I was just going off this article that chemgear posted. Since the phone hasn't been signed for by the store yet I assumed it was one of those "in-transit" orders.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chemgear
Yeah, they count sales differently than many other companies versus their "shipped" numbers.
"We expected 6-8 million over the opening weekend... Clarification - recall the 5mil+ iPhone 5 reported sales only takes into consideration: 1) what was sold into partners (e.g., retail outlets, carriers, etc.), 2) sold in AAPL retail stores, and 3) direct to customers only if they signed for the device. Importantly, this doesn't take into consideration units in delivery direct to customers (i.e., AAPL must have signature of acceptance by customer before it is counted as a sale) and we estimate units in transit could be in the millions currently.
Yeah, apparently they don't count those in transit that are not signed for based on the analysts/article.
Certainly sounds like there are some supply side restrictions. Again for comparison, the 4S had 600,000 orders in the first 24 hours. The 5 had more than a million - demand appears to be rather robust.
Apple also seems to like really short announcement/availability windows as well. They went September 12th to 21 for the iPhone 5. For comparison, the S3 went May 3rd to 29th. Less time to stock up the initial batches I'd imagine.
EDIT: Also forgot to mention that the pre-orders were listed at 2-3 weeks very quickly. They're sitting at 3-4 weeks now. I'd assume that is a fair expectation that demand is quite high and that supply is what is holding it back. Not surprising really, all the previous iterations have been the same. They can't really meet the demand without sitting on building inventory for many weeks/months prior to opening sales.
iPhone 5 vs Galaxy S III: Smartphone Display Technology Shoot-Out
Quote:
Conclusions: An Impressive iPhone 5 Display
Smartphone displays are continuing their rapid evolution in performance. Apple has again taken the lead in methodical refinements and factory calibration that are necessary to produce accurate very high picture quality. Based on our extensive lab measurements the iPhone 5 has a true state-of-the-art accurate display—it's not perfect and there is plenty of room for improvements (and competitors) but it is the best smartphone display we have seen to date based on extensive lab measurements and viewing tests. In particular it is a significant improvement over the display in the iPhone 4 with much lower screen reflections, much higher image contrast and screen readability in high ambient lighting (the highest we have ever measured), and a significantly improved and accurate color gamut and factory calibration that delivers very accurate colors and very good picture quality. While it's not quite as accurate as the new iPad, it is still probably more accurate than any consumer display you own (including your HDTV), unless you have a new iPad.
The display on the Samsung Galaxy S III uses OLED technology. It's a new technology that has not yet been refined to the same degree as LCDs, particularly the IPS LCDs on the iPhones, so it doesn't objectively test or perform as well as the iPhone 5. But OLEDs have been evolving and improving very rapidly as shown in our OLED Display Technology Shoot-Out so it has a very promising future. Here are the biggest issues we found in our extensive lab measurements and viewing tests of the Galaxy S III: the brightness is about half of the iPhone 5 due to power constraints resulting from the lower OLED power efficiency and concerns regarding premature OLED aging. As a result the image contrast and screen readability in high ambient lighting is much poorer than the iPhone 5. The color gamut is not only much larger than the standard color gamut, which leads to distorted and exaggerated colors, but the gamut is quite lopsided, with green being a lot more saturated than either red or blue, which adds a green color caste to many images. And for some reason Samsung has not bothered to calibrate the color gamut on any of its OLED displays, so they are wildly inaccurate and produce inaccurate and over saturated colors.
They could have one ready to go in the background and they'd probably still say that, that's actually a good ploy on Google's part, try to capitalize on some of the dissatisfaction with the Apple Maps. They'll do it eventually but if they submitted a great app tomorrow Apple probably would't approve it for a long time anyway.
It'll come eventually.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
They could have one ready to go in the background and they'd probably still say that, that's actually a good ploy on Google's part, try to capitalize on some of the dissatisfaction with the Apple Maps. They'll do it eventually but if they submitted a great app tomorrow Apple probably would't approve it for a long time anyway.
It'll come eventually.
And will be swiftly booted once Maps on iOS6 come to something more acceptable.
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using Xparent Cyan Tapatalk 2
As for players, I haven't used any because I'm fine with the native one. I've heard good things about iAlbums from music buffs who want more details about the music on their phones: http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/ialbums/id449814696?mt=8
On the micro usb vs. lightning thing, I've used both and I can honestly say I prefer the lightning connector. I know it's such a small difference, but the micro usb is such a PITA to connect. I have to look at it almost every time with my Nexus 7, but the lightning connector just fits in.
I agree with all the cash grab and proprietary arguments, but still usability counts for something, and even though Apple's drifted from it it's still one of their core values and I can see how the cable came about from that.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
