43 ms·

Completely disagree about needing devices. Apple only makes one [phone] device per year, but Apple is losing market share to Android every month. Having a singl

by ansy 15y ago

Completely disagree about needing devices. Apple only makes one [phone] device per year, but Apple is losing market share to Android every month. Having a single device might be a good formula for profitability or user experience, but it's not the road to an empire. Compare to Android. It's not just about form factors. It's about hardware freshness. Android has had dual core, LTE, and double the ram for months. There are Android phones with 3D screens and 3D cameras. The iPhone 4 is looking long in the tooth. And the iPhone 4S will just be catching up to the Galaxy S 2. If I had to point to one reason why Apple is trading at such a low multiple it's because Apple is making too few devices to maintain leadership. Apple's market share has peaked unless it starts acting very un-Apple.

bpeebles 15y ago
I mean, it's not that Nokia was only going to be releasing three devices before 2014, it was three MeeGo devices. I guess you could argue one/year is too slow to keep up, but they were going to continue to release Symbian phones. And I'm not sure if much of that "hardware freshness" is really what's getting Android market share. Are there (sizable numbers of) people buying a phone because it has a 3D camera? It may have made sense for Nokia to ditch MeeGo, but I think I was actually intending to mostly complain about how they got themselves into the corner.
- ansy 15y ago
  Are people buying Android over iPhone because of a 3D camera? Probably not. Because Android is the only way to get LTE? Definitely, this is a big one. Because Android is the only way to get a dual core CPU? Definitely. Not to mention the form factors which are also pretty important. Some people demand a keyboard. Other people want a huge screen. That's just not an option with iOS. There's also brand momentum. Everyone that isn't Apple has loaned Google its brand by putting Android inside. As for MeeGo's viability I think it's a moot point. Even if MeeGo was perfect Nokia would be in an uphill battle. Look at webOS, critically regarded as the best competitor to iOS. HP has a near zero market share. You either need to be the very best by far, i.e. Apple, or you need to have the rest of the industry behind you, i.e. Android. The fact Nokia looked at Windows Phone 7 and Android considered them equals makes me question Elop's decision making. The article also has a telling quote when Elop says he couldn't reach someone because the other guy was "probably testing an Android device that day." Elop might as well have decided to build personal computers with OS/2 Warp in the 1990's because IBM gave him a big check and Windows is humorously unreliable. I'm sure that would have been a great business decision.

by ansy 15y ago

bpeebles 15y ago

I mean, it's not that Nokia was only going to be releasing three devices before 2014, it was three MeeGo devices. I guess you could argue one/year is too slow to keep up, but they were going to continue to release Symbian phones. And I'm not sure if much of that "hardware freshness" is really what's getting Android market share. Are there (sizable numbers of) people buying a phone because it has a 3D camera? It may have made sense for Nokia to ditch MeeGo, but I think I was actually intending to mostly complain about how they got themselves into the corner.

ansy 15y ago
Are people buying Android over iPhone because of a 3D camera? Probably not. Because Android is the only way to get LTE? Definitely, this is a big one. Because Android is the only way to get a dual core CPU? Definitely. Not to mention the form factors which are also pretty important. Some people demand a keyboard. Other people want a huge screen. That's just not an option with iOS. There's also brand momentum. Everyone that isn't Apple has loaned Google its brand by putting Android inside. As for MeeGo's viability I think it's a moot point. Even if MeeGo was perfect Nokia would be in an uphill battle. Look at webOS, critically regarded as the best competitor to iOS. HP has a near zero market share. You either need to be the very best by far, i.e. Apple, or you need to have the rest of the industry behind you, i.e. Android. The fact Nokia looked at Windows Phone 7 and Android considered them equals makes me question Elop's decision making. The article also has a telling quote when Elop says he couldn't reach someone because the other guy was "probably testing an Android device that day." Elop might as well have decided to build personal computers with OS/2 Warp in the 1990's because IBM gave him a big check and Windows is humorously unreliable. I'm sure that would have been a great business decision.