So, the reporters loaded up the same picture to make the two phones look even more similar. When you look at the phones themselves, they are quite different.
A commentator of the Bentley post, who claimed to be a friend of the Bentley owner, said that the owner has an Aston Martin with a pizza delivery sign on the roof.
The pictures contain two different iphone look-a-likes. The bottom one is the Meizu M8 I’m excited about.
Mainly because the specs are even better than Apple’s original and for less!
The M8 comes with a 3.0 megapixel camera compared to Apple’s 2.0 one, it also has a higher resolution screen, 3G unlocked GSM capability as opposed to getting stuck with AT&T’s crap service for 2 years. Replaceable battery as opposed to custom one that turns your iPhone into a paperweight when it dies. Best of all, it’s 200 dollars less!
I for one would rather spend my hard earned money on actual features rather than pay for Apple advertising costs.
It shouldn’t be allowed to sell anywhere on earth, especially the US. Things on the iPhone were patented. M8 ignored the patent. They should be sued up the butt.
You’re not just paying for Apple’s ads. You’re paying for Apple’s invention.
M8 probably had nil R&D on this product compared to Apple’s work on it.
By the way, I HATE Apple’s battery replacement plan on all of its products.
Why they thought they should push this battery in a cell phone as well, I don’t even know. They’ll bite the curb for that one.
#8 - Well, you’ll also be getting an inferior UI and web browser for your money, among other things. Not all the tradeoffs are in the knockoff’s favor.
french quarter, I’ve seen an expensive looking Hummer, with a Domino’s Pizza sign and Car-hat on it, parked in a bank. I waited to see who actually drove it.
It was a middle aged white man and his son.
That didn’t answer any questions for me. Neither looked like Pizza delivery men.
#11 - I’d guess it was the franchise owner, leveraging his automotive investment with some cheap advertising for his business. People (used to) give Hummers a second look, and therefore the pizza ad got a second look too.
Cool, something to divert attention from the hostage saga and concomitant out-of-control comments.
Regarding the Hyundaified Bentley, how many times have you seen the opposite here in Korea? Like a Sonata with Beemer or Benz logos? I’ve seen at least a half dozen in the last few years.
But back to the phone, it’s far superior to the Apple POS. Takes sim chips, got a spot to hold an extra sim, takes memory cards, and lets you easily change both the backup battery and main battery. I bet you can even send a MMS photo message. All things Apple didn’t do because they like to “think different”. Different sometimes is a nice way of saying “stupid”.
Well if Max Watson is correct, there goes hopes of Apple domination of the cell phone market in the world. Instead, we’re going to be flooded with Chinese iPhones.
“My favorite misplaced badges in Korea are “AC Schnitzer”, which doesn’t sell a single thing you could use on a Korean car–except a badge.”
I’ve seen a couple of things labeled AC Schnitzer being sold here for Korean cars, stuff like strut bars and air intakes, but that’s about it…and I wouldn’t be surprised if they were fake.
#17 - It’s easy to quibble with Apple’s engineering choices. The fact remains that they produced an innovative product with, by most accounts, a revolutionary user interface and mobile web browser. Their savvy marketing led to a product launch accompanized by a buzz that was unprecedented in the industry. Quite an auspicious beginning for a total upstart in the mobile phone business. It’ll be interesting to see the follow-on models.
#18 - Apple’s marketing strategy has never been domination of any market sector. Rather, they have achieved astounding success primarily through winning tremendous customer loyalty and maintaining margins which are the envy of everyone in the consumer electronics industry.
You guys are a piece of work. It’s nice to see American nationalism (jingoism) on display here.
It’s not a clone if it’s better than the original.
Guys, the so called Chinese-iPhone clone, isn’t a clone. Its specs make it better than the iPhone. Calling the Chinese product a clone would be like calling Mozilla a clone of internet explorer just because they are both web browsers.
Looks like you all will be buying a Meizi real soon.
P.S. Yeah, you’re probably gonna make some snide remark about Chinese quality. Don’t be so fast though. The iPhone already failed a security test when it got hacked last week.
P.S.S Not too hard to see how the Chinese improved this product. Look at the iPhone’s OEMs. the iPhone is practically Chinese anyway — err… Taiwanese. The Chinese had months to look at the iPhone’s specs and figure out how to make it obsolete.
Ut Videam: Why are you trying to change the story now? In an earlier discussion about the iphone you boasted about Apple’s market share in the mp3 market. Now all of a sudden you’re saying their strategy isn’t about market share.
True, Apple doesn’t dominate the computer market, but their marginalization in that sector has nothing to do with strategy. Apple is trailing the rest of the industry because it is consistently outflanked by Bill Gates, Micheal Dell and IBM…
(And now it looks like it might get outflanked by this Chinese company. )
#23 again - As for Apple’s PC market share, the latest figures show them at a solid #3 after HP and Dell, ahead of Gateway. And as I and others have stated repeatedly, Apple holds this market share with margins that are the envy of the industry.
Since you apparently missed this when I posted it before, I’ll repost it for your convenience:
There’s also something more fundamental and more sustainable in Apple’s profit growth than chip prices or product mix. The latest quarter shows that Apple is gaining leverage from its unique cupboard of technologies.
Ut Videam are you an Apple shareholder? I don’t see why we the consumer would give a flying fuck that Apple has high margins. In fact, it means quite the opposite that Apple is getting away with charging more for less because of svelte marketing and the consumerist frenzy of the iHerd. I’m also the an owner of the Meizu M6, at half the price of an iPod nano and so many better features, all I can say is that it r0×0rz my s0ckz0rz.
Jing, the stuff about Apple’s margins is in response to YoungRocco’s constant trashing of that company. Like the antics of his feces-flinging countrymen, his silly rhetoric, while annoying, will ultimately have no impact on the bottom line.
And no, I’m not a shareholder. Stock’s too high for my budget; didn’t get in early enough.
Wanna bet we won’t hear about these clones in a year, whereas the iPhone will still be here?
OEM production by Taiwanese companies — including in their Dongguan, People’s Republic of ChiComs, factories — under strict supervision is a bit different from hack-a-frankenstein-with-my-feet, as the ChiComs have the talent for.
And before anybody starts on Lenovo, it’s IBM’s former laptop division…
Strawman? No strawman here. The only straw here is the straw in your head.
Anyways.
Ut Videam, you are so out of your league in this debate that you don’t even know what the term market share means.
I told you that Apple has low market share. You responded by underscoring Apple’s number four position in the PC market. Ut Videam, market position and market share are two completely different concepts.
Telling the difference between these two concepts is easy, and yet you couldn’t do it.
Ut Videam, Apple’s market share is below 5% in the PC industry. Less than 5 percent. Furthermore, the margin figures you posted for Apple’s products were for the ipod and iphone, not for the mac. Please don’t confuse your own points.
As for the Meizu, you can be darn sure that the Meizu will be heard from a year later. Apple is able to command high margins because of its coolness factor, but coolness can’t long retain its relevance against a product with superior functionality and lower cost.
Ut Videam, I like you, and I hope that we will continue to debate in the future. I’m sure that there are some issues that we can agree on. However, I think we would all appreciate it if you could keep your terms and arguments straight during debates. Don’t run away from facts. Embrace them.
Ut Videam, you are so out of your league in this debate that you don’t even know what the term market share means.
Wrong and wrong. Next!
Ut Videam, market position and market share are two completely different concepts.
Yes, completely different… except for the little fact that market position is a function of market share. Further, their #4 market share is comparable to (though higher than) many other famous PC makers such as Gateway, Acer, Toshiba, et al. Of course Dell and HP are way ahead of the others. I haven’t denied that for an instant. But Apple’s gaining strongly (viz. their record-breaking Mac sales in the quarter just ended—33 percent growth over the year ago quarter and 150,000 units higher than the previous quarterly record), while the others are stagnant.
Telling the difference between these two concepts is easy, and yet you couldn’t do it.
Wrong, as I’ve just demonstrated. Next!
Furthermore, the margin figures you posted for Apple’s products were for the ipod and iphone, not for the mac.
Wrong again. I didn’t post any margin figures—and Apple does not release margin figures for specific products.. I did state that Apple enjoys extremely high margins across the board—a statement you’re welcome to refute if you can. Oh wait, what’s this? “Gross margin was 36.9 percent, up from 30.3 percent in the year-ago quarter.” You can’t refute it. Never mind.
You’re getting sloppy, Rocco. Not only can’t you keep track of who posted what, you’re utterly failing to address the substance of your opponents’ points. To carry on the motif from above, you’re grasping at straws.
I made a point about market share. You responded with a point about market position. I am talking about apples. You’re talking about oranges. You’re being disingenuous.
Furthermore, your argument about Apple’s strategy fits in with your pattern of verbal legerdemain. Ut Videam, Apple’s low market position in the PC market is not a strategy. Apple is not, as you implied, eschewing market share for margin and the notion that a company would do that is absurd. A company that can have both market share and margin will go for both. Why doesn’t Apple have both in the PC market? Because Bill Gates, Micheal Dell and IBM outflank Apple time and time again.
Ut Videam, I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you’re just naive. However, I would ask again that you stay on the topic of the debate. If we’re having a discussion about the effect of low interest asian currencies on American home mortgages, don’t start talking about termite infestation in teak–and then claim that home mortgages are a function of teak quality. If you just stay on track and fashion your arguments accordingly, you’ll do fine.
You’re the one who doesn’t get it, Rocco. You crow about Apple’s low market share, approximately 5 percent. I pointed out that this market share places Apple on par with—ahead of, but on par with—other famous PC makers such as Gateway, Acer, Toshiba, etc. Further, I pointed out that Apple’s market share is growing—each of the two most recent quarters showing phenomenal growth in PC sales—while others are stagnant. You have, again, failed to respond to this point.
Further, you’ve misrepresented my argument about Apple’s market share and strategy. I never argued that Apple’s low market share was a strategic decision on their part. Rather, Apple is not willing to sacrifice its high margins to achieve higher market share. HP and Dell have high market share—and their margins suck. Why? Because they, like most other PC makers, have been sucked into the race to the bottom, cutting margins to the absolute minimum to get an edge on consumer pricing. Why? Because they offer largely indistinguishable products.
Apple has chosen another path—one that has proven hugely successful. That path has allowed Apple to post a higher profit than Dell at just over half the revenues. Not just higher margin, but higher profit. More dollars, Rocco. Just because you’re unable or unwilling to see the wisdom of Apple’s path doesn’t mean it’s not there. Apple’s investors are laughing all the way to the bank, while the stock prices of Microsoft, HP, and Dell stagnate.
Just for fun, let’s address one more of your foolish statements:
Because Bill Gates, Micheal Dell and IBM outflank Apple time and time again.
1) Bill Gates doesn’t make PCs. Who’s comparing apples to oranges, Rocco? And oh, by the way, Windows Vista sales have been sluggish. Far below expectations. Mac sales, meanwhile, are breaking records.
2) It’s Michael Dell, not “Micheal.” And Mr. Dell would kill for the kind of profitability Apple enjoys, I suspect.
3) IBM got out of the PC business. They sold their operations to Lenovo, a Chinese firm.
But I’m not going to keep this up anymore. It’s obvious that you’re out of your league, Rocco. While this has been amusing, it’s clearly pointless—you’re obviously unable or unwilling to concede that Apple is a far more successful business than you’ve been willing to admit, even in the face of voluminous evidence. Enjoy your weekend!
There are a number of factors that are preventing you from understanding your weak position in this debate. Your consistent disingenuousness, myopia, and inability to refrain from red herrings. Fortunately for me, since your argument is weak, this post will be easy to write.
1. Myopia:
You fail to see the big picture. Ut Videam, Apple’s growth is certainly commendable, but you fail to consider the fact that high growth is easy when you have a low base to start with. Apple has to sell far fewer computers than Dell in order to post high quarterly growth in PC sales. Apple has less than 5% of the PC market while Dell currently controls 16.1%. HP controls about 18% of the market. These guys sell a lot more computers than Apple so they have to work harder to attain growth.
I thought this concept was so easy to understand that it didn’t merit explaining. Looks like I was wrong. I’ll make sure not to underestimate your naivete in the future.
2. Myopia
You still fail to see the big picture. Yes, Apple certainly does have higher profits than Dell…this quarter. But Dell has consistently beat Apple for the past few years. Apple’s highest quarterly profits ever were just under 900 million dollars. Dell, on the other hand, has had quarters over 900 million multiple times before. In the first quarter of 2006, after two years of deline, Dell posted profits of 949 million dollars–over a hundred dollars higher than Apple’s best quarter. My point, Ut Videam, is that one quarter or two are not sufficient basis for judging the success of a business model. Dell’s model has been far more consistent and successful than Apple’s over the long term.
In addition to your inability to critically evaluate information, you have also failed to gather accurate information. There are numerous weak points in your post. I’ll start with the biggest.
1. Apple does not choose between market share and margin.
Ut Videam, Apple does not have to choose between margin and market share. Apple can release different products to appeal to both the price sensitive and the trend savvy ends of the consumer spectrum. In other words, it can release both market share products and a margin products.
In fact, Apple has done just that. It recently released the Mac Mini, a low margin, mass market computer. Apple also released the Ipod shuffle, an mp3 player designed to compete with low cost mp3 players. These are two low-cost products, Ut Videam. You may focus only on glamour products, Ut Videam, but Apple’s executives certainly don’t.
Ut Videam, get your facts straight. Apple DOES release low margin, mass market products. Don’t attribute a strategy to Apple that Apple does not have.
Are you sure Bill Gates doesn’t make PCs, Ut Videam? The Xbox 360 resembles a PC in quite a few ways–but that’s a discussion for another day.
Ut Videam, its obvious from your answer that you know nothing about the computer industry. Everyone who follows the industry knows about the great rivalry that once existed between Gates and Jobs over operating systems and office applications.
In the late 80’s, Apple decided to go it alone and develop an operating system incompatible with IBM’s PCs. Apple’s bonehead move resulted in compatibility problems with third party software developers, high costs, and pretty much the near death of the company in the early 90’s. Gates, on the other hand, opted to develop the OS and office applications for IBM clones, thereby becoming the (second) richest guy on the planet. In the war over who’s software platform would dominate the future, Jobs lost and Gates won.
But your ignorance of the rivalry between Gates and Jobs is no excuse. You should have been able to figure out that increased mac sales hurt Gates; Windows Vista is not bundled with macs. The bottom line here is that Gates and Jobs still, on some level, compete.
Red Herring:
Who cares how his name is spelled? Your argument still has cavities.
Disingenuousness:
You said that you suspect that Dell would kill for Apple’s profits. Bah. Apple’s best is almost equal to Dell’s worst. Dell has enjoyed profits higher than Apple’s on numerous occasions. If you’re going to speculate, at least get your facts straight.
Disingenuousness:
Thanks for telling everyone what we already know. Lenovo bought IBM, but still sells PCs under the IBM name. Furthermore, IBM retains an 18.9% stake in Lenovo. These two facts should make it clear to you that IBM and Apple still have separate interests. They still compete.
“YoungRocco2
Posted July 26, 2007 at 6:19 pm | Permalink
P.S. Yeah, you’re probably gonna make some snide remark about Chinese quality. Don’t be so fast though. The iPhone already failed a security test when it got hacked last week.
P.S.S Not too hard to see how the Chinese improved this product. Look at the iPhone’s OEMs. the iPhone is practically Chinese anyway — err… Taiwanese. The Chinese had months to look at the iPhone’s specs and figure out how to make it obsolete.”
Young Rocco, you are a total tit. First off, Taiwan isn’t China. 2) the vast majority of the components/software/codecs in the iPhone are NOT Chinese, but European and American in origin. So, LOL, BACK UP your statement “iPhone is practically Chinese”. 3) The Chinese ripoff doesn’t run Mac OSX. 4) Mac OSX IS American 5) China allows this inferior shit to be marketed because that’s MUCH easier than conducting their own R&D (much like many Korean companies in that regard) 6)OF COURSE it’s a ripoff clone you fool, just a POS ripoff, as usual. Don’t hold your breath about me buying this Chinese crap. By the way, just so you know, Apple is ranked as the World’s Most Innovative Company.
Even on weekends I can’t find the time to sift the internet to find all the stuff it takes to support my opinions.Some people must have more hours in their day than mine does.How do you guys do it?
Typical, Rocco. Responding with irrelevancies and ad hominems. Like I said, I’m finished. I’ll leave the task of fisking you to ihbb, as I’m too polite to deal with you in the appropriate manner.
[...] iPhoney 1pssts Erik shared this 0 seconds ago http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/.....bsp;cached copy] Chinese have already succeeded in knocking off the iPhone. That took them [...]
Korea News via Google
43 Comments
That was fast. So which is the real one?
Easy: top right. The high quality display and the lack of external buttons on the face give it away.
Incidentally, the photos seem to show two different knockoffs; the phone on the top left isn’t the same as the one on the bottom.
This is Hyundai’s fake Bentley Continental GT:
http://www.autoblog.com/2007/0.....a-hyundai/
Just kidding.
So, the reporters loaded up the same picture to make the two phones look even more similar. When you look at the phones themselves, they are quite different.
#3.
I’m guessing it’s owned by some guy who owns a Hyundai dealership that got tired of his buddies asking him why he doesn’t drive the cars he sells.
#5
A commentator of the Bentley post, who claimed to be a friend of the Bentley owner, said that the owner has an Aston Martin with a pizza delivery sign on the roof.
Youtube clip of the fake iPhone:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_8wuVEYMZ8
The pictures contain two different iphone look-a-likes. The bottom one is the Meizu M8 I’m excited about.
Mainly because the specs are even better than Apple’s original and for less!
The M8 comes with a 3.0 megapixel camera compared to Apple’s 2.0 one, it also has a higher resolution screen, 3G unlocked GSM capability as opposed to getting stuck with AT&T’s crap service for 2 years. Replaceable battery as opposed to custom one that turns your iPhone into a paperweight when it dies. Best of all, it’s 200 dollars less!
I for one would rather spend my hard earned money on actual features rather than pay for Apple advertising costs.
It shouldn’t be allowed to sell anywhere on earth, especially the US. Things on the iPhone were patented. M8 ignored the patent. They should be sued up the butt.
You’re not just paying for Apple’s ads. You’re paying for Apple’s invention.
M8 probably had nil R&D on this product compared to Apple’s work on it.
By the way, I HATE Apple’s battery replacement plan on all of its products.
Why they thought they should push this battery in a cell phone as well, I don’t even know. They’ll bite the curb for that one.
#8 - Well, you’ll also be getting an inferior UI and web browser for your money, among other things. Not all the tradeoffs are in the knockoff’s favor.
french quarter, I’ve seen an expensive looking Hummer, with a Domino’s Pizza sign and Car-hat on it, parked in a bank. I waited to see who actually drove it.
It was a middle aged white man and his son.
That didn’t answer any questions for me. Neither looked like Pizza delivery men.
#11 - I’d guess it was the franchise owner, leveraging his automotive investment with some cheap advertising for his business. People (used to) give Hummers a second look, and therefore the pizza ad got a second look too.
Cool, something to divert attention from the hostage saga and concomitant out-of-control comments.
Regarding the Hyundaified Bentley, how many times have you seen the opposite here in Korea? Like a Sonata with Beemer or Benz logos? I’ve seen at least a half dozen in the last few years.
#11
wjk, it might be another nice joke. BTW, I forgot to mention that the pizza delivery sign on the roof of an Aston Martin at #6 is a light-up sign.
#6
Well, if anything screams, “I’m stinking filthy rich”, it’s some guy who owns luxury cars and does that to them. Good on him if the stories are true.
My favorite misplaced badges in Korea are “AC Schnitzer”, which doesn’t sell a single thing you could use on a Korean car–except a badge.
But back to the phone, it’s far superior to the Apple POS. Takes sim chips, got a spot to hold an extra sim, takes memory cards, and lets you easily change both the backup battery and main battery. I bet you can even send a MMS photo message. All things Apple didn’t do because they like to “think different”. Different sometimes is a nice way of saying “stupid”.
Well if Max Watson is correct, there goes hopes of Apple domination of the cell phone market in the world. Instead, we’re going to be flooded with Chinese iPhones.
“My favorite misplaced badges in Korea are “AC Schnitzer”, which doesn’t sell a single thing you could use on a Korean car–except a badge.”
I’ve seen a couple of things labeled AC Schnitzer being sold here for Korean cars, stuff like strut bars and air intakes, but that’s about it…and I wouldn’t be surprised if they were fake.
#17 - It’s easy to quibble with Apple’s engineering choices. The fact remains that they produced an innovative product with, by most accounts, a revolutionary user interface and mobile web browser. Their savvy marketing led to a product launch accompanized by a buzz that was unprecedented in the industry. Quite an auspicious beginning for a total upstart in the mobile phone business. It’ll be interesting to see the follow-on models.
#18 - Apple’s marketing strategy has never been domination of any market sector. Rather, they have achieved astounding success primarily through winning tremendous customer loyalty and maintaining margins which are the envy of everyone in the consumer electronics industry.
Migook Mansei! Migook Mansei!
You guys are a piece of work. It’s nice to see American nationalism (jingoism) on display here.
It’s not a clone if it’s better than the original.
Guys, the so called Chinese-iPhone clone, isn’t a clone. Its specs make it better than the iPhone. Calling the Chinese product a clone would be like calling Mozilla a clone of internet explorer just because they are both web browsers.
Looks like you all will be buying a Meizi real soon.
P.S. Yeah, you’re probably gonna make some snide remark about Chinese quality. Don’t be so fast though. The iPhone already failed a security test when it got hacked last week.
P.S.S Not too hard to see how the Chinese improved this product. Look at the iPhone’s OEMs. the iPhone is practically Chinese anyway — err… Taiwanese. The Chinese had months to look at the iPhone’s specs and figure out how to make it obsolete.
Ut Videam: Why are you trying to change the story now? In an earlier discussion about the iphone you boasted about Apple’s market share in the mp3 market. Now all of a sudden you’re saying their strategy isn’t about market share.
True, Apple doesn’t dominate the computer market, but their marginalization in that sector has nothing to do with strategy. Apple is trailing the rest of the industry because it is consistently outflanked by Bill Gates, Micheal Dell and IBM…
(And now it looks like it might get outflanked by this Chinese company. )
#23 - Better recheck your facts, Rocco. I never “boasted about Apple’s market share in the mp3 market.” I’m not trying to change anything.
Your straw man is singing his swan song, Rocco… “If I only had a brain!”
#23 again - As for Apple’s PC market share, the latest figures show them at a solid #3 after HP and Dell, ahead of Gateway. And as I and others have stated repeatedly, Apple holds this market share with margins that are the envy of the industry.
Since you apparently missed this when I posted it before, I’ll repost it for your convenience:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/.....refer=news
As an aside, my high opinion of Apple has nothing to do with nationalism. It’s entirely due to their consistent innovation and excellent products.
Oops. Apple’s at #4, after HP, Dell, and Lenovo. That’s what I get for relying on my memory.
http://www.businessweek.com/te....._top+story
I bought a Meizu M6 together with my then (now ex) girl friend. Now she has a Meizu, and I have nothing. It was pretty good while I had it, though.
Shakuhachi, we are talking about phones here. How the Meizu M6?
Shakuhachi, we are talking about phones here. How was the Meizu M6?
mins0306 — this post got linked to Reddit and news.ycombinator.com. Nice.
Ut Videam are you an Apple shareholder? I don’t see why we the consumer would give a flying fuck that Apple has high margins. In fact, it means quite the opposite that Apple is getting away with charging more for less because of svelte marketing and the consumerist frenzy of the iHerd. I’m also the an owner of the Meizu M6, at half the price of an iPod nano and so many better features, all I can say is that it r0×0rz my s0ckz0rz.
Jing, the stuff about Apple’s margins is in response to YoungRocco’s constant trashing of that company. Like the antics of his feces-flinging countrymen, his silly rhetoric, while annoying, will ultimately have no impact on the bottom line.
And no, I’m not a shareholder. Stock’s too high for my budget; didn’t get in early enough.
Wanna bet we won’t hear about these clones in a year, whereas the iPhone will still be here?
OEM production by Taiwanese companies — including in their Dongguan, People’s Republic of ChiComs, factories — under strict supervision is a bit different from hack-a-frankenstein-with-my-feet, as the ChiComs have the talent for.
And before anybody starts on Lenovo, it’s IBM’s former laptop division…
Ut Videam:
Strawman? No strawman here. The only straw here is the straw in your head.
Anyways.
Ut Videam, you are so out of your league in this debate that you don’t even know what the term market share means.
I told you that Apple has low market share. You responded by underscoring Apple’s number four position in the PC market. Ut Videam, market position and market share are two completely different concepts.
Telling the difference between these two concepts is easy, and yet you couldn’t do it.
Ut Videam, Apple’s market share is below 5% in the PC industry. Less than 5 percent. Furthermore, the margin figures you posted for Apple’s products were for the ipod and iphone, not for the mac. Please don’t confuse your own points.
As for the Meizu, you can be darn sure that the Meizu will be heard from a year later. Apple is able to command high margins because of its coolness factor, but coolness can’t long retain its relevance against a product with superior functionality and lower cost.
Ut Videam, I like you, and I hope that we will continue to debate in the future. I’m sure that there are some issues that we can agree on. However, I think we would all appreciate it if you could keep your terms and arguments straight during debates. Don’t run away from facts. Embrace them.
Wrong and wrong. Next!
Yes, completely different… except for the little fact that market position is a function of market share. Further, their #4 market share is comparable to (though higher than) many other famous PC makers such as Gateway, Acer, Toshiba, et al. Of course Dell and HP are way ahead of the others. I haven’t denied that for an instant. But Apple’s gaining strongly (viz. their record-breaking Mac sales in the quarter just ended—33 percent growth over the year ago quarter and 150,000 units higher than the previous quarterly record), while the others are stagnant.
Wrong, as I’ve just demonstrated. Next!
Wrong again. I didn’t post any margin figures—and Apple does not release margin figures for specific products.. I did state that Apple enjoys extremely high margins across the board—a statement you’re welcome to refute if you can. Oh wait, what’s this? “Gross margin was 36.9 percent, up from 30.3 percent in the year-ago quarter.” You can’t refute it. Never mind.
You’re getting sloppy, Rocco. Not only can’t you keep track of who posted what, you’re utterly failing to address the substance of your opponents’ points. To carry on the motif from above, you’re grasping at straws.
Ut Videam:
I made a point about market share. You responded with a point about market position. I am talking about apples. You’re talking about oranges. You’re being disingenuous.
Furthermore, your argument about Apple’s strategy fits in with your pattern of verbal legerdemain. Ut Videam, Apple’s low market position in the PC market is not a strategy. Apple is not, as you implied, eschewing market share for margin and the notion that a company would do that is absurd. A company that can have both market share and margin will go for both. Why doesn’t Apple have both in the PC market? Because Bill Gates, Micheal Dell and IBM outflank Apple time and time again.
Ut Videam, I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you’re just naive. However, I would ask again that you stay on the topic of the debate. If we’re having a discussion about the effect of low interest asian currencies on American home mortgages, don’t start talking about termite infestation in teak–and then claim that home mortgages are a function of teak quality. If you just stay on track and fashion your arguments accordingly, you’ll do fine.
You’re the one who doesn’t get it, Rocco. You crow about Apple’s low market share, approximately 5 percent. I pointed out that this market share places Apple on par with—ahead of, but on par with—other famous PC makers such as Gateway, Acer, Toshiba, etc. Further, I pointed out that Apple’s market share is growing—each of the two most recent quarters showing phenomenal growth in PC sales—while others are stagnant. You have, again, failed to respond to this point.
Further, you’ve misrepresented my argument about Apple’s market share and strategy. I never argued that Apple’s low market share was a strategic decision on their part. Rather, Apple is not willing to sacrifice its high margins to achieve higher market share. HP and Dell have high market share—and their margins suck. Why? Because they, like most other PC makers, have been sucked into the race to the bottom, cutting margins to the absolute minimum to get an edge on consumer pricing. Why? Because they offer largely indistinguishable products.
Apple has chosen another path—one that has proven hugely successful. That path has allowed Apple to post a higher profit than Dell at just over half the revenues. Not just higher margin, but higher profit. More dollars, Rocco. Just because you’re unable or unwilling to see the wisdom of Apple’s path doesn’t mean it’s not there. Apple’s investors are laughing all the way to the bank, while the stock prices of Microsoft, HP, and Dell stagnate.
Just for fun, let’s address one more of your foolish statements:
1) Bill Gates doesn’t make PCs. Who’s comparing apples to oranges, Rocco? And oh, by the way, Windows Vista sales have been sluggish. Far below expectations. Mac sales, meanwhile, are breaking records.
2) It’s Michael Dell, not “Micheal.” And Mr. Dell would kill for the kind of profitability Apple enjoys, I suspect.
3) IBM got out of the PC business. They sold their operations to Lenovo, a Chinese firm.
But I’m not going to keep this up anymore. It’s obvious that you’re out of your league, Rocco. While this has been amusing, it’s clearly pointless—you’re obviously unable or unwilling to concede that Apple is a far more successful business than you’ve been willing to admit, even in the face of voluminous evidence. Enjoy your weekend!
Ut Videam:
There are a number of factors that are preventing you from understanding your weak position in this debate. Your consistent disingenuousness, myopia, and inability to refrain from red herrings. Fortunately for me, since your argument is weak, this post will be easy to write.
1. Myopia:
You fail to see the big picture. Ut Videam, Apple’s growth is certainly commendable, but you fail to consider the fact that high growth is easy when you have a low base to start with. Apple has to sell far fewer computers than Dell in order to post high quarterly growth in PC sales. Apple has less than 5% of the PC market while Dell currently controls 16.1%. HP controls about 18% of the market. These guys sell a lot more computers than Apple so they have to work harder to attain growth.
I thought this concept was so easy to understand that it didn’t merit explaining. Looks like I was wrong. I’ll make sure not to underestimate your naivete in the future.
2. Myopia
You still fail to see the big picture. Yes, Apple certainly does have higher profits than Dell…this quarter. But Dell has consistently beat Apple for the past few years. Apple’s highest quarterly profits ever were just under 900 million dollars. Dell, on the other hand, has had quarters over 900 million multiple times before. In the first quarter of 2006, after two years of deline, Dell posted profits of 949 million dollars–over a hundred dollars higher than Apple’s best quarter. My point, Ut Videam, is that one quarter or two are not sufficient basis for judging the success of a business model. Dell’s model has been far more consistent and successful than Apple’s over the long term.
http://www.finfacts.com/irelan.....6968.shtml
3. Misinformation.
In addition to your inability to critically evaluate information, you have also failed to gather accurate information. There are numerous weak points in your post. I’ll start with the biggest.
1. Apple does not choose between market share and margin.
Ut Videam, Apple does not have to choose between margin and market share. Apple can release different products to appeal to both the price sensitive and the trend savvy ends of the consumer spectrum. In other words, it can release both market share products and a margin products.
In fact, Apple has done just that. It recently released the Mac Mini, a low margin, mass market computer. Apple also released the Ipod shuffle, an mp3 player designed to compete with low cost mp3 players. These are two low-cost products, Ut Videam. You may focus only on glamour products, Ut Videam, but Apple’s executives certainly don’t.
Ut Videam, get your facts straight. Apple DOES release low margin, mass market products. Don’t attribute a strategy to Apple that Apple does not have.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4162009.stm
More to come.
Disingenuosness:
Are you sure Bill Gates doesn’t make PCs, Ut Videam? The Xbox 360 resembles a PC in quite a few ways–but that’s a discussion for another day.
Ut Videam, its obvious from your answer that you know nothing about the computer industry. Everyone who follows the industry knows about the great rivalry that once existed between Gates and Jobs over operating systems and office applications.
In the late 80’s, Apple decided to go it alone and develop an operating system incompatible with IBM’s PCs. Apple’s bonehead move resulted in compatibility problems with third party software developers, high costs, and pretty much the near death of the company in the early 90’s. Gates, on the other hand, opted to develop the OS and office applications for IBM clones, thereby becoming the (second) richest guy on the planet. In the war over who’s software platform would dominate the future, Jobs lost and Gates won.
But your ignorance of the rivalry between Gates and Jobs is no excuse. You should have been able to figure out that increased mac sales hurt Gates; Windows Vista is not bundled with macs. The bottom line here is that Gates and Jobs still, on some level, compete.
Red Herring:
Who cares how his name is spelled? Your argument still has cavities.
Disingenuousness:
You said that you suspect that Dell would kill for Apple’s profits. Bah. Apple’s best is almost equal to Dell’s worst. Dell has enjoyed profits higher than Apple’s on numerous occasions. If you’re going to speculate, at least get your facts straight.
Disingenuousness:
Thanks for telling everyone what we already know. Lenovo bought IBM, but still sells PCs under the IBM name. Furthermore, IBM retains an 18.9% stake in Lenovo. These two facts should make it clear to you that IBM and Apple still have separate interests. They still compete.
You’re done, Ut Videam.
Thanks for playing!
“YoungRocco2
Posted July 26, 2007 at 6:19 pm | Permalink
P.S. Yeah, you’re probably gonna make some snide remark about Chinese quality. Don’t be so fast though. The iPhone already failed a security test when it got hacked last week.
P.S.S Not too hard to see how the Chinese improved this product. Look at the iPhone’s OEMs. the iPhone is practically Chinese anyway — err… Taiwanese. The Chinese had months to look at the iPhone’s specs and figure out how to make it obsolete.”
Young Rocco, you are a total tit. First off, Taiwan isn’t China. 2) the vast majority of the components/software/codecs in the iPhone are NOT Chinese, but European and American in origin. So, LOL, BACK UP your statement “iPhone is practically Chinese”. 3) The Chinese ripoff doesn’t run Mac OSX. 4) Mac OSX IS American 5) China allows this inferior shit to be marketed because that’s MUCH easier than conducting their own R&D (much like many Korean companies in that regard) 6)OF COURSE it’s a ripoff clone you fool, just a POS ripoff, as usual.
Don’t hold your breath about me buying this Chinese crap. By the way, just so you know, Apple is ranked as the World’s Most Innovative Company.
Even on weekends I can’t find the time to sift the internet to find all the stuff it takes to support my opinions.Some people must have more hours in their day than mine does.How do you guys do it?
Typical, Rocco. Responding with irrelevancies and ad hominems. Like I said, I’m finished. I’ll leave the task of fisking you to ihbb, as I’m too polite to deal with you in the appropriate manner.
One Trackback
[...] iPhoney 1pssts Erik shared this 0 seconds ago http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/.....bsp;cached copy] Chinese have already succeeded in knocking off the iPhone. That took them [...]