Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 14th Aug 2012 22:17 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless You wouldn't believe it, but something actually, truly interesting came out of the Apple vs. Samsung lawsuit yesterday. Apple had conducted a survey to find out why, exactly, consumers opted to go with Android instead of the iPhone. The results are fascinating - not only do they seem to invalidate Apple's claims, they provide an unusual insight into consumer behaviour. The gist? People choose Android not because it's an iPhone copy - they choose it because of Android's unique characteristics.
Thread beginning with comment 531216
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: Comment by Tony Swash
by puenktchen on Wed 15th Aug 2012 13:03 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by Tony Swash"
puenktchen
Member since:
2007-07-27

It wasn't until the PC market was vastly oversaturated - the last few years - that Apple could stage its comeback.


I'd rather say it wasn't until Apple had a. pulled the plug from the clones b. again designed somewhat special hardware (starting with the Imac) and c. ditched the antiquated Mac OS for OSX. I don't think relevant number of customers bought a Mac just because they where bored by all the Wintel boxes standing around in their house.

Many people point to Apple's share of PC market profits *right now* as an indication Apple will do fine as a 5-10% player in mobile, but these people conveniently forget that for the 15 years before that, Apple was on the verge of bankruptcy and making virtually no money in the PC space.


Not really, they only posted a big loss in 96 and 97 and a very small one in 2001. 1999 and 2000 where better than ever, I'd guess most other computer makers wouldn't dream of 10% margin. These years look very modest compared to the apple of today, but apple was far from bankruptcy but a moderately successful company.

The iPod saved Apple's PC business - not the PC business itself.


The Ipod only started to take of in 2004.

This means that in order for Apple with a marginalised mobile market share to survive, it will need the next great thing.


Only if they want to continue to reap profits which remind me of a monopoly (like say microsoft). They might still survive as a company with normal profits if they don't. That might even be better for their customers.

We're not talking about today or even tomorrow (what Apple fans usually focus on) - we're talking about 5-10 years from now. Apple is competing in the court room because it knows it can't keep up with the android platform via market competition.


Doesn't hurt to try to get ahead of your competition with lawyers even if you might manage without. This isn't about fair play, it's about big business.

Reply Parent Score: 2