Apple report record profits

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

But if others can make similar products for lower prices it's a bit much for Apple to start court proceedings against those rivals for copyright infringement..it's not as if they are out of pocket in any way looking at their profits.

Look at it this way. No one could argue that Coca Cola don't make a lot of profit, but should they allow companies to manufacture cola and put in cans that look very similar to Coke cans? After all, Coke have spent a lot of time and money building an image, why should someone else take advantage? Why should anyone be allowed to take advantage of any company's image?

[ZrByte]

Originally Posted by Chris

It's patent infringement, and Apple aren't the only ones doing it. It's (sadly) standard practice between tech companies at the moment. That said, if Apple, or any other company, invests millions in novel technology, the patent system is supposed to be there to allow them to make a fair return on that investment. They shouldn't be castigated for using it.

Is it though? Apple claim to own the form factor for the iPhone/iPad but only go after Samsung and Motorola for it because they know if they went after Nokia or SE they wouldn't stand a chance because they have been making phones that shape for way longer. Its also interesting how they mainly seem to focus on the form factor and look of the device when apple products are supposedly infringed but since their widest display has only a 3:2 aspect ratio and most if not all of Samsungs are based on 16:10, 15:9 or 16:9 how could that be possible? Yet somehow they only seem to think its copying if someone started after they did, ignoring the fact that they didn't invent the tablet, or the smartphone for that matter they weren't even the first to try it in its current form but they where the first and very smart too in launching it on their already successful purchasing platform iTunes. Which did bring something new to the table.

I suspect Itunes is more than responsible for the increased sales of iPad/iPhone as it influences heavily when its time to upgrade. e.g. Sure the contract is £300 more expensive overall but I have £500 worth of purchases on my Itunes that I cant transfer to an android/BB/windows device. Next contract renewal will have even more purchases to be lost so the choice to switch from Apple becomes even less smart. And the same goes for tablet purchases. Which seems odd to me since wasn't apples biggest gripe with microsoft anti competition and monopolies?

---------- Post added at 12:16 ---------- Previous post was at 12:15 ----------

Originally Posted by Stuart

Look at it this way. No one could argue that Coca Cola don't make a lot of profit, but should they allow companies to manufacture cola and put in cans that look very similar to Coke cans? After all, Coke have spent a lot of time and money building an image, why should someone else take advantage? Why should anyone be allowed to take advantage of any company's image?

They do though. Buzz cola I think looks very similar to coke in can form.

[martyh]

Originally Posted by Damien

Again I don't think iPads from Injury lawers accounts for a large amount of the 15 million iPads that have been sold. Contracts maybe but these would be purchased from Apple and are used to entice people into a contract. The networks aren't in the business of giving around £400 devices as a freebe.

Anyway Apple best not shout too loud about their profits lest Alan Fry invade then and relieve them of their profits to build his new airport and train set

[Lew]

Originally Posted by swoop101

It does not matter what you say, you will never convert apple fan boys.

You could say the same about the "anything but Apple" brigade.

[ZrByte]

Originally Posted by Lew

You could say the same about the "anything but Apple" brigade.

If an iPhone 4/4s was the same per month as a an S2 for example I would be very tempted and I consider myself firmly in the anything but apple camp at the moment.

[Chris]

Originally Posted by ZrByte

Is it though? Apple claim to own the form factor for the iPhone/iPad but only go after Samsung and Motorola for it because they know if they went after Nokia or SE they wouldn't stand a chance because they have been making phones that shape for way longer. Its also interesting how they mainly seem to focus on the form factor and look of the device when apple products are supposedly infringed but since their widest display has only a 3:2 aspect ratio and most if not all of Samsungs are based on 16:10, 15:9 or 16:9 how could that be possible? Yet somehow they only seem to think its copying if someone started after they did, ignoring the fact that they didn't invent the tablet, or the smartphone for that matter they weren't even the first to try it in its current form but they where the first and very smart too in launching it on their already successful purchasing platform iTunes. Which did bring something new to the table.

I suspect Itunes is more than responsible for the increased sales of iPad/iPhone as it influences heavily when its time to upgrade. e.g. Sure the contract is £300 more expensive overall but I have £500 worth of purchases on my Itunes that I cant transfer to an android/BB/windows device. Next contract renewal will have even more purchases to be lost so the choice to switch from Apple becomes even less smart. And the same goes for tablet purchases. Which seems odd to me since wasn't apples biggest gripe with microsoft anti competition and monopolies?

---------- Post added at 12:16 ---------- Previous post was at 12:15 ----------



They do though. Buzz cola I think looks very similar to coke in can form.

These are arguments for lawyers in the courtroom. Whether they stand up or not is neither here nor there; their right to make such claims is enshrined in law.

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by ZrByte

If an iPhone 4/4s was the same per month as a an S2 for example I would be very tempted and I consider myself firmly in the anything but apple camp at the moment.

How much of that money goes to Apple though?

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Stuart

How much of that money goes to Apple though?

Quite a lot, I would presume. They even demand 30% of subscription fees on magazines etc. sold through the app store.

[ZrByte]

Originally Posted by Stuart

How much of that money goes to Apple though?

Well apple sell their products direct on their own website so we can see. And pay as you go is pretty similarly priced across the board to what they charge.
http://store.apple.com/uk/browse/hom.../family/iphone
http://www.carphonewarehouse.com/mob...learance=false
Admittedly the contracts do seem to be disproportionately inflated. e.g. Iphone 4s is actually £10 cheaper than Galaxy s2 through carphone warehouse on PayG yet a contract with similar usage can cost over £15 per month more which is £360 more for the contract.
So you are right that apple don't seem to be directly responsible for the prices but the network operators wouldn't be able to charge what they do if people wouldn't pay it in the first place which does boil down to fanboyism or at the least stupidity at the end of the day.

[Chris]

Originally Posted by ZrByte

So you are right that apple don't seem to be directly responsible for the prices but the network operators wouldn't be able to charge what they do if people wouldn't pay it in the first place which does boil down to fanboyism or at the least stupidity at the end of the day.

No, that's a market functioning in a perfectly normal manner.

You choose not to buy a particular product and that's fine, but as an owner of Apple products I find it insulting that you categorise me as stupid.

The things I buy and use - not just those things manufactured by Apple - I do so because they fit my needs, practically and aesthetically. They are the deliberate choice of an intelligent adult individual.

If you can't handle the fact that other people make different informed choices than you do, then perhaps a discussion forum where those choices are aired and discussed - ideally in a polite and respectful manner - is not a good place for you to be.

[ZrByte]

Originally Posted by Chris

No, that's a market functioning in a perfectly normal manner.

You choose not to buy a particular product and that's fine, but as an owner of Apple products I find it insulting that you categorise me as stupid.

The things I buy and use - not just those things manufactured by Apple - I do so because they fit my needs, practically and aesthetically. They are the deliberate choice of an intelligent adult individual.

If you can't handle the fact that other people make different informed choices than you do, then perhaps a discussion forum where those choices are aired and discussed - ideally in a polite and respectful manner - is not a good place for you to be.

I just find the concept of paying 75% more for something with only 75% of the functionality to be stupid. Especially when the product is valued the same as the competition by the company who made it and is readily available to the public at those prices. It doesn't mean I think the people who do it are stupid just that they have made a stupid decision.
Though I suppose 75% isn't fair anymore since a modern iPhone can do pretty much 100% of the things an Android phone can do once its Jailbroken. It just cant excuse what apple has served up in the past. The first iPhone was claimed to be 5 years ahead of its competitors by SJ and Fanboys around the world yet it couldn't handle MMS, or multitasking and I'm fairly certain it couldn't record video. Which Symbian and windows mobile could do just fine at the time. And it didn't bring anything new in terms of capabilities aside from the integration of iTunes and content supplied for customers existing iPods.

And I can handle it fine. Though going by your outburst I'm guessing you can't handle the fact that someone thinks you have made a poor decision. And unless I'm mistaken you bought your iPad/Mac so what I said doesn't apply to you anyway.

I think the Fanboyism surrounding Apple products especially the iPhone was summed up pretty well at the release of the iPhone 4s. The biggest criticism by the fans was that it didn't look different enough from the standard 4 so the people who had bought it couldn't wave their new status symbol about and have it recognised instantly.
Ignoring the fact that it was significantly better under the hood and simultaneously failing to critique the various genuine flaws such as the battery, software and regionalisation issues at the time of launch.

[Damien]

Originally Posted by ZrByte

I just find the concept of paying 75% more for something with only 75% of the functionality to be stupid. Especially when the product is valued the same as the competition by the company who made it and is readily available to the public at those prices. It doesn't mean I think the people who do it are stupid just that they have made a stupid decision.
Though I suppose 75% isn't fair anymore since a modern iPhone can do pretty much 100% of the things an Android phone can do once its Jailbroken.

You keep using 'functionality' by which you mean features, as the sole measurement of quality. Apple's unique selling point is the user interface and design of their products as how the features they do have are easily accessible and usable by the population. It's really underrated how important easy of use is to the user. There is no point having a long list of features if they are a hassle to use.

It just cant excuse what apple has served up in the past. The first iPhone was claimed to be 5 years ahead of its competitors by SJ and Fanboys around the world yet it couldn't handle MMS, or multitasking and I'm fairly certain it couldn't record video.

Yet it kick started a new era in smart phones which has all but killed of Symbian, Windows Mobile, and maybe RIM. It wasn't ahead of it's time in terms of a list of features but it was a big step-forward in smart phones. The interface has far beyond what went before with the design and the multi-touch screen.

The biggest criticism by the fans was that it didn't look different enough from the standard 4 so the people who had bought it couldn't wave their new status symbol about and have it recognised instantly.

No it wasn't. That was the popular refrain amongst the critics to further insult users of the product. It gained popularity because of the Samsung ad that poked fun at people queuing in the Apple store. It makes a nice story but it's not true.

And stop using the word fanboy. We are not teenagers fighting over which console is best. Your argument is weak if you have to keep resorting to cheap characterisations of people. Blind brand loyalty might explain the initial success of the iPhone but it doesn't explain why people keep buying them.

[Chris]

Originally Posted by ZrByte

Though going by your outburst I'm guessing you can't handle the fact that someone thinks you have made a poor decision.

My objection was to your use of the word 'stupidity' - which I don't believe you can re-define as narrowly as you are now attempting to, though thank you for attempting to back away from your earlier ill-judged comments.

As Damien has already pointed out, you are selecting one measure - functionality - and ignoring all the others. Perhaps that's because the functionality is all that's important to you. That's fine. Make your choice based on what's important to you. That's what a lot of other people have done, and that's why Apple has posted massive figures this quarter.

It would seem that Apple is meeting a lot of people's criteria for a smartphone/tablet/home computer. As a company, they can do no more than that. Congratulations to them.

[ZrByte]

Originally Posted by Damien

You keep using 'functionality' by which you mean features, as the sole measurement of quality. Apple's unique selling point is the user interface and design of their products as how the features they do have are easily accessible and usable by the population. It's really underrated how important easy of use is to the user. There is no point having a long list of features if they are a hassle to use.



Yet it kick started a new era in smart phones which has all but killed of Symbian, Windows Mobile, and maybe RIM. It wasn't ahead of it's time in terms of a list of features but it was a big step-forward in smart phones. The interface has far beyond what went before with the design and the multi-touch screen.



No it wasn't. That was the popular refrain amongst the critics to further insult users of the product. It gained popularity because of the Samsung ad that poked fun at people queuing in the Apple store. It makes a nice story but it's not true.

And stop using the word fanboy. We are not teenagers fighting over which console is best. Your argument is weak if you have to keep resorting to cheap characterisations of people. Blind brand loyalty might explain the initial success of the iPhone but it doesn't explain why people keep buying them.

If Blind brand loyalty can account for initial success it could also account for continued success. Regardless of the products quality. Just like in the example I gave earlier for people who have made the mistake of buying a lot on iTunes but now want to jump ship. My friend has just bought an s2 and has lost about £40 worth of albums. For him this was acceptable but for others it wouldn't be, and where's the limit? It doesn't mean that the iPhone is great it just means customers don't want to lose their content and apple have seen to it that they will if the move platforms (Unless I'm wrong about that one, Im not an apple user so can only go by what friends say).

You can claim that the aesthetics weren't complained about all you want but I saw it several times in news and reviews and heard it in person twice by different people at work yet heard very little about the actual faults so unless I see otherwise that's what I'm going to believe.

Yet Symbian still has the larger market share
http://www.engadget.com/2011/11/15/g...op-globally-a/
Cant seem to find a similar table for q4 but its plain to see that Sybian has lost a lot of share but not to Apple. And RIM put the bullet in its own head, as did windows mobile. Spot on about the multi-touch screens, I didn't know that.

And I will apologise for the Fanboys comment, I'm sorry that's not fair. Like you said we aren't teenagers arguing over a console.

---------- Post added at 16:08 ---------- Previous post was at 15:54 ----------

Originally Posted by Chris

My objection was to your use of the word 'stupidity' - which I don't believe you can re-define as narrowly as you are now attempting to, though thank you for attempting to back away from your earlier ill-judged comments.

As Damien has already pointed out, you are selecting one measure - functionality - and ignoring all the others. Perhaps that's because the functionality is all that's important to you. That's fine. Make your choice based on what's important to you. That's what a lot of other people have done, and that's why Apple has posted massive figures this quarter.

It would seem that Apple is meeting a lot of people's criteria for a smartphone/tablet/home computer. As a company, they can do no more than that. Congratulations to them.

Not really trying to redefine, just poorly defined to start with, I am dyslexic you know .
And I do agree with what you say about functionality being important to me, not everyone and I suppose that does distort how I see devices like the iPhone. I strongly dislike form over function and that is something Apple has been very guilty of in the past (Not so much now as the 4s is a capable device) but obviously that wasn't a concern of their userbase back then.
I think what also doesn't help the day to day snobbery I get off iPhone users when they see I use a Meamo device, even though my phone can out perform theirs in most ways as long as they don't have a 4s though it still isn't bad for a 2 year old phone.
My Phone is very much the opposite of Apples MO, its quite ugly, a face only a mother could love. It is however highly functional, with the resistive touchscreen being the exception.

[Hugh]

Mmm, I have to disagree over functionality.

I have both an iPad and a Android Tablet, and the iPad is much more user-friendly. I can do more with the Android Tablet, but for ease of use, and user functionality "out of the box", the iPad, imho, beats it hands down.

(I have a PC and a couple of laptops at home, and use a HTC Android phone, so I am not in any way, shape or form, an Apple fan thru and thru).