I have friends and family members that jump around between carriers a lot, and every time they jump to a different carrier, and ditch the old one, they get a brand new (typically Android) phone that was free or next-to-free upon activation. Do those count as "Re-sold" devices?
yes, because they are.
Thats 76M a quarter, which is hugely impressive given it is Q1.
They were at 700k activations in December so their growth rate is slagging off fast.
Of course it is. The overall smartphone adoption rate is much higher than a year ago, and the US and European markets are pretty mature now. They couldn't possibly continue huge growth rates forever, more than doubling activation rates every 12 months. Going from 10million to 300 million units in less than 3 years should be at least a little impressive to you. They sold fewer than 8M Android-based phones in all of 2009, and held less than 3% marketshare.
I have friends and family members that jump around between carriers a lot, and every time they jump to a different carrier, and ditch the old one, they get a brand new (typically Android) phone that was free or next-to-free upon activation. Do those count as "Re-sold" devices?
To me that sounds like a new device. Re-sold would be taking one that had the IEMI activated by Google and then reactivating it through another account. Of course, it's all a little wonky as Rubin has been less than forthcoming with his qualifications of terms. The Google+ quote I list is the best we have from Google exec on what's counted.
Thanks Solips. I still think there is a grey area there. I'm not necessarily referring to resold devices.
An individual with a wireless plan has a broken phone, they get a new phone, not a resold-phone. That phone has to be activated on the network. Activation+?
An individual's contract allows an upgrade to a better phone. They upgrade to the latest Android iPhone-clone and retire their old phone. Activation+?
An individual was an AT&T Android user, they jump ship and go to Verizon and get phone. Activation?
What Google doesn't tell you is that Gmail, calendars, Picasa, Docs, etc. are all different activations.
You seem awfully angry. Unless you have skin in the game, I would seek help.
And you're just being apologetic to a mess of an Android ecosystem. He has a valid point. Fandroids harp about ICS, yet four months later hardly anyone is on it and new phones coming out are using an outdated OS. If history remains constant, they probably are botching it with proprietary skins interfaces.
If Apple came out with an new iPhone right now running iOS 4.0, I'd bet money you and plenty of other folks would be the first to slam Apple for pulling a stunt like that.
But Android?? Heck, it's a non-event. Guess the expectations are so low it's accepted practice now. Congratulations to the Android makers for having zero standards.
Thanks Solips. I still think there is a grey area there. I'm not necessarily referring to resold devices.
An individual with a wireless plan has a broken phone, they get a new phone, not a resold-phone. That phone has to be activated on the network. Activation+?
Thats probably a sale in Apple's terminology, but I don't know since they may subsidise it.
Quote:
An individual's contract allows an upgrade to a better phone. They upgrade to the latest Android iPhone-clone and retire their old phone. Activation+?
Thats a sale and would be counted like that for Apple. So it is Apples and Apples here.
Quote:
An individual was an AT&T Android user, they jump ship and go to Verizon and get phone. Activation?
Thats a sale and would be counted like that for Apple.
I'm on the Android Market right now and most of the apps are utils, so many task managers, launcher add-ons, themes, wallpaper apps, and rarely any good quality games or apps. Not even close to iOS app store in terms of quality and quantity of good titles.
And what is Google really getting out of all these activations?
Apple's business model is so much more attractive: quality over quantity, profits over low-margin volume... Value for the customers in terms of usability and quality of experience (no fragmentation, no malware, etc.)...
Apple's net profits were $3 billion more than Google's revenues last quarter. Apple accounted for around 75% of the mobile phone industry's profits. What is Google really accomplishing with Android?
And what is Google really getting out of all these activations?
Apple's business model is so much more attractive: quality over quantity, profits over low-margin volume... Value for the customers in terms of usability and quality of experience (no fragmentation, no malware, etc.)...
Apple's net profits were $3 billion more than Google's revenues last quarter. Apple accounted for around 75% of the mobile phone industry's profits. What is Google really accomplishing with Android?
Google appears to have bigger plans for Android than simply a smartphone/tablet OS.
They were at 700k activations in December so their growth rate is slagging off fast.
Android device activations peaked last summer at 4.4% weekly growth. They're down to 1.5% weekly growth this last quarter - but improved from the 1.2% weekly growth the previous quarter.
Of course, iOS device sales doubled from the previous quarter, but it's not fair comparing all the numerous iOS devices out there for sale to the meager few Android devices available for purchase.
Android devices activations peaked last summer at 4.4% weekly growth. They're down to 1.5% weekly growth this last quarter - but improved from the 1.2% weekly growth the previous quarter.
Thanks for running the numbers.
Quote:
Of course, iOS device sales doubled from the previous quarter, but it's not fair comparing all the numerous iOS devices out there for sale to the meager few Android devices available for purchase.
"For those wondering, we count each device only once (i.e., we don't count re-sold devices), and "activations" means you go into a store, buy a device [and] put it on the network by subscribing to a wireless service."
So activations count only Android devices subscribed to a wireless service? What about wifi-only devices? Or 3G/4G devices that are bought but not subscribed to a carrier? I bought a 3G-capable iPad 2, but never got a plan for it and have been using my iPhone 4 as a hotspot.
I'm not asking you - I don't expect you to know - I'm just asking.
So activations count only Android devices subscribed to a wireless service? What about wifi-only devices? Or 3G/4G devices that are bought but not subscribed to a carrier? I bought a 3G-capable iPad 2, but never got a plan for it and have been using my iPhone 4 as a hotspot.
I'm not asking you - I don't expect you to know - I'm just asking.
According to Rubin those wi-fi only devices aren't counted in the activation numbers. That would make sense since you aren't activating them.
Market share should only really matter to a developer, that is whether the platform has a large enough user base to support.
However, the other thing a developer is likely to consider is: money. So where is the money?
As long as Apple can maintain or grow its share of the market (evidence points to Android stealing market share ceded by Nokia, Blackberry, and feature phones rather than at Apple's expense), then developers should continue to prioritize iOS development as it has proven to be "where the money is".
Google appears to have bigger plans for Android than simply a smartphone/tablet OS.
I understand what Google is trying to do: just get as many eyeballs onto their platform as possible to sell ads. But that's all that Google is driven by - to sell people and their info to advertisers. They're just an Internet real estate hog that attracts people with freebies (some good, some okay, some horrible) so they can sell targeted advertising.
I remember using web-based Gmail and corresponding with a friend in Korea writing in the Korean language. All of a sudden I started seeing ads in Korean related to the subjects and words that we were writing about. That was a very creepy feeling. I knew then that Google is out for me. Now the only Google thing I use is the default Maps app every now and then on my iPhone and iPad but that's it and I'm sure Apple will come up with a different map solution soon. I refuse to be part of an aggregate number that Google sells to other companies.
Thanks Solips. I still think there is a grey area there. I'm not necessarily referring to resold devices.
An individual with a wireless plan has a broken phone, they get a new phone, not a resold-phone. That phone has to be activated on the network. Activation+?
An individual's contract allows an upgrade to a better phone. They upgrade to the latest Android iPhone-clone and retire their old phone. Activation+?
An individual was an AT&T Android user, they jump ship and go to Verizon and get phone. Activation?
Yeah, same as Apple.
And iPhone breaks. User buys a new one? New sale. Go to a different carrier? New sale. This is how it has been in electronics for years.
Comments
I have friends and family members that jump around between carriers a lot, and every time they jump to a different carrier, and ditch the old one, they get a brand new (typically Android) phone that was free or next-to-free upon activation. Do those count as "Re-sold" devices?
yes, because they are.
Thats 76M a quarter, which is hugely impressive given it is Q1.
They were at 700k activations in December so their growth rate is slagging off fast.
Of course it is. The overall smartphone adoption rate is much higher than a year ago, and the US and European markets are pretty mature now. They couldn't possibly continue huge growth rates forever, more than doubling activation rates every 12 months. Going from 10million to 300 million units in less than 3 years should be at least a little impressive to you. They sold fewer than 8M Android-based phones in all of 2009, and held less than 3% marketshare.
I have friends and family members that jump around between carriers a lot, and every time they jump to a different carrier, and ditch the old one, they get a brand new (typically Android) phone that was free or next-to-free upon activation. Do those count as "Re-sold" devices?
To me that sounds like a new device. Re-sold would be taking one that had the IEMI activated by Google and then reactivating it through another account. Of course, it's all a little wonky as Rubin has been less than forthcoming with his qualifications of terms. The Google+ quote I list is the best we have from Google exec on what's counted.
Thanks Solips. I still think there is a grey area there. I'm not necessarily referring to resold devices.
An individual with a wireless plan has a broken phone, they get a new phone, not a resold-phone. That phone has to be activated on the network. Activation+?
An individual's contract allows an upgrade to a better phone. They upgrade to the latest Android iPhone-clone and retire their old phone. Activation+?
An individual was an AT&T Android user, they jump ship and go to Verizon and get phone. Activation?
What Google doesn't tell you is that Gmail, calendars, Picasa, Docs, etc. are all different activations.
You seem awfully angry. Unless you have skin in the game, I would seek help.
And you're just being apologetic to a mess of an Android ecosystem. He has a valid point. Fandroids harp about ICS, yet four months later hardly anyone is on it and new phones coming out are using an outdated OS. If history remains constant, they probably are botching it with proprietary skins interfaces.
If Apple came out with an new iPhone right now running iOS 4.0, I'd bet money you and plenty of other folks would be the first to slam Apple for pulling a stunt like that.
But Android?? Heck, it's a non-event. Guess the expectations are so low it's accepted practice now. Congratulations to the Android makers for having zero standards.
Thanks Solips. I still think there is a grey area there. I'm not necessarily referring to resold devices.
An individual with a wireless plan has a broken phone, they get a new phone, not a resold-phone. That phone has to be activated on the network. Activation+?
Thats probably a sale in Apple's terminology, but I don't know since they may subsidise it.
An individual's contract allows an upgrade to a better phone. They upgrade to the latest Android iPhone-clone and retire their old phone. Activation+?
Thats a sale and would be counted like that for Apple. So it is Apples and Apples here.
An individual was an AT&T Android user, they jump ship and go to Verizon and get phone. Activation?
Thats a sale and would be counted like that for Apple.
Flea Market does not equal Bloomingdales.
Apple's business model is so much more attractive: quality over quantity, profits over low-margin volume... Value for the customers in terms of usability and quality of experience (no fragmentation, no malware, etc.)...
Apple's net profits were $3 billion more than Google's revenues last quarter. Apple accounted for around 75% of the mobile phone industry's profits. What is Google really accomplishing with Android?
And what is Google really getting out of all these activations?
Apple's business model is so much more attractive: quality over quantity, profits over low-margin volume... Value for the customers in terms of usability and quality of experience (no fragmentation, no malware, etc.)...
Apple's net profits were $3 billion more than Google's revenues last quarter. Apple accounted for around 75% of the mobile phone industry's profits. What is Google really accomplishing with Android?
Google appears to have bigger plans for Android than simply a smartphone/tablet OS.
They were at 700k activations in December so their growth rate is slagging off fast.
Android device activations peaked last summer at 4.4% weekly growth. They're down to 1.5% weekly growth this last quarter - but improved from the 1.2% weekly growth the previous quarter.
Of course, iOS device sales doubled from the previous quarter, but it's not fair comparing all the numerous iOS devices out there for sale to the meager few Android devices available for purchase.
Android devices activations peaked last summer at 4.4% weekly growth. They're down to 1.5% weekly growth this last quarter - but improved from the 1.2% weekly growth the previous quarter.
Thanks for running the numbers.
Of course, iOS device sales doubled from the previous quarter, but it's not fair comparing all the numerous iOS devices out there for sale to the meager few Android devices available for purchase.
(this figure excludes the fire)
The iPad sold more than 15 million units in less than a year and last QUARTER Apple shifted over 15 million iPad 2s.
Apple is doomed.
From Andy Rubin back in December:
So activations count only Android devices subscribed to a wireless service? What about wifi-only devices? Or 3G/4G devices that are bought but not subscribed to a carrier? I bought a 3G-capable iPad 2, but never got a plan for it and have been using my iPhone 4 as a hotspot.
I'm not asking you - I don't expect you to know - I'm just asking.
. What is Google really accomplishing with Android?
google gets to insert more advertising. Not much advantage for other vendors IMO
So activations count only Android devices subscribed to a wireless service? What about wifi-only devices? Or 3G/4G devices that are bought but not subscribed to a carrier? I bought a 3G-capable iPad 2, but never got a plan for it and have been using my iPhone 4 as a hotspot.
I'm not asking you - I don't expect you to know - I'm just asking.
According to Rubin those wi-fi only devices aren't counted in the activation numbers. That would make sense since you aren't activating them.
However, the other thing a developer is likely to consider is: money. So where is the money?
As long as Apple can maintain or grow its share of the market (evidence points to Android stealing market share ceded by Nokia, Blackberry, and feature phones rather than at Apple's expense), then developers should continue to prioritize iOS development as it has proven to be "where the money is".
yes, because they are.
Thats 76M a quarter, which is hugely impressive given it is Q1.
Gartner had Android at 76M last quarter.
http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1924314
It all fits.
Google appears to have bigger plans for Android than simply a smartphone/tablet OS.
I understand what Google is trying to do: just get as many eyeballs onto their platform as possible to sell ads. But that's all that Google is driven by - to sell people and their info to advertisers. They're just an Internet real estate hog that attracts people with freebies (some good, some okay, some horrible) so they can sell targeted advertising.
I remember using web-based Gmail and corresponding with a friend in Korea writing in the Korean language. All of a sudden I started seeing ads in Korean related to the subjects and words that we were writing about. That was a very creepy feeling. I knew then that Google is out for me. Now the only Google thing I use is the default Maps app every now and then on my iPhone and iPad but that's it and I'm sure Apple will come up with a different map solution soon. I refuse to be part of an aggregate number that Google sells to other companies.
Thanks Solips. I still think there is a grey area there. I'm not necessarily referring to resold devices.
An individual with a wireless plan has a broken phone, they get a new phone, not a resold-phone. That phone has to be activated on the network. Activation+?
An individual's contract allows an upgrade to a better phone. They upgrade to the latest Android iPhone-clone and retire their old phone. Activation+?
An individual was an AT&T Android user, they jump ship and go to Verizon and get phone. Activation?
Yeah, same as Apple.
And iPhone breaks. User buys a new one? New sale. Go to a different carrier? New sale. This is how it has been in electronics for years.