Another boring money post

[Partial]

Except that's only one factor. Just as big a factor is that lots of manufacturers are free to build Android phones. And thus, Android provides many more choices in phones, as well as carriers.

To a degree, yes. I think you'd have a hard time telling HTC that it's free to build Android devices. They're being sued into oblivion. The Motorola Mobility patent profile is weak evidently and analysts don't expect it to help much. In addition to that, HTC pays a hefty licensing fee to Microsoft for patents in every handset they sell.

http://www.thestreet.com/story/11217...sing-fees.html

Google is also in some seriously hot water for not licensing java properly. Oracle won't back down.

Having said that, I think this is ridiculous. Patent law is so backwards in software. I would love it if Google really could distribute it for free. Hopefully they will be able to soon. To clarify, Android's presence is good. Android as a consumer piece of software is a nightmare.

Sony didn't license beta. VHS won.

Apple didn't license the Mac OS. Windows won.

There might be a pattern here.

Did MS really win? Apple makes more money and is worth more today. I agree that marketshare is hugely important and Windows clearly dominates this. At the end of the day, though, the goal of the business is to make money, so shouldn't this be the merit we choose the winner on? By that merit, Apple is currently winning.

http://articles.businessinsider.com/...crosoft-profit


Scott, what do you have to say about the tablet market where we have a wide variety of competitors and a slew of Android tablets. Adoption rate of tablets has been as fast as any consumer electronic ever developed and Androids adoption rate/market share is actually decreasing instead of increasing in this space. The same principals of being free to use and a wide variety of Android tablets exist. How do you explain this?

What is the difference between smart phones and tablets? Is there a big difference in quality of the user experience between the iPhone and the iPad? Is the level of competition different? What about the quality of the versions of Android between the two?

To me, the big difference is the middle man (the carriers). This soon won't be an issue for iPhone.

Pat, to me, AAPL has a few more good years in it before the growth will slow down. They simply cannot keep doubling in sales every year for much longer. Having said that, I think they can continue to grow rapidly for two more years at least.

It is refreshing to discuss with intellectuals, fellas. Keep it up. It would be great if the likes of RG/Ziggy would bring something besides sarcasm and ass-hattery to the table if they wished to continue to discuss.

edit:

I cannot stress enough how we are now in the age of software. Software is what will define the two technologies. With the vhs stuff, we're looking at hardware. Both had roughly equivalent user experiences, did they not? Maybe one had technical superiority, I don't know. In my opinion, this battle will be won in software. If the iPhone never existed and Android gingerbread was the standard, we'd think it was incredible. Having said that, iOs does exist and it's a much more pleasant user experience. Smartphones are so paramount in your typical person's day (email, calendar, calls, communication, etc) that the user wants the best possible experience.

Android has some unique characteristics that are good, such as their notification system that Apple blatantly ripped off. It seems to be that basically all of the complaints/reasons people would go with Android today are going to be moot with the iPhone 5.

"Android phones have bigger screens" - iPhone 5 will have a beautiful 4" display (which is still the highest res display) which in my opinion is really the sweet spot on screen size. The original galaxy phones nailed the screen.

"I can't get an iPhone on my carrier and I'm on a family plan" - Not anymore, iPhone will be available on all of the major players according to the rumors. I really hope this is true.

The iCloud stuff breaking the cord from iTunes will really help. The iTunes infrastructure with music, videos, etc is great, but the notion of plugging in to load some on my device seems so archaic to me. This is late 2011, after all.

Users are going to be wowed when they snap photos on their iPhone and they automatically on their computer. Who doesn't hate synching photos? I know I do!

Little things like the photo synching things just make your life as a user better. Now this is obviously a super small chunk of the equation, but the user experience is made up of the sum of (the small) parts.

[Patler]

With the vhs stuff, we're looking at hardware. Both had roughly equivalent user experiences, did they not? Maybe one had technical superiority, I don't know. In my opinion, this battle will be won in software. If the iPhone never existed and Android gingerbread was the standard, we'd think it was incredible. Having said that, iOs does exist and it's a much more pleasant user experience. Smartphones are so paramount in your typical person's day (email, calendar, calls, communication, etc) that the user wants the best possible experience.

Android has some unique characteristics that are good, such as their notification system that Apple blatantly ripped off. It seems to be that basically all of the complaints/reasons people would go with Android today are going to be moot with the iPhone 5..

No, they did not have roughly the same user experience for quite a while.

Sony - smaller, easier to carry from room to room. VHS competitors big and clumsy. In the early days, I'm talking about machines maybe 30+ inches and very, very heavy.

Sony- you could watch one channel and record on another. VHS - had to watch the channel that the recorder was recording. People had a dedicated TV just for their recorder.

Sony - you could pause a recording (and edit out a commercial by doing it). You could also "live pause" a playback, comeback and continue from where you paused. Initially, VHS erquired continuous run. There was no "pause" and if you hit "stop" it would stop recording or playing completely and automatically rewind to the beginning of the tape for most of them.

These are just some that come to mind.

Users are going to be wowed when they snap photos on their iPhone and they automatically on their computer. Who doesn't hate synching photos? I know I do!

Little things like the photo synching things just make your life as a user better. Now this is obviously a super small chunk of the equation, but the user experience is made up of the sum of (the small) parts.

SOME users will be wowed by those things, but I suspect for many (maybe even most) they won't really care all that much. I have a sneaking feeling that the vast majority of smartphone users in the future will be using basic functions and will not be life dependent on the glitz and glamor features. However, the ones for which it is a big "wow" will be the vocal ones and make it sound like it is more important than it really is.

[MJZiggy]

No, they did not have roughly the same user experience for quite a while.

Sony - smaller, easier to carry from room to room. VHS competitors big and clumsy. In the early days, I'm talking about machines maybe 30+ inches and very, very heavy.

Sony- you could watch one channel and record on another. VHS - had to watch the channel that the recorder was recording. People had a dedicated TV just for their recorder.

Sony - you could pause a recording (and edit out a commercial by doing it). You could also "live pause" a playback, comeback and continue from where you paused. Initially, VHS erquired continuous run. There was no "pause" and if you hit "stop" it would stop recording or playing completely and automatically rewind to the beginning of the tape for most of them.

These are just some that come to mind.




SOME users will be wowed by those things, but I suspect for many (maybe even most) they won't really care all that much. I have a sneaking feeling that the vast majority of smartphone users in the future will be using basic functions and will not be life dependent on the glitz and glamor features. However, the ones for which it is a big "wow" will be the vocal ones and make it sound like it is more important than it really is.

I think Sony's problem was that they invented very cool and high-quality bells and whistles that were also a bit on the expensive side and then everyone else took the ideas and flooded the market with cheaper products that did the exact same things and, as technology advanced learned to do them even better and smaller. When the market flooded and the cool factor of owning an original Walkman (or whatever device) wore off, Sony's share in it became closer to a niche than a domination.

[Scott Campbell]

Did MS really win? Apple makes more money and is worth more today.

We were talking products - not company. Windows beat Mac. Pretty handily. It nearly killed AAPL. It ushered in the John Scully era, when Jobs got the boot.

[Partial]

I think Sony's problem was that they invented very cool and high-quality bells and whistles that were also a bit on the expensive side and then everyone else took the ideas and flooded the market with cheaper products that did the exact same things and, as technology advanced learned to do them even better and smaller. When the market flooded and the cool factor of owning an original Walkman (or whatever device) wore off, Sony's share in it became closer to a niche than a domination.

Maybe, but then again why do people drive BMWs, and Mercedes? It's quite ironic the stance RG is in this discussion about fancy devices when he at least used to drive a Mercedes. Is there any thing more delta bravo and hypocritical about bitching about the price of a high end luxury good when you drive a Mercedes? LOL!

"These high end Apple computers with their proprietary parts are too expensive. Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to go to International Autos to have my luxury sedan serviced because the proprietary German parts aren't commonly available". Ha! Too funny.



Scott, I'm legitimately interested in this from a businessman's perspective:

Scott, what do you have to say about the tablet market where we have a wide variety of competitors and a slew of Android tablets. Adoption rate of tablets has been as fast as any consumer electronic ever developed and Androids adoption rate/market share is actually decreasing instead of increasing in this space. The same principals of being free to use and a wide variety of Android tablets exist. How do you explain this?

What is the difference between smart phones and tablets? Is there a big difference in quality of the user experience between the iPhone and the iPad? Is the level of competition different? What about the quality of the versions of Android between the two?

To me, the big difference is the middle man (the carriers). This soon won't be an issue for iPhone.

[Patler]

I think Sony's problem was that they invented very cool and high-quality bells and whistles that were also a bit on the expensive side and then everyone else took the ideas and flooded the market with cheaper products that did the exact same things and, as technology advanced learned to do them even better and smaller. When the market flooded and the cool factor of owning an original Walkman (or whatever device) wore off, Sony's share in it became closer to a niche than a domination.

Yup, that's pretty much it. I don't see that as much different than what is happening today.

[Scott Campbell]

Scott, what do you have to say about the tablet market where we have a wide variety of competitors and a slew of Android tablets. Adoption rate of tablets has been as fast as any consumer electronic ever developed and Androids adoption rate/market share is actually decreasing instead of increasing in this space. The same principals of being free to use and a wide variety of Android tablets exist. How do you explain this?

I'm still not entirely sold long term on the tablet market. They may still be selling on their novelty value vs. their practical value. But the sales numbers are pretty eye popping. So I'm watching developments with an open mind.

The market looks like it's playing out a lot like the PDA cellphone market. Apple has taken a concept that's been around a long time and built a UI that transformed the potential of the market into an actual market. Android ain't there, and doesn't currently have a competitive product. But Google has proven adept at playing "me too" over time, and I wouldn't write them off in the table space yet.

[Scott Campbell]

To me, the big difference is the middle man (the carriers). This soon won't be an issue for iPhone.

They already have AT&T and Verizon - the two dominant carriers in the US. I think your hopes for carrier based market share growth might be a little over zealous.

[Scott Campbell]

Users are going to be wowed when they snap photos on their iPhone and they automatically on their computer. Who doesn't hate synching photos? I know I do!

How long will that be a differentiating feature? Google already snycs to everything else.

And it looks like Samsung has already eliminated the iPhones advantage over Android for picture and video taking.



What I'm seeing at the moment is relative feature parity, with users primarily choosing one platform over the other based on personal preference and familiarity. And price.

[Partial]

They already have AT&T and Verizon - the two dominant carriers in the US. I think your hopes for carrier based market share growth might be a little over zealous.

They dominate ATT. They went onto Verizon more than half way through their typical product cycle. The product, despite being a foolish buy now in my opinion, remains Verizon's best selling phone. It's been on Verizon 9 months so, so it's (24 months - 9 months) - time remaining on contract before a lot of people can affordably get an iPhone on Verizon. Assuming an average distribution of contract signings throughout the year, 5/8 of the people interested in an iPhone on Verizon haven't had the opportunity to upgrade yet.

Google syncs to their cloud stuff. Apple syncs directly to all of your systems. Apple has the infrastructure to sync to computers, TV's (The Apple TV 2nd get is the de facto media streamer -- it will only get bigger and bigger if they release an app store for it -- the amateur porn channel (I wish) ), etc. Using Google's set-up, I would still have to log-in to my Google photos account (what is this, Picasa?) and download the pics. Why not just plug the device in then?

Unless Google TVs and Google Chrome Books start flying off shelves (not happening), they don't have the infrastructure to make it valuable.

[Scott Campbell]

It's quite ironic the stance RG is in this discussion about fancy devices when he at least used to drive a Mercedes. Is there any thing more delta bravo and hypocritical about bitching about the price of a high end luxury good when you drive a Mercedes? LOL!

Not the way he does it. He's buying used and not getting killed on depreciation. I think people might be shocked if they looked at what he's paying on a cost per mile basis.

[MJZiggy]

I'm still not entirely sold long term on the tablet market. They may still be selling on their novelty value vs. their practical value. But the sales numbers are pretty eye popping. So I'm watching developments with an open mind.

The market looks like it's playing out a lot like the PDA cellphone market. Apple has taken a concept that's been around a long time and built a UI that transformed the potential of the market into an actual market. Android ain't there, and doesn't currently have a competitive product. But Google has proven adept at playing "me too" over time, and I wouldn't write them off in the table space yet.

P brought up an entry by RIM as a competitor to the Android tablet, but if RIM puts out a decent product, how do we know that it will eat at Android's share of the market and not Apple's?

I ran into a friend today at the store today and she said she'd considered asking for an iPad for her upcoming birthday, but decided she didn't want a tablet. I don't either. I've seen someone playing ABirds on one and it looks nice, but I don't see a tablet doing anything my phone can't do and it doesn't have a keyboard, so if I'm writing, I'd rather have my laptop. I also don't want to carry it around because I prefer to travel light, usually carrying only my phone/wallet and keys. What's the tablet niche for a smartphone user?

[Scott Campbell]

They dominate ATT. They went onto Verizon more than half way through their typical product cycle. The product, despite being a foolish buy now in my opinion, remains Verizon's best selling phone. It's been on Verizon 9 months so, so it's (24 months - 9 months) - time remaining on contract before a lot of people can affordably get an iPhone on Verizon. Assuming an average distribution of contract signings throughout the year, 5/8 of the people interested in an iPhone on Verizon haven't had the opportunity to upgrade yet.

We'll see what happens. AAPL has to give people a good reason to switch platforms and work through a new OS learning curve, and there's not the much differentiating the two at the moment. Sammy's releasing some really nice Andoroid stuff that is being reviewed favorably in comparison to the iPhone.

[MJZiggy]

Not the way he does it. He's buying used and not getting killed on depreciation. I think people might be shocked if they looked at what he's paying on a cost per mile basis.

He also keeps his cars for a long time which is why he sticks with the Mercedes brand. Longevity. I have an Acura that I got for the price of a used Civic and will keep it for a long, long time. It never breaks down, gets good mileage and is cheap to maintain and insure.

p.s. If I take a photo with my phone, I REALLY don't want it automatically synched to my computer.

[Scott Campbell]

Ya, there was a time when Sony was the consumer electronics god. Sony TV's were widely viewed as a cut above the rest for a long time, too. Sony audio systems for quality and price as a combination. Sony gadgets too.

Being better isn't necessarily enough. Hitachi built the best plasmas. They're out of the market now. Then Pioneer built the best plasmas. They're out of the market now too.


Even when it comes to the iPod, the audiophile community avoids them. There are better sounding players out there.

[retailguy]

Not the way he does it. He's buying used and not getting killed on depreciation. I think people might be shocked if they looked at what he's paying on a cost per mile basis.

He also keeps his cars for a long time which is why he sticks with the Mercedes brand. Longevity. I have an Acura that I got for the price of a used Civic and will keep it for a long, long time. It never breaks down, gets good mileage and is cheap to maintain and insure.

p.s. If I take a photo with my phone, I REALLY don't want it automatically synched to my computer.

Thanks guys. And you're exactly right.

He's really scraping the bottom of the barrel out of desperation here.

Partial - I bought my mercedes when it was 6 years old and had 55k miles. I paid $10k, cash. I'm still driving it. It will hit 170k miles in about a month and a half. In the time I've owned it, I have put less than $4k dollars in it that I do not consider routine maintenance (Not bad for 7 years of driving, I don't think). I do some work myself (replace O2 sensors, recharge a/c, plugs, etc). The rest, I have a mobile mechanic who comes to my home and does the work in my driveway. He charges $80 an hour, and doesn't care if I buy parts or he does. There are a plethora of after market parts (big difference from apple, huh?), and availability has NEVER been a problem. Nor price. the car has never seen the inside of a Mercedes dealer and never will...

I have no intentions of getting rid of the car anytime soon, my 15 year old will be driving in a year. Will make a good 1st car for her, if she can afford it. (NO free cars in this family).

Ah, to be 25 and inexperienced again...

Scott, my $ per mile is about a cheap as it could ever get. the only knock against my car is that I'm down to about 19mpg after averaging about 22mpg for most of the life I've had it. Haven't figured out why yet, but I will. Not bad for a 4.2 litre v8, but it's a challenge.. you know?

[retailguy]

I'm still not entirely sold long term on the tablet market. They may still be selling on their novelty value vs. their practical value. But the sales numbers are pretty eye popping. So I'm watching developments with an open mind.

The market looks like it's playing out a lot like the PDA cellphone market. Apple has taken a concept that's been around a long time and built a UI that transformed the potential of the market into an actual market. Android ain't there, and doesn't currently have a competitive product. But Google has proven adept at playing "me too" over time, and I wouldn't write them off in the table space yet.

I bought two android tablets last weekend. they got here in the past few days. I really like them. They do more than my girls IPAD 1's. That's to be expected as they are different technologically.

I like the HDMI ports, the SD card slots, and the USB connections. Nothing proprietary about any of them. A $4 adapter for the HDMI port, and I'm streaming to my TV. Nice feature when I'm traveling on business.

I agree with Ziggy about the novelty factor. I see some uses, and in some ways, not so much. I don't have an IPAD 2 to compare it to, but I really can't see anything i'd want to do that it can't do. I paid less for 2 android tablets than I would have paid for 1 IPAD 2 that would've met my needs. Maybe I've got a dinosaur, but I doubt it.

My experience has been great so far, and for the price I paid, if it doesn't work out, I'll use them as photo frames and mount 'em on the wall.

If there is one thing I am not, it's trendy. That stuff isn't important to me, which is why I drive a 13 year old mercedes..... LMAO.

[retailguy]

Being better isn't necessarily enough. Hitachi built the best plasmas. They're out of the market now. Then Pioneer built the best plasmas. They're out of the market now too.


Even when it comes to the iPod, the audiophile community avoids them. There are better sounding players out there.

Cheaper players too.

I love the griping he's done over Samsung copying Apple's patents. Remember the $10m that Apple paid Creative for violating their patents related to the IPOD? Convenient how that gets forgotten.....

I love my old Creative mp3/video player. Still meets all my needs. Paid $99 for it about 4 years ago on clearance out of the Creative online store. Still use it when I travel. It's a little thick, but who gives a shit? I get about 4 hours out of it when watching video. It'll play anything and I've never once had to use ITUNES... I just copy the files to it using Windows explorer... Takes about 2 minutes and it never crashes on me..... LMAO.

[retailguy]

I don't get it?

Your analogy is the last one I gave you in the last email I wrote you three weeks ago... At least I know you read it.

[Partial]

Your analogy is the last one I gave you in the last email I wrote you three weeks ago... At least I know you read it.

I don't recall this but I'm sure you're correct. It's a common expression. I didn't intend to rip your line.

Thanks guys. And you're exactly right.

He's really scraping the bottom of the barrel out of desperation here.

Partial - I bought my mercedes when it was 6 years old and had 55k miles. I paid $10k, cash. I'm still driving it. It will hit 170k miles in about a month and a half. In the time I've owned it, I have put less than $4k dollars in it that I do not consider routine maintenance (Not bad for 7 years of driving, I don't think). I do some work myself (replace O2 sensors, recharge a/c, plugs, etc). The rest, I have a mobile mechanic who comes to my home and does the work in my driveway. He charges $80 an hour, and doesn't care if I buy parts or he does. There are a plethora of after market parts (big difference from apple, huh?), and availability has NEVER been a problem. Nor price. the car has never seen the inside of a Mercedes dealer and never will...

I have no intentions of getting rid of the car anytime soon, my 15 year old will be driving in a year. Will make a good 1st car for her, if she can afford it. (NO free cars in this family).

Ah, to be 25 and inexperienced again...

Scott, my $ per mile is about a cheap as it could ever get. the only knock against my car is that I'm down to about 19mpg after averaging about 22mpg for most of the life I've had it. Haven't figured out why yet, but I will. Not bad for a 4.2 litre v8, but it's a challenge.. you know?

I think it's a very rationale thing to do, I would do the same, but when applied to Apple, you contradict yourself.

You bought a luxury car. Most people buy luxury goods because they're a sign of quality, the design is better, the car is more comfortable, powerful, or has some features that differeniate itself from the pack. Whatever the reason is, it's because the luxury product ultimately provides some value to the user that the entry level would not have.

The luxury good is often purchased because of the quality and the intention to keep something a long time. Because you intend to keep it a long time, you need something that is made of quality components and materials, maybe using metals where other, cheaper cars use plastic, or providing all-wheel drive where as cheaper cars only have front wheel drive. Maybe the sound system is better. Maybe the engine is more powerful and better designed. Maybe it can sit more people. Who knows. You get where I'm going with this.

What's different about the car from the computer? The computer is expected to last a long time, at least 5 years for most people. Like a luxury car, it's important to have durable, long lasting components such as metal enclosures, glass trackpads and the best in class batteries. Luxury features on a computer are equivalent to luxury features in a car. After all, it's something you constantly for work, yes, so why would you not want something that's a little bit nicer and a cut above the rest? As someone who appreciates the finer things of a Mercedes, I cannot wrap my head around how one can not appreciate the design, build quality, etc put into Apple products.

You get what you pay for with just about everything. Whether it's a Cadillac, a Carolla, or a Cavalier this is true. It's also true whether it's an Inspiron notebook, a MacBook Pro, or an HP business class notebook.

The whole parts thing doesn't make a lot of sense. There are a plethora (in fact, basically the exact same) for any Mac as there are for a typical PC. In a notebook, the upgradeable things are batteries, ram, hard disks, and extensions through usb. The MacBook Air has soldiered on ram and disk due to size constraints, but this situation will exist in Ultrabooks as well. The iMac and the towers are upgradeable as well. The iMac can't upgrade graphics, I will give you that, but I don't think it's a huge deal because they do include latest gen discrete graphics, so it'll be very fast for years to come.

I'm not criticizing, I just think it's interesting. Personally, I think you're afraid to try it for fear you might like it. I would bet my bottom dollar that if you went in with an open mind you'd really enjoy the experience after a week (once you settled in) and would see the value. I'm unbelievably cheap and even *I* see the value.