Android worldwide market share went from 0.5% in 2008 to 3.9% in 2009. I will repeat to you what few here have been saying when the iPhone experienced such fast growth in first year "it is not much growth if you started from zero"
So Android's growth was nearly 800%? I didn't know that.
I think that means that ultimately neither corporate IT nor consumers will be happy with Google phones.
Well, if we can believe the figures cited in this thread, those who are happy with Google phones grew by nearly 800% last year. And if we look purely at the end of the year, it looks like Android's growth might be accelerating.
Android worldwide market share went from 0.5% in 2008 to 3.9% in 2009. I will repeat to you what few here have been saying when the iPhone experienced such fast growth in first year "it is not much growth if you started from zero"
Well obviously it is declining since it used to be 98% before Mac OSX and Linux. Win 7s sales are not overwhelming but solid for a platform upgrade. Remember, there are still a lot of people on XP let alone Vista who are not going anywhere soon. My 100,000 person company won't upgrade to 7 until everyone has HW that will acceptably run it and they have troubleshot all the corporate Apps which is likely 2-3 years away...
Desktop share is clearly not a determinant of mobile and entertainment device success or why would iPod be so dominant and everything but WinMo be 90%+ of the mobile market?
WinMo 7 may or may not be the bees knees but your logic clearly isn't.
...and what does any of that have to do with the comment to which I was responding?
"Microsoft should just stick to what they do best. XBox."
So Android's growth was nearly 800%? I didn't know that.
It took the original iPhone six months to achieve 5.2% worldwide smartphone market share. No one is saying Android is not gaining market share. You were saying that the iPhone market share is stagnating, which is not true.
PS: I don't know where you learned math but that should be 680% not 800%.
DaHarders reply was to the poster who said that the ONLY thing MS did well was the Xbox.
The point is, if that were true, then MS would not have 90% of the desktop market.
Actually, given the entrenched and heavily leveraged nature of the desktop PC installed user base, MS could pretty much do nothing for the next 10 years and still have the lion's share of the market.
They could still be selling XP and be doing perfectly fine; even the bad press surrounding early versions of Vista didn't really move the needle much. It's just too expensive to move all those beige boxes over to a new platform. The "excitement" over something like Windows 7 doesn't really mean much beyond the same Windows users get some new pretty and some statistically insignificant number of users that might be persuaded to stay put rather than jumping ship to OS X or Linux (or, I guess, at some point, Chrome).
Apple and Jobs have acknowledged as much, and are working feverishly to move the battle to new ground: hence, the iOS and the platform buildout.
Yeah, I agree that clearly someone has to pay. My point is that corporate IT is willing to pay Microsoft, because Microsoft really does cater to them. I am no fan of MS, but I have to admit that they do pay much more attention to the needs of IT than Apple does. Basically, MS can say to IT -- here's a phone that fits in perfectly with all of your other MS-based infrastructure ("ecosystem", if you will). Maybe that's true, maybe it's not, but just as Apple's brand carries a lot of weight with consumers, MS's brand carries a lot of weight with corporate IT guys.
And while I'm sympathetic to the idea that IT likes MS because it creates more work for IT, I really do think we have to acknowledge that MS really has done more to cater to that market than Apple has. It's hard to get too excited about buying from a company that isn't interested in your business, and that has been Apple's attitude towards corporate IT for a long time. And let's also remember that a lot of IT people just don't know anything about Apple products, so for them there would be a learning curve.
The bottom line is that corporate IT most likely is willing to pay for WinMo phones. So all MS has to do is make a phone that end-users will accept "for free" (meaning, their company pays) because the company will be willing to pay.
Google's problem is that they need to figure out a way to give phones away for free to everyone. Maybe they will eventually figure out how to do that, but it hasn't happened yet.
Apple hasn't made any real effort in this area, if only because doing so requires them to go head-to-head with Microsoft, something they have wisely avoided, even as the Apple brand has been resurgent. Microsoft is winning essentially by default.
All of this sort of begs the question, though. Surely the previous incarnations of WinMo have been "good enough" to meet the relatively low standards of corporate IT guys.
"My company's IT group had to be dragged kicking and screaming by the president of the company and several VPs to accept employees using their personal iPhones for work e-mail, and that was only because those top guys flat out refused to use a WinMo Phone."
My employer bans use of iPhones and iPod touches during work hours.
[CENTER]...and what does any of that have to do with the comment to which I was responding?
"Microsoft should just stick to what they do best. XBox."
Answer: Absolutely Nothing.[/CENTER]
Almost a fair point but then you let your rhetorical hysteria get the better of you... My follow on (about mobile OS) was taking your reply out of context (though true).
We can all agree that MS is still a pretty effective monopolist. However you state 2 things to back up your comment - that MS OS share is not declining and and Win7 has been an overwhelming success. My main point was that those 2 points are wrong even if it was adequately refuting the XBox comment (which was obviously tongue in cheek). That's what I was responding to.
MS OS share is declining over the long term, far more so if you include mobile smart-devices as computers and Win7 was a solid upgrade but is not reducing the share slide, just reshuffling the Win sub-OS shares (XP/Vista/Win7).
They might have tremendous sales, but if equal number of people is leaving iPhone for something else (or just replacing 1st gen iPhone for a new one) then their market share is stagnating, even if sales are still strong.
I'm not saying that is happening - I'm just saying strong sales are not necessarily sign of gaining market share.
I'm always amazed at the credit Microsoft gets. We're still at the start of the year and WM7 debuts near the end, an age in the smartphone world and almost 4 years after the iPhone debut. And it could still be delayed even further.
What evidence is there that this will be in the same league as the fast maturing Android nevermind iPhone 4.0? All we've seen so far is some computer generated demos, not even a proper working prototype if I'm not mistaken (same with Courier, real artists ship and all that...).
I'd say it comes with the size. It is like everyone is obsessed with US presidential elections. No one cares about, say, Lithuanian elections (well except Lithuanians and neighbours).
You are right about other thing - no one can tell at this point how good WP7 will be, but concept looks promising. It also looks different, which is great thing considering that most other solutions are copying iPhone to a degree.
Of course some people will like it and some will hate it, but if executed right, with good Exchange and MS Office integration, it might turn to be valid business alternative to Blackberries, and also interesting for home users with its social networking features and sleek GUI. Add to that Courier and Zune HD2 based on the same platform (and I would personally expect iPad-like oversized Zune tablet soon after)... yes, there is a lot of potential there.
It's because MS has incredible sway over corporate IT. You just can't ignore or underestimate that. IT *loves* MS. All MS has to do is create a phone that won't cause users to revolt, and they'll sell a ton of them to corporations. My company's IT group had to be dragged kicking and screaming by the president of the company and several VPs to accept employees using their personal iPhones for work e-mail, and that was only because those top guys flat out refused to use a WinMo Phone. But if the WinMo phones weren't such disasters -- if they were halfway credible -- then the IT guys probably would have won the argument.
The company that gets way too much credit is Google. Their Android "strategy" is so typically googlish in nature -- totally naive and lacking in serious commitment. Google just isn't up to the hard work of making a platform work. Apple and MS are.
So the first battle will be MS beating Google for the right to challenge Apple as the leader in the smartphone market.
I had strong feeling Blackberry is still the leader in the smartphone market, and probably hardest one to beat. But I would not ignore Nokia just yet.
Umm, just look at the phone itself. It looks like an iPhone. LOL.
Operates, maybe yes, but overall it's a same thing. How does Microsoft think that people gonna throw their iPhones and get Win7 Phone? There's nothing new or game changing in Win7.
Microsoft should just stick to what they do best. XBox.
There is a lot of new in WP7. Yes it does look like iPhone, or BB Storm, or Nexus... and they all look like old Palm Tungsten T5. Which, of course, looks like Newton or something else from before.
Human physiology and practical reasons dictates the way device like phone or PDA will look like. Having shuriken shaped phone would be tremendously fun, but very impractical for using and carrying.
At the end of the day, it is user experience that will differentiate it from other phones (for good or bad), same as iPhone user experience differentiated it from other phones. Apple users should be aware of that and respect it, like I do; having both company Nokia E63 and iPhone with me most of the day, I can say that almost all things can be done on both, but reason I prefer my iPhone is because of the smooth elegance those tasks are performed on iPhone.
If WP7 manages to create its own smooth and unique user experience (and we already can say it will be very unique), it will do well.
I did look at the phone. Doesn't look like an iPhone to me. Aside from having a screen and (drumroll please!) buttons. I had this discussion on another thread, but all these devices look like each other because they're all just screens and buttons. The iPhone obviously wasn't the first mobile device in the world (though it seems like you treat it as such). One could argue that the iPhone looks like the iPAQ or HP PocketPCs of old.
"Overall", every OS does the same thing. The iPhone OS does the same thing as older WinMo OS, so does that mean that the iPhone OS is a copy of WinMo? No.
MS does XBox spectacularily and they plan to integrate it into WP7. From the videos I've seen, it looks like they're headed in the right direction for XBox integration. Lets say that they get game studios onboard with WP7 (you'll probably attack me on this assumption ). Having mobile versions/compliments of the XBox games would be a good selling point.
Thank you, I dont get guys that scream out "it looks like an iPhone" of course all touchscreen phones are going to look similar. Just like a Sony 32" LCD TV looks like a Samsung 32" LCD TV but I dont hear guys yelling about that. Guys get over it, and if anything all these phones look like the LG Prada which was out before the iPhone.
[CENTER]I think you failed to acknowledge the near 90% market share that Microsoft Windows currently enjoys, which shows no signs of diminishing given the overwhelming success of Windows 7.
[/CENTER]
And just think, you can go to any wal-mart or Costco and pick up whatever Win7 PC your heart desires, since by now the only option on every PC a person can buy anywhere...is Win7.
Comments
That's US only
Android worldwide market share went from 0.5% in 2008 to 3.9% in 2009. I will repeat to you what few here have been saying when the iPhone experienced such fast growth in first year "it is not much growth if you started from zero"
So Android's growth was nearly 800%? I didn't know that.
I think that means that ultimately neither corporate IT nor consumers will be happy with Google phones.
Well, if we can believe the figures cited in this thread, those who are happy with Google phones grew by nearly 800% last year. And if we look purely at the end of the year, it looks like Android's growth might be accelerating.
That's US only
Android worldwide market share went from 0.5% in 2008 to 3.9% in 2009. I will repeat to you what few here have been saying when the iPhone experienced such fast growth in first year "it is not much growth if you started from zero"
Ironic, given Mr. Tonic's sig.
This is incredibly insightful.
+1
What a great post...
Seconded.
Well obviously it is declining since it used to be 98% before Mac OSX and Linux. Win 7s sales are not overwhelming but solid for a platform upgrade. Remember, there are still a lot of people on XP let alone Vista who are not going anywhere soon. My 100,000 person company won't upgrade to 7 until everyone has HW that will acceptably run it and they have troubleshot all the corporate Apps which is likely 2-3 years away...
Desktop share is clearly not a determinant of mobile and entertainment device success or why would iPod be so dominant and everything but WinMo be 90%+ of the mobile market?
WinMo 7 may or may not be the bees knees but your logic clearly isn't.
...and what does any of that have to do with the comment to which I was responding?
"Microsoft should just stick to what they do best. XBox."
Answer: Absolutely Nothing.
DaHarders reply was to the poster who said that the ONLY thing MS did well was the Xbox.
The point is, if that were true, then MS would not have 90% of the desktop market.
Thank You
So Android's growth was nearly 800%? I didn't know that.
It took the original iPhone six months to achieve 5.2% worldwide smartphone market share. No one is saying Android is not gaining market share. You were saying that the iPhone market share is stagnating, which is not true.
PS: I don't know where you learned math but that should be 680% not 800%.
DaHarders reply was to the poster who said that the ONLY thing MS did well was the Xbox.
The point is, if that were true, then MS would not have 90% of the desktop market.
Actually, given the entrenched and heavily leveraged nature of the desktop PC installed user base, MS could pretty much do nothing for the next 10 years and still have the lion's share of the market.
They could still be selling XP and be doing perfectly fine; even the bad press surrounding early versions of Vista didn't really move the needle much. It's just too expensive to move all those beige boxes over to a new platform. The "excitement" over something like Windows 7 doesn't really mean much beyond the same Windows users get some new pretty and some statistically insignificant number of users that might be persuaded to stay put rather than jumping ship to OS X or Linux (or, I guess, at some point, Chrome).
Apple and Jobs have acknowledged as much, and are working feverishly to move the battle to new ground: hence, the iOS and the platform buildout.
Yeah, I agree that clearly someone has to pay. My point is that corporate IT is willing to pay Microsoft, because Microsoft really does cater to them. I am no fan of MS, but I have to admit that they do pay much more attention to the needs of IT than Apple does. Basically, MS can say to IT -- here's a phone that fits in perfectly with all of your other MS-based infrastructure ("ecosystem", if you will). Maybe that's true, maybe it's not, but just as Apple's brand carries a lot of weight with consumers, MS's brand carries a lot of weight with corporate IT guys.
And while I'm sympathetic to the idea that IT likes MS because it creates more work for IT, I really do think we have to acknowledge that MS really has done more to cater to that market than Apple has. It's hard to get too excited about buying from a company that isn't interested in your business, and that has been Apple's attitude towards corporate IT for a long time. And let's also remember that a lot of IT people just don't know anything about Apple products, so for them there would be a learning curve.
The bottom line is that corporate IT most likely is willing to pay for WinMo phones. So all MS has to do is make a phone that end-users will accept "for free" (meaning, their company pays) because the company will be willing to pay.
Google's problem is that they need to figure out a way to give phones away for free to everyone. Maybe they will eventually figure out how to do that, but it hasn't happened yet.
Apple hasn't made any real effort in this area, if only because doing so requires them to go head-to-head with Microsoft, something they have wisely avoided, even as the Apple brand has been resurgent. Microsoft is winning essentially by default.
All of this sort of begs the question, though. Surely the previous incarnations of WinMo have been "good enough" to meet the relatively low standards of corporate IT guys.
My employer bans use of iPhones and iPod touches during work hours.
[CENTER]...and what does any of that have to do with the comment to which I was responding?
"Microsoft should just stick to what they do best. XBox."
Answer: Absolutely Nothing.[/CENTER]
Almost a fair point but then you let your rhetorical hysteria get the better of you... My follow on (about mobile OS) was taking your reply out of context (though true).
We can all agree that MS is still a pretty effective monopolist. However you state 2 things to back up your comment - that MS OS share is not declining and and Win7 has been an overwhelming success. My main point was that those 2 points are wrong even if it was adequately refuting the XBox comment (which was obviously tongue in cheek). That's what I was responding to.
MS OS share is declining over the long term, far more so if you include mobile smart-devices as computers and Win7 was a solid upgrade but is not reducing the share slide, just reshuffling the Win sub-OS shares (XP/Vista/Win7).
Show me where WP7 is a copy of the iPhone. From all the videos I've seen, the WP7 OS looks and operates completely differently than the iPhone OS.
C'mon, AsianBob. It does have touch screen, right? Volume up/down?
stagnant sales? Where's igenius?
They might have tremendous sales, but if equal number of people is leaving iPhone for something else (or just replacing 1st gen iPhone for a new one) then their market share is stagnating, even if sales are still strong.
I'm not saying that is happening - I'm just saying strong sales are not necessarily sign of gaining market share.
I'm always amazed at the credit Microsoft gets. We're still at the start of the year and WM7 debuts near the end, an age in the smartphone world and almost 4 years after the iPhone debut. And it could still be delayed even further.
What evidence is there that this will be in the same league as the fast maturing Android nevermind iPhone 4.0? All we've seen so far is some computer generated demos, not even a proper working prototype if I'm not mistaken (same with Courier, real artists ship and all that...).
I'd say it comes with the size. It is like everyone is obsessed with US presidential elections. No one cares about, say, Lithuanian elections (well except Lithuanians and neighbours).
You are right about other thing - no one can tell at this point how good WP7 will be, but concept looks promising. It also looks different, which is great thing considering that most other solutions are copying iPhone to a degree.
Of course some people will like it and some will hate it, but if executed right, with good Exchange and MS Office integration, it might turn to be valid business alternative to Blackberries, and also interesting for home users with its social networking features and sleek GUI. Add to that Courier and Zune HD2 based on the same platform (and I would personally expect iPad-like oversized Zune tablet soon after)... yes, there is a lot of potential there.
It's because MS has incredible sway over corporate IT. You just can't ignore or underestimate that. IT *loves* MS. All MS has to do is create a phone that won't cause users to revolt, and they'll sell a ton of them to corporations. My company's IT group had to be dragged kicking and screaming by the president of the company and several VPs to accept employees using their personal iPhones for work e-mail, and that was only because those top guys flat out refused to use a WinMo Phone. But if the WinMo phones weren't such disasters -- if they were halfway credible -- then the IT guys probably would have won the argument.
The company that gets way too much credit is Google. Their Android "strategy" is so typically googlish in nature -- totally naive and lacking in serious commitment. Google just isn't up to the hard work of making a platform work. Apple and MS are.
So the first battle will be MS beating Google for the right to challenge Apple as the leader in the smartphone market.
I had strong feeling Blackberry is still the leader in the smartphone market, and probably hardest one to beat. But I would not ignore Nokia just yet.
Umm, just look at the phone itself. It looks like an iPhone. LOL.
Operates, maybe yes, but overall it's a same thing. How does Microsoft think that people gonna throw their iPhones and get Win7 Phone? There's nothing new or game changing in Win7.
Microsoft should just stick to what they do best. XBox.
There is a lot of new in WP7. Yes it does look like iPhone, or BB Storm, or Nexus... and they all look like old Palm Tungsten T5. Which, of course, looks like Newton or something else from before.
Human physiology and practical reasons dictates the way device like phone or PDA will look like. Having shuriken shaped phone would be tremendously fun, but very impractical for using and carrying.
At the end of the day, it is user experience that will differentiate it from other phones (for good or bad), same as iPhone user experience differentiated it from other phones. Apple users should be aware of that and respect it, like I do; having both company Nokia E63 and iPhone with me most of the day, I can say that almost all things can be done on both, but reason I prefer my iPhone is because of the smooth elegance those tasks are performed on iPhone.
If WP7 manages to create its own smooth and unique user experience (and we already can say it will be very unique), it will do well.
I did look at the phone. Doesn't look like an iPhone to me. Aside from having a screen and (drumroll please!) buttons. I had this discussion on another thread, but all these devices look like each other because they're all just screens and buttons. The iPhone obviously wasn't the first mobile device in the world (though it seems like you treat it as such). One could argue that the iPhone looks like the iPAQ or HP PocketPCs of old.
"Overall", every OS does the same thing. The iPhone OS does the same thing as older WinMo OS, so does that mean that the iPhone OS is a copy of WinMo? No.
MS does XBox spectacularily and they plan to integrate it into WP7. From the videos I've seen, it looks like they're headed in the right direction for XBox integration. Lets say that they get game studios onboard with WP7 (you'll probably attack me on this assumption
Thank you, I dont get guys that scream out "it looks like an iPhone" of course all touchscreen phones are going to look similar. Just like a Sony 32" LCD TV looks like a Samsung 32" LCD TV but I dont hear guys yelling about that. Guys get over it, and if anything all these phones look like the LG Prada which was out before the iPhone.
[CENTER]I think you failed to acknowledge the near 90% market share that Microsoft Windows currently enjoys, which shows no signs of diminishing given the overwhelming success of Windows 7.
And just think, you can go to any wal-mart or Costco and pick up whatever Win7 PC your heart desires, since by now the only option on every PC a person can buy anywhere...is Win7.
We've frequently criticized Microsoft's inept efforts in delivering a user-friendly smartphone operating system. Such criticisms are now in the past.
Hold on one big fat minute there, Charlie. You make it sound like WinPhone7 is a done deal. It's not delivered yet, and won't be for 6 months or more.
Time travel hasn't been invented yet, so just be patient until the product actually exists.
Perhaps this is the first graphical presentation of the data but I certainly have a download of the data and there is no surprise here, is there?
go apple!
(apple store has been down for a couple of hours now, less than an hour until the iPad pre-sales are launched)