Apple report record profits

[denphone]

l have never really bought a Apple product apart from my ipod but l do agree that Apple products have excellent functionality but to me l will never really purchase many Apple products for the simple reason that l believe you are paying quite a premium price on top just because it is a Apple product and so in my mind l will generally always go for another brand on the basis that you are getting better value for your money and a product that generally is as good as any Apple product if not better then it.

[gazzae]

As someone pondering buying a tablet device can some kind person throw out a few "killer" things that an out of the box non-fruit based device cnd do which an out of the box fruit based device can't.

Thanks

[Hugh]

Originally Posted by denphone

l have never really bought a Apple product apart from my ipod but l do agree that Apple products have excellent functionality but to me l will never really purchase many Apple products for the simple reason that l believe you are paying quite a premium price on top just because it is a Apple product and so in my mind l will generally always go for another brand on the basis that you are getting better value for your money and a product that generally is as good as any Apple product if not better then it.

Problem is, with Tablets, that's not (usually) true - there isn't much of a price differential between the quality Android Tablets and iPads.

[ZrByte]

Originally Posted by gazzae

As someone pondering buying a tablet device can some kind person throw out a few "killer" things that an out of the box non-fruit based device cnd do which an out of the box fruit based device can't.

Thanks

As has been stated above they are both pretty close these days if anything the fruit flavoured device appears to be better out of the box but personal preference based on cost upfront and for cost of apps for me still goes to Non-fruit flavoured for me.
If money isn't an issue go down to PC world or similar and see which one you like hands on. Most go for the pad apparently, Though if like me you prefer the true widescreen format this will become apparent when you have a go.

---------- Post added at 16:47 ---------- Previous post was at 16:44 ----------

Originally Posted by Hugh

Problem is, with Tablets, that's not (usually) true - there isn't much of a price differential between the quality Android Tablets and iPads.

Though some offer things the other isn't capable of, like true TV-Out rather than airplay and MKV playback.

[Damien]

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).

No. First of all brand loyalty doesn't explain the scale of Apple's success. The amount of Mac users 10 years ago so very small. The amount of iPhone users when it first coming out was small. Yet we're seeing them sell 37 million in 3 months, you can't explain that away by using brand loyalty. The Apple loyalists pale into insignificance against the numbers of people buying it. Apple are now the biggest company in the world by market cap. The idea of a brand loyalty is a nonsense as much as it's a nonsense if someone said Ford did so well because of brand loyalty.

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.

Well I don't want to disagree with your sample size of 2 people but, well, I do want to disagree.This is a review from Macworld, certainly a loyalist publication, which likes the design of the 4S. Now of course not everyone was happy there were no design changes but your the one assigning a motivation by saying it's because they won't be able to show off their 'new status symbol'. Considering that's quite an obviously vain complaint I don't think many people would have articulated like that, it sounds suspiciously like a straw man argument designed to back up your argument. It sounds suspiciously like the quote that gained popularity after it was articulated in a Samsung advert, now I don't have to explain that Samsung are the competition and are unlikely to portray the iPhone in a positive light.

Yet Symbian still has the larger market share

It has this because it's coming down from a very dominant base. It takes time for them to disappear, they are declining fast. It's also still popular in the developing world on cheap phones, Nokia still uses it for cheap phones sold in India for example.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Problem is, with Tablets, that's not (usually) true - there isn't much of a price differential between the quality Android Tablets and iPads.

l am afraid that Tablets have not really enter our equation so far Hugh as we am quite happy with our PC, Netbook and Laptop thus far.

[ZrByte]

Originally Posted by Damien

No. First of all brand loyalty doesn't explain the scale of Apple's success. The amount of Mac users 10 years ago so very small. The amount of iPhone users when it first coming out was small. Yet we're seeing them sell 37 million in 3 months, you can't explain that away by using brand loyalty. The Apple loyalists pale into insignificance against the numbers of people buying it. Apple are now the biggest company in the world by market cap. The idea of a brand loyalty is a nonsense as much as it's a nonsense if someone said Ford did so well because of brand loyalty.



Well I don't want to disagree with your sample size of 2 people but, well, I do want to disagree.This is a review from Macworld, certainly a loyalist publication, which likes the design of the 4S. Now of course not everyone was happy there were no design changes but your the one assigning a motivation by saying it's because they won't be able to show off their 'new status symbol'. Considering that's quite an obviously vain complaint I don't think many people would have articulated like that, it sounds suspiciously like a straw man argument designed to back up your argument. It sounds suspiciously like the quote that gained popularity after it was articulated in a Samsung advert, now I don't have to explain that Samsung are the competition and are unlikely to portray the iPhone in a positive light.



It has this because it's coming down from a very dominant base. It takes time for them to disappear, they are declining fast. It's also still popular in the developing world on cheap phones, Nokia still uses it for cheap phones sold in India for example.

The brand loyalty comes from the interlinking via iTunes, people with an iPod will already likely have many purchases on iTunes and will have all this content available to them in their iPhone/pad/mac. It doesn't make any one of these products superior but all in all it does make sense that if you own one to go for the set if/when you want one of the other devices. Asside from the Mac itself ironicly as apple decided to make iTunes x86 compatible.
Basicly Im claiming that a lot of the iPhones success can be attributed to the success of the iPod, and Apples choice to close iTunes to other devices.

You can disagree with me all you want but your link to macworld is no more credible than the two people I have spoken to. Would you accept similar reviews from an android based publication? And I don't remember even seeing this Samsung advert you keep linking to. And I never said the design wasn't praised on its own merit, just like with the 4 the fans liked the look of the 4s because it looked the same, they couldn't deny it given the praise they had given the 4 at launch. What they didn't like about it was that it looked exactly the same as the 4 so they couldn't be told apart by the untrained eye. And the only possible reason I can fathom for this is to show off.

I don't really see your point? I didn't deny It wasn't falling I think you got hung up on what I pointed out about them being higher than IOS. However the main point of that was to say that their market share has not been acquired by apple but rather android.

[Damien]

Originally Posted by ZrByte

You can disagree with me all you want but your link to macworld is no more credible than the two people I have spoken to. Would you accept similar reviews from an android based publication?

You talking about the motivations of Apple loyalists. What would Android have to do with it? Find me a review from a pro-apple application and bemoans the fact they can't show off.

I don't really see your point? I didn't deny It wasn't falling I think you got hung up on what I pointed out about them being higher than IOS. However the main point of that was to say that their market share has not been acquired by apple but rather android.

No, it's being taken by both Android and Apple. In the last year both of those platforms increased their market share, therefore they are both taking it at the expense of others.

[ZrByte]

Originally Posted by Damien

You talking about the motivations of Apple loyalists. What would Android have to do with it? Find me a review from a pro-apple application and bemoans the fact they can't show off.




No, it's being taken by both Android and Apple. In the last year both of those platforms increased their market share, therefore they are both taking it at the expense of others.

Like I said I haven't seen the full figures for q4 so things may have changed but for q3 Apples fell by 1.6% and androids increased by more than 25% which was roughly the same as all the other platforms combined fell by including Apple.
No apple loyal publication is going to do that because its something that none of them can admit to even though plenty do it.
BBC news did a segment on the Iphone 4s launch which mentioned this and plenty of other publications have commented on the iPhone 4s looking like the 4 as a con rather than a pro, what other reason is there for this to be a con?

[Matt D]

iPad sales compared to PC sales...

Apple sold more iPads than HP sold PCs in Q1 2012

Originally Posted by Slashgear.com

Apple reported record fiscal Q1 2012 earnings today with sales of its iPads and Macs well exceeding rivals’ sales of PCs. Specifically, the 15.4 million units sold of iPads alone already surpass HP’s worldwide PC sales of 14.7 million as well as Lenovo’s 12.9 million and Dell’s 11.6 million units.

For the first time, Apple has surpassed HP in both computer unit sales and revenues, making it the largest computer maker.

__________________________________________________ ____________

Originally Posted by Cobbydaler

So can anyone argue Apple products aren't overpriced?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-16712089



I just can't believe people will pay inflated prices for a device which is available elsewhere with the same, if not better, functionality.

I guess they just want to be seen as 'cool'...

"Overpriced"? "inflated prices for a device which is available elsewhere with the same, if not better, functionality"?

OK, I'll give you that for the iMac. Lovely bit of kit, but far more expensive than a Windows PC with the same specs. Although a cheap Windows PC with the same specs won't have the same build quality, though.

iPhone? Fair enough. That too. Although the SIM free unlocked price of an iPhone is comparable to that of the top-end Android phones at launch, the subsidised price on a contract is always more expensive, and you tend to not get as much for your tariff.

The iPad, however, is not overpriced. In fact, all of the high-end "competition" in the tablet market (which is still actually the iPad market) released their rival tablets at the same price as the iPad. The only reason any of them are now cheaper is that hardly anyone wants to buy them.

Motorola launched the Xoom at exactly the same price points as the iPad 2.

Samsung launched the Galaxy Tab 10.1 at exactly the same price points as the iPad 2 (and IIRC the original Galaxy Tab cost the same as the iPad 1).

RIM launched the Blackberry PlayBook at exactly the same price points as the iPad 2.

HP launched the TouchPad at exactly the same price points as the iPad 2.

Sony launched the Tablet S at exactly the same price points as the iPad 2.


Of course, as Apple has the tablet market sewn up, and no one else other than Amazon seems to understand it...

Horrendously poor sales of Motorola's failed Xoom led to it receiving a massive price cut.

Horrendously poor sales of RIM's failed PlayBook led to it receiving a massive price cut.

Horrendously poor sales of HP's failed TouchPad led to it being discontinued and then sold off in a massive firesale.

Sony has recently knocked a little off the price of the Tablet S, but it's nothing compared to the drastic price cuts received by the Xoom, PlayBook, and TouchPad.

Samsung has so far resisted slashing the price of the Tab 10.1, although I doubt it has done particularly well when compared to sales of the iPad.

I would not be surprised if Samsung and Sony were reluctant to slash their prices because of the effect it may have on their image, no matter the sales.

---------- Post added at 19:06 ---------- Previous post was at 18:52 ----------

Originally Posted by ZrByte

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?

Does the S2 not play AAC files, or were they old purchases which he never converted to DRM-free iTunes Plus?

[swoop101]

Apple make some very nice looking kit, there is no argument there.

The thing that irks me is the fact that THEY decide what you can and cannot do with the equipment YOU 'buy'.
If I purchase any type of equipment, I want to do with it what I want and not be pervented and made to feel like a criminal for doing it. (jailbreaking etc)

Oh and I gave up trying to win people over years ago when the beardies went on a new crusade with the airbook.

[Hugh]

I agree with you, but most users wouldn't - they just want something that works and is easy to use, and Apple meets those criteria.

[Chris]

Originally Posted by swoop101

Apple make some very nice looking kit, there is no argument there.

The thing that irks me is the fact that THEY decide what you can and cannot do with the equipment YOU 'buy'.
If I purchase any type of equipment, I want to do with it what I want and not be pervented and made to feel like a criminal for doing it. (jailbreaking etc)

Oh and I gave up trying to win people over years ago when the beardies went on a new crusade with the airbook.

When you buy a TV made by ... Oh ... Just about any manufacturer ... What it can and cannot do is hard-wired at the factory. The thing does what the manufacturer has decided it will do, and nothing more.

Apple makes consumer electronics. They perform the function they are designed to perform and they perform it superbly well. If you want a crystal radio set you can pull apart and re-build at will, then you should buy one of those instead. But while you're doing it, reflect on the fact that the people with the
Apple kit never wanted to do that and aren't missing it.

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Chris

When you buy a TV made by ... Oh ... Just about any manufacturer ... What it can and cannot do is hard-wired at the factory. The thing does what the manufacturer has decided it will do, and nothing more.

Apple makes consumer electronics. They perform the function they are designed to perform and they perform it superbly well. If you want a crystal radio set you can pull apart and re-build at will, then you should buy one of those instead. But while you're doing it, reflect on the fact that the people with the
Apple kit never wanted to do that and aren't missing it.

Bit of a stretch to compare to compare a smartphone or tablet to a TV, when the first two are essentially light weight computing devices that are designed to have third party apps running on them. Then there's the fact that Apple seem quite keen to get an exorbitant slice of any action performed on their devices, (quietly dropped) apparently.

They like(d) making you pay for content you can't play on competitors devices.

Overall, Apple likes to set up a closed shop where they dictate the market. Some may argue that's a good thing in terms of user experience, but I have serious doubts about the consequences for the financial aspects of the consumer experience.

[Matt D]

Originally Posted by danielf

Then there's the fact that Apple seem quite keen to get an exorbitant slice of any action performed on their devices, (quietly dropped) apparently.

It was "quietly dropped" before it ever actually came into place, so what's the problem?

As for taking a cut elsewhere...

Apple takes 30% of the price of all apps sold on the App Store, with the remaining 70% going to the developer.

... which is the same split for app sales on the Windows Phone Marketplace: 30% for MS, 70% for the developer.

... which is same split for app sales on the Android Market: 30% for the carriers and payment processors, 70% for the developer.

Originally Posted by danielf

They like(d) making you pay for content you can't play on competitors devices.

...Except that it was the record companies who were responsible for imposing DRM on music purchased from iTunes. Blame them for "making you pay for content you can't play on competitors' devices". [Plus, at the time, it was the same with other devices, Apple wasn't the only company with this issue: e.g. you could only play music purchased from Microsoft's Zune store on Zune devices. Again, blame the record companies...]

In February 2007, Steve Jobs called on the "Big Four" record companies to get rid of their requirement for DRM.

Later that year, DRM-free "iTunes Plus" tracks started to be made available via iTunes. Within two years, Apple had deals in place with the major labels so that all music on iTunes would be DRM-free "iTunes Plus".

Apple didn't create the problem, but it helped bring about its solution.

https://www.apple.com/uk/hotnews/thoughtsonmusic/