chris.holland07@gmail.com

http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/blogs/ind...=1433&blogid=4


http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2007/11...e_activations/

26,000 activations -
hahahhahahahahahhahahahhahahahahahahhahahahahhahah aha

Calum

chris.holland07@gmail.com wrote:

> 26,000 activations -
> hahahhahahahahahhahahahhahahahahahahhahahahahhahah aha

I certainly wouldn't mind raking in 26,000 * £899 in the space of a
fortnight.

Jon

com.gmail@scottishwildcat.nospam declared for all the world to hear...
> chris.holland07@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > 26,000 activations -
> > hahahhahahahahahhahahahhahahahahahahhahahahahhahah aha
>
> I certainly wouldn't mind raking in 26,000 * £899 in the space of a
> fortnight.

It's a very poor sales number for such a highly touted device. Interest
will now tail off.
--
Regards
Jon

Calum

Jon wrote:
> com.gmail@scottishwildcat.nospam declared for all the world to hear...
>> chris.holland07@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> 26,000 activations -
>>> hahahhahahahahahhahahahhahahahahahahhahahahahhahah aha
>> I certainly wouldn't mind raking in 26,000 * £899 in the space of a
>> fortnight.
>
> It's a very poor sales number for such a highly touted device. Interest
> will now tail off.

Either that, or it will take off when they knock £200 off the price like
they did in the States. If I had any wish to own an iPhone, I certainly
wouldn't have bought it this early.

R. Mark Clayton

"Calum" <com.gmail@scottishwildcat.nospam> wrote in message
news:fia9nn$km6$1@reader01.news.esat.net...
> Jon wrote:
>> com.gmail@scottishwildcat.nospam declared for all the world to hear...
>>> chris.holland07@gmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> 26,000 activations -
>>>> hahahhahahahahahhahahahhahahahahahahhahahahahhahah aha
>>> I certainly wouldn't mind raking in 26,000 * £899 in the space of a
>>> fortnight.
>>
>> It's a very poor sales number for such a highly touted device. Interest
>> will now tail off.
>
> Either that, or it will take off when they knock £200 off the price like
> they did in the States. If I had any wish to own an iPhone, I certainly
> wouldn't have bought it this early.


It is the HP35 effect.

Hewlett Packard introduced the HP 35 pocket calculator in 1972. It replaced
the HP 9100A desktop calculator that cost $$$$.

Initially it was £600, but fell to £200 within 18 months. It had good
accuracy, full scientific functions, LED display and reasonable battery
life, but to put it into perspective cost about half the annual grant for a
physics undergraduate at the time (so I didn't buy one)..

Nowadays you can buy one with greater accuracy, looong battery life, more
functions (including hex, stats etc.) in the pound shop.

Similarly the first true pocket phones (Technofone Mk1) cost £2,000 + VAT
from Excel in 1986, and I did buy one. These days you can get a SIM free
mobile phone with similar basic+ functionality for ~£20.

Why Apple thinks it hype the market with an underspec, overweight, over
priced and locked phone when there are plenty that are better, cheaper and
less restricted on the market beggars belief. Hopefully once they have sold
up in their captive and fan based market it will literally beggar them.
Apple were getting punished in the PC market until they came up with the
iPod, which did have a slight edge until all the MP3 players caught up, why
they think they can capture a mass market with an inferior and more
expensive product is a mystery.

Fergus

"R. Mark Clayton" <nospamclayton@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:dLidnRZoQ7ptMNTanZ2dnUVZ8rCdnZ2d@bt.com...
>
> "Calum" <com.gmail@scottishwildcat.nospam> wrote in message
> news:fia9nn$km6$1@reader01.news.esat.net...
>> Jon wrote:
>>> com.gmail@scottishwildcat.nospam declared for all the world to hear...
>>>> chris.holland07@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> 26,000 activations -
>>>>> hahahhahahahahahhahahahhahahahahahahhahahahahhahah aha
>>>> I certainly wouldn't mind raking in 26,000 * £899 in the space of a
>>>> fortnight.
>>>
>>> It's a very poor sales number for such a highly touted device. Interest
>>> will now tail off.
>>
>> Either that, or it will take off when they knock £200 off the price like
>> they did in the States. If I had any wish to own an iPhone, I certainly
>> wouldn't have bought it this early.
>
>
> It is the HP35 effect.
>
> Hewlett Packard introduced the HP 35 pocket calculator in 1972. It
> replaced the HP 9100A desktop calculator that cost $$$$.
>
> Initially it was £600, but fell to £200 within 18 months. It had good
> accuracy, full scientific functions, LED display and reasonable battery
> life, but to put it into perspective cost about half the annual grant for
> a physics undergraduate at the time (so I didn't buy one)..
>
> Nowadays you can buy one with greater accuracy, looong battery life, more
> functions (including hex, stats etc.) in the pound shop.
>
> Similarly the first true pocket phones (Technofone Mk1) cost £2,000 + VAT
> from Excel in 1986, and I did buy one. These days you can get a SIM free
> mobile phone with similar basic+ functionality for ~£20.
>
> Why Apple thinks it hype the market with an underspec, overweight, over
> priced and locked phone when there are plenty that are better, cheaper and
> less restricted on the market beggars belief. Hopefully once they have
> sold up in their captive and fan based market it will literally beggar
> them. Apple were getting punished in the PC market until they came up with
> the iPod, which did have a slight edge until all the MP3 players caught
> up, why they think they can capture a mass market with an inferior and
> more expensive product is a mystery.
>

with style...........other mobile phones HAVE become boring.

well done Apple for sticking your neck out.

Richard Tobin

In article <dLidnRZoQ7ptMNTanZ2dnUVZ8rCdnZ2d@bt.com>,
R. Mark Clayton <nospamclayton@btinternet.com> wrote:

>Why Apple thinks it hype the market with an underspec, overweight, over
>priced and locked phone when there are plenty that are better, cheaper and
>less restricted on the market beggars belief.

I think it's because they have a

>captive and fan based market

They do seem to be pushing it a bit too far even for the fans
recently: viz the rebate for US iPhone purchasers after the outrage
when they cut the price.

-- Richard
--
"Consideration shall be given to the need for as many as 32 characters
in some alphabets" - X3.4, 1963.

Rent Boy

"Richard Tobin" <richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:ficcen$tmu$3@pc-news.cogsci.ed.ac.uk...
> In article <dLidnRZoQ7ptMNTanZ2dnUVZ8rCdnZ2d@bt.com>,
> R. Mark Clayton <nospamclayton@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>>Why Apple thinks it hype the market with an underspec, overweight, over
>>priced and locked phone when there are plenty that are better, cheaper and
>>less restricted on the market beggars belief.
>
> I think it's because they have a
>
>>captive and fan based market
>
> They do seem to be pushing it a bit too far even for the fans
> recently: viz the rebate for US iPhone purchasers after the outrage
> when they cut the price.
>

But it wasn't a rebate, it was just a $100 voucher and with limitations.


> -- Richard
> --
> "Consideration shall be given to the need for as many as 32 characters
> in some alphabets" - X3.4, 1963.

MichaelJP

"Fergus" <The@Catbtinternet.com> wrote in message
news:PtKdnRwT9pjOLtTanZ2dnUVZ8rKdnZ2d@bt.com...
>
> "R. Mark Clayton" <nospamclayton@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:dLidnRZoQ7ptMNTanZ2dnUVZ8rCdnZ2d@bt.com...
>>
>> "Calum" <com.gmail@scottishwildcat.nospam> wrote in message
>> news:fia9nn$km6$1@reader01.news.esat.net...
>>> Jon wrote:
>>>> com.gmail@scottishwildcat.nospam declared for all the world to hear...
>>>>> chris.holland07@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> 26,000 activations -
>>>>>> hahahhahahahahahhahahahhahahahahahahhahahahahhahah aha
>>>>> I certainly wouldn't mind raking in 26,000 * £899 in the space of a
>>>>> fortnight.
>>>>
>>>> It's a very poor sales number for such a highly touted device. Interest
>>>> will now tail off.
>>>
>>> Either that, or it will take off when they knock £200 off the price like
>>> they did in the States. If I had any wish to own an iPhone, I certainly
>>> wouldn't have bought it this early.
>>
>>
>> It is the HP35 effect.
>>
>> Hewlett Packard introduced the HP 35 pocket calculator in 1972. It
>> replaced the HP 9100A desktop calculator that cost $$$$.
>>
>> Initially it was £600, but fell to £200 within 18 months. It had good
>> accuracy, full scientific functions, LED display and reasonable battery
>> life, but to put it into perspective cost about half the annual grant for
>> a physics undergraduate at the time (so I didn't buy one)..
>>
>> Nowadays you can buy one with greater accuracy, looong battery life, more
>> functions (including hex, stats etc.) in the pound shop.
>>
>> Similarly the first true pocket phones (Technofone Mk1) cost £2,000 + VAT
>> from Excel in 1986, and I did buy one. These days you can get a SIM free
>> mobile phone with similar basic+ functionality for ~£20.
>>
>> Why Apple thinks it hype the market with an underspec, overweight, over
>> priced and locked phone when there are plenty that are better, cheaper
>> and less restricted on the market beggars belief. Hopefully once they
>> have sold up in their captive and fan based market it will literally
>> beggar them. Apple were getting punished in the PC market until they came
>> up with the iPod, which did have a slight edge until all the MP3 players
>> caught up, why they think they can capture a mass market with an inferior
>> and more expensive product is a mystery.
>>
>
> with style...........other mobile phones HAVE become boring.
>
> well done Apple for sticking your neck out.

And there was a massive gap in the market for someone to bring out a phone
with a good intuitive interface. You may not agree that Apple have hit the
target but surely anyone would agree that virtually all current mobile
phones have ridiculously bad UIs, even for achieving simple things.

Apple is also exploiting the power of the brand, just as Gucci does when it
sells a women's handbag for £750.

Sarah Brown

In article <Lhe3j.120293$bj2.46895@fe08.news.easynews.com>,
MichaelJP <mjp@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>And there was a massive gap in the market for someone to bring out a phone
>with a good intuitive interface.

Agreed, and the iPhone should up the game. My own view is that what
Apple have done, however, is brought out a good intuitive interface
with a phone, rather than the other way round, so there's a choice -
decent phone, clunky interface, or decent interface, feature-poor
phone.