Active Topics
-
Install Fonts in N900 (67)
to Maemo 5 / Fremantle by panjgoori - 2 hrs, 43 mins ago -
Nokia Booklet 3G (RX-75) Drivers (60)
to Alternatives by Maemish - 4 days, 9 hrs ago - more...
enne30 |
2015-12-21
, 11:36
|
|
Posts: 242 |
Thanked: 169 times |
Joined on Nov 2011
|
#11
|
Originally Posted by itdoesntmatt
As Nokia executives said in 2007 looking at Iphone
| The Following User Says Thank You to enne30 For This Useful Post: | ||
 |
|
2015-12-21
, 12:23
|
|
Posts: 6,445 |
Thanked: 20,981 times |
Joined on Sep 2012
@ UK
|
#12
|
Originally Posted by enne30
I hear this all the time and I just don't get it. Apple did not invent the smartphone. I used a smartphone for three years before the iPhone came out. And another one even before that.
As Nokia executives said in 2007 looking at Iphone
Apple did not even improve the smartphone. Both mine were far superior to anything available even today in some respects. If anything, the iPhone was a step back, not forward.
iPhone did not win because it was the first. Or better. It won because it was Apple. They can make a pocket sundial trendy if they put their mind to it, FFS!
__________________
Русский военный корабль, иди нахуй!
Русский военный корабль, иди нахуй!
| The Following 15 Users Say Thank You to pichlo For This Useful Post: | ||
att, Copernicus, enne30, Fellfrosch, itdoesntmatt, JoOppen, Jordi, juiceme, minimos, mosen, reinob, salyavin, sicelo, strongm, zenecho | ||
|
|
2015-12-21
, 12:40
|
|
Posts: 229 |
Thanked: 725 times |
Joined on Sep 2010
@ Permanent cruiser - either water- or motorways
|
#13
|
Originally Posted by pichlo
No my friend, Apple won because they had the best marketing talent in the whole business ... Not the best ideas or products survive (beta max - Palm - Maemo/Meego ... - ...) it's all about selling them in the right way - people don't buy the product they buy the feeling ;-)
I hear this all the time and I just don't get it. Apple did not invent the smartphone. I used a smartphone for three years before the iPhone came out. And another one even before that.
Apple did not even improve the smartphone. Both mine were far superior to anything available even today in some respects. If anything, the iPhone was a step back, not forward.
iPhone did not win because it was the first. Or better. It won because it was Apple. They can make a pocket sundial trendy if they put their mind to it, FFS!
| The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to elastic For This Useful Post: | ||
 |
|
2015-12-21
, 12:49
|
|
Posts: 1,986 |
Thanked: 7,698 times |
Joined on Dec 2010
@ Dayton, Ohio
|
#14
|
Originally Posted by pichlo
Actually, I can understand it. Apple does not produce "smartphones" (or "computers" for that matter -- they've happily adopted the notion that a Mac is not a PC, as they show in their "Mac vs PC" commercials). In the end, it comes down to who their customers are.
I hear this all the time and I just don't get it. Apple did not invent the smartphone.
...
Apple did not even improve the smartphone. Both mine were far superior to anything available even today in some respects. If anything, the iPhone was a step back, not forward.
Apple's target customer is explicitly the well-heeled technophobe. "Hey, customer, you see those gadgets everyone seems to be using? Well, here, take a look at this: it does everything those other gadgets do, but it's simple and easy to use. We'll guide you every step of the way, and keep you from making the kind of embarrassing mistakes you'd make on those other devices that give you, well, the freedom to make mistakes. And our gadgets look downright beautiful! You'll be delighted to have this handsome product at your side, and everyone else will be envious."
Apple's goal is customer happiness first, technical superiority second (if at all). In that sense, the first iPhone was a huge improvement on everything that came before; it made the world of people who had no technical ability into "smartphone" users. (Which, essentially, is the same as what the iPod did -- turned the mp3 player world from a technically sophisticated market into a general market.) By selling products directly to non-technical users, Apple tapped into an underserved market and reaped the rewards.
|
|
2015-12-21
, 12:51
|
|
Posts: 6,445 |
Thanked: 20,981 times |
Joined on Sep 2012
@ UK
|
#15
|
Originally Posted by elastic
And what did I say?
No my friend, Apple won because they had the best marketing talent in the whole business ...
The gist is, you may be the market leader for years but you are pretty much guaranteed to go out the moment Apple decides to enter the market. There was absolutely nothing that could have saved Nokia.
__________________
Русский военный корабль, иди нахуй!
Русский военный корабль, иди нахуй!
| The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to pichlo For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2015-12-21
, 13:29
|
|
Posts: 498 |
Thanked: 836 times |
Joined on Jun 2012
@ Finland
|
#16
|
Originally Posted by Copernicus
This is EXACTLY why they succeeded! To the very core. As a personal notion, I wonder why it is still not clear to other companies and their sale divisions.
Actually, I can understand it. Apple does not produce "smartphones" (or "computers" for that matter -- they've happily adopted the notion that a Mac is not a PC, as they show in their "Mac vs PC" commercials). In the end, it comes down to who their customers are.
Apple's target customer is explicitly the well-heeled technophobe. "Hey, customer, you see those gadgets everyone seems to be using? Well, here, take a look at this: it does everything those other gadgets do, but it's simple and easy to use. We'll guide you every step of the way, and keep you from making the kind of embarrassing mistakes you'd make on those other devices that give you, well, the freedom to make mistakes. And our gadgets look downright beautiful! You'll be delighted to have this handsome product at your side, and everyone else will be envious."
Apple's goal is customer happiness first, technical superiority second (if at all). In that sense, the first iPhone was a huge improvement on everything that came before; it made the world of people who had no technical ability into "smartphone" users. (Which, essentially, is the same as what the iPod did -- turned the mp3 player world from a technically sophisticated market into a general market.) By selling products directly to non-technical users, Apple tapped into an underserved market and reaped the rewards.
And no. Android didn't do it that way and still succeeded. Yes, that is true also. They did, however, come to an market that had already exploded to expansion and thus didn't need to fight same kind of war. Nokia went down because they choose wrong and were slower than my gran-ma would be against U. Bolt to react and evolve. Also leadership made so many mistakes that it is mindboggling.
__________________
- "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe."
- Albert Einstein
- "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe."
- Albert Einstein
|
|
2015-12-21
, 14:16
|
|
Community Council |
Posts: 4,920 |
Thanked: 12,867 times |
Joined on May 2012
@ Southerrn Finland
|
#17
|
Originally Posted by pichlo
There, corrected it for you...
And what did I say?
The gist is, you may be the market leader for years but you are pretty much guaranteed to go out the moment Apple decides to enter the market. There was absolutely nothing that could have saved Nokia Mobile Phones.
| The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to juiceme For This Useful Post: | ||
 |
|
2015-12-21
, 14:22
|
|
Community Council |
Posts: 1,669 |
Thanked: 10,225 times |
Joined on Nov 2014
@ Lower Rhine
|
#19
|
Copernicus got it right.
I am partialy sorry for all foss projects and fanboys (like myself) having to say:
Apple (oh, no, it was steve all by himself) invented a whole new ballgame when it comes to UX.
Most companies not admitting to not even having fully comprehended what happend, not giving credit and not trying to selectively learn from Apples strong points is borderline indication of Dunning Kruger Effect
They are the biggest company in the World now because they came up first with a UX that took noobs completely serious but did not leave out the hackers as it is still based on bsd.
It is that simple but difficult in its humongous heap of details.
No offense to anyone i hope, especially pichlo again has the joy that it looks like this is an answer to his post, no. but sorry upfront<3
i am here to rant against companies and foss projects mindset.
My humble observation from the past years lead me to conclusion that there will probably never be a decent foss ui for everyone. (Sorry again Plasma) because of "too many cooks syndrom".
The Task screams for a "leading mind" to produce a clear line and concept to withstand "outsiders" opinions on unfinished features and half arsed rants based on false comparisons and assumptions.
Yes we have other horses in the race but that was and is my biggest hope that Jolla can still accomplish best, sitting on the shoulders of maemo/meego giant.
Give a competetiv mobile UX to the Foss world.
Nothing more, nothing less.
I am partialy sorry for all foss projects and fanboys (like myself) having to say:
Apple (oh, no, it was steve all by himself) invented a whole new ballgame when it comes to UX.
Most companies not admitting to not even having fully comprehended what happend, not giving credit and not trying to selectively learn from Apples strong points is borderline indication of Dunning Kruger Effect
They are the biggest company in the World now because they came up first with a UX that took noobs completely serious but did not leave out the hackers as it is still based on bsd.
It is that simple but difficult in its humongous heap of details.
No offense to anyone i hope, especially pichlo again has the joy that it looks like this is an answer to his post, no. but sorry upfront<3
i am here to rant against companies and foss projects mindset.
My humble observation from the past years lead me to conclusion that there will probably never be a decent foss ui for everyone. (Sorry again Plasma) because of "too many cooks syndrom".
The Task screams for a "leading mind" to produce a clear line and concept to withstand "outsiders" opinions on unfinished features and half arsed rants based on false comparisons and assumptions.
Yes we have other horses in the race but that was and is my biggest hope that Jolla can still accomplish best, sitting on the shoulders of maemo/meego giant.
Give a competetiv mobile UX to the Foss world.
Nothing more, nothing less.
__________________
Watch our weird watchfaces for mighty AsteroidOS
Performance comparison Video Sailfish 2.0 vs 1.1.9 vs 1.1.7
[MC eV] Maemo Community eV membership application please concider to join!
Watch our weird watchfaces for mighty AsteroidOS
Performance comparison Video Sailfish 2.0 vs 1.1.9 vs 1.1.7
[MC eV] Maemo Community eV membership application please concider to join!
|
|
2015-12-21
, 15:25
|
|
Guest |
Posts: n/a |
Thanked: 0 times |
Joined on
|
#20
|
Originally Posted by elastic
Apple convinced people that they needed their product, stayed focused and delivered timely, increased their distribution channels and then taught people how to use and develop feelings for their product meanwhile convincing people to develop for their platform.
No my friend, Apple won because they had the best marketing talent in the whole business ... Not the best ideas or products survive (beta max - Palm - Maemo/Meego ... - ...) it's all about selling them in the right way - people don't buy the product they buy the feeling
Wait... I think I just restated everything you said.
Thus we agree.
The issue is that Jolla started strong in their marketing ("unlike") but strayed by not delivering a product, didn't secure third party developers that bring app parity to other platforms without using Android (glad it's there) and the developers that did embrace the platform produced stuff that was made more for themselves, not for people (my opinion).
There's a ton of gems that are out there for Jolla, most feel incomplete though. But there's also an app gap, a marketing inconsistency and above all, a true lack of distribution channels and presence. You have to HUNT for Jolla information. Too much "soon", not enough definitive information, not enough delivery of what's next.
And a very fickle user base.