|
Google are taking over the world! (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Elec |
| quote: | Originally posted by echosystm
Dude, you're not going to get Microsoft software on Android or iPhone and Microsoft software is what drives business. Sure, Windows smart phones might be , but Microsoft have a complete monopoly over the business smart phone segment just because of application selection. This is not going to change either. iPhones obviously monopolise the hipster segment and you can be guaranteed none of such individuals would buy an Android. Thus:
1. Windows: Business
2. iPhones: Trendy wankers
3. Android: ??? Geeks...
You're confusing technical merit with actual value. Most consumers don't care about operating systems, they care about applications and aesthetics. |
Wtf are you talking about? Here is a correction:
1. Windows: people still use these?
2. Blackberry: Business
3. iPhones: Most non-business smart phone owners, at least used to be
4. Android: a quickly increase share of people who either previously could not afford a quality smart phone or just got sick of iPhone gayness (a lot of people basically).
I see a ton of people all over using the new Android phones. |
|
|
| Moongoose |
| You also see a lot of business users with nokias (E series devices). The advantage windows, symbian and now android devices have (even for business users) is the openness of the platform itself so that anything one imagines can be developed and installed on these. Even management sometimes needs more than outlook, word and excell to do their work or the mobile equivalent of these to do their work :) |
|
|
| wing |
they've come a long way
[img] |
|
|
| gehzumteufel |
| quote: | Originally posted by echosystm
Dude, you're not going to get Microsoft software on Android or iPhone and Microsoft software is what drives business. Sure, Windows smart phones might be , but Microsoft have a complete monopoly over the business smart phone segment just because of application selection. This is not going to change either. iPhones obviously monopolise the hipster segment and you can be guaranteed none of such individuals would buy an Android. Thus:
1. Windows: Business
2. iPhones: Trendy wankers
3. Android: ??? Geeks...
You're confusing technical merit with actual value. Most consumers don't care about operating systems, they care about applications and aesthetics. |
lol you are obviously clueless. First off, Windows Mobile is hardly the "business phone of choice" for most business users. BlackBerry's are. iPhones have been adopted as of late now that Exchange support exists. Also, there are things that open Office documents on Android and iPhone. So fail again. Android has been picked up by MANY more than just geeks. That is what you fail most at. I know personally, at least 3 people that would NEVER have bought a smartphone before Android came out, and now they are owners of an Android-based device. These users that are NOT geeks in any form or fashion. One of the people I know, does't even own a computer or any type of advanced electronics, but he bought the G1 (HTC Dream) when it came out. What the does that say? This is happening time and time again. New users that would never have bought one before. |
|
|
| Domesticated |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lira
It's not a matter of "need". If you really understand what they're for, and know to use them, they're useful as hell. Social Networks are very good for passively keeping in touch with your friends (which pays of in the long run, strangely enough); as for Twitter, I really like the example of a bakery in São Paulo. The place was located in the underground of one of the city's busiest office towers, and the owner would twit whenever the buns came out of the oven. Costumers flocked in order to fetch them while they're still hot.
These tools are way more powerful than the usual attention whore makes them out to be :) |
You obviously missed the point of my post. Which was: very few new products are actually needed, but if they target the right audience in the right way, they make space in the market and become 'needed'. Bakers could still make buns before twitter, and people could still make phone calls and text messages before smartphones. |
|
|
| Lira |
| quote: | Originally posted by Domesticated
You obviously missed the point of my post. Which was: very few new products are actually needed, but if they target the right audience in the right way, they make space in the market and become 'needed'. Bakers could still make buns before twitter, and people could still make phone calls and text messages before smartphones. |
Oh, sorry, your post was so brief I didn't realise this was the intended meaning :) |
|
|
| Lunar Phase 7 |
| quote: | Originally posted by echosystm
Dude, you're not going to get Microsoft software on Android or iPhone and Microsoft software is what drives business. Sure, Windows smart phones might be , but Microsoft have a complete monopoly over the business smart phone segment just because of application selection. This is not going to change either. iPhones obviously monopolise the hipster segment and you can be guaranteed none of such individuals would buy an Android. Thus:
1. Windows: Business
2. iPhones: Trendy wankers
3. Android: ??? Geeks...
You're confusing technical merit with actual value. Most consumers don't care about operating systems, they care about applications and aesthetics. |
x 100000
Suck dick getmutnzelpumpskin |
|
|
| gehzumteufel |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lunar Phase 7
x 100000
Suck dick getmutnzelpumpskin |
Oh god, another one of those. I am hurt. /slitswrists |
|
|
| leph555 |
No Ty
will stick with OSX on the laptop and Win 7 on the desktop |
|
|
| david.michael |
| quote: | Originally posted by leph555
No Ty
will stick with OSX on the laptop and Win 7 on the desktop |
Chrome OS is not intended as a replacement OS for a user's primary computer. |
|
|
|
|
