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
@ vanquish: Your smart statements amazes me.
Anyway, mib does have a point whether you like it or not. Just face facts. Smartphones are selling more and more, whether people care for their features or not. Nokia is doing exactly what has happened to PCs. Nokia is making cheap, affordable smartphones. They become commonalities. Not everyone buy a PC for what it can do. Many buy it for gaming. Yet, some prefer a good game console.
does not have a viable player in the competition at the moment. They have a very competitive product (technically speaking, although EDGE is a must), but sales figures are disappointing vs other smartphones. That's very clear. Sure UIQ is nice, but S60 (which can do basically the same stuff or more) sells much more. Merely the UI is different. UI is not a qualifier for defining a smartphone (And paying 100s of Euros more to get a touchscreen is questionable). The OS is, and here both share Symbian OS.
I'm waiting for the day when
will license S60.
--
Posted: 2005-03-23 11:06:00
Edit :
Quote
@vanquish, exactly, quantity doesn't make quality.
@dave, thanks for the support! That post took some miles off my scrolly wheel I can tell you.
--
Posted: 2005-03-23 11:11:49
Edit :
Quote
@Super G, I don't think it will ever happen. s60 is only the predominant os because Nokia is pushing it regardless of the market demand for smartphones.
What problem do you have uiq (or palm or pocketpc for that matter)? they all have strengths and weeknesses.
And NOONE is arguing that Nokia don't lead the sales market in Smartphones, we just don't accept that smartphones are the sole criteria for high end phones that can claim market leadership in handset technology (not sales, the two things are completely different beasts).
And EVERYONE knows that smartphones have a very good chance (almost 100%) of becoming a standard (cept maybe scots, though I don't trust mib's interpretationof what he said). But what sort of standard? Across all handsets, mid to high end, high end only? The dust is yet to settle, and SE has by no means forsaken the smartphone market.
Okay so they are a little late on the replacement to the P910, but I'm sick of the Nokia supporters saying that the P910 can't compete, well of course it can't. No SE fan is comparing the P910 against the latest nokia smartphones. On the same lines some Nokia fan dumped on the Comparison of the K750 against a current Nokia saying it wasn't fair since the K750 wasn't out yet!
When smartphones are more than 10% of the market, (currently 6%) you can expect all OEM's to ramp up smartphone production.
I do think SE are leading the market; they are pushing handsets in terms of hardware integration technology, not os technology. Nokia and all OEM's are benefiting from the lead SE has set and continues to maintain in hardware development.
--
Posted: 2005-03-23 11:41:17
Edit :
Quote
@Super G
If you have worked out what MIB's point is, my congratulations to you. An honorary degree in telepathy from the University of Life is winging it's way to you as I type.
Incidentally, you may be interested in the thread title - as you and MIB have failed to notice (and MIB has had around 23 pages to do so!) neither the words Nokia, Series 60 nor more pertinently smartphone figure anywhere. Not that they should not be discussed - there is clearly a relationship - but the overwhelming dominance of these topics and the fact that numerous people are now contributing without reading what has gone before, is making this whole thread only slightly less repetitive than watching paint dry
--
Posted: 2005-03-23 11:41:47
Edit :
Quote
@max_wedge
Quote:
What I am saying is that untill two years have passed, you can't use the argument that all smartphones are high end and therefore SE are not leading the market.
What the heck r u talking about?
All I'm saying is that smartphone is competing in the high-end segment together with SE K750 etc and because smartphone has additional "free" smart features which give it some advantage. scotsboyuk obviously disagrees with this.
Firstly, it was proclaimed that K750 is a revolutionary phone in terms of features which enabled SE to "lead the mobile solution". This whole debate started when I asked: "Doesnt smartphone has better capability than K750?"
Quote:
THIS IS OUR WHOLE POINT my friend, that SE DON'T NEED SMARTPHONES (YET) TO CLAIM MARKET LEADERSHIP!!!!!!
friend, claim what market leadership? SE is languishing in 6th position if u hv not noticed.
Quote:
It is growing faster, but is not yet bigger. In order for the above statement of yours to be true, you have to assume that 1. That phones have to be smartphone to be high-end, and 2. that the faster growing smartphone market is already big enough to preclude SE.
here u go again with ur wild conjectures.
1) Who say high-end phone must be a smartphone? Only u did.
2) SE is still producing high-end phone like S700/K750 to compete in high-end market isnt it? So who is precluding who? Nobody.
Quote:
You are the one who keeps insisting that smartphones are SE's downfall. What we are saying is that it doesn't matter if they don't have a good range of smartphones, they are still providing leading handsets.
here u go again with your babbling. Did I mention anything that smartphone are SE's downfall? My gosh. You r really one of a kind.
Quote:
Again you are supporting the idea that smartphones growth is about people wanting smartphones.
I am. Havent u been reading?
imo, it is more plausible than opposing arguments (to mine): E.g.
"Smartphone features has no attraction to buyers."
"Buyers just accidentally bought smartphone which leads to fluke in stats".
"Smartphone is in a market segment of its own and high-end non-smart like K750 would hv an unopposed reign as the best and would not be affected by smartphone"
Quote:
SE will enter the fray with excellent smartphones, WHEN it is necessary.
I certainly hope so.
Quote:
Nokia are the only manufacturer who have embraced smartphones in a big way, all other manufacturers just bring out one or two models. Does this point alone make Nokia the "leading mobile solutions" manufacturer?
Once again, you got it very very wrong. I thought it was the opposite. Isnt it that many SE fans unashamedly proclaimed SE is "leading mobile solutions" with K750.
I did not say anything about Nokia "leading mobile solutions". I only highlight the fact (from stats) that Nokia is leading in smartphone
sales.
--
Posted: 2005-03-23 11:46:32
Edit :
Quote
Quote:
On 2005-03-23 11:06:00, Super G wrote:
@ vanquish: Your smart statements amazes me.
Anyway, mib does have a point whether you like it or not. Just face facts. Smartphones are selling more and more, whether people care for their features or not. Nokia is doing exactly what has happened to PCs. Nokia is making cheap, affordable smartphones. They become commonalities. Not everyone buy a PC for what it can do. Many buy it for gaming. Yet, some prefer a good game console.
does not have a viable player in the competition at the moment. They have a very competitive product (technically speaking, although EDGE is a must), but sales figures are disappointing vs other smartphones. That's very clear. Sure UIQ is nice, but S60 (which can do basically the same stuff or more) sells much more. Merely the UI is different. UI is not a qualifier for defining a smartphone (And paying 100s of Euros more to get a touchscreen is questionable). The OS is, and here both share Symbian OS.
I'm waiting for the day when
will license S60.
No one is saying Smartphones aren't selling quicker than non-smartphones but what we ARE saying is it will be a long time before they start selling in greater quantities!!!!!!!
Affordabililty might be the common denominator. In the UK the Networks heavily subsidise nearly all handsets.
However I would rate a smartphone with a Qwerty keyboard and Touch screen over one without!!
--
Posted: 2005-03-23 11:48:48
Edit :
Quote
Quote:
On 2005-03-23 11:46:32, mib1800 wrote:
friend, claim what market leadership? SE is languishing in 6th position if u hv not noticed.
and
I did not say anything about Nokia "leading mobile solutions". I only highlight the fact (from stats) that Nokia is leading in smartphone
sales.
Are you for real?
--
Posted: 2005-03-23 12:12:39
Edit :
Quote
Quote:
On 2005-03-23 03:59:46, mib1800 wrote:
I can't quite see why u keep harping on this point. I hv always been talking about high-end segment. Let me ask you what is the percentage of high-end to overall phone market (in volume). Would a ballpark figure of 20% be reasonable? Smartphone volume overall is 6-8%. This percentage share will increase in the years to come. I'll let you do the sum.
Please read my posts, I am speaking of the high-end market. The cross-section I refer to is within the high-end market, or do you assume that only certain 'types' buy high-end mobile phones?
I have no doubt that smartphones will play an increasingly important role as time goes by, again you can see this from reading my posts.
Quote:
For the nth times, it doesnt matter whether people really use (or want ) smartphone features, the fact is that smartphone is sucking up volume in the high-end segment. So if u throw in a K750 to compete in this high-end, there may be a chance it get steam-rolled over.
I disagree. Smartphones are not 'sucking up' volume at all. If you were to actually consider for a moment how much of Nokia's product range is made up of smartphones and then also take into account that Nokia sell the most mobile phones; it isn't a huge leap to arrive at the logical conclusion that smartphones are selling more because they make up an ever increasing proportion of the world's biggest selling mobile phone manufacturer's product range!
As for the K750 being 'steam-rolled' over, why should it be? Unless one specifically wants smartphone capabilities thenwhy would one choose a mobile that has inferior specifications on basic features common to all mobile phones (and desired by the majority of the public)?
I think what we have here is a misconception that smartphones are somehow 'the default' option for customers seeking a high-end phone. If this isn't true then why state that the K750 may be 'steam-rolled' over? This scenario might possibly have some value in it if smartphones were the deafult option, but since they are not it seems clear that this is blatantly false logic.
As has been covered many times in this thread, smartphones and non-smartphones do not compete with one anothe ron the same terms, no matter how much you may wish to the contrary.
Quote:
At this moment I believe SE dont hv any phone to compete with the likes of thumb-based smartphone like s60, mpx220 or Xphone2. Well, maybe not entirely as SE has S700. But then again S700 is selling too little to be considered a serious challenger.
Why should SE? SE haven't focused upon smartphones, instead relying on one model a year to 'hold the fort'. If SE thought that the smartphone market was mature enough they would release more, they obviously don't, so they won't.
The S700 isn't marketed as a smartphone, quite why you are trying to compare it with one I don't know. Again we see this nonsense of trying to directly compare smartphones and non-smartphones.
Quote:
When K750 comes out, whether SE will target K750 to get a slice of this segment is left to be seen.
More false logic.
Quote:
I think everyone would agree that the design of 6600 is nothing to shout about. In fact, it is not too pleasing at all with its size, thickness and weight. These factors would put people off buying at the first instance if they were just, I quote
"looking for basic features" unquote. And yet 6600 sold in the millions. Can you explain that? (pls don't use the rhetoric "..because it is a Nokia"
)
I wasn't aware that you set the standard for what society deems pleasing to the eye!
The 6600 offers a good range of basic features, which customers can identify with, it also has the look of an ordinary mobile phone, agains omething most customers appreciate. One only has to look at some of Nokia's more whacky designs to see that both critics and customers tend to be put off by such designs.
I would also imagine that the massive advertising campaign instituted for the 6600 was at least partially useful in persuading people to buy the handset.
Two examples I can give you of people who bought the 6600:
Example 1.) The business user - bought the 6600 to check e-mail and read the news whilst commuting to work in the morning.
Example 2.) The student - bought the 6600 because he liked the look of it and because it had a camera and video player.
These are two reasonably conflicting reasons for buying the product, one is a work related motive whilst the other is very much not. The features both want can be found in other handsets, but to be fair the business user did use some of the smartphone features. The fact that both were happy with the overall design seems to indicate that the mark you set for the 6600 is quite as universal as your statement would at first suggest.
Whether you like it or not many people do buy Nokia because it is their default standard. Nokia have a huge market presence and people respond to that. Whether you like the fact or not, many people buy Nokia because they 'go with what they know'.
Quote:
I think you should leave this hypothesis to the psychologists (unless of course u r a qualify one).
I won't bore you with my Psychiatric qualifications.
Quote:
I think most psychologist wont agree with you because u r going against human behaviour: 1) u r assuming people r not interested in finding out more of what they r buying and 2) u r assuming that people r not greedy (just go to buffet dinner and u will see how wrong u r)
It seems to be you who us doing too much assuming with this response!
I am not assuming that people are not interested in finding out what they are buying at all, far from it. My point is that people find out what they actually need from a product, extra features are superfluous to their needs and tend not to enter into the buying decision.
The average Joe going to buy a new televsion may very well be told that it has a range of sound options and that the display features certain amazing qualities, but these sort of thing aren't important to him. The average man on the street wants certain features that he knows about e.g. picture quality, sound quality and reliability. He probably doesn't care less what the screen is coated with or if the sound system can be hooked up to certain speakers to provide a difference in quality he probably can't and won't appreciate.
This analogy is applicable to mobile phones. If you were to actually observe someone buying a mobile phone then you would hear them asking certain questions e.g. does it have a camera? what are the ringtones like? what's the battery life like? can it play mp3s? etc. Most people don't understand smartphone applications, not because they are stupid, but because they have no real interest. For customers to be interested in something it has to have relevance to their lives, smartphone features simply don;t at the moment, except for a minority.
Quote:
Let's just stick to fact we know ==>i.e. smartphone sales is growing faster than the rest of market. So if SE dont hv a viable smartphone, then it is losing out in this HIGH END segment. As simple as that.
No it isn't as simple as that. Once again you equate the high-end market with smartphones, which is only partly true. You also assume that SE is a unique company, unique in the respect that it isn't interested in making money. If SE's own research, plus that of others, identified a situation, in which SE were losing out then SE would hardly sit back and see themselves loose business.
Furthermore you are assuming that an increase in smartphone sales sales is attributable to smartphone features. You take no account of the customers who buy a smartphone simply for its basic features or who are given one as an upgrade without appreciating that it is a smartphone.
Unless one actually examine the factors involved then one can make all sorts of statements. I could claim, with a certain degree of validity, that t-shirts were going out of fashion because they weren't selling as well in December (in the UK) as they were in June. Of course I would have to ignore the fact that summer wear traditionally does not sell well in winter months, but this is tantamount to what youb are doing in assuming that smartphone sales increases are attributable to smartphone capabilities alone.
Quote:
I just dont see why u want to continuosly dispute this fact.
I was taught something at nurserey school that has stayed with me for the rest of my life. I shall try and remember the exact quote ... ah yes, "... because I'm right and you're wrong!"
_________________
"I may be drunk my dear woman, but in the morning I will be sober, and you will still be ugly." WSC
[ This Message was edited by: scotsboyuk on 2005-03-23 11:32 ]
--
Posted: 2005-03-23 12:31:23
Edit :
Quote
Mib! quote:"1) Who say high-end phone must be a smartphone? Only u did. "
I never said that it was so, I only referred to the many times you inferred that it was.
I'm not going to look for more examples since the ones I've already given are obvious enough.
Okay, so you now say you are only talking about sales.
To complete the circle for the thousandth time, the forum title is "Have Sony Ericsson finally taken the lead in global mobile phone solutions?" not "Do SE have the biggest marketshare"
Ferrari are a world leader in performance technology, but they don't sell too many cars.
You keep insisting that this whole debate is about sales (and smartphones
), but I think peeps on this thread want to discuss some other aspects of the topic.
I for one would be interested in a more feedback from people about SE competition that isn't about s60 or market share. For example what do people think about comparative handsets from other oems; are they more ergonomic, are they easier to use, do they compromise on features, how do they compare in quality, what networks are they compatible with?
These are the questions relevant to the title of this thread I reckon
--
Posted: 2005-03-23 14:02:35
Edit :
Quote
@ dave uk
I know the title of that thread. I have some early posts in it...
I disagree with the conclusions. I dont think
has taken the lead in blah blah (ah, but vanquish came up with the title, no wonder. It couldnt be more vague, hence this thread going banana. People react on ":se: taking the lead", no matter what lead it is.).
I believe 6680 is THE actual mobile phone that has everything a mobile phone can possibly have today. WCDMA, EDGE (Class 10), great screen, two cameras, S60, hot-swap MMC, etc etc. In terms of integration, difficult to beat that at the moment.
Quote:
On 2005-03-23 11:41:17, max_wedge wrote:
@Super G, I don't think it will ever happen. s60 is only the predominant os because Nokia is pushing it regardless of the market demand for smartphones.
Still selling like hot cakes. There is demand for such phones. Nokia has created a whole new market here, and
has not yet made a significant footprint in that particular market, because
makes a smartphone as a high-end phone, which is completely wrong a way of thinking. If you want to sell in big numbers, dont just target high-end, but target mid-end, budget. Their problem is very likely UIQ which requires a touch screen. Hence I think
should license s60 or develop their own smartphone witha normal keypad.
Quote:
What problem do you have uiq (or palm or pocketpc for that matter)? they all have strengths and weeknesses.
I have not problem with UIQ whatsoever. I said its good.
But, I'm very skeptical one could evey make a budget phone supporting UIQ.
Quote:
And NOONE is arguing that Nokia don't lead the sales market in Smartphones, we just don't accept that smartphones are the sole criteria for high end phones that can claim market leadership in handset technology (not sales, the two things are completely different beasts).
A high-end phone is defined as per its pricetag. Full point. Whatever that phone supports whether its a smartphone or not.
Quote:
And EVERYONE knows that smartphones have a very good chance (almost 100%) of becoming a standard (cept maybe scots, though I don't trust mib's interpretationof what he said). But what sort of standard? Across all handsets, mid to high end, high end only? The dust is yet to settle, and SE has by no means forsaken the smartphone market.
Smartphone as I said should address all ends of the market. Likely difficult for low-ends, but certainly mid-end must be available.
has no offering there, and I doubt they will have if they only use UIQ.
, trust me, license s60 and you will sell a lot of phones.
Quote:
Okay so they are a little late on the replacement to the P910, but I'm sick of the Nokia supporters saying that the P910 can't compete, well of course it can't. No SE fan is comparing the P910 against the latest nokia smartphones. On the same lines some Nokia fan dumped on the Comparison of the K750 against a current Nokia saying it wasn't fair since the K750 wasn't out yet!
P910 can compete, technically (if you forget EDGE). You got me wrong. But its pricetag is hurting its competitiveness.
Quote:
I do think SE are leading the market; they are pushing handsets in terms of hardware integration technology, not os technology. Nokia and all OEM's are benefiting from the lead SE has set and continues to maintain in hardware development.
Yes,
is certainly leading its 6th position in the market.
--
Posted: 2005-03-23 14:03:39
Edit :
Quote
New Topic
Reply
