Active Topics
-
Porting apps to Leste (32)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by Arno_11 - 19 hrs, 37 mins ago -
[ANNOUNCE] CSSU-thumb thread - stable Thumb2 on N900 (2,264)
to Maemo 5 / Fremantle by panjgoori - 2 days, 13 hrs ago -
Full linux distros on Sailfish OS (254)
to SailfishOS by qoh - 3 days, 12 hrs ago - more...
| The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Cue For This Useful Post: | ||
|
2011-08-13
, 22:48
|
|
Posts: 673 |
Thanked: 856 times |
Joined on Mar 2006
|
#4072
|
Originally Posted by Chuck Norris
Let's talk n9 price!
september 7...but who cares. Iphone is not for n9 users.
__________________
http://gpl-violations.org/faq/violation-faq.html
http://gpl-violations.org/faq/violation-faq.html
Last edited by momcilo; 2011-08-13 at 22:51.
 |
|
2011-08-13
, 23:33
|
|
Posts: 738 |
Thanked: 983 times |
Joined on Apr 2010
@ London
|
#4073
|
Originally Posted by Cue
I've used WP 6.5 extensively... the product has changed. Maybe it's not better, but it's certainly different.
Hi erendorn
This is the exact reaction that any company aims for when re-branding. It's the sole reason they do it regardless of whether the product has changed .
 |
|
2011-08-13
, 23:43
|
|
Posts: 1,312 |
Thanked: 736 times |
Joined on Sep 2009
|
#4074
|
Originally Posted by govprog
http://www.google.com/trends?q=nokia...ate=all&sort=0
Wrong. WP7 lovers won't search for "WP7" . Instead, they search the phrase "windows phone". So sorry for that,this is the reality(If you want to describe reality with the trends):
http://www.google.com/trends?q=windo...ate=all&sort=0
|
|
2011-08-14
, 00:09
|
|
Posts: 840 |
Thanked: 823 times |
Joined on Nov 2009
|
#4075
|
Originally Posted by erendorn
As have I but that wasn't my point. I am not debating whether the product has changed or not I'm actually showing why it is irrelevant to market performance statistics.
I've used WP 6.5 extensively... the product has changed. Maybe it's not better, but it's certainly different.
Last edited by Cue; 2011-08-14 at 00:13.
| The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Cue For This Useful Post: | ||
 |
|
2011-08-14
, 00:54
|
|
Posts: 194 |
Thanked: 172 times |
Joined on Jan 2011
@ Sydney, Australia
|
#4076
|
Originally Posted by Cue
Depends on your classification of re-branding; do not assume everyone agrees with you on that.
Hi erendorn
This is the exact reaction that any company aims for when re-branding. It's the sole reason they do it regardless of whether the product has changed .
The aggregated market share is much more reliable than a launch 0 to x number. I'll tell you why. Say your market share was declining at a rapid rate. Say 2% each quarter. If I re-branded this very same product, without even having to change anything, as in the exact same product, I can make it look like a market share increase. How? I'd call windows 6.5, Doors 6.5. Automatically without even having to do anything, I've made a market decrease look like a market increase. How? because I've split the graph, Doors 6.5 has gone from 0 market share to some positive number, even though my sales are dropping I can now say that Doors 6.5 went from 0 marketshare to some positive number, simply because I sold some I show a positive gradient. If however you look at the gradient throughout an actual period I am not increasing market share at all and whether or not I've actually changed my product becomes irrelevant to the statistics.
|
|
2011-08-14
, 01:16
|
|
Posts: 457 |
Thanked: 600 times |
Joined on Jan 2010
|
#4077
|
Damn, lost my n900 
Well at least it didn't happen earlier. Now I am seriously thinking about getting a galaxy 2 instead of the N9, bigger screen, faster cpu, 100 bucks cheaper...very tempting...I must resist.
Well at least it didn't happen earlier. Now I am seriously thinking about getting a galaxy 2 instead of the N9, bigger screen, faster cpu, 100 bucks cheaper...very tempting...I must resist.
|
|
2011-08-14
, 01:18
|
|
Posts: 840 |
Thanked: 823 times |
Joined on Nov 2009
|
#4078
|
Originally Posted by keflex
My classification of rebranding is the same as any other person who knows the definition of the term. It's a creation of a new name for an established brand regardless of actual product change. A Pentium 1 and Pentium 4 differ greatly but share the same branding. A core 2 Duo is the successor to the same product but is a different brand. While trying your utmost to be civilized, what assumption have I made and what do you not agree on?
Depends on your classification of re-branding; do not assume everyone agrees with you on that.
Last edited by Cue; 2011-08-14 at 01:22.
|
|
2011-08-14
, 01:23
|
|
Posts: 194 |
Thanked: 172 times |
Joined on Jan 2011
@ Sydney, Australia
|
#4079
|
"Windows Mobile"
"Windows Phone"
"Windows Phone"
 |
| Tags |
| disapoint, eflop, epic win!, laggy interface, n9 rox, so much win, wateriswet, who cares, whyyyyy?????? |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 06:46.
This is the exact reaction that any company aims for when re-branding. It's the sole reason they do it regardless of whether the product has changed .
The aggregated market share is much more reliable than a launch 0 to x number. I'll tell you why. Say your market share was declining at a rapid rate. Say 2% each quarter. If I re-branded this very same product, without even having to change anything, as in the exact same product, I can make it look like a market share increase. How? I'd call windows 6.5, Doors 6.5. Automatically without even having to do anything, I've made a market decrease look like a market increase. How? because I've split the graph, Doors 6.5 has gone from 0 market share to some positive number, even though my sales are dropping I can now say that Doors 6.5 went from 0 marketshare to some positive number, simply because I sold some I show a positive gradient. If however you look at the gradient throughout an actual period I am not increasing market share at all and whether or not I've actually changed my product becomes irrelevant to the statistics.
Last edited by Cue; 2011-08-13 at 22:52.