Apple's (Doomed) Tablet - Old man yells at icloud
- Thread starter jonKranked
- Start date
Apple realized that 20 years ago, it just seems most of the public are just now catching on.
I think that article ignores a big part of the market. Its not just hipsters who buys these things and add it to a pile of gadgets funded through obscure Kickstarter projects but again its an article in Wired. My children love the Ipad and use it all the time it is espcially brilliant for the car and traveling and the same with my dad its great for old people who never really got used to the PC.
^ to sum it up: toys.
I must say, we do use them at work a lot. They are great for making up drawings and working with PDF's. Easy for singing documents and sending out as well. I do however use it significantly less than my iphone. I could survive without it because it hasn't "replaced" anything.
it's not all bad news for Apple tho: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jan/28/apple-financial-results-watch-iphone-china?CMP=EMCNEWEML6619I2
A little more about what Apple is really trying to do ie becoming a luxury brand
Especially the last couple of minutes.
Especially the last couple of minutes.
so they sold 5x the amount of phones with hundreds of different phones using the OS. meh
hmm,i guess "ignore" isnt the same as block... you can post any video you want but it still wont change the fact that the majority of smartphones are running Android and only two (new models) are running IOS.. so hearing that over 1bil android phones were sold compared to apple's 192mil isnt that surprising and/or impressive.
If you agree with the what Scott talks about in the presentation I posted above the current Apple is a totally different company playing a totally different game ie a luxury goods manufacturer vs computer manufacturer. Thus what happened in 1997 is pretty irrelevant.
So hearing that Apple's integrated product strategy on desktops bankrupted the company and required a bailout from MS proves it is impressive. Apple's marketshare on phones is also approx. 15% right now.
In Apple's desktop heyday their marketshare was 15% in 1992. Five year later, by the end of 1997 (the year they were bailed out), it was 3.3%. Worked out awesome then I see.
Given Tim's record and their failure to commercialize any new must-have technology in recent years, "me too" on mobile devices is going to be just as successful as it was on desktops regardless of what demographic they're targeting.
http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2013-12-09/worst-deal-ever-microsofts-apple-investment
What point are you trying to make? Besides the name the current Apple does not have much in common with the Apple that Microsoft bailed out. A random coincidence of 15% OS market is really nothing else but random.
Also take a look at the competition if Apple is doing so bad as you claim they are then who is doing really good who is that is winning in your mind? I remember you used to love Blackberry but it can't be them you are thinking about. Their two CEO strategy and no touch screen strategy didn't work out that well.
Also take a look at the competition if Apple is doing so bad as you claim they are then who is doing really good who is that is winning in your mind? I remember you used to love Blackberry but it can't be them you are thinking about. Their two CEO strategy and no touch screen strategy didn't work out that well.
Thanks for bring it up, proves what can happen in similar time frame from lack of innovation. Seven years ago (you know, when FIRST iphone was released, had no app store, no third party apps, no remote administration, etc, etc). I was a BES admin at the time so work paid for them and at the same time many on the Apple board of directors used them (and even the technical co-founder of Apple - Woz).
http://www.forbes.com/sites/adamthierer/2012/04/01/bye-bye-blackberry-how-long-will-apple-last/
http://www.forbes.com/sites/adamthierer/2012/04/01/bye-bye-blackberry-how-long-will-apple-last/
Agree Apple can lose itself again all companies can very few companies has survived over time but it does not prove anything about what current Apple is actually able to achieve. Interestingly enough the luxury segment has a lot of staying power over time and I think this is one of the very smart thing Apple is doing moving away from being a computer manufacturer to being a producer of luxury goods. Building a luxury brand is not easy. Hell they could even drop their OS if it is necessary to survive and time changes. This is again where I think you analysis of Apple always go wrong too focused on the OS or their ability to narrowly innovate from a technology point of view.
Will they the succeed with the luxury I have no idea but I think it will be very interesting to see how they will do with the watch talk about attacking a luxury industry head on. Success will really be more about luxury that technology.
Will they the succeed with the luxury I have no idea but I think it will be very interesting to see how they will do with the watch talk about attacking a luxury industry head on. Success will really be more about luxury that technology.
Luxury goods, by definition, are not mass market. Marketing can't change that no matter what the brand. Apple has always been a niche high-end mass market product but never luxury and there's little reason that will change.
Also the growing masses in China, India, and the developing world are the prize to be eyeing not saturated and mature items like tablets and smartphones in the US and Europe. Some companies seem to be taking notice:
http://www.wired.com/2015/01/facebook-lite/
Also the growing masses in China, India, and the developing world are the prize to be eyeing not saturated and mature items like tablets and smartphones in the US and Europe. Some companies seem to be taking notice:
http://www.wired.com/2015/01/facebook-lite/
What do you base that on? They are already making the most expensive phone. Just look at who buys Apple vs Android. The global luxury market is huge and the margins are huge too. Becoming mass market is exactly what the luxury goods manufacturers has done over the last 20 years. Average Iphone is 650 Dollars my wallet think that is pretty luxury for a phone when you can get much much cheaper Android that can do the same.
I don't know who will win the low end but I am sure there will be tons of people in these markets who would much rather have an Iphone than some crappy cheap phone with Facebook lite. As for Facebook they just want more users and sell more ads. The love Apple who helps people view their app all the time and look at ads served all the time.
As I have already said they are doing really well and they continue to evolve the company and doing much better than then the current competition. And they didn't go Blackberry. Killed off their own Ipod with the Iphone. Stole customers from the Mac with the Ipad. I have no idea why you have such a hard time seeing that current sales numbers and market evaluation supports this too.
I don't know who will win the low end but I am sure there will be tons of people in these markets who would much rather have an Iphone than some crappy cheap phone with Facebook lite. As for Facebook they just want more users and sell more ads. The love Apple who helps people view their app all the time and look at ads served all the time.
As I have already said they are doing really well and they continue to evolve the company and doing much better than then the current competition. And they didn't go Blackberry. Killed off their own Ipod with the Iphone. Stole customers from the Mac with the Ipad. I have no idea why you have such a hard time seeing that current sales numbers and market evaluation supports this too.
High-end popular Android phones like the Samsung S4/S5, HTC M8, etc etc are also around $650 - that's not a luxury good which is why its not uncommon to see an average US consumer with a high-end Apple or Android product. The average person cannot afford a true luxury good otherwise it wouldn't be a luxury.
Why can't you see the reality, like the article further above said, the iPad market is saturated:
http://www.emarketer.com/Article/iPad-Market-Saturated/1011313
Why can't you see the reality, like the article further above said, the iPad market is saturated:
http://www.emarketer.com/Article/iPad-Market-Saturated/1011313
Last edited:
I have anywhere say anything about the Ipad market being or not being saturated my only comment regarding that is I think it was a crappy article with the only examples of users being a single person and not taking into consideration where the Ipad or other tablets actually are a great product. I think its more larger phones cannibalizing the Ipad market and tablet market more than its the product being outdate.
Absolutely incorrect definition of luxury goods. Tons of average people buy what is consider luxury goods every day. This can be a bottle of champagne, a Chanel leather bag, expensive watch. It not like its ultra rich 1%ters who only buys these products. Try to look at the heat map of where the Iphone use vs Android use is in the video I posted.
Yes other manufactures sell expensive phones but Apple on average per phone sales price is higher than the competition.
Again you keep arguing Apple is so terrible and have done so for a long time I'm just saying they have done really well and continue to do so much better than the competition has been able to do. They have also been able to survive near death which I think is a really important lesson for a company and will help them not become stubborn and self centered like both Blackberry and Nokia became just to name the closest competition.
I am all for looking at a business case from different angles I just don't see the big faults in their strategy or current market positioning.
Absolutely incorrect definition of luxury goods. Tons of average people buy what is consider luxury goods every day. This can be a bottle of champagne, a Chanel leather bag, expensive watch. It not like its ultra rich 1%ters who only buys these products. Try to look at the heat map of where the Iphone use vs Android use is in the video I posted.
Yes other manufactures sell expensive phones but Apple on average per phone sales price is higher than the competition.
Again you keep arguing Apple is so terrible and have done so for a long time I'm just saying they have done really well and continue to do so much better than the competition has been able to do. They have also been able to survive near death which I think is a really important lesson for a company and will help them not become stubborn and self centered like both Blackberry and Nokia became just to name the closest competition.
I am all for looking at a business case from different angles I just don't see the big faults in their strategy or current market positioning.
Luxury is not the same as high-end mass produced goods. The average person does have high-end smartphones like the Iphone, S5, M8, etc but not luxury goods like expensive watches/handbags, yachts, vacation homes, etc, etc. Also you live in NYC, the average New Yorker is not a good representation of an average American - the real estate there is a good reflection of that reality.
Here are luxury smartphones, they're a joke, I've never seen a luxury IT good that made any sense compared to well engineered high-end, mainstream mass-market version:
http://www.phonearena.com/news/10-expensive-luxury-smartphones-that-youll-probably-never-own_id31248
Here are luxury smartphones, they're a joke, I've never seen a luxury IT good that made any sense compared to well engineered high-end, mainstream mass-market version:
http://www.phonearena.com/news/10-expensive-luxury-smartphones-that-youll-probably-never-own_id31248
I'm glad I can't see his drivel anymore. You'll never be right as long as he has something to say
tl;dr, steve jobs still dead.
Commercial Glassware is better then Handblown glassware anyday. You can go to the Dollar Store and buy a whole set for the price of one hand blown glass piece.
I am not talking about high temperature applications....
I am not talking about high temperature applications....
I like your vitreous humor.
That gels with you?
Wrong.
Apple is a premium mass market brand, it will never succeed as a luxury brand. This branding expert (Professor Francine Espinoza Petersen, European School of Management and Technology) specifically mentions Apple as a non luxury brand in his lesson:
Another expert spells it out for the clueless:
http://blogs.barrons.com/techtraderdaily/2014/12/16/apples-not-quite-like-a-real-luxury-brand-biz-says-berenberg/
Premium mass market good (iP6) vs luxury good(handbag):
Last edited:
Rule 11
Hermes has been around for many many years however Apple has the all the building blocks necessary to become a luxury brand even by your definition. Please just watch Scott presentation above starting at around 11 minutes. Scott runs L2 which does nothing but advice the biggest global luxury brands he not just some dude from academia.
Also you the above is comparing a leather bag with an electronic device. Just because it does not share the same characteristics as a leather handbag does not exclude electronics from being luxury.
Last but not least you analysis are always very focused on the now which I think is a general problem with a lot of strategic analysis but even more a problem with electronics which rapid changes short life span of products. Apple is on the path to strengthen their luxury image and brand with everything they do. Just look at the coming watch as the next step where they get in to much more price differentiation and even more options to create very expensive and exclusive models it models where only a selected few can play along.
Also you the above is comparing a leather bag with an electronic device. Just because it does not share the same characteristics as a leather handbag does not exclude electronics from being luxury.
Last but not least you analysis are always very focused on the now which I think is a general problem with a lot of strategic analysis but even more a problem with electronics which rapid changes short life span of products. Apple is on the path to strengthen their luxury image and brand with everything they do. Just look at the coming watch as the next step where they get in to much more price differentiation and even more options to create very expensive and exclusive models it models where only a selected few can play along.
You didn't address all the other criteria mentioned by the marketing professor. The same professor that specifically mentioned Apple as a contrast to a real luxury brand.
http://www.theguardian.com/media-network/2014/nov/25/luxury-goods-marketing-ferrari-le-labo
http://www.theguardian.com/media-network/2014/nov/25/luxury-goods-marketing-ferrari-le-labo
this professor?
If you look at the list for Guardian I think Apple is doing a really good job at all of them or are very close to doing so. Where is it you think they fail on that checklist?
How this started was your narrow focus on 15% market share on OS and your comparison to the old Apple when they got saved from Microsoft. I told you that comparison is wrong and not relevant. I still think this is the case. If you want to be anal about Apple being a luxury brand or now at this moment has no is really irrelevant to the overall analysis.
As Scott also mentioned a significant hire was when Apple was able to hire the CEO of Burberry Angela Ahrendts this article from Forbes give a good insight to why and how that ties into the transition from technology company to high end life style brand.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/2013/10/15/apples-hire-of-burberrys-angela-ahrendts-shows-its-future-is-in-lifestyle-not-tech/
How this started was your narrow focus on 15% market share on OS and your comparison to the old Apple when they got saved from Microsoft. I told you that comparison is wrong and not relevant. I still think this is the case. If you want to be anal about Apple being a luxury brand or now at this moment has no is really irrelevant to the overall analysis.
As Scott also mentioned a significant hire was when Apple was able to hire the CEO of Burberry Angela Ahrendts this article from Forbes give a good insight to why and how that ties into the transition from technology company to high end life style brand.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/2013/10/15/apples-hire-of-burberrys-angela-ahrendts-shows-its-future-is-in-lifestyle-not-tech/
High strength Concrete Mix has only 10 % more aggregate then Normal Concrete Mix. Save money and buy Mix and Gravel. That will save you $100 if you need 10 bags. If your fence contractor uses the dump the bag of mix in the hole method, fire them. He did all his math on a Ipad. He seemed to like to walk around holding his Ipad instead of a shovel. I knew I hired the wrong guy when I shook his soft clammy hands.
High-end lifestyle brand, not luxury.
Nokia's dominance of the smartphone market (much larger than Apple's 15% and with largely responsible manufacturer practices based in the EU - on the high end even up to the end of their rein) lasted over a decade BTW. They were a much bigger deal than anyone for a long time and I have pointed them out for various reasons including marketshare shifts.
Nokia's dominance of the smartphone market (much larger than Apple's 15% and with largely responsible manufacturer practices based in the EU - on the high end even up to the end of their rein) lasted over a decade BTW. They were a much bigger deal than anyone for a long time and I have pointed them out for various reasons including marketshare shifts.