Worldwide Handheld Shipments Continue Double-Digit Growth

Ed Hardy · 11-01-2005, 08:42 AM

The number of handhelds shipped worldwide was up 20.7 percent last quarter, and the industry is on track to set a new record in shipments for the whole year.

Read more at www.brighthand.com/article/Gartner_Results_Q305

NewtonDKC · 11-01-2005, 09:49 PM

I would be extremely happy about this news except IDC is reporting a Worldwide *decline* of like 16%-17% in handheld shipments...who is right? Obviously both can't be right, and both groups appear to have left out phone device shipments.

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the methodolgy used by each study. Ed - any chance of Brighthand posting IDC's findings and comparing the two to see how such drastically different outcomes could be discovered by these two companies? By Gartner, Handhelds are experiencing their best year yet; IDC seems to be offering the doom and gloom future for handhelds (though both seem to agree on a potentially bright future for "SmartPhones").

Excepting my ignorance of obvious reasons for the differences (assuming there really are reasons for it - or perhaps I'm not ignorant and they are just full of it ), I wonder why these studies are even carried out? Who relies on them? It just seems any company wanting to prove Handhelds make money would quote Gartner, and anyone wanting the opposite would quote IDC...i.e. like religion, you can pretty much find a verse here or there which backs up your own personal ideas or interpretation of what constitutes the "reality" of the situation.

Can anyone explain this to me (and I'm sure many others are curious too!). :-)

Thanks in advance! :-)

Ed Hardy · 11-02-2005, 08:29 AM

It's pretty simple.

The two market research companies use very different definitions for handhelds and smartphones, so they have very different results. I don't always agree with Gartner's definition, but I like IDC's even less, which is why I don't report its findings at all.

To IDC, anything with a cellular-wireless modem in it is a "smartphone" and therefore isn't counted in its total of handheld shipments. This means no RIM BlackBerry shipments are counted.

Gartner takes a more function-based approach. A device that is primarily focused on data is a handheld, while a device that's primarily focused on voice is a smartphone.

As I said, I don't always agree with Gartner's definitions, which is why I mention smartphone statistics for devices that I think are on the line, like the Treo.

This industry is in a time of transition. There's no doubt that shipments of devices with no cellular-wireless functionality at all are declining (I tend to call these "traditional" handhelds), while devices with cellular-wireless functionality are increasing steadily... what ever they are called.

This is why IDC is reporting one group of numbers, and Gartner a very different set.

I explore this in a bit more depth in an editorial I wrote a while back, Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics.

Ed Hardy · 11-02-2005, 08:31 AM

It's pretty simple.

The two market research companies use very different definitions for handhelds and smartphones. I don't always agree with Gartner's, but I like IDC's even less, which is why I don't report its findings at all.

To IDC, anything with a cellular-wireless modem in it is a "smartphone" and therefore isn?t counted in its total of handheld shipments. This means no RIM BlackBerry shipments are counted.

Gartner takes a more function-based approach. A device that is primarily focused on data is a handheld, while a device that's primarily focused on voice is a smartphone.

As I said, I don't always agree with Gartner's definitions, which is why I mention smartphone statistics for devices that I think are on the line, like the Treo.

This industry is in a time of transition. There's no doubt that shipments of devices with no cellular-wireless functionality at all are declining (I tend to call these "traditional" handhelds), while devices with cellular-wireless functionality are increasing steadily... what ever they are called.

This is why IDC is reporting one group of numbers, and Gartner a very different set.

I explore this in a bit more depth in an editorial I wrote a while back, Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics.

pixelator · 11-03-2005, 04:15 PM

I hate to say this, since I'd very much like for the handheld market to be booming, but I had an actual Gartner rep in where I work about a week ago. I asked him about the data collecting and such, and let's just say his opinion of his own company's veracity wasn't enthusiastic.

I won't go into any detail, but the guy really didn't inspire much confidence in Gartner's methods or their accuracy. I don't think I'll put much stock in their data from now on.

PlasticMan · 11-03-2005, 09:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by pixelator
I won't go into any detail, but the guy really didn't inspire much confidence in Gartner's methods or their accuracy. I don't think I'll put much stock in their data from now on.

i've known this for years. gartner has been biased towards microsoft in everything they say since i can remeber. its sad if your just figuring this out.

pixelator · 11-05-2005, 08:29 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by PlasticMan
i've known this for years. gartner has been biased towards microsoft in everything they say since i can remeber. its sad if your just figuring this out.

'Sadly' that wasn't what I said - nor what he said. It was the data collating that he felt was questionable, not that the company was biased one way or the other.

Just because PalmOS has lost marketshare (not a conclusion unique to Gartner) doesn't mean those reporting that are 'biased toward Microsoft'. Of course, that would be your assertion about any company failing to issue glowing, favorable reports about Palm products.

After all, you cry 'PPC fanatic' every time anyone here at BH says anything even remotely critical about Palm...