Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 96

Thread: Nokia Q4 2009: Smartphone market share 40%, and 39% global market share

  1. #46
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,807
    Device(s)
    9700
    Carrier(s)
    Cingular
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by THETRUTH#34
    this is the real #'s
    smartphones and mobile computers, were 20.8 million units in the fourth quarter 2009
    rim- 10.1
    apple-8.7
    = 18.8 NOKIA STILL sold 2 million more smart phones then rim and apple combined
    True, but both RIM and apple make more (profits) than nokia. That's what happens when you make better phones and can charge more. Or, to put it another way, Nokia dabbles in the high end market (and mostly fails). RIM and Apple own the high end and never seem to fail.

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    NYC United States
    Posts
    8,784
    Device(s)
    Lumia 520
    Carrier(s)
    [at&t],
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Jonnycat26
    True, but both RIM and apple make more (profits) than nokia. That's what happens when you make better phones and can charge more. Or, to put it another way, Nokia dabbles in the high end market (and mostly fails). RIM and Apple own the high end and never seem to fail.
    You really consider Apple iPhone High End?

    Joke of the day "Apple iPhone is an High End Device"

    RIM yeah..
    "With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility"

    Follow me on TWITTER

    HOFO FEEDBACK

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Queens, NewYork
    Posts
    8,253
    Device(s)
    WHATEVER WORKS
    Carrier(s)
    AT&T
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Jonnycat26
    True, but both RIM and apple make more (profits) than nokia. That's what happens when you make better phones and can charge more. Or, to put it another way, Nokia dabbles in the high end market (and mostly fails). RIM and Apple own the high end and never seem to fail.
    True, but then again they both play it safe or at least apple does.
    This is getting a little carried away though, the thread is not now who is more profitable and i think the op started it because again, everyone crying at how fast Nokia is losing market share, now that they gain it back we say, well they only sold this many nseries or eseries or other companies are more profitable and we get off the subject that they gained back marketshare when everyone said they were dead.
    Jonny again i dnt care if they have 60% of the market and havent improved the ui im not going to support them, im just calling it like it is and they did gain market share, as i said in previous post they still need an overhaul and i hope they aren't fooled by this gain.
    Know The Truth and the Truth will set u free.
    John 8:32




    Winner of the 3rd Annual Hofies Awards in the catergories of

    "Friendliest s60 Hofo'er"-Gold Medal
    "Most helpful S60 Hofo'er" - Silver Medal
    "Most Interesting S60 Blog From a Member"-Silver Medal

    FreeBlaxx!!

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,807
    Device(s)
    9700
    Carrier(s)
    Cingular
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by gwapz
    You really consider Apple iPhone High End?

    Joke of the day "Apple iPhone is an High End Device"

    RIM yeah..
    The iphone is arguably better than any non-qwerty touchscreen nokia has released.

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,807
    Device(s)
    9700
    Carrier(s)
    Cingular
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by THETRUTH#34
    This is getting a little carried away though, the thread is not now who is more profitable and i think the op started it because again
    Well, profitability is just as important and needs to be considered.

    Apple and RIM make more money and they're moving half as many units as Nokia.

    It's also important to consider that Nokia sells a lot more models of smartphones than either RIM or Apple. Now, I've got no way of knowing how much each line costs Nokia, but it's fair to say they're spending a lot more on support, research and development than RIM or Apple, but quite probably less per phone line.

    Look at the Bold/Bold2 and E71/E72. You've got a 9700, and I'm assuming you've used the E72 as well. RIM managed to improve the memory, processor, screen resolution, battery life, and throw a new OS with all sorts of new goodies into the newer model.

    Nokia rehashed the same formula and flung it out as the E72. Incremental OS upgrade, same lame screen, etc.

    RIM probably spent more on improving the Bold than Nokia spent on the E72 because RIM makes more and has less to produce/support. It's a great position for RIM to be in, and it just goes to show that Nokia needs to drop the number of models they produce to become leaner and meaner.

  6. #51
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Queens, NewYork
    Posts
    8,253
    Device(s)
    WHATEVER WORKS
    Carrier(s)
    AT&T
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Jonnycat26
    Well, profitability is just as important and needs to be considered.

    Apple and RIM make more money and they're moving half as many units as Nokia.

    It's also important to consider that Nokia sells a lot more models of smartphones than either RIM or Apple. Now, I've got no way of knowing how much each line costs Nokia, but it's fair to say they're spending a lot more on support, research and development than RIM or Apple, but quite probably less per phone line.

    Look at the Bold/Bold2 and E71/E72. You've got a 9700, and I'm assuming you've used the E72 as well. RIM managed to improve the memory, processor, screen resolution, battery life, and throw a new OS with all sorts of new goodies into the newer model.

    Nokia rehashed the same formula and flung it out as the E72. Incremental OS upgrade, same lame screen, etc.

    RIM probably spent more on improving the Bold
    than Nokia spent on the E72 because RIM makes more and has less to produce/support. It's a great position for RIM to be in, and it just goes to show that Nokia needs to drop the number of models they produce to become leaner and meaner.
    could not agree with you more on the statements that i bolded

  7. #52
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    196
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Jonnycat26
    Look at the Bold/Bold2 and E71/E72. You've got a 9700, and I'm assuming you've used the E72 as well. RIM managed to improve the memory, processor, screen resolution, battery life, and throw a new OS with all sorts of new goodies into the newer model.
    The E72 has a better camera, better processor, 3.5 mm jack digital compass and accelerometer which counts as a solid improvement over the E71. It has the same RAM as the 9700:128MB. And in most markets it's significantly cheaper than the 9700.

    And Nokia has sold more than 10 million N Series and E series phones most of which can be considered high-end. The idea that it just sells cheap smartphones is pretty silly.

    The bottom line is there is a lot of hysterical and foolish Nokia bashing on these forums by people who think their personal preferences and obsessions count as objective evaluation. Nokia has some serious strengths as a global company particularly when it comes to production and distribution and their products work for a lot of people. These numbers back that up.

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    NC, USA
    Posts
    6,562
    Device(s)
    Infuse
    Carrier(s)
    at&t
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Multiplier
    The E72 has a better camera, better processor, 3.5 mm jack digital compass and accelerometer which counts as a solid improvement over the E71. It has the same RAM as the 9700:128MB. And in most markets it's significantly cheaper than the 9700.

    And Nokia has sold more than 10 million N Series and E series phones most of which can be considered high-end. The idea that it just sells cheap smartphones is pretty silly.

    The bottom line is there is a lot of hysterical and foolish Nokia bashing on these forums by people who think their personal preferences and obsessions count as objective evaluation. Nokia has some serious strengths as a global company particularly when it comes to production and distribution and their products work for a lot of people. These numbers back that up.
    9700 has 256MB RAM, not 128MB.

  9. #54
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    196
    Feedback Score
    0
    No there is some incorrect information on some websites who confuse RAM with storage. The 9700 has 128MB of RAM as this thread on the RIM forum makes clear.
    http://www.howardforums.com/showthread.php?t=1608603

  10. #55
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,807
    Device(s)
    9700
    Carrier(s)
    Cingular
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Multiplier
    The E72 has a better camera, better processor, 3.5 mm jack digital compass and accelerometer which counts as a solid improvement over the E71. It has the same RAM as the 9700:128MB. And in most markets it's significantly cheaper than the 9700.
    None of which is really impressive. It should have had a 3.5mm jack in the first place. The digital compass and accelerometer means squat in a business phone. It's almost like they added those features just so they could put them on a list.

    The fact that Nokia is allowing the E72 (and E75 for that matter) to march on with 320x240 displays is pathetic and inexcusable.

  11. #56
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,807
    Device(s)
    9700
    Carrier(s)
    Cingular
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Multiplier
    No there is some incorrect information on some websites who confuse RAM with storage. The 9700 has 128MB of RAM as this thread on the RIM forum makes clear.
    http://www.howardforums.com/showthread.php?t=1608603
    Time to put this to rest. The bold2 has 256mb of both application and storage memory. I've installed a memory monitor to confirm this, and I invite other 9700 owners to do the same.

  12. #57
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    196
    Feedback Score
    0
    So you are saying there is a total of 512MB of flash memory? Because that's not what the RIM website says. Can you please describe exactly what your memory monitor is saying?

    As for the digital compass/accelerometer that is precisely the kind of nonsense where people think their personal preferences are some kind of objective criticism. You might not need a digital compass but there are many people who find it useful including business users. Not to mention the fact there are many E series owners who aren't traditional business users.

  13. #58
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,807
    Device(s)
    9700
    Carrier(s)
    Cingular
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Multiplier
    So you are saying there is a total of 512MB of flash memory? Because that's not what the RIM website says. Can you please describe exactly what your memory monitor is saying?

    As for the digital compass/accelerometer that is precisely the kind of nonsense where people think their personal preferences are some kind of objective criticism. You might not need a digital compass but there are many people who find it useful including business users. Not to mention the fact there are many E series owners who aren't traditional business users.

    I would wager most users would take the better screen over a digital compass. If you disagree, I think you'll find yourself in a very small minority.

    As for memory, I have 108 free of storage and 214 free of system memory. That system figure includes opera, which is very impressive.

  14. #59
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    196
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Jonnycat26
    I would wager most users would take the better screen over a digital compass. If you disagree, I think you'll find yourself in a very small minority.
    The issue isn't whether a digital compass is better than a screen but whether it "means squat" like you said. Perhaps it means squat to you but to suggest that this is true for everyone is pretty ridiculous.

    And it's not just the digital compass; you get an accelerometer, better camera, better processor and 3.5mm jack. The combination of these improvements are more important than the screen IMO and I suspect this is true of a lot of users.

  15. #60
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Orange County, California
    Posts
    510
    Device(s)
    Shared phones- E71-2 (2), E51 black, iPhone 3G, N85-3, E75 NAM
    Carrier(s)
    AT&T
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Multiplier
    The issue isn't whether a digital compass is better than a screen but whether it "means squat" like you said. Perhaps it means squat to you but to suggest that this is true for everyone is pretty ridiculous.

    And it's not just the digital compass; you get an accelerometer, better camera, better processor and 3.5mm jack. The combination of these improvements are more important than the screen IMO and I suspect this is true of a lot of users.
    Those little additions to technically make the E72, an "upgrade", but coming from someone who went from an E71 to an E72, the ENTIRE user experience feels exactly the same with both phones. You can't even tell the upgraded processor is there because the OS imho feels considerably SLOWER than that of the E71.

    There is some truth that you don't necessarily need to upgrade the screen in making a successor (just look at the iPhone), but the E71's screen compared to its competitors was poor to begin with and the fact that it remained unchanged on the E72 is unacceptable
    Phone History

    Phones: iPhone 4 (black), iPhone 3GS (2x), Nokia E71-2, Nokia E72, Nokia E75, Nokia E51, Blackberry 8310, Nokia N85

    Sold: iPhone 3g, iPhone 2g, AT&T 8525, N93, N70, 9500, 7610, E61 , 6680, E60, E65, E65 black, E61i, N95-1 plum, E71-1

Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast

Bookmarks