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

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.

“Then they pop up and say ‘Hello, surprise! Give us your money or we will shut you down!' Screw them. Seriously, screw them. You can quote me on that.” -- Newegg Chief Legal Officer Lee Cheng referencing patent trolls

Most Popular ArticlesFree Windows 10 offer ends July 29th, 2016: 10 Reasons to Upgrade Immediately
July 22, 2016, 9:19 PM
Top 5 Smart Watches
July 21, 2016, 11:48 PM

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