Was the Droid launch more successful than the iPhone?

[thegoldenmackid]

I was expecting TheSpaz to be the OP of this thread

Why? That was unnecessary. He is not one of the Droid trolls on the forums. (OP, I'm not calling you one, but we have a few) Just because he likes to rant about minute dealings with his iPhone doesn't mean that one has to bash him every thread possible.

1st Gen iPhone sold more or less 200,000 units in the first weekend. Don't quote me, look for it here in MR.

It was ridiculously expensive...

I think the droid did really well on it release when you factor in they do not have rabid apple fanboys that will buy anything apple puts out.
And the Droid does not have the media hype that apple gets for everything. Strip out those things from the iPhone and compare it to the droid and the droid did really damn good.

Verizon has done so much advertising that I'm sure they still aren't anywhere in the black. It's mentioned below, but Verizon's OS's are awful - I don't think there were as many switchers who left x for Verizon because of the Droid.

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7D11 Safari/528.16)

Hmm, after reading, it seems to me the $100m advertising budget might have something to do with this, too.

Yeah, something the iPhone didn't have to do.

While I don't know what the actual sales figures are, don't discount the "pent up demand" factor for an above average smartphone from Verizon. After years of crippling features on their handsets and lackluster models, Verizon customers were more than willing to pull the trigger on the Droid since there wasn't much incentive to move from older handsets like the Treo or BB models, until this new handset hit the shelves.

QFT. The droid might be successful, but not more so then the iPhone. The iPhone will be one of the products of the decade and likely the century, the Droid will be forgotten.

 

[mkrishnan]

I thought at first that the 1M units included international sales (under various names). My surprise. Impressive. OTOH Motorola's concern is as much reproducing their iconic previous handset successes such as StarTAC and RAZR. There is going to be more than one successful phone on the market, and for the long-term foreseeable future, more than one successful smartphone.

Also in the meantime, comparing Droid's first 6 mos (or whatever) sales to Apple's original iPhone sales does ignore the facts that it's almost 2010 now, Apple is briskly selling it's third iPhone revision and at work on their fourth, and that Apple already has the one and only vibrant app store as well as the one and only vibrant digital music sales business. Droid has to do more than just sell a few million copies to really change the game at this point.

But the Droid sales will at least ensure that Droid users get versions of Android apps and websites that play nicely with their phone's features, which is very nice for them.

 

[sidewinder]

So far, the Droid has not set the world on fire. Currently, it is doing a little better than the Palm Pre.

This article is interesting:

http://www.pcworld.com/article/181865/droid_sales_are_fine_but_seem_familiar.html

S-

 

[Applejuiced]

Why? That was unnecessary. He is not one of the Droid trolls on the forums. (OP, I'm not calling you one, but we have a few) Just because he likes to rant about minute dealings with his iPhone doesn't mean that one has to bash him every thread possible.

Im just used to seeing his name with posts that attract alot of attention, thats all.

 

[scaredpoet]

The Droid is going as well as it needs to do for Verizon. And that's fine enough.

That said, people need to stop acting as if the success of one means the demise of the other. The Droid is going to be around for a while. But the iPhone isn't going away anytime soon either.

The question is the long-term prospects for the device. Apple has already proven they have staying power and can refresh their products and continue to innovate on them enough to sell more and more. Motorola, on the other hand, has a long history of stagnating. If they could find a way to make it profitable, they'd still be pumping out RAZR V3's if they could, and not care at all about improving on it. They love coming out with a product, seeing that it sells well, and then just beating it to death.

Hopefully the fact that it's an Android-based phone will help the situation. But, I still have doubts.

On the other hand, of Motorola does stagnate, the Android platform might mean it won't matter to end users. They can just migrate to some other, newer Android mobile. Motorola would be the only party to suffer much.

 

[dread]

verizon has spent $100 million on advertising for the droid. That means if they sell 1 million phones they are paying $100 to sell each phone. That seems ridiculous to me. I am not sure what apple spends on the iphone but whatever they spend benefits their entire line of products. Verizon's strategy can't add up to profits especially when you consider the large subsidies they are paying. The droid is not a failure, but it sure as hell isn't an iphone killer. If anything its an iphone decendent.

 

[ghayenga]

So far, the Droid has not set the world on fire. Currently, it is doing a little better than the Palm Pre.

Since the Palm Pre is only available on Sprint it would seem that the Droid should be doing a *lot* better due the the vastly larger number of existing Verizon subscribers.

 

[cmaier]

Since the Palm Pre is only available on Sprint it would seem that the Droid should be doing a *lot* better due the the vastly larger number of existing Verizon subscribers.

perhaps a sizeable percentage of people who wanted decent phones had already abandoned verizon for sprint's cheaper data plans.

 

[MTI]

perhaps a sizeable percentage of people who wanted decent phones had already abandoned verizon for sprint's cheaper data plans.

I don't believe that the numbers support that. Sprint hasn't been the beneficiary of any great migration of customers via the Pre, or even when they had the initial release exclusives on the Palm smartphones. Rather, it seems that Verizon customers were more than willing to wait the few months until the VZW version arrived, which is a testament to either the service or other value that VZW provided their customers, considering that the actual phones wound up crippled due to V-Cast, V-Navigation, etc.

 

[kdarling]

verizon has spent $100 million on advertising for the droid. That means if they sell 1 million phones they are paying $100 to sell each phone. That seems ridiculous to me. I am not sure what apple spends on the iphone but whatever they spend benefits their entire line of products.

Oh, I dunno. Whatever Verizon (or any other carrier) spends, benefits their entire line of products as well. Which are lucrative monthly services.

For example, they get one one or two hundred dollars a month from each of those Droid owners for voice, data and text plans.

And that's real money, not vague halo benefits.

Besides, it's probably a drop in the bucket compared to what ATT pays in extra subsidies to Apple... an expense that Verizon doesn't have.

Rather, it seems that Verizon customers were more than willing to wait the few months until the VZW version arrived, which is a testament to either the service or other value that VZW provided their customers, considering that the actual phones wound up crippled due to V-Cast, V-Navigation, etc.

Not sure how including additional app icons "cripples" anything. Especially when we're talking about smartphones, whose UIs were, and are, rarely changed by any carrier.

 

[jav6454]

Yes, you are correct. I read that in the first article I quoted. It also took 74 days to reach a million sold. The Droid was somewhere in the 600,000 mark after 2 weeks. None of this has anything to do with the topic though.

If you are asking which was more successful, you need unit sold on first weekend for comparison.

Obviously, the high price of the iPhone didn't help it at all initially, instead it hampered sales. However, once the price went down... well, 1,000,000 in a weekend is not bad.

 

[nehunte]

To answer what the OP is originally asking is difficult to do. It's really subjective on how you want to look at the numbers. Looks like the Droid will sell more units in less time, but it's cheaper than it was when the iPhone came out. It also has the privilege of people fully understanding how phones such as these work and how functional they are due to the iPhone's existence. Then, when the iPhone came out, the economy was great as when the Droid came out, the economy was in a recession. When the iPhone came out, I believe AT&T had somewhere between 55 million and 65 million customers (don't know actual number). Verizon had over 80 million customers at the Droid launch.

So, depending on how you want to look at these numbers; I guess you can draw many conclusion from them (sounds an awful lot like politics). I guess my point is that the Droid is only successful because of the iPhone. While it has differentiated itself from the iPhone in a lot of ways, it essentially mimics the device it competes against.

Was the Droid launch more successful than the iPhone? Probably not. I'm not sure you'll ever beat that launch for the first time a phone like that released (3G and 3Gs launch don't count FYI). But, it is a successful launch and will likely be a great device for years to come. Although with Android, it's hard to tell if you'll see upgraded devices or just different ones with upgraded OS. I guess only time will tell.

 

[jayenh]

this thread is 5 months early. a lot of phones do well at release, it's whether or not they are still being bought 6 months down the line or if the next "ZOMG AMAZING IPHONZ KILLA" phone is getting a months worth of good sales. rinse and repeat.

 

[greygray]

Will verizon be able to have more people camp out for the next generation like apple did?

Who said Verizon would be getting the iPhone?

 

[nehunte]

this thread is 5 months early. a lot of phones do well at release, it's whether or not they are still being bought 6 months down the line or if the next "ZOMG AMAZING IPHONZ KILLA" phone is getting a months worth of good sales. rinse and repeat.

Yeah, you're right to a point. Staying power does matter, but the Android OS has had a lot of success already. In terms of the Droid, it's the only phone that runs the newest 2.0 firmware and by this Christmas, there may already be more Droid handsets than any other Android phone on the market. The Blackberry Curve, IMHO, is one of the most boring and sterile handsets offered in the marketplace. And when it was initially released, it did well like most RIM handsets, but didn't light the world on fire. Then, in 2008, it lit the world on fire and outsold the iPhones a few quarters due to the competitive prices (Verizon's BOGO) the carriers offered them at. So, initial sales aren't necessarily a great way to see future success of a phone either. You have to let these things play out for for a year or so, but it'll always be up or debate during that time though. The nature of the beast....

Who said Verizon would be getting the iPhone?

gigapocket1 is talking about if Verizon would have that many people camping out for the 2nd generation of the Droid, not the iPhone.

 

[kdarling]

gigapocket1 is talking about if Verizon would have that many people camping out for the 2nd generation of the Droid, not the iPhone.

Right.

However, as anyone who's used Verizon or hung out for years on HoFo knows, their (HTC or Samsung or Motorola) smartphone fans do not waste time or effort camping out at stores.

Verizon users simply order the device online, with overnight delivery.

Go check HoFo. The really crazy ones wait until midnight when the new device shows up on the VZW website, and order right then. Much nicer to sit warm at home, instead of lining up in the cold.

 

[jclardy]

iPhone 1G -> $599 on contract
Droid -> $199 on contract

 

[iRob213]

So comparing the Droid to Apple's two and a half year old technology makes it a success?

Compare it to the 3g or 3GS release numbers, probably not even close.

I tell my wise ass son-in-law..."you're bragging and blowing about something I've had for 2 years now, how bad ass can it really be"?

End of argument!

 

[MTI]

Not sure how including additional app icons "cripples" anything. Especially when we're talking about smartphones, whose UIs were, and are, rarely changed by any carrier.

Blackberry and Palm Treo owners know exactly how their handhelds were crippled by VZW. Even the Moto Razr had deleted features, even though other carriers supported them. Native features that RIM and Palm built into the devices were "turned off" so that the VZW brand of services were the only way to get them. Only in the last year or so has VZW stopped this on their new exclusives.

 

[elpmas]

How come some folks are bringing up the factor that "1st generation iPhones were more expensive "? The economy is still crap now, and people are buying the Droid...should that not show for something?

And aren't we talking about the quantity that has been "sold" rather than the amount of "$$" it made?

 

[Consultant]

Are those official numbers?

Where are all the FUD slingers when it comes to non-Apple products?

When iPhone was released, it was a completely new product type. It was industry pioneering, with a lot of challenges. It was also over 2 years ago.

So comparing the Droid to Apple's two and a half year old technology makes it a success?

Compare it to the 3g or 3GS release numbers, probably not even close.

I tell my wise ass son-in-law..."you're bragging and blowing about something I've had for 2 years now, how bad ass can it really be"?

End of argument!

Yeah exactly.

 

[cmaier]

And aren't we talking about the quantity that has been "sold" rather than the amount of "$$" it made?

Why? I can sell a billion of phones for free, and that wouldn't be much of a success, would it? In judging success, I would think the best metric is how much money the phone made for the manufacturer and carrier.

 

[elpmas]

Why? I can sell a billion of phones for free, and that wouldn't be much of a success, would it? In judging success, I would think the best metric is how much money the phone made for the manufacturer and carrier.

Well then, aren't you just the perfect little saint for this upcoming Christmas? Back to the topic. "Was the Droid launch more successful than the iPhone?" The thread starter referred claims that the Droid has had 800k sold so far. He did not mention any money, but the comparison of quantity between the iPhone and the Droid.

A measurement of money isn't always the best measurement of how well a product is launch. I personally think a good measurement of how well a product has been launched is by how many people are carrying their products around.

 

[jclardy]

How come some folks are bringing up the factor that "1st generation iPhones were more expensive "? The economy is still crap now, and people are buying the Droid...should that not show for something?

And aren't we talking about the quantity that has been "sold" rather than the amount of "$$" it made?

For one, most people aren't going to pay $600 for a phone on contract, especially when they can get 20 different phones for free. Secondly a lot less people had 'smart' phones 2 years ago, the iPhone helped push them into the mainstream (Although the iPhone before 2.0 was more of a feature phone). The average consumer thought paying more than $100 for a phone on contract was ridiculous, but now with the ease of use in smart phones that was ushered in by iPhone people see them as more useful.

And also, the economy was in a worse situation a few months ago when the 3GS was released with "incremental" improvements (as most people like to say) and it still moved more than the Droid.

But anyways, who cares how many people have the same phone as you? The only way it matters to most people is in the number of developers that come to the platform...Even still it seems that people who buy Android phones are less likely to pay for apps than the average iPhone user. Why that is I'm not sure, but it is something that developers have to pay attention to.

 

[thegoldenmackid]

How come some folks are bringing up the factor that "1st generation iPhones were more expensive "? The economy is still crap now, and people are buying the Droid...should that not show for something?

And aren't we talking about the quantity that has been "sold" rather than the amount of "$$" it made?

At the time the iPhone was one of the most expensive phones on the market. $200 is historically on the high end, but much different then the $600 price of the original iPhone. Despite the economy being worse, people have a perception of what they should spend for x before it becomes unreasonable. For the vast majority of the population $200 on a cell phone wouldn't seem to be that unreasonable.

The above argument also respond to any of the claims about the global launch of the iPhone vs. the U.S. launch of the Droid.

The best argument as to why it's not fair to claim a "victory" over the iPhone given initial sales number is that the supply of the iPhone prevented Apple from achieving the numbers. Remember that there were lines days after the launch of the original iPhone (and the iPhone 3G), any lines for the Droid...no. Demand outpaced supply in the case of the iPhone, what the iPhone could have achieved if Apple had enough iPhones at the time we shall never know, but even at $600 and with a crappier network I would find it hard to believe that the iPhone would be outsold.