Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 18th Dec 2013 17:24 UTC
Windows

2013 was nothing less than a blockbuster success for Windows Phone, which went from industry also-ran to the undisputed third mobile ecosystem, and is poised to challenge iPhone for the number two spot. You didn't think it could get this good? That's OK, neither did I.

Windows Phone seemingly turns a corner with every new application, small operating system update, and new Nokia Lumia. It's turning so many corners it's running in circles.

Order by: Score:
Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Wed 18th Dec 2013 17:33 UTC
Nelson
Member since:
2005-11-29

Thurrot is pretty much spot on here and it mirrors my thoughts exactly on Windows Phone. Microsoft has enough money, patience, and stubbornness to brute force itself mobile success.

It will pay developers, pay carriers, pay OEMs, sink massive amounts of money into marketing, and basically spare no expense to ensure the survival of Windows Phone.

The market share gains in the various regions prove exactly what I've been saying all along, and hilariously flies in the face of the naysayers on this website.

But I'm sure through some contrived logic some here will simultaneously be downbeat on Windows Phone while remaining strangely bullish about the prospects for Sailfish, Tizen, and FFOS. It used to be BB10 and Bada but those fell by the wayside (don't tell Tomi Ahonen who alot of you worship, who insisted BB10 would beat Windows Phone LOL).

Reply Score: 0

RE: Comment by Nelson
by Carewolf on Wed 18th Dec 2013 17:51 UTC in reply to "Comment by Nelson"
Carewolf Member since:
2005-09-08

Well, they continue to grow and is showing there is room for more than 2 brands, though this year most of the growth was in the new market of very cheap low-end smartphones where there is little competition and less profit. So on high-end high profit smartphones the situation is probably not nearly as good.

We know Nokia made a profit this year, the question is how close the mobile division in itself is to breaking even, that is what will determine if this is still a money sink or a stable position in the market.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by Nelson
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Wed 18th Dec 2013 18:16 UTC in reply to "Comment by Nelson"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Globally this is the growth.

Windows Phone ended 2012 with worldwide market share of 2.8 percent


By the end of this year, things are looking better, and much better in many countries. Worldwide, Windows Phone commanded 3.6 percent worldwide market share


While the individual company market shares are growing, globally its still not very growing much. The real story of the numbers is more about BB10 dying, IOS growth stagnating, and Android KILLING EVERY ONE.

I'll believe Windows phone is a real contender when someone I know (regardless of country they live in) has one.

EDIT: Or the division turns a profit. Although that's less of a concern now that its a part of Microsoft, I imagine they want a profit out of it. Rather than just driving traffic to their web services to show them ads, like Google.

Edited 2013-12-18 18:21 UTC

Reply Score: 10

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Wed 18th Dec 2013 18:19 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Yup. Success isn't simultaneous across all markets all at once, but looking at a region by region breakdown am interesting picture starts to form.

Global market share is a lagging indicator I'd say, and I expect them to make inroads there after making significant headway in these markets.

I think its fair to say though, based on the regional data that Windows Phone is doing increasingly well.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by Nelson
by ddc_ on Wed 18th Dec 2013 20:38 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Nelson"
ddc_ Member since:
2006-12-05

I think its fair to say though, based on the regional data that Windows Phone is doing increasingly well.

This reminds of the "fastest growing" xkcd comics. Sure, Windows Phone has beaten everyone on grows stats, but the actual percentage is arguable within the range of statistic fault - it may simply indicate a growth by eating up BB's market share decrease, in which case it indicates that WP is not doing well.

You are totally right that Microsoft have huge amount of resources that may help WP grow (and FWIW some Android vendors work hard to make WP look better by making their Android devices truly horrible), but it won't be right time to speak of any success until WP has at least 10% - an amount of market presence that would make it noticeable. Right now it is in the same boat with BB and arguably with Sailfish and FirefoxOS (FxOS?).

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by lucas_maximus on Wed 18th Dec 2013 19:05 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

In Europe they are doing quite well in the low end.

As much as this matters generally from feedback I had from people that I know that have one are:

* Quite happy with the phone and are pleasantly surprised. (I even heard this from a guy that used to write commericial embedded Operating Systems and is a SQL GOD).
* The girls that have them like the colours.

Disclaimer: I own a Galaxy S3 Mini.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by moondevil on Wed 18th Dec 2013 19:59 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

I'll believe Windows phone is a real contender when someone I know (regardless of country they live in) has one.


Then come to Germany, you will see quite a few around.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by jgfenix on Thu 19th Dec 2013 07:52 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
jgfenix Member since:
2006-05-25

I would say that it has more to do with the demise of Symbian inside Nokia.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by Nelson
by cdude on Thu 19th Dec 2013 19:28 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Nelson"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

Nailed. Nokia had the strongest brand loyalty and yet lost 9 out of 10 customers with WP. So, somehow 9 out of 10 ex-customers where satisfied with Symbian but are not with WP. Thats a lot. Thats with so called outdated Symbian!

Still 1 out of 10 customers stayed with Nokia and got a Lumia since Nokia does not offer anything else. And now Nokia is gone. So, what will the 1 out of 10 customer left do? Switching to Android like the other 9? Not a significant number on top of >80% market share Android but for ~3% market share WP any lost customer is, in relative percentage, another big step backwards.

Edited 2013-12-19 19:37 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by zima on Sun 22nd Dec 2013 00:15 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

I'll believe Windows phone is a real contender when someone I know (regardless of country they live in) has one.

Is that the metric? Because I know several, does that make it a raving success?

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by Nelson
by some1 on Wed 18th Dec 2013 18:43 UTC in reply to "Comment by Nelson"
some1 Member since:
2010-10-05

The market share gains in the various regions prove exactly what I've been saying all along, and hilariously flies in the face of the naysayers on this website.

Oh, this reminds me of another prediction that you've made:
http://www.osnews.com/permalink?539399
So, do you want fries with your hat?

Reply Score: 12

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by Thom_Holwerda on Wed 18th Dec 2013 18:54 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Good one.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by Nelson
by lucas_maximus on Wed 18th Dec 2013 19:11 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Nelson"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

So he is not allowed to be wrong ever, about anything?

Ridiculous.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by Nelson
by some1 on Wed 18th Dec 2013 19:16 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Nelson"
some1 Member since:
2010-10-05

Not allowed, who said that? But a bet is a bet.

Reply Score: 4

RE[5]: Comment by Nelson
by lucas_maximus on Wed 18th Dec 2013 19:17 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by Nelson"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

It is just petty point-scoring bollox. I am pretty sure I say the expression "I bet you" about 50 times a day.

Edited 2013-12-18 19:20 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment by Nelson
by some1 on Wed 18th Dec 2013 19:20 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by Nelson"
some1 Member since:
2010-10-05

Great analysis, certainly adds a lot to the discussion.

Reply Score: 4

RE[7]: Comment by Nelson
by lucas_maximus on Wed 18th Dec 2013 19:21 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by Nelson"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Great analysis, certainly adds a lot to the discussion.


And what did yours add other than "Oh you didn't predict the future correctly"?

Edited 2013-12-18 19:22 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[7]: Comment by Nelson
by SlackerD on Wed 18th Dec 2013 19:23 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by Nelson"
SlackerD Member since:
2012-01-16

Pot, meet kettle.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Comment by Nelson
by acobar on Thu 19th Dec 2013 00:46 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by Nelson"
acobar Member since:
2005-11-15

I am sorry but could you explain what is your point? Nelson is a smart guy or, at least, seems to be, but he also like to undervalue the opinions of others and act like he knows how the market will develop and brags about it, like he did on a previous post on this thread. Pointing the he was wrong serves to put things on perspective for others that don't know him very well and may be tempted to side with him.

To me, that is all about the intention of the post you are replaying to.

Edited 2013-12-19 01:01 UTC

Reply Score: 7

RE[7]: Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Thu 19th Dec 2013 04:39 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by Nelson"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Just wanted to add, I was right about where the market was going, albeit a little slower than I imagined (due to what in hindsight is a pricing, marketing, and distribution problem).

http://techcrunch.com/2013/12/18/low-surface-inventory-could-hamper...

Microsoft was more conservative this time around with Surface volumes, but demand is outstripping supply. Retail channels reporting devices are popular.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Comment by Nelson
by some1 on Thu 19th Dec 2013 08:02 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by Nelson"
some1 Member since:
2010-10-05

He doesn't have a point. He's an ass clown provided here for our entertainment.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by Nelson
by segedunum on Thu 19th Dec 2013 19:08 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Nelson"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

It doesn't lend much credibility to the arguments he's making now, does it?

There will always be a perfect storm in his world for Windows to saunter into............

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Thu 19th Dec 2013 19:29 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by Nelson"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

I'm pretty sure we're looking at the same market share data in the article above, the only difference is that you're probably closing your eyes (and/or burying your head in the sand).

I don't need credibility lent to me by some tangential prediction about another market, because the report speaks for itself.

So, I was bold enough to make a prediction, was wrong, and owned up to it. A lot more than can be said for a lot here who in the rare event they actually stick their neck out and make a prediction, never own up when it doesn't materialize.

Edited 2013-12-19 19:29 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment by Nelson
by segedunum on Thu 19th Dec 2013 19:55 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by Nelson"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

I'm pretty sure we're looking at the same market share data in the article above, the only difference is that you're probably closing your eyes (and/or burying your head in the sand).

We've seen the same market share data before about Windows Phone, and Surface, and Windows RT for that matter (and the same ridiculous 'selling out' story)........and the inevitable bad news surfaces later. It's Paul fricking Thurrott for crying out loud.

Same difference.

I don't need credibility lent to me by some tangential prediction about another market, because the report speaks for itself.

OK, you don't need credibility, which is fine because you don't have any.

Of course the report speaks for itself, just as the Windows RT and Surface sales figures have and just as countless prior reports on the success of Windows Phone, or subsequent lack of it, have done.

See a pattern?

So, I was bold enough to make a prediction, was wrong...

...and you're making further very similar predictions. See a pattern?

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Thu 19th Dec 2013 20:06 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by Nelson"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

The report is from KWP, not PT. Every other media outlet ran with the report the day it dropped, and came to the same conclusion. That's where my head in the sand comment comes from.

You don't attack the sources, you attack the author of an article summarizing various sources. Very telling.

IDC, Canalys, and Gartner all come to the same conclusion.

IDC:
http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS24442013

Canalys:
http://www.canalys.com/newsroom/quarter-billion-smart-phones-ship-q...

Gartner:
http://techcrunch.com/2013/11/14/gartner-456m-phones-sold-in-q3-55-...

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Comment by Nelson
by JAlexoid on Sun 22nd Dec 2013 10:20 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Nelson"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

He is allowed to be wrong. But yacking that he was right all along and telling people all the time that they are dead wrong results in a backlash...

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Wed 18th Dec 2013 18:57 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Nope. You got me. That was a bad call, ouch.

That's the fun in this though, you look at the information available, make a prediction and sometimes it pans out and sometimes it doesn't.

Though I will point out that the Surface went on to outsell the Nexus 10 (mums the word on that here though...).

Edited 2013-12-18 19:00 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by Nelson
by some1 on Wed 18th Dec 2013 19:12 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Nelson"
some1 Member since:
2010-10-05

You forgot the part where you use fudged data and flawed logic to try to make it seem to "pan out" for as long as you can.

Reply Score: 6

RE[4]: Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Wed 18th Dec 2013 19:25 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Nelson"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

I believe I've very seldom spoken specifically on Surface sales, afaik there was one specific report that cited around a 7.5% market share for Windows Tablets, and I haven't kept up with it since because the reports aren't as frequent, but that's to my knowledge my only comments regarding specific Surface sales.

During the write down post on OSNews I believe I commented on the mismanagement of the supply, and it may have been here on on Twitter that I shared my thoughts on the fumbled messaging surrounding the Surface.

This is all an aside but I do remain optimistic for Windows tablets in general because of how nascent the tablet market is, but I'm not as confident in Microsoft's ability to push Surface like I was a year ago.

A few positive catalysts are Microsoft's rapidly improving retail footprint, Windows 8.1, reseller and volume licensing, enterprise deals, and pricing for the new line of Surface products.

On the negative side Surface needs a stronger value proposition and the app situation needs to improve at a faster pace, but we'll see.

Reply Score: 5

RE[4]: Comment by Nelson
by lucas_maximus on Wed 18th Dec 2013 19:29 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Nelson"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Vendetta much?

Did you save the bookmark like some mental Stalker so you can feel vindicated after things panned out how you wanted it to be?

The guy was wrong about Tablet sales ... you were right.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U12bWXqxgXM

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Comment by Nelson
by segedunum on Thu 19th Dec 2013 19:15 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by Nelson"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Did you save the bookmark like some mental Stalker so you can feel vindicated after things panned out how you wanted it to be?

Why would he need to save a bookmark? His comment history if full of it.

The guy was wrong about Tablet sales ... you were right.

Looks very similar to the triumphant predictions made about phones, doesn't it?

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: Comment by Nelson
by lucas_maximus on Thu 19th Dec 2013 19:20 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by Nelson"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Why would he need to save a bookmark? His comment history if full of it.


Well it is quite obvious he did. Since it was a specific post.

Looks very similar to the triumphant predictions made about phones, doesn't it?


Well Nokia are 1 out of 10 phones in the UK now, , In Spain Android has a monopoly (according to a magazine that was left at reception we were looking at). Depends where you go whether Windows Phones are selling well.

It kinda like people that said nobody uses Opera when in quite a few European Countries the percentage of people using the browser was higher than IE8 (this was a few years back, mind you).

Global usage statistics are meaningless if your business is local or national.

Edited 2013-12-19 19:24 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[7]: Comment by Nelson
by segedunum on Thu 19th Dec 2013 19:25 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by Nelson"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Well it is quite obvious he did. Since it was a specific post.

You just have to peruse his comment history for three minutes. It's not hard because it's crystal clear where he's coming from and what he comments on.

Besides, it's mildly amusing that some people seem to be upset that he's been called out.

Reply Score: 4

RE[7]: Comment by Nelson
by cdude on Thu 19th Dec 2013 20:21 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by Nelson"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21


Global usage statistics are meaningless if your business is local or national.


http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/news/press/2011/feb11/02-11partnersh...

"Nokia and Microsoft Announce Plans for a Broad Strategic Partnership to Build a New Global Mobile Ecosystem"

The keyword is GLOBAL and its direct in the headline. That comes direct from Microsoft and Nokia. Its THE point. WP is a global strategy and so global usage statstics makes most sense if you try to evaluate success/failure of there "New Global Mobile Ecosystem" strategy.

But even if we ignore that, US was and is there main target market... [silence]

Edited 2013-12-19 20:32 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by Nelson
by shmerl on Wed 18th Dec 2013 18:45 UTC in reply to "Comment by Nelson"
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

Pouring money into a dead horse won't make it run faster. Zombie horse is an option though.

Edited 2013-12-18 18:46 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by lucas_maximus on Wed 18th Dec 2013 19:13 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

It isn't dead, it just hasn't reached it peak.

Disclaimer: I sometimes provide pool betting solutions for horse racing ;-)

Edited 2013-12-18 19:13 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by Nelson
by bassbeast on Thu 19th Dec 2013 12:51 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Nelson"
bassbeast Member since:
2007-11-11

RT IS dead,MSFT has been talking about how they don't need 3 OSes. Since WinPhone is growing (albeit slowly) and Windows is still making money? That leaves RT on the block. Meh I always thought WOA was a dumb idea, Intel and AMD were making lower and lower powered chips so X86 was bound to catch up.

As for TFA? Ever hear of a Pyrrhic victory? Just as Xbox may not have made a profit yet (when you figure in the losses on the 3 consoles plus the R&D of all 3) MSFT can sink piles of money into becoming #3 in what is basically a 3 man race (MozPhone and the rest are really more geek toys than mainstream contenders, at least at this point) but if they never make a cent off of it was it really worth doing? Since the rise of Apple and consumer focused electronics MSFT has shown they are good at spending money, coming up with a strategy to make a ROI after blowing all that cash? Not so much.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Comment by Nelson
by Tony Swash on Wed 18th Dec 2013 19:26 UTC in reply to "Comment by Nelson"
Tony Swash Member since:
2009-08-22

It will pay developers, pay carriers, pay OEMs, sink massive amounts of money into marketing, and basically spare no expense to ensure the survival of Windows Phone.


Why?

Seriously why should Microsoft pursue that as a business strategy?

To build something that loses more money than Bing?

I just can't see the point?

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Wed 18th Dec 2013 20:23 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

When the Surface was announced it was billed as "the stage" for Microsoft services. iDevices are a stage, Android devices are a stage, etc. What MSFT probably believes is that they can put on the best show so to speak.

Bing is deeply integrated into Windows 8.1 and Xbox for example. That level of seamlessness is hard to achieve unless you control the entire stack.

Speaking on Bing, yes it loses money but yes it also incubated Azure which makes a lot of money. Its funny how these things work.

Devices are Microsoft's weak point, or should I say was, since the Nokia acquisition brings major hardware competence that will extend beyond phones into tablets, xbox,and wearables.

Microsoft always did software well, and services are just an implementation detail of that. Now they do hardware well. And they have a ton of money.

Devices and Services allows them to control their own destiny. Look at how Apple is shutting Google out of its walled garden for example.

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: Comment by Nelson
by No it isnt on Wed 18th Dec 2013 20:26 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Nelson"
No it isnt Member since:
2005-11-14

The joke used to be that Microsoft only did hardware well. Mice, keyboards.

Reply Score: 5

RE[4]: Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Wed 18th Dec 2013 20:38 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Nelson"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

I think I'm one of the few that hates MSFT mice and keyboards.

Then again I do most of my work nowadays from a Surface 2 with a type cover (remote into a VM for running VS on a large monitor on my desk) so my "traditional" PC experience isn't what it used to be.

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Comment by Nelson
by lucas_maximus on Thu 19th Dec 2013 19:22 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Nelson"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

A lot of Microsoft mice and keyboards were made by Logitech back in the past, I have no idea if it is true now.

However my keyboard has had quite a few glasses of Vino Tinto spilled over it and it still works quite well.

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Comment by Nelson
by tkeith on Fri 20th Dec 2013 16:09 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Nelson"
tkeith Member since:
2010-09-01

I always chalk this up to drivers. Most problems people seem to have with mice are driver related. Since Microsoft makes the OS, they should logically have the least problem with drivers.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by segedunum on Thu 19th Dec 2013 19:21 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Why?

Seriously why should Microsoft pursue that as a business strategy?

Because they believe it works. They had experience with waiting a long time for Windows to amount to something, but there wasn't two entrenched operating system ahead of them with a large amount of apps written for them. Ditto for Bing. They have a blind belief that it will all come good and they won't change.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by Nelson
by theTSF on Wed 18th Dec 2013 20:06 UTC in reply to "Comment by Nelson"
theTSF Member since:
2005-09-27

Microsoft does have the power to push and withstand for a while. However it doesn't guarantee success.

The Zune never replaced the iPod, even after a strong attempt.

I think widows mobile growth, is just due to Nokia having a decent camera that works as a phone that runs Windows Mobile. If Nokia used Android they will probably sell just as many if not more units. And MS will be much further behind.

Reply Score: 6

RE: Comment by Nelson
by segedunum on Thu 19th Dec 2013 19:04 UTC in reply to "Comment by Nelson"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Thurrott is a cheerleader, as you are, who believes there is some magical pot of gold at the end of a rainbow.

You're not going to see anyone writing articles like this who isn't cheerleading for Microsoft.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Thu 19th Dec 2013 19:38 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Uh, the reports cited are from KWP and are not sourced by Paul Thurrot (as opposed to Tomi who sources numbers from himself, yet who few here ever question).

Just FYI, Thom also reported on these very same numbers. But no, no Paul Thurrot, cheerleader, right right.

*rolls eyes*

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by Nelson
by segedunum on Thu 19th Dec 2013 20:15 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Nelson"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

*rolls eyes*. I clicked on a link above and got Paul Thurrott. Funny that.

We've had countless 'reports' like this sourcing figures from anyone you care to mention (but cheerled by the same usual suspects) claiming devices 'selling out', using 'growth' as a measurement when it seems convenient to do so (150% growth to 3% outpaces the rest of the market!!) and trying to break sales down to regionals - and you usually find they are measured within very short time periods. Conveniently those short time periods coincide with special offers, free phones with a contract etc. etc.

It's such a well-worked formula I didn't even need to read it straight away to work out what it was going to say. Needless to say I wasn't surprised.

They have all, without exception, amounted to nothing in the fullness of time and their credibility, like the boy who cried wolf, diminishes with each one.

Edited 2013-12-19 20:17 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Thu 19th Dec 2013 20:25 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Nelson"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

KWP reports I believe every quarter. Might be every 6 weeks. Every being the important part there. There is no grand conspiracy by these firms to make Windows Phone look good.

IDC, Canalys, and Gartner say the same. Are they in collusion to shatter your own self delusion?

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Comment by Nelson
by segedunum on Thu 19th Dec 2013 20:35 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by Nelson"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

There is no grand conspiracy by these firms to make Windows Phone look good.

They don't say what Thurrott wants them to say I'm afraid.

IDC, Canalys, and Gartner say the same. Are they in collusion to shatter your own self delusion?

When they've been saying the same thing for the past three years or more and people like Thurrott see what they want to see and point out trends that don't exist from them and that don't come to fruition I'd call that fair evidence of a delusion.

Edited 2013-12-19 20:37 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Thu 19th Dec 2013 20:40 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by Nelson"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Leave PTs article aside and focus on the reports themselves as I've linked them above. Do they not show increasing regional market share for Windows Phone (may need to take a seat, as I'm sure this might shock you), but of course they do.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by Nelson
by segedunum on Thu 19th Dec 2013 21:11 UTC in reply to "Comment by Nelson"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Thurrot is pretty much spot on here and it mirrors my thoughts exactly on Windows Phone. Microsoft has enough money, patience, and stubbornness to brute force itself mobile success.

It will pay developers, pay carriers, pay OEMs, sink massive amounts of money into marketing, and basically spare no expense to ensure the survival of Windows Phone.

So you're admitting Windows Phone is a sinkhole for large amounts of cash. Well, they've been doing that for years on end and it's not worked.

The market share gains in the various regions prove exactly what I've been saying all along, and hilariously flies in the face of the naysayers on this website.

Throwing cheap or free phones at marginal ('regional' - ROTFL) markets is always going to give you nice nice shot in the arm. We've seen it all before. It won't last.

That's all these 'figures' tell us. Nothing has changed.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Fri 20th Dec 2013 11:24 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

I think you're confused. In fact, I don't think, I know you're confused.

Which is sad because I came into this thinking you were intelligent. Perhaps misguided and a smart ass, but intelligent.

There is proof in the KWP, IDC, Canalys, Gartner, and Windows Phone store transaction increases that Windows Phone is gaining traction.

The region by region break downs serve to illustrate that WP is growing. Nothing more, nothing less. I think your outrage comes because you think its being used to imply WP is gaining worldwide traction. Its not, at least not yet.

So for all of the accusations that I'm spinning these numbers into something they're not, it is actually you who wants to read more into this than what is there, probably because it helps your argument.

Reply Score: 3

Faint praise
by Soulbender on Wed 18th Dec 2013 17:40 UTC
Soulbender
Member since:
2005-08-18

which went from industry also-ran to the undisputed third mobile ecosystem


Eh, if this had been 2007 maybe overtaking Blackberry would have been an accomplishment but in 2013? Not so much.

Reply Score: 10

At least they can give them away
by torp on Wed 18th Dec 2013 17:42 UTC
torp
Member since:
2010-08-10

All I hear from Romanian mobile carriers is "get a Lumia smartphone free with your contract". Hard to beat free in a price sensitive market.
Note to US readers: contracts around here don't include free premium phones, the Lumia is the exception rather than the rule.

Reply Score: 6

darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

Note to US readers: contracts around here don't include free premium phones, the Lumia is the exception rather than the rule.

Neither do ours most of the time. For free, unless there's a very special promotion going on, mid range is the best you're likely to get. We're not a land of free premium phones, and our long-term contract prices will end up costing you about 4x the cost of any high-end phone you might think you're getting at a discount.

Reply Score: 3

Brendan Member since:
2005-11-16

Hi,

Neither do ours most of the time. For free, unless there's a very special promotion going on, mid range is the best you're likely to get. We're not a land of free premium phones, and our long-term contract prices will end up costing you about 4x the cost of any high-end phone you might think you're getting at a discount.


Isn't that what "free" normally means (pay nothing for the phone, and accept a 12-month or 24-month contract that costs enough extra $$ to pay for about 3 phones)?

- Brendan

Reply Score: 4

Comment by timdp
by timdp on Wed 18th Dec 2013 17:48 UTC
timdp
Member since:
2009-06-19

Oh, Thom.

Reply Score: 3

"Growth" numbers are useless
by phoenix on Wed 18th Dec 2013 17:48 UTC
phoenix
Member since:
2005-07-11

"Growth" numbers only play favourably for the smallest players. Windows Phone shows "150% growth year over year" is meaningless. Going from 1 million to 2.5 million is not that great (150% growth) when the rest of the market is counted in the billions. Sure, Android may only have a miniscule growth percentage, but the actual numbers are orders of magnitude greater.

Having "the fastest growing" anything is nothing more than verbal diarrhea. If I make up a religion with only myself as a member, wait a few months, then get 5 of my friends to join, I can legitimately brag that I have the fastest growing religion around, with over 500% quarter-over-quarter growth! Hoowhee! Yay me!

Let's see some actual numbers for Windows Phones out in the wild, and compare those numbers to iPhones and Android phones. Then you'll see just how badly things are going for MS.

Let me know when they get over a billion phones sold.

Reply Score: 15

RE: "Growth" numbers are useless
by jello on Wed 18th Dec 2013 17:57 UTC in reply to ""Growth" numbers are useless"
jello Member since:
2006-08-08

My thoughts exactly.

What some people don't realize is this:
If you run in circles and you don't change the course you will end up where you started ;)

Edited 2013-12-18 17:58 UTC

Reply Score: 0

RE: "Growth" numbers are useless
by Nelson on Wed 18th Dec 2013 17:58 UTC in reply to ""Growth" numbers are useless"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Installed base isn't useful for identifying an ongoing trend as it biases established players, quite obviously.

Nokia for example keeps posting great growth rates on similar volumes to other Android OEMs. LG was flat, Lenovo was 9%, Sony was 4%. Nokia was 19% at similar volumes.

If we're speaking for the purposes of identifying a trend then the numbers speak favorably for Windows Phone.

Edited 2013-12-18 18:08 UTC

Reply Score: 3

The123king Member since:
2009-05-28

Exactly. This whole "Nokia and Windows Phone is dead" logic is blown way out of proportion. I'm sure, if you found some numbers somewhere, Nokia has probably sold more phones than the once-kingpin Blackberry, LG, Lenovo, ZTE and all the other small-time Android device manufacturers. They've still got a long way to go to conquer Apple, Samsung and probably HTC too though.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: "Growth" numbers are useless
by acobar on Thu 19th Dec 2013 16:13 UTC in reply to "RE: "Growth" numbers are useless"
acobar Member since:
2005-11-15

Oh! Really, does it?

Lets create a hypothetical setting where we had the following market share on some unspecified time and then regularly update it with hypothetical constant sales by period:

Total sales / period (for example months or years)
Android Apple Microsoft
20 10 5

Total sales (accumulated) and initial set
Android Apple Microsoft
20 50 0
40 60 5
60 70 10
80 80 15
100 90 20
120 100 25

Market Share %
Android Apple Microsoft
28.57 71.43 0.00
38.10 57.14 4.76
42.86 50.00 7.14
45.71 45.71 8.57
47.62 42.86 9.52
48.98 40.82 10.20

Note how the initial (trend) growth of MS is staggering! Like people said, it derives from the fact that it did not had a market presence. Android is looking to be running out of gas even though it is at every period putting 4 times more phones than Microsoft! Who would thought!? The final situation after infinity time?

Market Share %
Android Apple Microsoft
57.14 28.57 14.29

Now, before you jump to conclusions, let me start arguing that, at least to me, the worst case scenery is to see Google achieve the same market dominance that MS once had on desktops. I would like to see them, Microsoft, succeed, first and foremost, to have a more balanced market and to improve competition, what is good for us all, and not only stockholders minority.

I also think that MS has a nice development tooling and a strong business appeal but, unluckily to them, and I am talking from a business customer perspective, their later steps on licensing generated a lot of dissatisfaction between their very own installed base. I used to like them when their only worry was to sell "good" products by fair values but it all changed under MS Ballmer umbrella. Also, their politics toward Android manufactures is despicable, to say the least. Lets hope they have the time and willingness to correct their steps. I am not standing still for that, though.

Edited 2013-12-19 16:15 UTC

Reply Score: 3

Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

No. How about we don't create a hypothetical and actually use real numbers from real financials of the companies I mention. Those were their growth rates.

People trot out the "from a low base" argument which is probably because its the last leg they have to stand on.

What they leave out is that Nokia had similar volumes to all of these OEMs individually, but is still growing more strongly. LG especially was flat QoQ and Sony had anemic growth.

I will also point out that Nokia had strong 19% sequential growth during what traditionally is their slowest quarter, and Q4s growth trajectory could be even higher.

I understand fully that the 150% YoY growth comes from a low base initially, but that's precisely why o eont cite them (seriously, look at my comment history) and instead cite Nokia's volume shipments compared to the other Android OEMs.

Reply Score: 3

acobar Member since:
2005-11-15

And where are we going to get the real numbers from? Apple, Microsoft, Samsung and all others use "shipment", "produced" or "available to customer purchase" instead of really "sold to final customers" numbers, what is understandable from strategy / tracking POV. The problem is that we only get the real results when they have to make available their balance.

Also note that my main argument is that at any period what counts is the proportion of each shipment and not what it was before, like yourself asked for. The other things are not "for real" as market is something that keeps changing all the time.

Anyway, what is really important to know is who can keep timely shipping improved and desired devices to an ever evolving market, and to this point this important "index" is not all set yet but, and I guess you agree, Google has showed an impressive track to now.

Edited:

Ops, my bad, looks like on Android case we can get numbers of "activated" devices directly from Google. Forgive my naiveness on this case.

Edited 2013-12-19 17:18 UTC

Reply Score: 1

Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

I think its hard to pin a specific down to the last phone number on actual end user sales (because OEMs don't control the retail experience and aren't tracking phones moving over sales counters).

What can give at least some insight is the inventory levels that the companies maintain, which is something that is usually detailed in financial reports. Channel stuffing as its called generally leads to a dip the following quarter as retailers cut back on purchases.

At least in Nokia's case, the shipment numbers keep increasing at a pretty good rate.

Reply Score: 3

segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

People trot out the "from a low base" argument which is probably because its the last leg they have to stand on.

Microsoft has never had more than around 3% market share for Windows Phone, or whatever its various incarnations were called at various times.

When figures like 50%, 100%, or 150% growth are trotted out that's the only leg 'they' have to stand on because it's pure number play.

What they leave out is that Nokia had similar volumes to all of these OEMs individually

Of course you'll say that, and insert Nokia for Windows Phone and vice versa where it suits you.

.....and instead cite Nokia's volume shipments compared to the other Android OEMs.

....and you're doing it again. This is about Windows Phone.

Android has the benefit of much greater supply and suppliers, which is why Android has such a large market share. Microsoft is not going to get anywhere by trying to make Nokia their personal 'iPhone' division and throwing cheap phones at marginal markets to try and boost their sales numbers and apparent growth.

I predict in a few months we'll see a several hundred million dollar writedown and a whole bunch of losses, because that is all that can be happening here. If you have lower volumes you need higher margins. If you have higher volumes then you might be able to make selling phones in Mexico profitable. Otherwise, it's creative accounting.

Edited 2013-12-19 20:52 UTC

Reply Score: 1

Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

....and you're doing it again. This is about Windows Phone.

Android has the benefit of much greater supply and suppliers, which is why Android has such a large market share. Microsoft is not going to get anywhere by trying to make Nokia their personal 'iPhone' division and throwing cheap phones at marginal markets to try and boost their sales numbers and apparent growth.


Actually they're going to get very far, and already are seeing great traction at those price points.

Furthermore, I think its a bit myopic to assume that Nokia will be the single OEM moving forward, and that another OEM or collection of OEMs wont come in to add significant volumes.

There are rumors of Microsoft partnering with regional OEMs to release WP devices, couple that with free licenses for the OS and you have an OS which performs better than Android on lower end hardware, and that is as cheap, or cheaper (due to legal uncertainty surrounding Android).


I predict in a few months we'll see a several hundred million dollar writedown and a whole bunch of losses, because that is all that can be happening here. If you have lower volumes you need higher margins. If you have higher volumes then you might be able to make selling phones in Mexico profitable. Otherwise, it's creative accounting.


Its fascinating to see you have such a primitive understanding of how things work, but sure, ill take you up on that bet. There wont be a Nokia/WP related write down. That's absurd.

Reply Score: 3

glarepate Member since:
2006-01-04

Actually the installed base numbers do identify a trend.

With an installed base estimated to reach as high as 45 million by the end of this year MSFT's phone OS will have slightly more phones in use than were sold in the last 5 quarters.

The trend this indicates is that they are selling new phones to users who are just replacing an existing WP device with a new one and/or that most of the users who bought these devices in the last 3 years have moved to other platforms.

As a growth story this is interesting but not dynamic.

Reply Score: 1

Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

That number is a forecast by ABI Research done in February, id say its a bit of a reach to draw conclusions without a follow up.

I'd say that measuring this kind of thing is notoriously difficult, but what probably can serve as an indicator is app store transactions and developer revenue. Both of which are sharply up for WP.

I don't know of any way to reliably measure churn like that and I'm wary of those kind of reports.

Reply Score: 3

tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

LG was flat, Lenovo was 9%, Sony was 4%. Nokia was 19% at similar volumes.


LG sold 12 million units in Q3, Sony moved 10 million xperias during that period. Nokia moved 8.8 million lumias, or 36% and 14% less than LG and Sony respectively. As usual, it depends what you mean by "similar."

From Q1 to Q2 Sony actually managed to hit the same 19% growth rate, actually surpassing Nokia in unit shipped for 2013. Does that mean Xperias are on the same boat to success as you claim Nokia to be?


In any case LG and Sony, not being the main Android OEMs, still managed to ship 150% more units on their "flat" quarter than Nokia did on their best record quarter.

Edited 2013-12-20 22:12 UTC

Reply Score: 1

Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

No, Sony's growth was anemic for the past few quarters. I believe last time we touched on this subject I pulled Sony's financials for the past few quarters and showed how they're more or less stagnant.

On the other hand, Nokia has had sequential double digit growth for as many quarters. So lets leave the false equivalence right at the door.

I think its fair to say that the volumes are similar, or to put it another way, its getting more difficult to attribute their shipment increases solely to coming from a low base.

Edited 2013-12-21 00:40 UTC

Reply Score: 3

tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

What false equivalence? You touted 19% quarter to quarter growth as something remarkable as far as Nokia is concerned. And yet when I point out Sony managed a similar growth rate in the previous quarter (Q1 to Q2), all of the sudden you want to change the conversation.


LG still managed to ship almost 4 million more units than Nokia on a stagnant quarter (for LG) vs. Nokia's best quarter as far as Lumias are cocerned. I guess our definitions of "equivalent" are not so equivalent then.

Edited 2013-12-21 02:58 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

What were the Sony growth rates for every quarter this past year? Hint: Its not pretty. I know the answer, but since you're playing dumb, maybe some homework might serve as a refresher.

LG had zero, none, probably negative growth this quarter. While they are still ahead of Nokia in absolute volume, they are much closer now (3.2m this quarter vs 4.7m last quarter).

Put your thinking cap on son.

Reply Score: 3

tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

Sony had -7%, 19%, and 5% growth rates for the 3 quarters this year.

Thus highlighting the fact that a 19% growth figure out of context is nothing exceptional, if Sony with the lackluster Xperia line can pull it out. Sony also sold more Xperia units than Nokia has managed to push during 2013. So there's also that...

PS. This Quarter is far from over, so where are you getting your figures from. Specially since Nokia completely missed the big Black Friday/Christmas window with regards to Verizon, for example.

Edited 2013-12-21 03:56 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Nokia has 27%, 32% and 19% grown for the first three quarters. Nokia is not Sony, and in fact they have outpaced them every quarter so far.

Re the LG figures, I meant as of Q3.
For Q4, we'll see, but I wouldn't be surprised to see a stronger growth rate due to seasonality.

Reply Score: 3

phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

Hence why I said "growth" numbers are useless.

Look at the actual numbers of units shipped for each of them. Overall, Sony shipped more units than Nokia. LG shipped more units than Nokia.

Everyone shipped more units than Nokia; separate, combined, however you want to calculate them.

Reply Score: 2

RE: "Growth" numbers are useless
by segedunum on Thu 19th Dec 2013 20:21 UTC in reply to ""Growth" numbers are useless"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

"Growth" numbers only play favourably for the smallest players. Windows Phone shows "150% growth year over year" is meaningless. Going from 1 million to 2.5 million is not that great (150% growth) when the rest of the market is counted in the billions. Sure, Android may only have a miniscule growth percentage, but the actual numbers are orders of magnitude greater.

Having "the fastest growing" anything is nothing more than verbal diarrhea.

Indeed. They do this every single time and it's the same well worked, well worn formula because it's all they have. They like to try and argue 'trends' to get people imagining what Windows Phone will do in the future.

The part where Thurrott claims that Windows Phone is poised to challenge the iPhone on that basis was hilarious when in reality the iPhone has hit a ceiling with their limited supply and Android is the one taking some of its market share.

Edited 2013-12-19 20:25 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: "Growth" numbers are useless
by Nelson on Fri 20th Dec 2013 11:25 UTC in reply to "RE: "Growth" numbers are useless"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Paul Thurrots unfounded assertion is incorrect because your unfounded assertion is. Can't make this stuff up.

Reply Score: 3

MS made so many blunders
by ronaldst on Wed 18th Dec 2013 17:57 UTC
ronaldst
Member since:
2005-06-29

They waited way too long to focus on low end handsets. The Lumia 520 proved a success for them and Microkia.

Reply Score: 3

RE: MS made so many blunders
by bnolsen on Thu 19th Dec 2013 03:17 UTC in reply to "MS made so many blunders"
bnolsen Member since:
2006-01-06

I would agree. if anything microsoft was fortunate that they hit the market at the right time when dumping nokia 520s at a time when "high end" phone upgrades are becoming incrementally more inconsequential. I mean 5" 4k screens. seriously??? The current resolutions are already overkill.

If anything microsoft finally figured out how to become somewhat competetive right when we're starting to see the final days of very high profitability in mobile. The carriers and phone manufacturers will try to sustain things with locked bootloaders (go to hell verizon and at&t re galaxy s4) and premature EOL on devices.

Welcome to the beginning of complete commoditization in mobile.

Reply Score: 4

RE: MS made so many blunders
by glarepate on Thu 19th Dec 2013 19:49 UTC in reply to "MS made so many blunders"
glarepate Member since:
2006-01-04

They announced that they were focusing on low end handsets shortly after the 800 was announced.

The 6xx series was supposed to be a move in that direction. Those and the 5xx series were just too little, too late.

Reply Score: 1

Turning the corner
by WorknMan on Wed 18th Dec 2013 18:04 UTC
WorknMan
Member since:
2005-11-13

I don't think things are really going to take off for Windows phone until Microsoft has WP and Windows RT running the same apps, something that should've happened when Windows 8 first launched.

Personally, I'd be excited over the prospect of being able to run the same apps on phone, tablet, and desktop. Not like I'd do any 'heavy lifting' on the desktop with phone/tablet apps, but if I could do some data entry on those and then sync with Skydrive? That would rock.

With Android, I might be lucky enough to get some web app to use on the desktop, but sometimes not. And even if I do, it's a crapshoot whether there will be an accompanying browser extension to get notifications on the desktop. So at best, I always have to have a browser running in the background, and probably Chrome, which I don't use day-to-day anyway. (I prefer Firefox.) One thing that Metro is good at is running stuff in the background, as opposed to a bloated Win32 app always running in the task tray.

And, let's face it... there are some tablet apps where there are simply no decent desktop alternatives. For example, several good choices for podcatchers on Android, but none for Windows. (And anyone who says 'iTunes' or 'Zune' is getting stabbed in the eye ;) )

Reply Score: 4

New phone
by lancealot on Wed 18th Dec 2013 18:45 UTC
lancealot
Member since:
2007-02-25

I recently purchased a new phone, and I really wanted to consider a Windows phone (Lumia 1020) or even a Blackberry. When it came down to it my only two legitimate choices ended up being a iPhone or Android phone because they supported two important apps I needed (bank app and business voip app). So really the choice came down to app support for myself. WP didn't have the applications I needed, and BB might have worked using the Android emulation layer, but I didn't want to take my chances on app stability. In addition I liked the keyboard replacements for Android (Swiftkey) over all of the other keyboards out there (BB10 keyboard comes in a close second). So in the end I ended up getting a Nexus 5 because of the features and price. I couldn't be happier, this phone is a huge improvement over my previous Gingerbread phone (HTC Evo).

I know people have different reasons to choose a phone, but in my case it was app support. I really wanted a Lumia 1020 for the camera, or a Blackberry Z30 for QNX, but ultimately the choice came down to the phone that suited all my needs, and that was the Nexus 5 (features, app support, and price).

This might have all been different if Blackberry would support the Google PlayStore. If Blackberry wants real consumer market share, then offering the ability to use the PlayStore as a option would be huge considering their new OS supports Android 4.2.2 now. I know they might have to bow to Google to some requirements for this to happen, but I see benefits for them both. The only device I know to have accomplished this for the most part has been the Nook. Too bad Blackberry couldn't have done something similar.

Reply Score: 4

RE: New phone
by richard.shepherd1969 on Wed 18th Dec 2013 19:12 UTC in reply to "New phone"
richard.shepherd1969 Member since:
2011-10-03

Exactly. I have owned IPhones, Androids, Windows phones, Blackberry and even HP Pres. As phones they are all fine and the core feature are all pretty much present these days. My favourite is WP (I currently have a Lumia 920) but I keep having to go back to Android or iOS because I need my Banking app and a medical calculator which are only available on these platforms. If they were then I would use WP.

Reply Score: 2

Not yet there...
by reduz on Wed 18th Dec 2013 19:40 UTC
reduz
Member since:
2006-02-25

We still don't know if the "success" of Windows Phone can be replicated without the Nokia brand.

Next year will be the final challenge WP will have to face before settling itself as the 3rd mobile OS.

Reply Score: 4

So far, so good
by ano69 on Wed 18th Dec 2013 19:46 UTC
ano69
Member since:
2006-07-07

Currently the users of Windows Phone buy my app more than Android users despite the sheer market size of Android.

The problem with Android apps is the spam in the Google Play Store. My apps do have though times gaining visibility among the others. The competition is good thing, but this severally limits the choice for the end user by giving him MUCH choice.

Reply Score: 3

Turning the wrong corner
by phti on Wed 18th Dec 2013 20:12 UTC
phti
Member since:
2012-06-02

You might meet some people like these. Be warned.

http://youtu.be/Q7xVrI-tUIQ

Reply Score: 3

RE: Turning the wrong corner
by shmerl on Wed 18th Dec 2013 22:51 UTC in reply to "Turning the wrong corner"
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

Was this ad supposed to freak out any potential customer so they'd never consider buying from MS again?

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Turning the wrong corner
by glarepate on Thu 19th Dec 2013 19:53 UTC in reply to "RE: Turning the wrong corner"
glarepate Member since:
2006-01-04

My impression was that it was designed to prey on those who see WP as being as good a choice as the mullet.

It would also target those with an appreciation for satire.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Turning the wrong corner
by mightshade on Thu 19th Dec 2013 12:09 UTC in reply to "Turning the wrong corner"
mightshade Member since:
2008-11-20

Wow, I never thought there are hair salons in Wonderland. ;)

Reply Score: 2

Comment by M.Onty
by M.Onty on Wed 18th Dec 2013 20:20 UTC
M.Onty
Member since:
2009-10-23

Preface: I know I run the risk of being asked why I bother to comment on topics that don't interest me much. however I feel that OSNews is a bit of a community as well as a news site, so I generally read a couple of threads a week regardless of the topics available.

That said: I know its Pantomime season, but the "Oh yes it is", "Oh no it isn't", repeat ad nauseam tone of these Windows Phone debates is really tiresome. What is the point of making distant sales figures so personal when we may as well all be betting on the horses?

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by M.Onty
by joekiser on Wed 18th Dec 2013 21:25 UTC in reply to "Comment by M.Onty"
joekiser Member since:
2005-06-30
v Wait until the "Nokia" branding disappears
by jnemesh on Wed 18th Dec 2013 23:28 UTC
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Wrong. Microsoft can use the Lumia brand.

Reply Score: 5

glarepate Member since:
2006-01-04

And not just Lumia but Asha as well.

Reply Score: 2

mkone Member since:
2006-03-14

Lumia is not "Nokia".

Microsoft cannot create any new handsets with the name "Nokia".

Reply Score: 2

Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

I didn't say they could.

Reply Score: 3

zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Also Nokia brand for non-smartphones?

Reply Score: 2

JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

And we will truly see how non Nokia phones get on.
But we will probably not, because it all(Limia + Nokia Asha) will be lumped into one number.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by TBPrince
by TBPrince on Thu 19th Dec 2013 00:02 UTC
TBPrince
Member since:
2005-07-06

I'm amazed by the fact that lots of people will simply not acknowledge bare facts. And, BTW, it is beyond me why Thom hates Nokia (more than Windows Phone and Windows 8, of course).

We're not discussing which phone is better but numbers show a steady growth for WP, to the point that in many areas WP (which is basically Nokia) surpassed iOS.

Here in Italy, for example, reports show that WP share is over 16%. There are a few carriers advertising Samsung and Apple this Xmas. Many of them are promoting Nokias and those Lumias are everywhere. iOS is gone, struck at about 12% and dropping.

Let me add that it's not WP alone. You guys are underestimating the Nokia brand. We always loved Nokia here and people was stating things like "Yeah, I bought this nice Samsung phone. It's nice and cool. Sigh... I wish it was a Nokia...". Now that Nokia is back, people are flooding stores to buy them. Good? Wrong? Don't know... they're numbers and they state 16%.

There's no doubt that part of those results came from Apple drop and that definitely teaches a lesson : when you have no technology, don't play the big boy role with the ones who are providing technology to you. Apple just confirmed they're great sellers and a good marketing machine. Others provided Apple all technologies they had and Apple was great at making packages.

When the big guys started to wonder why they should provide all that technology to a company which was developing nothing at all except for shiny packages, only to be rewarded by floods of legal actions and decided to keep their great technology for their own devices, Apple fell like a stone in the water.

Now, I hope that they will come up with something new and great, just to light up competition, but during past 2 years they weren't able to keep up the pace and proved that selling others' technologies is not a good way to go for the long term.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by TBPrince
by joekiser on Thu 19th Dec 2013 04:43 UTC in reply to "Comment by TBPrince"
joekiser Member since:
2005-06-30

Now that Nokia is back, people are flooding stores to buy them.


What happens in six months when Nokia is gone?

Reply Score: 2

benali72
Member since:
2008-05-03

Better, more objective statistics are at Techcrunch --
http://techcrunch.com/2013/11/04/windows-phone-one-in-10/

Reply Score: 2

glarepate Member since:
2006-01-04

Did you mean to say more objective rather than more selective?

Because the article points out the exceptions ; markets where the phones are selling better than they are in the overall market. Globally market share in still tiny and is staying that way.

Reply Score: 2

Europeans...
by galvanash on Thu 19th Dec 2013 15:35 UTC
galvanash
Member since:
2006-01-25

According to Kantar Worldpanel, Windows Phone in Q3 commanded 8.2 percent market share in the five biggest European markets—UK, Germany, France, Italy and Spain—exceeding 10 percent in some of them.


I'm used to people on this forum asking me "what the f*ck is wrong with you Americans" because, well..., we do a lot of weird stuff ;)

But I have to ask after reading this (for my friends on the other side of the pond):

What the f*ck is wrong with you Europeans?

Seriously though, WHY is Windows Phone selling so much better in Europe?

I don't get it. Do you use phones differently there? Is it different pricing? Is it more about Nokia than the OS? What is it? What makes Windows Phone sell at twice the rate it does in the states?

Edited 2013-12-19 15:37 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE: Europeans...
by chithanh on Thu 19th Dec 2013 17:14 UTC in reply to "Europeans..."
chithanh Member since:
2006-06-18

Seriously though, WHY is Windows Phone selling so much better in Europe?

I don't get it. Do you use phones differently there? Is it different pricing? Is it more about Nokia than the OS?

A large part is indeed Nokia brand loyalty. People keep on buying Nokia phones, though fewer than during Symbian times.

The OS itself is not in demand, or as one European mobile carrier executive famously put it, "no one comes into the store and asks for a Windows Phone."
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hardware/european-carriers-nokias-lumia-s...

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Europeans...
by Nelson on Thu 19th Dec 2013 18:18 UTC in reply to "RE: Europeans..."
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

You're citing a report from 2012 in response to Windows Phone turning a corner in 2013?

I know that the Nokia brand being the only reason the phones sell is a popular narrative around here, but its pretty much impossible to tell until the Nokia brand ceases to be in use.

Fortunately, the Microsoft deal closes in Q1 with the new branding coming into effect in earnest around Q2-Q3.

Its likely that until then we won't know with any degree of confidence. Stop guessing.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Europeans...
by glarepate on Thu 19th Dec 2013 20:13 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Europeans..."
glarepate Member since:
2006-01-04

I know that the Nokia brand being the only reason the phones sell is a popular narrative around here, but its pretty much impossible to tell until the Nokia brand ceases to be in use.


The fact that Nokia now has 90% of all sales of the OS kind of flies in the face of your assertion that it's impossible to tell whether the OS sells on it's own merits.

Huawei, having displaced HTC in this niche, is now number two in winphones and they are part of that 10% that is not Nokia.

LG quit offering them due to lack of sales.

Samsung can't sell them in any meaningful volume either.

If the OS is that attractive it should have had some halo effect on the other vendors instead of causing Nokia to kill all the others off.

Whistling past the graveyard ...

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Europeans...
by Nelson on Thu 19th Dec 2013 20:18 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Europeans..."
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

I think that Nokia owns 90% of Windows Phone because its relative to the amount of effort they put in. Can't remember the last time I even saw an advertisement for another OEMs Windows Phone.

It also has to do with the fact that Nokia has a device at every price point in many, many more markets than Samsung, HTC, et all.

Nokia also has significant value-add, has Microsoft matched funding for carrier promotion, and very aggressively prices their devices. You can get a 520 for $60 in the states.

I'll agree to disagree until 2014.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Europeans...
by zima on Sun 22nd Dec 2013 00:29 UTC in reply to "Europeans..."
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Seriously though, WHY is Windows Phone selling so much better in Europe?
I don't get it. Do you use phones differently there?

Winphone does seem to work quite good as an "advanced feature phone" of sorts, for people whose life don't resolve around their phone; at least the situation with apps isn't so bad in such case...

Reply Score: 2

Hyperbole!
by mkone on Fri 20th Dec 2013 18:07 UTC
mkone
Member since:
2006-03-14

Windows Phone is doing OK. Not great.

Calling 2013 a blockbuster year for Windows Phone is verging on hyperbole.

Given that Nokia is the only significant Windows Phone shop, why would they sell the handset division if Windows Phone was doing spectacularly?

The assertion just doesn't make any sense.

Reply Score: 1