Superficial research suggests this is true.
Note: the RIM referenced on this graph is the original bbos, not bb10
You will need your imagination to add the bb10 1M for launch and 2.7 M for next quarter above all of those other lines.
Please discuss.
Attachment 178808
It doesnt matter what iOS did 6 years ago or android did 4 years ago. Smartphone sales are not the same as they are now and right now is what matters for BB
Not sure what the iPhone got on their first quarter.
Android is all over so I don't think we can compare. They don't manufacture what they build the OS for.
True, coming up with excuses doesn't get you money as a company, selling does.
That's fine.
Based on sales though, this has been the most successful launch for any new mobile OS.
Posted via CB10
This is for any phone with android on it at launch. Added together.
Posted via CB10
To me it's like comparing the price of milk in 2013 and 50 years ago.
Hmm. What would you use as a measure of launch success?
Posted via CB10
Note that the bbos launch shown is from the quarter ending November 2005.
Years before the compared iphone and android launches.
Posted via CB10
When Apple and DROID first launched they had no existing mobile customer base to draw upon. BlackBerry had 70+ million yet they only migrated a small fraction of those users to date.
Am I the only one not able to see said graph?
This signature was swiped up from the Z10's sexy keyboard.
Hmm. I can see it from the z10 CB app.
It is borrowed from a guardian article. Here is a link to it http://forums.crackberry.com/showthread.php?t=825222
Posted via CB10
Fair point.
I guess you could say that apple had a loyal following already, just not yet in phones specifically. Rabid fans actually haha.
Android was much more from scratch than both for sure.
The quarter reported only hit a few countries, meaning it was not available yet to the vast majority of that installed base.
Posted via CB10
How much iphone sold their first 6 quarters is on the graph. As is Android.
Posted via CB10
Worthless without availability data because you aren't comparing like with like
Yes. Another factor is the absolute size of the smartphone market when iOS or Android launched. It was a lot smaller then.
This attempted comparison is worthless without normalizing for the factors above.
Yes that is a good point, I seem to remember that at one stage windows mobile had a massive share of what was a pretty small market, similarly palm is always thought of as a giant but it was a big fish in a very small pond.
This is absolutely the single biggest factor. Really the thread is a tribute the iphone and how it expanded the market so as to be recognizable by the standards of 5+ years ago.
It's a bit hard to believe that people genuinely don't recognize this context.
This is an interesting start to an analysis. I think for it to be more meaningful, however, you'd want to find statistics on the overall smartphone sales numbers at the time of the launches in question, and normalize the graphs relative to that. In other words, forget absolute numbers but compare with the overall sales. That should eliminate all the legitimate complaints about "milk now vs. 50 years ago".
Ultimately, with any such statistics and graphs, you kind of want to keep both (or all) viewpoints in mind since any one comparison will always have some "apples and oranges" element to it.
But you also need availability - if I launch in one market and sell one thousand units and you launch in 10 and sell three thousand - did you really have a better launch than me?
LOL. I hadn't seen the previous few posts when I posted my above one. I find it hilariously sad that while we said the same thing, one can so easily see the difference in tone that one's bias makes.
I said it would be "more meaningful" with some normalization. Others have to use words like "worthless", or launch into personal attacks about how incredibly stupid people must be not to think of this.
Sheesh... no wonder these forums are such a b*tch to read these days. :-(
Correct, to bring more depth to the analysis. I had actually written the same point, then deleted it in favour of my final sentence.
All these types of analysis are meaningful. Some are more valuable for different purposes than others. There is value in the original. More by normalizing. Factoring in data about number of carriers and countries etc would bring still more, but also start changing the nature of the analysis. And then you could look at marketing budgets and how the launch has done relative to that, and overall expenses, etc.... at some point you're either repeating what the earnings reports say, or you're doing a post-mortem years later and only when you've got 20-20 hindsight.
Hmm, well I look forward to the:
"1 million phones! Best launch when overall size of smartphone market and number of countries launched into is considered, after normalizing for previously installed base and $ of marketing spend"
...thread starts.
:)
Posted via CB10
If this was really something to celebrate, Heins would have mentioned it during the earnings call. But he didn't, because he knew the analysts would rip him a new one during the Q&A because he hadn't adjusted for the growth of the market since then. That's why he's all cheery and gung-ho when he claims "50% better than any product launch before" because there isn't anyone to question him on inconvenient specifics like "50% better than which product, when, in which market?"
Also true!
Plus, we should compare how much each phone sold for because of course if I sold 4 million $50 phones versus your 1 million $400 phones my 4 million isn't necessarily better in that context.
Posted via CB10
