Now that figures from (almost) all smartphone manufacturers are 'in' for Q4 2009, it's possible to look back over the entire year just finished. Was it an 'annus horribilis' for Nokia and for Symbian? Or was it a case of the market heading for a new equilibrium, in the face of new competition? Using figures collated by TomiAhonen Consulting and Strategy Analytics, I highlight some figures that analysts everywhere really should pay attention to.
Read on in the full article.
despite those numbers i have a feeling that apple fans will see it, and STILL say apple is the best by making some lame story about why they didnt get higher numbers and try to come out on top.....hey wait a minute, this sounds like something i've heard before....
ESP and dowsing rods anyone?
anyway, great job to nokia for being able to maintain such a huge number for so many years. symbian^3 and ^4 should increase that number back up to 42. the UI is the main reason a lot of new comers get turned away from nokia, at least over here in north america.
iPhone 3GS price is not too bad. I bought one one yesterday for application testing, it was �440. I have also purchased an N900 for about the same price.
Yes, but �440 is what I mean by a 'premium' price. So is the N900. In contrast, you can now get a Nokia 5230 for less than �100, only 22% of the price. As I said a few days ago, it's all about 'range'.
slitchfield wrote:Yes, but �440 is what I mean by a 'premium' price. So is the N900. In contrast, you can now get a Nokia 5230 for less than �100, only 22% of the price. As I said a few days ago, it's all about 'range'.
OK, so in its price range or its own particular sector of the market, we can safely say that iPhone dominates in the same way that Nokia does the overall market?
If Apple were to venture down a bit, by making a lower piced competitor in the way that they do with the Mac mini and the iPod nano, what might happen then?
Interestingly they have chosen to go in a completely new direction (as far as we know).
Seems the manufacturers are establishing their place in the world, and the battle is between Google and Apple and there is really only one likely winner given than Google's reputation as a horrible company is even worse than Apples.
Yes, I see a market for a S60v5 device at �100-200.. but I can't really see who is going to pay for a N97. I only know that I've seen an iPhone and altought I will never buy it because IMHO it 's not "smart" enough (to much apple limitations) it has changed my view of nokia touch interfaces from "slightly disatisfied with usability" to "how the f@#~do they dare to ask money for that!!" 😃 (ok, a bit of an exageration but you understand me) ;-P
If at least they will release an interface update for ALL S60v5 models they will recover some of the lost recognition.. but I don't see it very likely...
With regards to the high end of the market I think it is probably closer than people imagine. RIM tends to be under rated for example. Even the much derided N97 sold more than 2 million in its first 3 months. With the software updates and reworked hardware (N97 mini) plus stuff like the free navigation the N97 is much more attractive to consumers than it was before.
Nokia sold 4.6 million Nseries devices last quarter. You could argue that some of the 6.4 million Eseries count as high end. With that in mind the high end sales don't really look all that different between Nokia and Apple. Especially if you look outside the US (where the markets are more on a level playing field in terms of device availability / pricing). It does depend where you draw the line and you can't just ignore the low end stuff - they are important as part of platform count for things like addressable market for service providers and developers... The 'they don't count because they cheap / not smartphones' is ridiculous - do they matter as much - more open to debate possibly.
And yes Apple could venture down the market too, but its not really possible with the current platform and I don't think it fits with Apple's general strategy. They are more than happy to stay in the high end with its larger margins.
Equally you can argue about definitions, but it is always that way with stats. I think the main point of the article is that the figures very much speaksagainst the doom laden predictions that was pre-dominant in discussions of Symbian and Nokia last year.
Rafe, you�re missing something fundamental: from iPhone OS 3.2 (and 4.0) onwards, iPhone OS now clearly supports differente resolutions (the iPad and upcoming iPhone 4G will have different resolution than the old iPhones and iPod touches). So, unlike you say, the iPhone platform will now support "going down" the market, i.e., something like and iPhone nano can appear, and still be part of the iPhone OS ecosystem.
RIM, at least where I live, dominate the schoolkid market. The 14-18 age group and probably upwards to undergrads too all seem to want Blackberrys. The Curve is everywhere and it has to be Blackberry, the kids are as brand-snobbish with their phones as they are with their clothes. Same form factor other maker just doesn't cut it and will attract derision. It makes sense, because its a cheap enough unit to sacrifice to a careless teenager.
I have iPhones for professional reasons, but I don't carry them about. They are too uncomfortably large for a start, they have poor telephony performance where signal strength is marginal (even compared to bargain basement dumb phones) and their cameras are lacking. The user interface is first class, and unrivalled of course, this is generally acknowledged. However, I don't carry a phone so I can play with its user interface, I want to be able to take calls and hear the voice at the other end.
As for the Nokia touch UI, I have got used to it and it works very well. Long learning period required compared to others, but once you get it then it is as good as anything. Not as slick, but definitely as useful. Nokia has good telephony and RF performance, solid and able to stand an impact (see Ebay for cracked/broken screen phones for sale, and screen replacement kits!!), my Nokia also has an impressive battery life by comparison.
Unregistered wrote:Rafe, you�re missing something fundamental: from iPhone OS 3.2 (and 4.0) onwards, iPhone OS now clearly supports differente resolutions (the iPad and upcoming iPhone 4G will have different resolution than the old iPhones and iPod touches). So, unlike you say, the iPhone platform will now support "going down" the market, i.e., something like and iPhone nano can appear, and still be part of the iPhone OS ecosystem.
It's a requirement of any app that wants to get itself past approval and onto the app store that it can handle different resolutions. However, should Apple make a cheaper phone I feel its likely that the screen size (physical dimensions) could well change, but resolution would not drop as the current iPhone screen resolution is already considered to be low compared to competition.
(I just had to stop and think why I am discussion Apple in this thread - possibly because it is the speculation about what might happen if Apple decided to compete in the sector below iPhone directly against the Nokia XM phones).
I understand that Palm Pre sales performance in Europe is very very bad. No idea how it is doing in the US.
Dismiss RIM at your peril. Their OS is going to evolve rapidly this year (new webkit browser for one). They launched an app store without nokiaing it up. They're listening to developers and working with them to evolve the OS. Nokia could learn some lessons from RIM.
I�m not so sure I agree with all this: I�m thinking about the 1.2 million Nokia owners worldwide, most of whom owns series 40 devices and would want to upgrade to Symbian devices over time. This is at least Nokia�s estimation that there�s something like 57% retention rate, and the figure is expected to go up to 65% in 2010. You don�t have this situation for the other smartphone players like Android, iPhone or Blackberry. Blackberry is mostly for business consumers and there�s a limited amount of them, iPhone is for the "rich elite" - and I suppose Apple did draw a lot of iPhone customers from their already iPod and Mac-users (the iPhone is after all an iPod), which contributed to the initial high growth of this device. But I think it will plateau out to a more modest growth quite soon. Apple cannot draw customers from the "bottom up" like Nokia can.
The elite is a limited group, and maybe one could compare it with the automobile industry. In 2000 I believe it was about 60 million vehicles sold per year, in 2008 it was 70 million, meaning it is only growing at 2-3% per year. So it�s basically only like 1% of the world�s population that buys a vehicle per year. Why so few? Because they are simply too expensive. iPhones and Blackberrys are also too expensive and to some extent Android that cannot be run on lower end devices like Symbian can.
Of course it all depends on how one define "smartphone".
And going beyond the current year, I think there will be wild cards, just like one can go back to 2006 and see all the predictions then for 2010 that was wrong so will the predictions today I�m sure be very wrong. Things can also fluctuate if one look at a longer term perspective of many years, where Nokia is leading at one point, then suddenly iPhone and Android comes out, Nokia (Symbian) lose share, then they release a completely new reingeneered user interface and some compelling mapping services etc and regain market share and so on, and suddenly Microsoft - which was discounted by many - suddenly comes out with a new very compelling mobile OS, or something completely new comes out that we now cannot guess. Anything is possible.
Unregistered wrote:Dismiss RIM at your peril. Their OS is going to evolve rapidly this year (new webkit browser for one). They launched an app store without nokiaing it up. They're listening to developers and working with them to evolve the OS. Nokia could learn some lessons from RIM.
True! RIM is really hot with the youngsters where I am at the moment. But dismiss Nokia at your peril too.
All the "Symbian is dead hype" is taking a toll on the sale of Symbian devices, with OS market share down 12% .
Symbian is not dead, Does everyone proclaim Windows is dead when PCs run linux?
Totally baseless negative hype is being generated, particularly by US tech sites.Symbian is on a sabbatical and will get back at you,literally,in no time.
It would be pleasing to see how Android & Maemo platforms fare.
Unregistered wrote:Blackberry is mostly for business consumers and there�s a limited amount of them, iPhone is for the "rich elite"
Way off the mark. Blackberry as a messaging device is extremely popular amongst the young, which bodes well for its future. iPhone is for anyone. It's just a credit agreement and doesn't actually cost very much at all. iPhone owners come from all ends, but mostly NOT the rich elite.
Agree with the other commenters about RIM. BlackBerry is the hottest brand by far at the moment, no matter what the Apple crowd would have you believe. Easily underestimated, but they're going nowhere.
Yes, in developed countries, I guess a lot of people can afford an iPhone or a Blackberry if they really want one (although I have to say: I�m from Norway, currently the richest country in the world in terms of gdp/capita (nominal) and also one of the most egalitarian, I know a lot of people that won�t buy an iPhone because it is too expensive when the contract and everything is included).
But I�m thinking about the hundreds of millions of people in countries like India and China who loves Nokia (Nokia is the most trusted and loved brand in India for example) and would naturally want to upgrade to higher end Nokia�s over time, that is to Symbian devices. And I believe this will increase Symbian�s market share over time. That would be for the lower-end devices.
For the higher end devices we�ll see how much of an impact the now lower prices of Nokia devices, the free mapping/navigation service, the completely reeingineered user interface, the new SDK (building on Qt) etc will play in - on the one hand - and on the other hand, and on the other hand how much novelty we�ll see from Blackberry(OS), iPhone and Android. I happen to belive we�ll see more novelty from Nokia the coming year, and that Symbians market share will go up also in the high end market over the next two years.
People don't seem to be aware that Blackberry are at the bottom end with the Curve 8520, it's a cheap phone.
Depends on your definition of "cheap". If the mentioned Blackberry cost $300, it isn�t cheap compared to a full-touchscreen Nokia 5530 that would cost only $150 (or however much it is). Nokia�s own hardware and mass-production can bring prices much lower than RIM can. If you�re a poor guy from for example Eastern Europe, this $150 difference will matter a lot...
Unregistered wrote:Way off the mark. Blackberry as a messaging device is extremely popular amongst the young, which bodes well for its future. iPhone is for anyone. It's just a credit agreement and doesn't actually cost very much at all. iPhone owners come from all ends, but mostly NOT the rich elite.
RIM was totally in the right place at the right time, and totally by accident. But give them credit for realizing that their ability to push real-time email for enterprises could also be used to push real-time IMs and Facebook/Myspace/Twitter updates.
It's interesting to see other people going down this path (Motorola with MotoBLUR). Nokia is way late to the party on this one.
The curve 8520 is about �200 or slightly less, depending where you buy it. It's a bit more expensive than the 6220c I bought almost a year ago SIM-free, but not much.
I guess in USD, it would be $250-$300?
My 6220c has Xenon.
Nokia does have a huge market share but they run the risk of loosing market share because of arrogance. I am new to Nokia, I purchased a sim free 5800 last September. I thought (and still do) that it was a great phone for the price and I liked the idea of being the only gay man in the UK without an Iphone (Apple know their tarket market). However 3 firmwares updates later my 5800 is still stuck on v21 (so no free navigation maps). E mails to UK customer support and faxes to Finland all go unanswered. This is no way for a company to maintain a loyal customer base, if things do not improve Nokia will not be at the top of my list when I come to change phones.
Where did you buy it from? Was it through Nokia? Or was it through a more dubious source? Just asking...., I'm curious as to how some product codes slip through the net!
ecpect Nokia and Symbian to lose more smartphone marketshare when the worlds 2nd and 3rd biggest phone manufacturers start pushing their own 'smartphone' OS's.
slitchfield wrote:Where did you buy it from? Was it through Nokia? Or was it through a more dubious source? Just asking...., I'm curious as to how some product codes slip through the net!
Your best bet is to ask the question on the Nokia Discussions board. It's monitored by Nokia employees who have direct lines to the product teams.
slitchfield wrote:Your best bet is to ask the question on the Nokia Discussions board. It's monitored by Nokia employees who have direct lines to the product teams.I cant tell you how many times I have done that, nothing. E mails to support unanswered, 2 faxes to head office in Finland, unanswered. I just cant believe how bad Nokia customer support is and I just don't know what to do now apart from to change my codes!
Well, in that case, yes, suggest changing the product code to one that has the update (see above), then changing back again afterwards. It's not good practice to do this, of course, but if Nokia really are ignoring you..... 8-)
slitchfield wrote:Well, in that case, yes, suggest changing the product code to one that has the update (see above), then changing back again afterwards. It's not good practice to do this, of course, but if Nokia really are ignoring you..... 8-)