My Photo

Ordering Information

Tomi on Twitter is @tomiahonen

  • Follow Tomi on Twitter as @tomiahonen
    Follow Tomi's Twitterfloods on all matters mobile, tech and media. Tomi has over 8,000 followers and was rated by Forbes as the most influential writer on mobile related topics

Book Tomi T Ahonen to Speak at Your Event

  • Contact Tomi T Ahonen for Speaking and Consulting Events
    Please write email to tomi (at) tomiahonen (dot) com and indicate "Speaking Event" or "Consulting Work" or "Expert Witness" or whatever type of work you would like to offer. Tomi works regularly on all continents

Tomi on Video including his TED Talk

  • Tomi on Video including his TED Talk
    See Tomi on video from several recent keynote presentations and interviews, including his TED Talk in Hong Kong about Augmented Reality as the 8th Mass Media


Blog powered by Typepad

« Final 2009 mobile phone market numbers as all have reported: we have big news | Main | All Quiet on Western Front - Smartphone battle update: RIM is NOT in trouble »

April 01, 2010


Josh Grey

Great post! I saw this link RT'd on Twitter and I knew I had to read the whole thing.

Simon Frank

While I accept your evidence, especially about corporate IT and I also agree with a good degree of your sentiment, your statement is incorrect. iPhone and Blackberry compete for business and therefore are rivals/competitors.

There are points where blackberry and iPhone clash in business. This may not impact most enterprise customers where IT are completely in control or in finance, but in SMB exchange users there are more and more iPhone's appearing and debate between exchange connected users is always blackberry vs. iPhone. So in the scenario where IT issue phones then Blackberry wins, but where companies allow users with their own phones to connect to exchange the iphone is a credible functional competitor (I'm an ex BB user and glad to have my iPhone so your QWERTY arguument isn't 100%).

Whether any of this actually makes any difference in Market share stats is another matter. Blackberry are also pushing hard for consumer business where they will compete with iPhone. The youth market is where there is competition, Blackberry sell well in that market but so do iPhone as youth also care about music, video, internet etc..

Last point: apps are not just free/cheap toys. Compare the salesforce app for iPhone and the one for Blackberry the Blackberry one is unusable and the iPhone one is superb and a real productivity booster.


Good post, but I do not agree!

I work in advisory and in close cooperation with many law firms. I would say two corporate groups with a large penetration of Blackberry users. Not only within my firm, but also with the lawyers I see a tendency to move to touchscreen smartphones like Iphone and Android.

Maybe the ferrari and hummer comparison is still feasible, but only as a way of saying that not all people working at one company want to drive the same car. And thus they don't. So not all people will use the same phone. Now diff. technology doesn't matter and integration is not a big issue anymore, people will choose themselves.

And thus I would still say that touchscreen smartphones are a threat to Blackberry, only because they deliver more and better functionality.


There's a mistake in the numbers: RIM's revenues outside North America only account for 33%. UK+USA+Canada accounted indeed for 75% of the calendar 2009 revenue, that's why we are cautious about growth prospects. It's all publicly available in their quarterlies.

Antoine RJ Wright

I have to agree with @Simon Frank in that BBs and iPhones are competitors in the enterprise space simply because of their prosumer approaches. They do attend similar audiences from different perspectives, and unfortunately, many of those IT persons making the decisions on these devices don't so much want to break the boat by supporting platforms (such as Exchange) which can support multiple devices (and device platform) - even though the support overhead would be a lot easier if they simply trained folks.

Nevertheless, I enjoyed this piece... the ending part was most notable. Mental note to not write rubbish in my pieces.

Tomi T Ahonen

Hi Josh, Simon, Hoferman, Julien and Antoine

Thank you all for commenting. I will respond to each individually, but please read this general comment first.

I was maybe not clear enough. They are both 'smartphones' and are both relatively 'expensive' ie luxury bracket gadgets when it comes to mobile phone handsets. Like in automobilees, Hummer and Porsche are both expensive cars. But my point - if any 'analyst' or 'expert' singles out 'iPhone' (or Android) as 'THE' reason - not one of the reasons - but the reason - why Blackberry did something (or not) in the market share race - that is completely utterly ridiculous. ANY and ALL smartphones of other brands and systems - Windows Mobile, Symbian, Palm, Linux Mobile etc are MORE similar to a Blackberry than an iPhone.

So to extend my analogy, if the iPhone is a Hummer and Blackberry is a Porsche, then perhaps some Porsche clients were selecting a Hummer instead, yes, but its more likely if a Porsche owner doesn't want that car, he'll buy a Ferrari (very similar) or a BMW (sporty luxury performance sedan) or even an Audi (sporty sedan) long before they'd go all the way from Porsche to Hummer.

My gripe is not with any analyst who mentions Nokia (E-Series) or Windows Mobile in the comment that said iPhone/Android took market share. My gripe is only with those who said that it was 'only' iPhone (and/or Android) that did this. I think I have proven beyond any reasonable doubt, that globally, in every market including US, the closest two rivals, competing for same clients, sold by same operators/carriers, in the same ways - to the Blackberry are Nokia E-Series (outside of USA) and Windows Mobile in USA.

Now will go to individual replies...

Josh - thanks!

Simon - you make good points, very clearly. So lets take SMB (SME) business customers first. The small and medium sized businesses or enterprises. You said that the argument is currently BB vs iPhone (and here I guess you are referring to mainly the US market). But you then admit that mostly BB wins. So, lets take the point - there is a 'desire' to have iPhones in small businesses, and in some cases some do get to use them there, but Blackberry tends to win here (currently, even in the USA). Yes, then if we examine the stats, we find that Windows Mobile phones are used in SMB/SME environments in America as the second largest handset type after Blackberry. The 'real' rival is WinMo, not iPhone, even as many individual employees may request iPhones. Its a 'theoretical' rival, not a practical one. Certainly not a viable candidate to eat into BB's market share, when compared to WinMo in US or E-Series abroad.

On the youth market, you'll find if you dig into the stats, that its very clear distinction, the under 15 year segment is not very interested in BB, but love the iPhone in the kind of 'universal' way as most potential consumers like it. Then there is a sudden dramatic change of opinion - no, I want the BB. That happens at somewhat a younger age point in the most advanced texting markets - under 10 year olds have Blackberries in Indonesia haha and in Scandinavia there are young teens who want QWERTY phones, but generally its that age of adolescence where it starts, or soon thereafter. Then its most of teenagers, not all obviously. Some still love their gaming or music like you say, etc, but most teens want to hang out together, and be 'social' to an enormous degree and yes, the stats don't lie, half of British and 40% of American teens say they can text blindly. That is impossible on an iPhone or any phone with only a touch screen. This is the reason why Nokia is rolling out QWERTY keypads to non-smartphones, cheaper feature phones, aimed at heavily texting teens.

But its not absolute, there will be of course many who like both, want both, perhaps can convince their parents to buy them both haha.. Or have a Blackberry and an iPod Touch (the Touch ownership is heavily skewed to younger demographic than iPhone)

Apps - again valid point, yes there will be good apps also on iPhone, bound to be with over 150,000 apps on their store. But the typical app is free, or a game and costs a dollar. The typical app on Blackerry is paid and for business use, and sold with a 'license' form for large user numbers, hundreds, thousands of users at one shot. There is bound to be overlap, but it is certain, that there is far more overlap between WinMo apps and Blackberry apps, than between iPhone apps and Blackberry apps, don't you agree? If any phone took market share (or not) from Blackberry clients, its phones that are similar serving similar needs sold to similar customers in similar ways with similar features (as such phones do exist) than those that are most dissimilar.

Hoferman - haha, thanks yes. Very good point, the legal profession is one that has traditionally been very open-minded about what tools it allows to its users and also traditionally exceptionally receptive to Apple products. I remember when I worked for OCSNY, an Apple authorized reselleer in Manhattan early in my career and we sold computers and networks to small and medium businesses on Manhattan - the law firms would typically have a hodgepodge mixture of tech within their offices, each lawyer a 'strong' personality with peculiar wants and thus a should I say 'relatively weak' IT department to fight them haha. And yes, plenty of Macs even back then.. But you'll give me the argument that most employed people even in America are not attorneys, at least not yet haha? If we add 'legal' to the media and advertising industries that are very warm to the iPhone, we're still at only about a couple of percentage points of all employed people, and even in those companies, many use Blackberries.

Julien - thanks, the number I was referring to was yesterday's announcement by RIM which talked of their fourth quarter. For the full year its less than half that comes from outside America, yes, but the trend has already shifted, currently (ie March 2010) half comes from outside..

Antoine - I hear you, and yes, Apple is trying very hard to make it so, that one day the iPhone is not only desirable, but actually also successful in the business customer space. It isn't today. And WinMo and E-Series are. So while yes, there may be 'interest' in it, today no facts support the position that Blackberry's market share is being lost 'to iPhone' in the business customer space. It is so small, Apple itself says one percent of their total sold devices go to enterprise clients. Meaningless. But meanwhile WinMo and E-Series are there, and they DO compete with Blackberry. So if any expert is fair to the truth, and mentions WinMo or E-Series and then speculates on other smartphones, then yes, thats fair. But if they just babble nonsense, I will call them out, by name, and will shame them haha.

And ARJ, don't you worry at all. I love your writing, you are one that I follow all the time, you know this industry far too well for me ever to lecture you, don't worry.. :-)

Thank you all for writing. I will now go read up on some RIM analysis stories to see if anyone else needs to join this club of shame..

Please do come back and continue the dialog.

Tomi Ahonen :-)

Tim Bray

First, I'm not sure the "smartphone" category is all that useful a label. To start with, it includes Bberry and Apple/Android, and Nokia, which as you point out are very different beasts. I think the "Internet phone" category is very interesting, which correctly puts Apple/Android (and a small bit of Nokia) in their own bucket. Right at the moment measurements suggest that almost all mobile-device-sourced Web traffic is coming from Apple or Android. I think this category (which can and will be done with a good QWERTY, and can and will be done more cheaply) is probably more interesting than you're currently allowing for. Also, Nokia hasn't yet proved they can compete in it. But let's wait a year and see what the numbers say.

Second, be careful of basing predictions on what IT groups like and don't like. I'm old enough to remember them fighting back against PCs and Email and even the Web, and losing; history shows that at the end of the day, the desires of productivity workers trump what IT wants. At the moment in North America, the productivity people are splitting between RIM - because of its command of business communication - and Apple/Android - because of their command of the Net. Clearly, RIM will get better at the Web, and Apple/Android are already getting better at email and corporate citizenship. I'd be inclined to bet against RIM simply because the device programmability is awkward and slow compared to the competition. As for Nokia, I'm not remotely smart enough to predict where they'll succeed/fail.

Anyhow, your core point is correct for today, but I'm pretty sure that in the near future, RIM and Nokia and Apple and Android will end up competing much more directly.

Fabio Sisinni

I think you are missing an important point.It is not longer about selling pieces. If Nokia does not come up with new exciting devices with great web and app experiences it will be losing more and more. Nokia smartphones are not used as such. Only 5% is unlimited data plan penetration is EU based on Comscore vs. 20% in the US. This is just a snapshot. In the mobile web future the picture is going to be different and given the new accelerated replacement cycle the future will happen very soon

James Pearce

I think you say that to figure out who the smartphone market is "run by, or dominated by, or controlled by", you should use the "only relevant number - unit sales".

I disagree.

This post (and similar pieces of yours) tend to award victory to comfortable incumbency on such a basis alone. But to me, this is starting with myopic axioms.

Firstly the battle is never done. Secondly, disruption is a powerful force, which consumers are quick to detect. Thirdly, the boundaries of such a fast, aggressive, global market will never be as black and white as you suppose.

(To make am effort to follow your analogy, Porsche & Audi seemed to have no trouble moving into, and disrupting, the SUV market for example.)

I should hope the executives at RIM go to bed every night thinking about how best to deal with these (and other) emerging threats. I should hope those at Nokia don't sit around, comfortable with their gargantuan unit sales, cutting back on innovation and research and ways with which they can re-compete. And I find it highly unlikely, as you imply, that there aren't large numbers of users who did indeed consider buying a Blackberry device only to have then eventually chosen an iPhone or Android handset instead.

Another way to retitle your post might have been "Who cares about rising stars when you own a cash cow?" ... something that no self-respecting, paranoid executive would ever dare subscribe to.

Or was it just analyst-bashing link-bait on April Fool's day? Maybe I missed the joke, ha ha ;-)

Peter Kropf

"So repeat after me: the rival to the Blackberry is not the iPhone."

1st time on your blog. Don't know whether you're normally this arrogant with apparently cogent, well reasoned argument, but, OOPS, there's an outlier here...

"Meanwhile, almost four-in-ten Blackberry users selected iPhone, and about one-third selected Android, as the brand they would definitely/probably purchase tomorrow".

Actually w/ n=159, 39% would move to the iPhone, and 33% to Android TOMORROW.

This is from the 4th slide of

Can you explain how your argument still holds?


Peter, surveys like that are largely meaningless - for example, Changewave's surveys on potential Mac buyers overstate actual purchases by a factor of two to three. As Tomi mentions there is only one thing that matters - unit sales and if you were to look at the actual data rather than wasting your time reading opinion pieces you would see that RIM are doing very well in terms of growth.

Thanks for the read, Tomi. It is frustrating reading some of the drivel that journalists and bloggers come out with on these matters.

Tomi T Ahonen

Hi Tim, Fabio, James and Peter

Thank you all for the comments. I will respond to each individually

Tim - lets start with mobile web traffic. You say that stats today say most traffic comes from Apple or Android. I know from your statement which stats you refer to, that is Admob measurements. You might not know that Admob is one of more than a dozen major ad networks, four of which report regular ad impression stats globally, and report dramatically different findings. for example Buzz City gives Nokia an overwhelming lead - but their focus is strongly Asia focused where Admob is US focused.

Secondly on Admobs own findings - did you note that they make it quite clear that the majority of actual devices that have mobile web traffic is still dumbphones but of the traffic the users generate, obviously iPhone and Android generate the lion's share of the traffic. In other words - many users have dumbphones, on expensive data plans, put modest traffic on their phones - but use the mobile web regularly - and then there are the data hogs, iPhone and Android users who are on unlimited plans and cripple networks with their traffic loads. If I recall, Admob measures WiFi use of iPhone but am not now sure (as I said, there are 4 major ad netwoks that report regularly). That would hardly be a fair comparison, to compare WiFi use vs cellular 3G use haha..

But your main point was that the smartphone category is becoming blurred or perhaps meaningless. That may be so, it is still the only globally recognized sub-categorization of mobile phone handsets by anything else than network generation (1G, 2G, 3G). You may wish an internet phone category, I would put it to you, that is even more difficult to define than smartphones. And it would be years before we had any measurements for it. I am left to analyze what I can measure, smartphones is what we have.. sorry.

On those IT departments in the USA, I too am old enough to remember, I sold to them in my earlier career when living on Manhattan when I was employed by New York's first ISP. And I was then working for the 'enterprise' telecoms services division of one of Finland's biggest operators when I was employed there, again dealing directly with the telecoms purchasing and the hostility of the IT department. I have immense respect for it and still have plenty of consulting needs that address that delicate meeting-point where corporate IT decides yes/no on mobile related issues. I can tell you for a fact today, that in major companies, their need is to DIMINISH the number of platforms they support, not add to them - because out of IT corporate budgets, as much as 80% goes not to new hardware and software, but to maintenance of existing and legacy systems and their interconnectivity headaches.. No, if Blackberry is in, the IT departments of large corporations will not accept a new platform. They can of course make an exception for some 'VIP' execs, like the VP of Marketing who is so close to the CEO, and then they do some work-arounds for his iPhone. Thats one iPhone at that company. Yes, Apple can say they have now another company using the iPhone but 99.9% of the smartphones in that corporations are, and continue to be - Blackberries. And DEFINITELY any company phone bought by the company for employees will continue to be a Blackberry.

But we agree, yes, today this is reality. It may well change in the future. And I will be the first to celebrate that here - I am very loyal to Apple, I was an authorized Apple trainer and love all things Apple. The subtitle of my latest book is cellphone, cameraphone, iPhone, smartphone. I was the person attributed with calling the iPhone the 'Jesusphone' before it was launched (I never said so, was incorrectly quoted) and I said it was the industry's only transformational phone - this before it had even launched. I love Apple haha..

Fabio - you said if Nokia doesn't do better web and apps, it will 'be losing more and more'. Are you aware of how Nokia has been doing in the mobile space and the smartphone space? I doubt there has ever been any tech brand that has so utterly dominated an industry for so long as Nokia has done. For the past ten years, every single year, it has been biggest. At least 50% bigger than its nearest rival. At least as big as both of its 2 biggest rivals put together, often as big as 3 of its biggest rivals. For every single year of this past decade. Not only that, Nokia is the only handset maker to post 40 consecutive profitbale quarters in mobile phones this past decade. All of its 4 biggest rivals have posted unprofitable quarters, usually at least 2 do so, and at times all 4 of its rivals have been unprofitable.

And of smartphones, same stats, for the whole decade. Except that for the whole decade, every single year, Nokia's market share in smartphones has been better than in dumbphones. The best phone selling giant has done EVEN better in smartphones.

So with that, you say they are losing? Losing where? Please don't go to those Admob stats (see above). In real sales, in the real world - this past quarter, Apple sales did not gain one market share point. RIM sales did not gain one market share point. How did Nokia do? Its market share went up 3 percentage points! You are very very mistaken.

Of the unlimited data plans. Fine, in US 20% use them. Did you know who launched unlimited data plans to mobile in the world's most advaanced mobile market? Willcom in Japan. They just went bankrupt. The US carriers are screaming bloody murder about it, and both AT&T and Verizon have spoken very loudly that the era of all-you-can-eat mobile data will end. Don't count on that trend, please.

James - I think we do agree totally. But to be clear. I think we agree both that RIM and Nokia must evolve and react to how the market evolves. They can't stand still. I never suggested they should or that they are. And on the measurement of who is winning and who isn't I would assume James that you agree, the only viable global fair and unbiased measure is to measure smartphone sales by units. That is how cars are measured, that is how airplanes are measured. That is how pop music hit records are measured. It is how just about any industry with actual tangible 'goods' is measured. To find out whose market share is biggest in smartphones, we count who sold more of them. In units.

but that does not mean we don't have new industries developing. From the PC industry we suddenly got the worlwide web and the internet (a services) industry. how to measure 'market share' in the internet services is not as easy as to count how many PCs were sold by Dell or HP or Toshiba etc. That is also happening in mobile, a new services industry is growing and also a new apps market evolving. Nokia, Apple, RIM all have interests in those markets. But to measure smartphones for their market shares, I do think you agree it has to be unit count as reported by Gartner, IDC etc.

Peter - welcome to the blog and yes I am always arrogant but perhaps not always as abrasive as this time haha. I try also to be very engaging and as honest, brutally honest, as I can possibly be. So welcome. And you have a good point.

Yeah, I saw those slides by Crowd Science. Note that there are two stongly skewing factors to the study. First, the majority of Blackberry phones are in busienss use, mostly as employee phones. That means, that the employer selected the phone. Most iPhones and Androids are sold to individual consumers, it the consumer selected the phone. We are of course going to have far more loyalty to a brand and device we selected than one that was forced upon us.

Secondly, the average replacement cycle in America is about 24 months. The first-time iPhone 2G owners are now coming to the end of their contract, on average. Most of the iPhones in use - all iPhone 3G and iPhone 3GS devices are still 'new'. Even more for Android, all Android devices are less than 1 year old. Meanwhile the Blackberry user population includes those family members with 'hand-me-down' second hand BB's that can be 4 years old. There is the greater appeal to the new than the old.

With those caveats, its a fair study and yes, no doubt there are consumers who are fed up with their old phone and want a new one. And if the user is not 'addicted' to the Blackberry (the kind of user that is called a 'crackberry' user) ie one who can text blindly, then yes, they're easily interted in any new hot sexy better phone that is 2 years newer..

But this is US and consumer survey. It totally ignores the enterprise customers - there the individual user does not get to make the decision, the phones are bought in bulk, often thousands at a time. And its US centric, and half of the iPhoen market is already abroad, and RIM is on the brink of its market shiting abroad right now.

Thank you all for writing

Tomi Ahonen :-)

Dean Bubley


I think you might be over-stating the enterprise bias for BlackBerry. I believe that there are now more BIS (BlackBerry Internet Service) subscribers than BES (BlackBerry Enterprise Server) accounts.

BIS is generally used by consumers and small businesses which don't have MS Exchange servers.

I also think you may be overlooking the fact that financial analysts (rightly) focus on the difference between outcome and *expectations*. ie relative performance is important for share price movement, not absolute - the baseline expectations are already "priced in".

There are also some other competitive dynamics in play:
- The US operators are able to "shift the needle" by individual decisions, eg Verizon putting extra marketing and subsidy budgets behind the Moto Droid. That's a big deal given RIM's geographic bias - as is the risk of a future CDMA iPhone.
- Some enterprises now reimburse employees that "bring their own" smartphone, rather than get a company-issued device. In that sense, a consumer-bought iPhone competes as a "business" product with am IT-issued BlackBerry.
- In some markets (I definitely notice it in the UK) there is growing evidence that PIN/BlackBerry Messenger is a clear differentiator vs. Nokia E-series. Among some groups there is now a "network effect" in play, where social groups *have* to get BlackBerries. (WinMob has essentially disappeared from that group)
- The problem with Nokia / Symbian has always been splitting out the part of the shipment numbers which are actual conscious "smartphone sales", rather than "featurephones which have a smartphone OS"
- Anecdotally, some consumers definitely flip-flop before deciding on buying smartphones both between "branded" iPhone and BlackBerry routes, and more generic-seeming Android or Symbian products. While some come from a "must have a QWERTY" standpoint, others have other criteria like "must have a good browser", "must have apps", "must have a decent camera" and so forth. In many purchasing decisions, seemingly different device classes may be considered in parallel. This is pretty different from the car market, where few people go to a dealer wanting a Range Rover and actually drive off with a Lambo.

As another anecdote - I am *staggered* by the numbers of BlackBerries I see toted by 18-30 year olds in London. I see debates among non-industry friends on Facebook "Noooo don't get an iPhone, get a BB!". Yes it's a microcosm that's not representative of the market as a whole, but there's definitely an interesting dynamic that's not widely recognised.

Lastly, unit shipments are an interesting metric but far from the only important figure. Particularly for the audience you are criticising (financial analysts), profit is far more important. Nokia's ASPs are far below Apple's or RIM's, and it's not clear that the Nokia smartphone business (if carved out, and especially if added to a part of Ovi as a platform play) is anywhere near as profitable.

Geoff Schaadt

Whew - thanks for your analysis. I'm very glad to know that RIM, and especially Nokia, are going to control the future of the mobile communications marketplace worldwide due to the size of their current sales advantage and their entrenched relationship with corporate IT departments.

I'll now go back to coding my COBOL in-house inventory control program on my DEC box.

Remember - share price is a reflection of the value of *future* revenues. Just because iPhone/android <> RIM/Nokia today does not mean that it won't in the future. Clearly the market perceives the future of the incumbents to be threatened by the increasing success of the newcomers, and isn't the slide in RIM's share values what started this little fracas?


While i agree with your analyses of the smartphone market and players, i would ask you this.....

Should we consider a financial analyst an expert? If so, then why bother having industry analysts?

Richard Law

Tomi... Interesting post as always. :) I would suggest a different alignment of brands: Apple = Ferrari, Nokia N Series = Porsche, Blackberry = Hummer, Nokia E-Series = Range Rover.


In reporting 4Q09, that is Mar 2009, RIMM said half of its subscribers were consumers. Since then, RIMM has reported more consumer than enterprise consumers in each of 4 quarters. So I think you over-estimate the enterprise aspect of Blackberry.

Also, Blackberries are most similar to Nokia E-series in terms of function. But at least in the US, BBs are the same as iPhones and Androids in that all three usually require a data plan (usually about $30/mo) that costs the same. Again, in the US, many BB consumer users I know are switching to what Google labeled "superphones" - iPhones (at AT&T) or Androids (at the other 3 carriers) - not because they think email/texting is unimportant, but because they think adding a solid web browser and fun/useful apps is equally important. Comparing the US to other countries, iPhone and Android were much more in the news and much more heavily advertised by vendors and the US carriers in the last half of 2009.

Also, RIMM's ASP is falling because it's selling more of its cheaper Curves (largely free or buy one, get one free). BB Curves keep looking like a great entry point for those buying their first smartphone, especially those who want to text or email.

Nokia E-series smartphones would've been perfect in helping to provide more evidence for or against this switching theory in the US, but alas, Nokia barely sells any in the US.


answer is very simple:
if there is no iphone, will customers buy more blackB?
If you get only ferrari in town what car will you buy?
now if you get ten brands in town do you think ferrari will sell less?
by the way, comparing phone and then giving an analogy with ferrari is a nice manipulation.
BlackB looks like a dino comparing to new phones.
flush it.

Drew Freyman

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you!

It is so frustrating hearing American analysts spout off about the smartphone market without taking into account the almost 10 years of history of the smartphone BEFORE Apple entered the market. All they can see is Apple and the North American market.

Also, you deftly point out these analysts ignorance regarding the North American market too. One thing they seldom bring up when trying to interweave the RIM and Apple stories is the importance of RIM's real-time, secure messaging platform to some business users. In addition to the QWERTY keyboard differentiator you pointed out, this feature really does carve out a large group of customers that Apple cannot effectively serve. Even if one doesn't believe there is a functionality gap there is a credibility gap. This is significant when security is of concern and when having a piece of info a few seconds ahead of rivals can translate into BIG bucks to an investment banker, lawyer, etc..



If there were no landline phones, would customers buy more Blackberries?

("BlackB looks like a dino comparing to new phones." Apple fanatics do care a lot about looks.)

The comments to this entry are closed.

Available for Consulting and Speakerships

  • Available for Consulting & Speaking
    Tomi Ahonen is a bestselling author whose twelve books on mobile have already been referenced in over 100 books by his peers. Rated the most influential expert in mobile by Forbes in December 2011, Tomi speaks regularly at conferences doing about 20 public speakerships annually. With over 250 public speaking engagements, Tomi been seen by a cumulative audience of over 100,000 people on all six inhabited continents. The former Nokia executive has run a consulting practise on digital convergence, interactive media, engagement marketing, high tech and next generation mobile. Tomi is currently based out of Helsinki but supports Fortune 500 sized companies across the globe. His reference client list includes Axiata, Bank of America, BBC, BNP Paribas, China Mobile, Emap, Ericsson, Google, Hewlett-Packard, HSBC, IBM, Intel, LG, MTS, Nokia, NTT DoCoMo, Ogilvy, Orange, RIM, Sanomamedia, Telenor, TeliaSonera, Three, Tigo, Vodafone, etc. To see his full bio and his books, visit Tomi Ahonen lectures at Oxford University's short courses on next generation mobile and digital convergence. Follow him on Twitter as @tomiahonen. Tomi also has a Facebook and Linked In page under his own name. He is available for consulting, speaking engagements and as expert witness, please write to tomi (at) tomiahonen (dot) com

Tomi's eBooks on Mobile Pearls

  • Pearls Vol 1: Mobile Advertising
    Tomi's first eBook is 171 pages with 50 case studies of real cases of mobile advertising and marketing in 19 countries on four continents. See this link for the only place where you can order the eBook for download

Tomi Ahonen Almanac 2009

  • Tomi Ahonen Almanac 2009
    A comprehensive statistical review of the total mobile industry, in 171 pages, has 70 tables and charts, and fits on your smartphone to carry in your pocket every day.

Alan's Third Book: No Straight Lines

Tomi's Fave Twitterati