Sony Ericsson / Sony : General : Have Sony Ericsson finally taken the lead in global mobile phone solutions?
>
New Topic
>
Reply<
Esato Forum Index
>
Sony Ericsson / Sony >
General
> Have Sony Ericsson finally taken the lead in global mobile phone solutions?
Bookmark topic
The basic conclution is that people choose phones for their features and looks, not because they have a certain OS (most people probably don't even know what an OS is or what it is good for).
As long as their needs can be fulfilled any phone will do regardless if it is an S60 smartphone or an SE dumb phone, which by the way is getting smarter and smarter for every new release.
In fact, the only smart thing about smartphones is their ability to install user selectable non-java third party apps, which is of little or no use at all if apps you need are already preinstalled.
[ This Message was edited by: Arne Anka on 2005-03-13 22:39 ]
--
Posted: 2005-03-13 23:35:08
Edit :
Quote
Nokia . . . rules !
--
Posted: 2005-03-14 01:38:53
Edit :
Quote
Sure, in your fantasy.
--
Posted: 2005-03-14 02:25:57
Edit :
Quote
@scotsboyuk
Quote:
Not at all because a feature like the mp3 player is a feature that the majority of customrs want and use. If you look at customer trends you will see that people are buying mobiles, which have all the basics i.e. phone calls, texting, etc and a few 'standard extras' such as a mp3 player, a camera and Bluetooth. S60 smartphone features just aren't a consideration for most people.
a short time ago, mp3 player was not a function people expect in a phone but now it is desired to be. are you so sure that smartphone features will not be desired just like MP3?
Quote:
I find myself repeating myself to you again and again, it doesn't matter how many features a device has if the customer does not want them. Even if a super-computer cost £1 the vast majority of people would still be unlikely to buy it because they would have absolutely no use for it! The very same principle applies to smartphones, those that are bought are often bought more for their basic features.
Here I assume you mean that people dont buy supercomputer (i.e. the smartphone) even it cost $1 because they have no use/need for it. Smartphone do satisfy the basic phone like you said. Only that for smartphone you have the additional icing on top of the cake thrown in for free. So the question you have to ask yourself is whether you want the free icing or not. Several posts back, I have said greed is a factor in buying decision AFTER design & price and I have said this free icing is very tempting to the avg high-end phone buying consumers.
I want to understand your point of view unlike what
arez is babbling about. Your only premise (which you have repeated over and over) is argument like "customer does not need smartphone hence they dont buy". r painting a picture that s60 & K750 are in separate segments to consumers. They are not because a s60 have the same price range and have same usability as a normal phone.
==edited.
if a person buying a phone has narrowed his choices to K750 and s60, and assuming he has no preferences over design and price, what would he use to break the tie?
a) Brand loyalty
b) Better features
c) All of above
[ This Message was edited by: mib1800 on 2005-03-14 03:54 ]
[ This Message was edited by: mib1800 on 2005-03-14 04:04 ]
--
Posted: 2005-03-14 03:00:39
Edit :
Quote
@Mib1800.
Are Nokia customers more loyal than Sony Ericssons?
--
Posted: 2005-03-14 12:34:52
Edit :
Quote
Quote:
On 2005-03-14 03:00:39, mib1800 wrote:
a short time ago, mp3 player was not a function people expect in a phone but now it is desired to be. are you so sure that smartphone features will not be desired just like MP3?
Exactly! I am quite sure that smartphone features will be wanted by the majority of consumers at some stage, but with two important caveats.
First of all smartphone features have to become useful to the average customer in the street. Spreadsheets are of little use to most people and integration with corporate networks is hardly much use to the majority of people who don't use a corporate network. Smartphone features need to become relevant to the man in the street and offer him abilities that he will actually use on a regualr basis.
Secondly smartphones need to become much easier to use. We may very well think nothing of downloading an application from the internet and transfering it to our handset using Bluetooth, where we install and then use it, but most people will not think that that is as simple as we do. What if there is a problem with the installation and one has to manually intervene? What if the application stops working? Smartphones need to be mad eidiot proof, but much more than that thye need to be made easy to use. Just like Windows 95 attracted huge numbers of customers with its amazing new looking interface, so too smartphones ned their Win 95 (hopefully without the bugs) to persuade people that this is indeed an easy concept to understand and use.
mp3 players have become so popular because people understand them, they are not seemingly remote and they have a practical every day application.
Quote:
Only that for smartphone you have the additional icing on top of the cake thrown in for free. So the question you have to ask yourself is whether you want the free icing or not. Several posts back, I have said greed is a factor in buying decision AFTER design & price and I have said this free icing is very tempting to the avg high-end phone buying consumers.
My point is that someone is not going to buy a smartphone for its smartphone features unless they, at the very least, actually understand those featurs and mor elikely actually want them.
High-end buyers are more likely to opt for a smartphone, but only if they actually see a need for the smartphone features. High-end buyers are arguably the least likely group to buy a smartphone because it satisfies their basic needs. This group will very likely be looking for the handset, which gives them the absolute best performance in those areas that they need, smartphone abilities will therefor eonly come into consideration for them if they actually need them.
Therefore, to answer your question, high-end buyers will likely only take the icing if they actually need it and low-end buyers are likely to take the icing because they want the cake and don't actually know or care about the icing.
Quote:
Your only premise (which you have repeated over and over) is argument like "customer does not need smartphone hence they dont buy". r painting a picture that s60 & K750 are in separate segments to consumers. They are not because a s60 have the same price range and have same usability as a normal phone.
You misunderstand my argument in your first sentence; it isn't that customers aren't buying smartphones (they are), but rather they aren't buying them as smartphones. Most of the people buying a smartphone are buying them because they offer them the non-smartphone functions that they want.
I am saying that a S60 smartphone and the K750 can be compared, but only to a certain degree. If one is going to buy a mobile phone then one compares those features one needs, no the ones that one does not. If I don't need Bluetooth then the fact that one of my prospective choices has it is irrelevent and does not influence my decision.
The comparison you are attempting to make doesn't exist; the K750 is not a smartphone, it cannot be compared to a S60 smartphone in terms of smartphone capabilities. The K750 and a S60 can only be compared on the features they share, which is what most people who buy such handsets will be doing.
Quote:
if a person buying a phone has narrowed his choices to K750 and s60, and assuming he has no preferences over design and price, what would he use to break the tie?
a) Brand loyalty
b) Better features
c) All of above
The answer all depends on the person and their requirements. One can imagine many Esatonians choosing option a because they like SE. One can imagine a business executive choosing option b because he needs smartphone features. One can imagine the average joe choosing option c because he only wants certain basic features and prefers SE. One can imagine any combination of factors in fact.
The question is specious because it assumes certain crieteria, which are highly unlikely to be applicable to the average customer e.g. lack of concern for design and price, which are arguably the two single most important factors people use in deciding on their new purchase.
--
Posted: 2005-03-14 13:11:40
Edit :
Quote
Design is very important. Being a designer (don't bother scotty
) i can see that sony ericsson, with samsung, design fantastically well. Their corporate and customer website is amazing, one of a kind. Nokias is blue bars and text.
has style. But its a radical style, to the average joe bloggs it isnt anything special, in fact its quite weird. Why be different they may think, Nokias look fine...
--
Posted: 2005-03-14 18:59:31
Edit :
Quote
Quote:
On 2005-03-14 12:34:52, goldenface wrote:
@Mib1800.
Are Nokia customers more loyal than Sony Ericssons?
i doubt so. SE followers are one of a kind. Just looking at esato you know they are very passionate about SE products. IMO, very few will venture out of SE phones or give more than a glance to other makers.
Some Nokia customers like me buy Nokia not by choice but by default. At the moment i can't find anything compelling enough to replace s60. And of course my collection of 1100 symbian apps/games.
. MS/WM did come close.
Will I buy SE? I doubt so unless SE comes out with a S60 or Microsoft WM. SE can come out with a UIQ3 smartphone but then it is not very attractive because software support is not there. It is very hard to give up a S60 phone with hundreds of installed apps and games (eventhough some u rarely use).
--
Posted: 2005-03-15 03:07:26
Edit :
Quote
@scotsboyuk
Quote:
First of all smartphone features have to become useful to the average customer in the street. Spreadsheets are of little use to most people and integration with corporate networks is hardly much use to the majority of people who don't use a corporate network. Smartphone features need to become relevant to the man in the street and offer him abilities that he will actually use on a regualr basis.
You have to see beyond the enterprise/business usage. Maybe your conception of smartphone is based on the likes P910. But if you look at s60, there r more s60 personal productivity/entertaiment apps than business type apps. I can tell you for a fact that I'm using s60 more for non-business. i can give you a few example of smartphone functionalitie which I'm using and find very useful to me (and I believe to many people also).
1. manage incoming call schedules of different group of people with white/black list support. e.g. divert to phone answering m/c when a business contact calls you after hours.
2. one-touch voice record an appointment and set it to calendar.
3. Life-Blog which track all activities for the day.
4. today screen that shows all your schedule appointments/task
5. personal diary where you can attach image/sound/file etc.
6. full-html browser
7. full dictonary/thesaurus/office doc viewer.
8. ngage games games games
etc
Quote:
I am saying that a S60 smartphone and the K750 can be compared, but only to a certain degree. If one is going to buy a mobile phone then one compares those features one needs, no the ones that one does not. If I don't need Bluetooth then the fact that one of my prospective choices has it is irrelevent and does not influence my decision.
yes. i understand this very well (i.e. "u dont need it then it wont influence decision"). Sometimes it is just not so clearcut. Say you dont have need to view word doc on phone now. As human, we would always have some niggling feeling that "what if I need it in the future?".
A S60 can have many of these "so called" smartphone features over a K750. One niggling feeling may not influence decision. But as in this case, it is many niggling feelings. Are you sure majority of consumers are so strong-willed to resist this?
Quote:
The question is specious because it assumes certain crieteria, which are highly unlikely to be applicable to the average customer e.g. lack of concern for design and price, which are arguably the two single most important factors people use in deciding on their new purchase.
It is not specious. S60 and K750 will be in the same price range, unless SE set K750 to much lower price. What is left is design. Like you say, design is subjective. For everyone who likes K750 design there may be another who dont. And they will many in the middle that find both appealing or acceptable.
[ This Message was edited by: mib1800 on 2005-03-15 05:27 ]
--
Posted: 2005-03-15 04:00:56
Edit :
Quote
Quote:
On 2005-03-14 02:25:57, Arne Anka wrote:
Sure, in your fantasy.
Nope . . . in REALITY mate
!
--
Posted: 2005-03-15 04:06:11
Edit :
Quote
New Topic
Reply
