<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Smartphone misconceptions</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.techiteasy.org/2008/03/21/smartphone-misconceptions/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.techiteasy.org/2008/03/21/smartphone-misconceptions/</link>
	<description>A Technology and Business Weblog provided to You by a Global Group of Friends.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 10:37:47 +0100</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: fredotcho</title>
		<link>http://www.techiteasy.org/2008/03/21/smartphone-misconceptions/#comment-3852</link>
		<dc:creator>fredotcho</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 16:00:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jeremyfain.wordpress.com/?p=931#comment-3852</guid>
		<description>@Vincent van Wylick : I totally agree with you. The iPhone builds on both iPod users and OSX developpers bases. As Fred Brunel summed up here http://fredbrunel.com/journal/2008/03/5-reasons-why-the-iphone-is-a-great-platform/

the iPhone is more like a gaming console than any other handset. I add that , unlike the Nokia nGage, it doesn&#039;t look like one.



Also, openeness has grown as beign important for the success of a smartphone on the prosumer market but NO COMPANY has engaged like Apple in building a sales channel for the applications.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Vincent van Wylick : I totally agree with you. The iPhone builds on both iPod users and OSX developpers bases. As Fred Brunel summed up here <a href="http://fredbrunel.com/journal/2008/03/5-reasons-why-the-iphone-is-a-great-platform/" rel="nofollow">http://fredbrunel.com/journal/2008/03/5-reasons-why-the-iphone-is-a-great-platform/</a></p>
<p>the iPhone is more like a gaming console than any other handset. I add that , unlike the Nokia nGage, it doesn&#8217;t look like one.</p>
<p>Also, openeness has grown as beign important for the success of a smartphone on the prosumer market but NO COMPANY has engaged like Apple in building a sales channel for the applications.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Vincent van Wylick</title>
		<link>http://www.techiteasy.org/2008/03/21/smartphone-misconceptions/#comment-3851</link>
		<dc:creator>Vincent van Wylick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Mar 2008 10:27:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jeremyfain.wordpress.com/?p=931#comment-3851</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the smartphone market-share graph, very insightful. Still, I think that market-share alone is not a good judge of what the future will bring. Take Wii of Cirque du Soleil. Both were new entrants in an industry, filled with competitors. They offered unique advantages over incumbents and were able to drive the media to their side, so much so that if you can ask a lot of of people today what gaming system they want to buy or circus they want to visit, those two will be high up on their list for sure.



I can&#039;t compare Symbian to Android/iPhone, because I haven&#039;t tried any of them. But it seems to me that iPhone at least has the kind of media-attention any new entrant would want and has managed to create a device that plenty of people would buy straight-away, if it wasn&#039;t for the price-point of both the device and the carriers&#039; fee.



Also, let&#039;s not forget that the market for iphones is essentially previous iPod owners, who—I don&#039;t have the exact figures—very probably occupy a bigger market than that for smartphones.



All that aside, I completely agree with your judgement of the carriers&#039; walled garden, which was a large part of my point in the last post. If the mobile situation was similar to the PC-one—a net-neutral one—everyone would jump to buy a smartphone.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the smartphone market-share graph, very insightful. Still, I think that market-share alone is not a good judge of what the future will bring. Take Wii of Cirque du Soleil. Both were new entrants in an industry, filled with competitors. They offered unique advantages over incumbents and were able to drive the media to their side, so much so that if you can ask a lot of of people today what gaming system they want to buy or circus they want to visit, those two will be high up on their list for sure.</p>
<p>I can&#8217;t compare Symbian to Android/iPhone, because I haven&#8217;t tried any of them. But it seems to me that iPhone at least has the kind of media-attention any new entrant would want and has managed to create a device that plenty of people would buy straight-away, if it wasn&#8217;t for the price-point of both the device and the carriers&#8217; fee.</p>
<p>Also, let&#8217;s not forget that the market for iphones is essentially previous iPod owners, who—I don&#8217;t have the exact figures—very probably occupy a bigger market than that for smartphones.</p>
<p>All that aside, I completely agree with your judgement of the carriers&#8217; walled garden, which was a large part of my point in the last post. If the mobile situation was similar to the PC-one—a net-neutral one—everyone would jump to buy a smartphone.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
