And you obviously think that you have something new to say on this subject, something not yet said in this forum at least 3-4 times by now? =)

Exactly: I have got the device I like and shut up. You do not see me endlessly bitсhing about devices I own, do you?

Mmm... I think you are mixing passive and active voices here...

@fms:
You might want to reread what the thread is about and your last dozen or so posts to understand how we got here.

Wow, what a long thread - must be vacation season...

As much as we can pick apart (or praise) Nokia, I find two things here that drive me nuts:

1) Nokia is NOT losing global market share. Just look at their recent quarterly results, both overall and in the smartphone sector. The fact that they focus on emerging markets is just clever business planning.

Note also that in many markets, the phone IS the internet. The iPhone and others are computer accessories, in that they need a "real" computer to function properly. This effectively locks them out of these emerging markets, where many people don't have/want a home computer. Most Nokia devices work well an their own, without a computer.

2) Comparing the merits of phones with RADICALLY different prices is just... silly. The iPhone is far more expensive than most of its "competition". You just pay for it over the life of a loooong contract. Given the real price, it damned well better be much better than the "competition". I can buy a 5800 for $299 USD, unlocked, or an N97 for under $500. What does an unlocked iPhone/Pre/whatever cost?

Would you really choose a BMW over a Toyota if price were an issue? Guess what, for most people, price IS an issue. This is a huge advantage for Nokia, and a huge problem for RIM/Apple/etc.

And before the flamewars begin, note that I don't currently have a phone or NIT or iPod or any of that stuff. Maybe in a few weeks, when something stronger/faster/higher is announced. Or maybe not.

1. "Nokia continued to lead the mobile phone market, but its share dropped to 36.2 per cent from 39.1 per cent in the first quarter of 2008 (see Table 1). ..

"Symbian accounted for 49.3 per cent of worldwide smartphone operating systems (OS) market share in the first quarter of 2009, down from 56.9 per cent share in the first quarter of 2008. RIM’s smartphone OS market share reached 19.9 per cent in the first quarter of 2009, up from 13.3 per cent share in the first quarter of last year. The iPhone OS accounted for 10.8 per cent of the market, up from 5.3 per cent market share in the first quarter of 2008."

"Vendor Performance
Nokia’s worldwide sales reached 97.4 million units in the first quarter of 2009, thanks to reductions in inventory in markets such as Asia/Pacific and Latin America. This was the first time Nokia’s sales dipped below 100 million units since the first quarter of 2007."

source: http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=985912

2). Without contract, the iPhone 3G is $499 from the Apple Store (confirmed).
I think the Palm Pre is $549, I'm not 100% sure on this one.

You cite Gartner. Nice source. But why not cite Nokia, the original source?:

http://www.nokia.com/press/press-rel...newsid=1329222

Olli-Pekka Kallasuvo, Nokia CEO, said:

"Nokia put in a solid performance in what was another tough quarter. We increased our share of the global mobile device market sequentially to an estimated 38% and grew our smartphone market share to an estimated 41%. As a result of strong operational execution, underlying operating margins improved sequentially in all segments."

As summarized on All About Symbian <http://www.allaboutsymbian.com/news/item/10105_Nokia_Q2_2009_results_in.php>:

"Nokia mobile device volumes were 103.2 million units, down 15% year on year and up 11% sequentially. This is set against estimated industry volumes of of 268 million units, down 12% year on year and down 5% sequentially. Nokia's market share was estimated at 38%, up from 37% in Q1 2009 and down from 40% in Q2 2008."

"Nokia's estimated industry converged mobile device volumes (smartphones) was 41.0 million, compared to 37.1 million in Q2 2008 and 36 million in Q1 2009. Therefore, Nokia's share of the converged device market was estimated at 41% in Q2 2009, the same as Q2 2008, but up from 39% in Q1 2009."

"Nokia's decline in market share year on year was primarily due to weaker sales in Latin America, North America and Asia Pacific, although this was offset, to some extent, by higher market share in China and EMEA. Sequentially, market share declined in North America, but increased in all other markets."


As for the iPhone; as shown at the Apple Store (US Version), the iPhone STARTS at $499:

"For those who are not eligible for an early upgrade or who wish to buy iPhone as a gift, the prices are $499 (8GB), $599 (16GB), or $699 (32GB)".

For comparison, the 5800 is $299 (w/8GB card) and the N97 is $629 (w/32GB card). Sure, the N97 is "close" in price, but at the low end it's still a $200 (67%) jump from 5800 to iPhone.

I didn't bother looking up prices of the Pre or RIM devices, but the general trend is the same.

(Prices vary by market, and are subject to change. See store for details. And enjoy your summer!)

Nokia's share gains are in the low-margin stuff that isn't helping the bottom line.

As for the device costs, when those are invisible to consumers, such differences become moot for all intents and purposes. At least in the US, the customer is highly focused on the use experience.

@Texrat:
What do you mean by "when those (device costs) are invisible to consumers"?
Are you referring to the portion of the device price embedded into the contract price?

This is another "for all practical purposes thing".

Let's say the typical US consumer has two choices:

1) an unlocked phone for $600 paid upfront + service plan;

2) locked phone for "free" but actually costs them $800, spread out over a contract

By and large option 2 will be selected. That's just the way it works here. And the really funny thing is, many people opting for choice #2 will subsequently seek to unlock their phone after they get it.

The point is that cost is *almost* a moot point of any discussion involving US cell phones and users. For the most part they're very programmed by the status quo. It all comes down to "what can it do?"

Last I checked, the life of a BMW and a Toyota is much longer than the less than 2 years that each NIT has enjoyed in the name of "support"

My last BMW lasted 8 years, and in high school to college, my Toyota lasted 9.

Regardless, these are disposable items, especially where firmware updates are basicaly stopped the moment a newer version/iteration of said product comes out. This comparison to paying more for a telephone or NIT in the name of "better quality" but yet it lacks continued support and/or seems already dated from the moment you purchase it is the wrong analogy.

Paying a premium for something that does not get regular support in the way of the rest of the Nokia products is a foolish endeavor no matter how you split it.

And these numbers being tossed around... which models represent this growth?

I still stand by my notion that the mindshare for Nokia is lessening. We've already seen it happen to Motorola. And Apple/RIM has nothing to do with that; they're just competition.

I want to add that in the US there is virtually no possibility to sign up for a phone service contract without long term commitment... and they all come with a (locked) phone included. Only some prepaid plans you can buy a phone with full price and pay the minutes you use, but for heavy users they are not an option due to significantly higher cost per minute. (I personally have had prepaid account for years that works good for me. I do not use my personal cell much...)

Only if there was possibility to sign up for month to month service only (without phone), and if those were priced cheaper than the contract packages (with phone), then there would be some market for unlocked phones.