Apple have been very smart by always having a very limited line-up of iPods and each new one boots an old one off the scene, they’re very seldom added to. Each one is also a subtle evolution of the one before, so the paradigm and usability of them remains consistent. Most mobiles are a complete disaster in this regard. Market segmentation in the way it’s currently executed is awkward and confusing for customers. Apple know how to make hardware that is pleasant and simple to configure and use and it’s what the smartphone market has being crying out for for ages.

Also, it’s a mistake to equate the iPhone with smartphones only. The smart part of the iPhone is that it crosses those market segments, from people who would have just bought an iPod, to those people wanting the mobile web (properly done) to the ‘usual’ smart phone users.

It’s just plain short-sighted and arrogant of the Symbian folks to say “we’ve been doing it for 10 years” suggesting that others couldn’t do it better. In ten years they should have come up with a better solution than the hash-up they have right now. I seem to remember Palm’s CEO bragging that Apple couldn’t just “walk into” the mobile market. Apple have been in the business longer than both of them. Google also have more, arguably much smarter folk working for them too.

Das erkl�rt vieles, gefunden bei Volker Weber:

This graph probably explains to American readers why Nokia smartphones like the E61i or E90 are so important to me, although they are almost unseen in the US. The North-American market is very different from the rest of the world, with strong segments…