built their image as the computer maker for non-conformists

Yes! Now you, too, can be different like everyone else! :P

6% ?
By Oregonian2 on 5/2/2007 2:00:51 PM , Rating: 3
If it does BETTER than the RAZR (which it would if it gets 6% with ONLY Cingular), I'll be very surprised.

It's VERY spendy and its keyboard has NO tactile feedback (essential for safe car use). And it at least looks in pictures to be a lot larger than RAZR or its smaller followons (K1 ,etc). So, reviewing: large, no tactile feedback on keyboard, single wireless vendor, and very very expensive even AFTER the vendor's discount. Hm... a world record coming?

Apple's marketting panache is really strong, but that strong (and I'm someone who has bought two 60G iPods)? I find it hard to believe.

P.S. - Yes, I know people have been "attacked" for making asumptions about the unit before having seen one. But I'm still willing to go out on a ledge saying that they keyboard doesn't have tactile feedback. The surface may only look flat as an optical illusion, but I'm willing to risk that it really is flat and even.

RE: 6% ?
By BMFPitt on 5/2/2007 2:59:14 PM , Rating: 2
If the iPhone was $99 after contract, then maybe they could sell 8 million. The truth is that most people will choose a free phone over a non-free phone no matter what, and sales figures show that.

Personally I wouldn't trade my phone for it if it was free, as the exterior screen wouldn't last a month with me.

RE: 6% ?
By defter on 5/2/2007 3:18:34 PM , Rating: 1
To clarify some things, in 2006:
- over 1 Billion mobile phones were shipped
- over 70 Million smartphones were shipped

For example, selling 8 million units annually means less than 1% of the marketshare.

RE: 6% ?
By Oregonian2 on 5/2/2007 6:52:00 PM , Rating: 2
Markitecture says that 6% of 77% (4.6%) of people who are responsible for their cell phones will be buying an Apple Cell phone within the next year. So for a billion sold, that'd be sales of 46 million according to Markitecture (who is the direct topic here). But, IMO it's not the world-market where their percentages apply although I think it may be for the rest of the numbers spoken.

Percentage would have to be only U.S. Domestic sales unless Cingular (now AT&T) operates internationally (like folk such as Orange do).

I don't think a billion (U.S. definition) is possible in the U.S. anyway, that'd be several cell phones per man, woman, and child.

I wonder if we're not seeing crossed numbers, meaning phones like Motorola's RAZR may have had a 6% world-wide marketshare, it had been revolutionary for all I read (wife just got a KRZR). But the iPhone could not reach that number this year even if every new Cingular customer opted for it (which would never happen, not even close). Cingular is only one section of one market. One couldn't even unlock it and use it on Verizon if one wanted to (not GSM).

So Markitecture has to be talking U.S. numbers only, and even then MAY be talking Cingular numbers only (and even then I think overly optimistic when the money has to hit the road and be paid out).

RE: 6% ?
By retrospooty on 5/2/2007 7:37:08 PM , Rating: 2
"- over 70 Million smartphones were shipped For example, selling 8 million units annually means less than 1% of the marketshare."

On what planet is 8 million less than 1% of 70 million? Its 11% and 11% or 8 milllion iphones is NOT going to happen. Mybe the next iteration of it will, when it supports Sprint, Verizon and 3g on all platforms, AND significantly drops teh price.

RE: 6% ?
By fil6786 on 5/2/2007 7:48:56 PM , Rating: 2
I think he was comparing to the $1 Billion phones.

RE: 6% ?
By fil6786 on 5/2/2007 7:49:45 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry. One billion phones. Can't get money out of my head

RE: 6% ?
By retrospooty on 5/2/2007 11:11:06 PM , Rating: 2
$1 billion dollar phone is the iphone 2 or 3 ;)

RE: 6% ?
By kelmon on 5/3/2007 10:06:41 AM , Rating: 2
its keyboard has NO tactile feedback (essential for safe car use)

Is it me or is anyone else alarmed by this statement? What the heck are you doing attempting to operate a phone whilst driving a car? If you need to use your phone by your hand then do the public a favour and pull over.

From my perspective the loss of a "real" keyboard is no loss at all - I've just gained a lot more screen space and that's more important.

RE: 6% ?
By Oregonian2 on 5/3/2007 1:35:59 PM , Rating: 2
First of all speaking pragmatically, from my observation it's likely that HUGE numbers of people talk from their car while moving. I see it going on every day. So something that helps/harms the "real world" is a consideration.

Speaking more personally, I call my wife while I'm driving home from work. Phone is connected as a speakerphone so takes no hand usage except for when calling and hanging up. Neither takes "looking". With buttons one can feel, I can call without having to move my eyes away from the road. I can feel where the buttons are and push down the button that calls my wife (or one of the others, knowing which is programmed to call where). Purely by feel (tactile feedback). That few seconds of push is all it takes and I'm speakerphoning from that point on, the same as talking to a passenger in the car. That's why an iPhone would be likely be dangerous to use (and I was beneficially assuming it can do "speakerphone" without having to look at it and pick that mode in a menu). People DO call while driving a car, so doing it safely is a good thing even if others would prefer one to drive with no phone and no passengers to verbally distract them (although doing so does bad things to the atmosphere and eliminates use of express lanes on some highways).

Apples and Oranges
By Misty Dingos on 5/2/2007 2:59:26 PM , Rating: 2
This is the classic apples and orange comparison. A software guy wants his software on anything that will run it and rightly bases his success on that. Then there is this hardware guy and he wants a significant market share, enough to make a significant profit on, and measures his success on that. If Apple’s iPhone hits 4% or 6% market share the hardware guys are going to drink a whole lot of champagne.

Having said that, I am certain that I will not be buying one of these first generation overpriced toys from Apple. I will wait and see if they can get the market share they are looking for and then wait for them to make a smaller version of the iPhone. I really think that it is too big. But then again I wouldn’t buy a Crackberry for the same reason.

I want a small cell phone that has a battery life measured in weeks not days or hours. I want something that can pull the weakest most pathetic signal out of the ether and sound crystal clear. It does not have to have a camera, MP3 player, calendar function, GPS, access to email, the internet, or text messaging or play crappy ported video games. I know I must be a dinosaur because cell phones are increasingly become the nexus device. A mythical device that does everything that you could ever possible want out of a hand held electronic device.

RE: Apples and Oranges
By BMFPitt on 5/2/2007 3:34:36 PM , Rating: 2
All cell phones are required by federal law to have GPS, you just want one that doesn't offer to let you make good use of it for some absurd fee per month. Are you OK with it having a contact list? Seems that if you want to throw out every feature - useful or not - from cell phones, you could just use a piece of paper to keep all your numbers on.

I rely on my calendar to use as a mid-day alarm clock. I find text messaging to be a very useful tool for certain situations - and much better than playing phone tag with voicemail. I'd much prefer to not have a camera on my phone, but don't mind the MP3 player - though I'd never use it while not plugged into a power source. Having internet access on the go has proven invaluable to me a few times.

RE: Apples and Oranges
By Munkles on 5/2/2007 5:04:34 PM , Rating: 2
Its funny, but I didnt get that impression at all from his post! I just got the idea that this gent wants a phone to be what its intended for, and the logical extensions.

So, yeah I bet he does want a contact list, I bit he even would want e-mail and txt services. Hell, Id even wager he would like to have an outlook based calendar system in it too. What he DOESNT want are things which will drag down the battery life, or make him pay extra.

I too would prefer less "toys" and better reception, and better battery life.

RE: Apples and Oranges
By BMFPitt on 5/2/2007 11:44:09 PM , Rating: 2
So you think he was using reverse psychology when he specifically said he didn't want everything you just listed - other than the contact list which was my bit?

RE: Apples and Oranges
By mcnabney on 5/3/2007 10:51:39 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, no, all cell phones are NOT required by law to have GPS. All providers had to implement a system for locating and providing coordinates of phones making emergency calls. That could be done either by adding equipment to all cell towers to perform triangulation to locate a signal or by putting GPS equipment in every handset that turns on automatically when making 911 calls. The company I work for, Verizon Wireless, chose the GPS route years ago because they anticipated selling services like Navigator. Not all wireless providers chose to add the GPS expense to every handset.

RE: Apples and Oranges
By Oregonian2 on 5/2/2007 7:04:58 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe Apple could get the price down if they left out the phone-call part. That's only about 10% of the functions anyway but probably takes a lot out of the battery with all that RF stuff. That way they could improve those crummy games into something good!

Yes, I miss our old classic Motorola StarTACs (despite being made more than ten years ago would still be considered small nowadays). Only made phone calls though (and were $1K). :-) Still have them in a box somewhere. :-)

RE: Apples and Oranges
By jconan on 5/3/2007 3:27:50 AM , Rating: 2
Well the updated Startac III MS900 is out but available only in Korea! CDMA???

RE: Apples and Oranges
By Dactyl on 5/3/2007 12:56:52 AM , Rating: 1
I want a small cell phone that has a battery life measured in weeks not days or hours.

The iPhone's battery life is measured in minutes. It doesn't even last a full hour of actual use (as opposed to an hour of keeping it in your pocket or showing it off to friends without actually making a call or watching a video).

It's a useless status symbol. It's true that Macs and iPods put a priority on design and good looks, but they are also useful. The iPhone is not useful.

RE: Apples and Oranges
By Misty Dingos on 5/3/2007 7:42:01 AM , Rating: 3
Oh you have got to be kidding me?! Minutes? Please tell me you can prove that.

So what?
By AlabamaMan on 5/2/2007 3:28:16 PM , Rating: 2
Macs also have no chance of "getting significant (PC) marketshare", and yet Apple's computer division seems to be doing pretty damn good.

RE: So what?
By Master Kenobi on 5/2/2007 4:23:45 PM , Rating: 3
They are staying afloat but there hasn't been much in the way of gains there. They are citing strong purchasing of Intel based mac's but the marketshare of Mac's remains largely unchanged. It looks as if few people are switching from PC's to Mac's, mostly old PowerPC users switching to Intel.

Apple will never gain mainstream adoptance without better software support and enterprise integration. I'm sure most people here are not aware but while a Mac might be seen as "superior" to a desktop pc, Mac servers and network storage is god awful. We keep a dozen brand new Mac's here for the graphic artists to use (They refuse to use windows) so we keep them on an isolated network completely disconnected from the regular corporate network.

We plan to switch them over to PC's in the next year or two. Weak management last time gave in to demand and bought them new Apple's, this time we are dead set on getting rid of them. There is just no way to police those machines in an enterprise environment.

RE: So what?
By fic2 on 5/2/2007 6:10:31 PM , Rating: 2
Funny enough Apple's best selling point recently seems to be Vista. I know quite a few people that are now looking at a Mac as their next computer purchase and mostly because of Vista.

Also the other day Mark Haines, one of the morning hosts on CNBC, said that he was getting a Mac instead of a PC when they were talking about Vista.

RE: So what?
By stromgald on 5/2/2007 8:06:41 PM , Rating: 2
The funny thing is that most people don't know why they avoid Vista other than they've been told that Macs are better . . and they're told that by Apple's advertising. Most of the complaints against Vista are either compatibility (legitimate excuse, but getting better each day) or bloat/higher sys. req./viruses/etc. (which Macs also suffer from).

Hmm, now that I think about it, Macs don't suffer from higher sys. requirements because they don't let you upgrade your OS. If you want the new OS, you generally need a whole new computer.

RE: So what?
By hiscross on 5/3/2007 8:24:56 AM , Rating: 1
You seem to windows admin, with little or no UNIX or Mainframe experience. To say Mac servers and storage is not good only confirms you lack serious technical knowledge and skills. Mayhe the graphics people will quite once they are force to suffer like the rest of of your company employees. Further, Apple is no longer a computer company (Apple, Inc) and has desire to get caught up in the enterprize thing (bad software and terrible support by windows admins). Apple will be around longer than you will ever understand why.

RE: So what?
By radams on 5/3/2007 1:13:25 PM , Rating: 1
Mac Servers aren't good. Seriously. Their implementation of Open Directory is subpar, their documentation is non-existent, management is poorly thought out, support is a nightmare, I could go on. OS X Server is acceptable on a homogeneous mac network, but when you have to integrate it with Windows and Linux Workstations, it's a royal pain. The only thing he's wrong about is the impossibility to police Macs on a heterogeneous network. It's actually not that hard. As a workstation, a OS X is perfectly acceptable, as an enterprise level server, it's anything but.

Actual iPhone Market
By mbarry1961 on 5/2/2007 5:28:49 PM , Rating: 1
Enough with the whining about the $500 price tag for the iPhone already. There are legions of mid and executive management prospects for this device from companies all over the world where the purchase price is a tax write off. The cost is of no importance and, if the device is able to make their staff’s lives even one iota easier, they will have it in a heartbeat. It should be obvious that the initial target market segment for the iPhone isn’t going to care about watching Pirates of the Caribbean. They want the business functions to work and work without peer…forget the fluff.

The question remains whether Apple can capture enough of this potential initial market to afford to create a down-market offering later on but it shouldn’t shock anyone that this is a market strategy from this company.

RE: Actual iPhone Market
By darkpaw on 5/2/2007 5:32:03 PM , Rating: 5
As mentioned earlier, without integration into common business applications this will not be purchased by any mid and executive management. No exchange or lotus integration? No sale.

RE: Actual iPhone Market
By mbarry1961 on 5/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: Actual iPhone Market
By namechamps on 5/2/2007 8:03:28 PM , Rating: 2
So instead of a native app he can try an run a web based version over EDGE on an iphone. Then when someone emails him an excel document he does what? While pocket excel isn't very useful for data entry it is good for grabbing the file taking a look and sending sending back an email, IM, or phonecall reply.
No integration into corporate networks equals a 0% chance of it being picked up by large corps. Just like on the desktop side. Apple's market share of the business computer market is what a fraction of 1%. Wonder why? It's not just the OS, it's email (exchange server), network logins, radius integration, etc.

This will appeal to the I have to much money and am too cool for a windows phone group but will do nothing in the corp world.

RE: Actual iPhone Market
By KentState on 5/3/2007 9:57:46 AM , Rating: 2
You do realize there is a huge difference between browsing email messages on the web and the intergration that a Blackberry has with Exchange? How are you suppose to have an updated calendar that notifies you when an appointment is about to begin?

RE: Actual iPhone Market
By Oregonian2 on 5/2/2007 7:17:12 PM , Rating: 2
Being tax deductible does not make things free, it just gives a discount about that of the net corporate tax rate minus accounting costs to handle the deduction or worse if it has to be depreciated over time (is $500 over the limit?).

All I need in a phone....
By Vanilla Thunder on 5/2/2007 3:49:16 PM , Rating: 2
Is provided by my Sony Ericsson W810i. There is nothing I would need to do with my phone that this handset isn't stellar at. I highly recommend it for anyone looking for a multi function phone without jumping into a full on smart phone.


RE: All I need in a phone....
By AlexWade on 5/2/2007 4:47:59 PM , Rating: 2
I just got a new W810i. And it is awesome, despite Ericsson getting support from Sony now. Anyway, I bought an overpriced 4GB Memory Stick (because this is a Sony product, and thus they can't use cheaper common standards) and loaded a ton of songs onto it. Now I have all the music I'll ever need for a lot less and lot smaller.

Ericsson still makes the best phones. Too few people know about them because they are GSM only, and America isn't (but should be).

RE: All I need in a phone....
By Oregonian2 on 5/2/2007 7:12:22 PM , Rating: 2
Well, both Cingular and T-mobile are GSM in the US. But in any case I understand that CDMA that Verizon uses is superior technically in terms of not dropping calls (Can you hear me now...). But whatever.... :-)

RE: All I need in a phone....
By AlexWade on 5/2/2007 10:00:36 PM , Rating: 2
No network is perfect everywhere, period. Where I live, Cingular has been perfect. Customer service, on the other hand, sucks. But, I can live with them. Where I live, call quality on Cingular is second to no one.

Unfortunately, because the US isn't all GSM, we have discussions like this. Whereas Europe, which is all GSM, laughs at our sorry networks. The root of the problem is CDMA, which means less rural coverage because we have to have more towers. Competition in standards is very bad.

RE: All I need in a phone....
By Oregonian2 on 5/4/2007 9:28:32 PM , Rating: 1
I'm not sure what you mean. All of the US is GSM with two independent physical networks (Cingular and T-Mobile). My wife will be visiting Europe next week and where she's going has two major cell phone companies. Yes both are GSM, but that's the same number of major GSM networks that are here (already mentioned above). Just that we've more competition with (much) more than just two choices.

By kevgav on 5/2/2007 3:03:21 PM , Rating: 3
What is Windows Mobile's share of the Smart Phone OS Market?

According to this:

Symbian smartphone OS share for 2006 is 72.5%. Then there is Linux and Palm and how much is Windows Mobile left with? I have read 5.6 up to 16.9. So Where does Balmer get his 40%-80% numbers from?

By mcnabney on 5/3/2007 10:54:37 PM , Rating: 2
I don't think they are counting anything from RIM as a smartphone. For business use nothing compares to the speed and simplicity of a Blackberry. Also, Symbian is huge in Europe. Not so much in the US where Palm is busy losing their business to Microsoft.

Balmer's probably right
By Hoser McMoose on 5/2/2007 2:45:17 PM , Rating: 2
Honestly at $500 with a 2 year contract, the guy probably has a point. And I don't expect the price to drop by nearly as much in the next couple years as some other phones (eg the Razr). The hardware used in the phone is much more expensive than what is used in other phones.

$500 is a LOT of money for a mobile phone. I picked up my phone for under $200 with no contract, about $250 with all the accessories. It's got a 2MP camera, built-in MP3 player, video record and playback, 2GB of memory and <gasp> it can even make phone calls. This phone (a Nokia 6275) that would cost about $50 with a 2-year contract is getting pretty darn close to what Apple is offering on their $500 phone. I'm not sure Apple has enough extra features on their phone to convince people that the extra $450 is worth spending.

Also I think the touch-screen, while it may look snazy on store shelves, is going to prove VERY unpopular when people actually try to use it.

RE: Balmer's probably right
By corduroygt on 5/2/2007 5:14:10 PM , Rating: 2
I totally agree with your points, especially with the touchscreen. I would say the iphone has a chance if it did not have a touchscreen. It will sell many, then people will realize how clumsy it is to use the touchscreen.
I personally am looking to buy a nokia e65, small, light and can do everything...

No chance?
By JAB on 5/2/2007 2:51:15 PM , Rating: 2
Ballmer should become a comedian that way it wont seem like he is the joke. Wishing apple away wont do any good. MS needs to get back to basics and figure out what they can delver what people want not just what they need. Make something people get excited about don't just attack Apple or whoever is doing well.

By paydirt on 5/2/2007 3:39:49 PM , Rating: 2
Agreed. Ballmer. Keep your trap shut!

and I wonder why ?
By uberfu on 5/2/2007 3:44:21 PM , Rating: 2
Balmer isn't next in line after Billy steps down_

Now there's a paradox for ya_

He's kinda like the idiot side-kick that's been around you forever - so you don;t get rid of him 'cause yore used to him by now - but he's always got ya wondering why the hell you do keep 'em around - you know_

SONY Award
By lemonadesoda on 5/2/2007 5:12:25 PM , Rating: 2
I think Balmer is shooting for the SONY award for P.R. own-goals and foot-in-mouth.

Either that or he is hoping he'll get headhunted by SONY marketing to help them create their new P.R. image with his trite nonsense.


What about features?
By TimberJon on 5/2/2007 5:18:16 PM , Rating: 2
Whoohoooo touch screen everything! awesome!!

But does it view CAD? Word? Excel? PowerPoint? Does it hook up to Exchange? does it support Remote wipe? Does it support bluetooth or GPS? Does it support gmaps mobile?

It plays music. yay. It tries to view web pages at a better resolution than other PPCs and smartphones and what the hell is wrong with a stylus?

Doesnt support dual batteries, like they proposed years ago. I like my 8525 brick better. Besides, 3rd party coders will be trying to create slider-interface installers for WM6, built upon CF 5.0, and will also be trying to generate along CF 6.0 that was just released in tandem with WM7 currently under way.

You could get that touch screen look on other phones, once the craze was over, other manufacturers im SURE had a little meeting about how they could try the same thing for their customers.

It's not a smartphone.
By Ominor on 5/4/2007 11:05:39 AM , Rating: 2
The iPhone may have many features that are usualy only found in smartphones and the people who usualy buy smarthones are companies and they aren't the target Apple has in it sights.
What Apple is aiming for are the early adopters and, much more importantly, the fashion crowd. The people who want the coolest phone around. THAT is where Apple is going to find the most of it's customers.

This man is complaining?
By vze4z7nx on 5/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: This man is complaining?
By BMFPitt on 5/2/2007 4:31:45 PM , Rating: 2
I know at least 30 people using legal copies of Vista and nobody spent more than $200 on theirs. In any case, there is no real competition for Vista in its market. The iPhone is trying to gain a foothold in a hyper competitive market, so its price tag will hurt it much more.

RE: This man is complaining?
By vze4z7nx on 5/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: This man is complaining?
By Nekrik on 5/2/2007 5:02:23 PM , Rating: 4
"But, why is Ballmer commenting on it?"

It was a question presented to him in an interview. Why are you commenting when you didn't even bother to read the article.

RE: This man is complaining?
By vze4z7nx on 5/2/07, Rating: 0
RE: This man is complaining?
By BMFPitt on 5/2/2007 5:04:25 PM , Rating: 2
Then I'll be glad that your uneducated purchasing decision is subsidizing my relatively cheap OEM version. Have fun installing it on your $299 eMachine. Besides, $400 is less than you'll spend having some barely computer literate Geek Squad member run SpyBot for you every couple of months, anyway.

And Vista will sell very well over the next few years until it replaced by its successor - which will be another Microsoft product. Sounds like success to me.

RE: This man is complaining?
By vze4z7nx on 5/2/2007 7:05:12 PM , Rating: 1
Well, just so you know, I am do not own an eMachines computer, nor any of those already built pieces of junk. I build my own rigs.

I'm just trying to make a point that the value of some of Microsoft's products are worse than some of Apple's products. I gave you an example of what I mean so that I can back up my claim.

And yes, its better to spend that $400 on Vista Ultimate than on Geek Squad, but we are not talking about Geek Squad here. We are talking about Apple...

RE: This man is complaining?
By BMFPitt on 5/2/2007 11:54:06 PM , Rating: 2
In response to:

But let's say that I'm a noob and I go to the local Bestbuy or CircuitCity and get myself Windows Vista Ultimate, which is or is close to $400. Maybe you have smarter friends, but think about all of the noobs out there.

RE: This man is complaining?
By Munkles on 5/2/2007 7:21:29 PM , Rating: 1

Please don't reference myself or my company in that light. I am a Geek Squad agent, and have been so for almost two years. I am quite intelligent and very computer literate. Furthermore "Spybot: Search and Destroy" is on a very long DO NOT USE list that we must strictly adhere to. We have our own fully licensed software which we eradicate viral infections, and Spyware infestations. I do terribly regret that you may have had a poor experience with an agent in your past, but please know like every GOOD company we are working hard and very diligently to improve ourselves in every way. I cannot divulge any of the "top secret" things we have developed or are in the process of rolling out but rest assured their are concepts and practices that none of our contemporaries are even dreaming of.

If theres something I can do to help mend your experience with the Geek Squad please just let me know. I maybe a low man on the totem pole but I will listen and share your concerns with the appropriate management.

You can reach me @

RE: This man is complaining?
By BMFPitt on 5/2/2007 11:57:41 PM , Rating: 2
Your reading comprehension skills shown in your 5/2/2007 5:04:34 PM post above does not instill confidence.

But thanks for the laugh on your "top secret" line.

RE: This man is complaining?
By vze4z7nx on 5/3/2007 3:53:46 PM , Rating: 2

Face it, we all know GeekSquad needs a lot more improvement. BMF was not criticizing you, he was criticizing GeekSquad as a whole. Most people here understand that you're just an "agent" and that you are doing what you are supposed to do.

If you are going to defend a company that steals peoples' money and does things that any computer literate person could do, then go ahead. Just remember, this is not going to benefit you in any way... it will just benefit the guy that owns GeekSquad.

RE: This man is complaining?
By theapparition on 5/3/2007 7:45:17 AM , Rating: 2
Uneducated noob's (as you say) don't purchase Ultimate. They will purchase home or home premium.

Why is it when everyone compares things, they use the highest price for the thing they don't like, vs lowest price for the things they do? Get unbiased and make informed comments, otherwise, you'll just be taken as a fool.

RE: This man is complaining?
By vze4z7nx on 5/3/2007 3:48:14 PM , Rating: 2
What if I want "everything", as Microsoft calls it? If there was no need for Ultimate, or if there is little or no difference between Ultimate and Home Premium, then why would Microsoft release such a version?

I never said I don't like Vista Ultimate. I was just saying that $500 for a piece of well built hardware is better than $400 for an OS, also known as a disc with software on it.

Okay, fine lets compare the most expensive iPhone which is the $600 one, to the most expensive version of Windows Vista. I still think it is better to spend $600 on the iPhone than on the $400 Vista Ultimate. But hey, that's only my opinion...

RE: This man is complaining?
By BMFPitt on 5/3/2007 6:09:49 PM , Rating: 2
If by "you" you are still speaking in an uneducated user sense, then you are only paying for the idea that you will get "everything." Nobody who fits this category will make use of the features that are present in Ultimate but not Home Premium (how many grandmothers do you know that use remote desktop, or need full-disk drive encryption?)

I still spent $191 including shipping on Vista, whereas I wouldn't take an iPhone for free after contract, but that's just my opinion.

Balmer out of touch
By Scorpion on 5/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: Balmer out of touch
By Homerboy on 5/2/2007 2:01:00 PM , Rating: 3
actually there are several phones very much like it

RE: Balmer out of touch
By Flunk on 5/2/2007 2:25:38 PM , Rating: 1
And most of them run Windows Mobile.

RE: Balmer out of touch
By johnadams on 5/2/2007 2:27:26 PM , Rating: 3
I know people in Malaysia who are dying to get their hands on one - even with the 500 US dollar price tag, which converts into almost 2000 Malaysian Ringgit . Now these guys aren't loaded or anything (they earn about 2.5K per month), but they do have a portfolio of credit cards.

Apple built a strong brand and they can afford to charge extra for it. Many people would buy it as a status symbol. Surprisingly most that buy it for that reason are the everyday wage-earners. imho.

RE: Balmer out of touch
By defter on 5/2/2007 3:04:09 PM , Rating: 2
Isn't the part of problem that the Iphone will be initially available for a very small market, and will come much later for example to Malaysia or rest of the Asia. Thus I cannot see how Iphone can achieve significant (>5%) marketshare.

RE: Balmer out of touch
By Saist on 5/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: Balmer out of touch
By creathir on 5/2/2007 2:53:19 PM , Rating: 1
Did you pull your stats out of your rear?

3% market share on smart phone devices?!?

Are you insane?!

I suppose with Blackberries running around, they consitute a large portion, but this business of Windows at only 3% is assinine.

- Creathir

RE: Balmer out of touch
By defter on 5/2/2007 3:14:28 PM , Rating: 4
Why are you attacking previous poster without doing any kind of research yourself? His numbers are roughly correct.

"The market share for smartphones is commonly reported by the OS running the phone. In September 2006, Todd Kort, a principal research analyst for Gartner, Inc., reported market share for smartphone mobiles in Q2 2006:

"Symbian accounted for about 71 percent of worldwide smartphone shipments in the second quarter of 2006 and serves the consumer market well. Microsoft, Palm, and [Blackberry maker] RIM each accounted for only about 3 percent of smartphone shipments in the second quarter, with Linux accounting for the remaining 19 percent."

Depending on who’s counting and when, the numbers fluctuate, but not by much. Canalys, reporting on Q3 2006, similarly gave Symbian 72.8%, Linux 16.7%, Microsoft 5.6% , RIM 2.8%, and Palm 1.8%."

RE: Balmer out of touch
By cocoman on 5/3/2007 8:59:17 AM , Rating: 2
Are pocket PCs included in the stats????
I have never seen Pocket PCs included in the smartphone category, so. Yes it would make sense only about 3% share. Now add pocket PCs and you have a totally different number, I am pretty sure. Sorry for not researching, don´t have time...

RE: Balmer out of touch
By darkpaw on 5/2/2007 2:38:53 PM , Rating: 1
Whats the be jealous about? They'll probably sell 10,000 windows based phones for every one of these that sell.

Regardless if you like them or hate them, Apple = overpriced.

RE: Balmer out of touch
By Scorpion on 5/2/2007 3:08:29 PM , Rating: 1
Sure, and that's why the iPod has done so well and continues to do so well, because it's overpriced. The Zune hasn't made much of a significant impact from what I can tell. While I may agree with you that Apple is overpriced a lot of times, you can't deny that they sell their products.

And you really think that with an Apple iPhone on the market that the current Windows phone platform will continue to do so well? I expect it to get a Vista-like overhaul, or something more similar to the look of the iPhone. I have no doubt in my mind that Microsoft is going to be watching the iPhone very closely in fear of what it could do.

RE: Balmer out of touch
By darkpaw on 5/2/2007 4:47:16 PM , Rating: 2
The Zune has too many DRM issues and MS hurt themselves with that one by not even supporting their own previous standard. Its really no wonder the Zune is a failure.

I'm still quite happy with my old Zen personally.

I think MS already has a Vista clone version of Windows Mobile (6?), but it really wasn't much of an upgrade over 5.

RE: Balmer out of touch
By AlexWade on 5/2/2007 4:53:40 PM , Rating: 2
Another problem of the Zune was the color. Everywhere I saw a Zune featured, it was the brown color one. You know, the one that looks like poo, to put it politely. And, to top it off, song sharing was called "squirting". Squirting with your brown Zune. The whole Zune thing felt like XMen 3: some corporate guy who commutes to work in helicopter trying to decide was cool and didn't leave well enough alone.

RE: Balmer out of touch
By kevgav on 5/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: Balmer out of touch
By dosun on 5/2/2007 4:25:31 PM , Rating: 2
The comparison is skewed. The Dell is a 17" vs the 15" MacBook. Also those prices are from last year. Granted the Apple notebooks are probably better built than Dell's.

RE: Balmer out of touch
By darkpaw on 5/2/2007 4:48:56 PM , Rating: 2
Those two expensive phones your quoted are also targeted at businesses or professionals which can afford the expense. The iphone is not a business class phone.

Quoting year old prices on PC hardware is just funny. I bet those macs still cost near the same exact price and the PCs are now half that.

RE: Balmer out of touch
By fic2 on 5/2/2007 5:56:10 PM , Rating: 2
Hmmm, I bought a Dell Inspirion E1505 April '06. Mine has a CoreDuo 1.6, 17" BrightView screen, 1.5G ram, 80G 7200rpm HD and I only paid about $800 for it. So a larger screen, little bit slower processor, smaller, but faster HD and more memory I paid about $1200 less.

Configuring a 15.4" Dell 6400 to the specs as the MacBook cost $1107. MacBook is still $2000 (from Apple's website).

Oh, and Balmer is dillusional.

"If they're going to pirate somebody, we want it to be us rather than somebody else." -- Microsoft Business Group President Jeff Raikes

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki