What you're ignoring is the most important thing. WHAT IS THE ANALYSIS FOR?
If you want an academic analysis of which OS is on more phones (for a limited time and geography), then you're OK. But if you want to actually DO something with the information, that analysis is probably useless. It is discussed in my previous post. You're clearly in group #5.
I'm not ignoring what you're failing to see yourself. As you have pointed out with the bolded part, that is probably exactly what the data is gathered for.
I'm sure it's also got a valid use in advertising. We've all seen the commercials where a company state that because of research done by Group X (generally JD Power or NPD or the like), their product is the best selling/best performing/best whatever. That in turn, generates more sales.
The same can be said for all the JD Power studies that shows who's more satisfied with their choice of smartphones that everyone likes to cheer for when it's reported here. No one seems to be questioning the reason for those studies when the iPhone's on top. Again, this can also be used for advertising purposes just like NPD's data.
These data collections are always needed at some level just to we know the current state of things. How would any of these companies listed in the study know for a fact who's actually selling the most if these studies weren't done? Apple, Google, RIM, and Microsoft could all claim that they sold the most because "their research shows". We need these independent studies so we have a baseline that's not influenced by a primary player.
How is it not meaningful? If you want to look at all mobile phone sales in the US for the quarter/year, then you have to limit the iOS to all iterations of the iPhone, as all other iOS devices don't qualify as a mobile phone (in the tranditional sense). And I agree. Fairness isn't a concept on these boards (it is an Apple-themed site, after all). It's what the individual wants to make of it.
All I've done is confirmed that it isn't a meaningful analysis for you. There are clearly people who find these statistics and numbers meaningful, otherwise a large organization like NPD wouldn't have bothered to do the study in the first place.
Lot's of people find meaning in meaningless things, every day. They're still meaningless.
Sorry, you're using a distorted figure - as usual.
If you are comparing operating systems (as you claim), you need to include iPod Touch and iPad in Apple's column.
You're trying to compare a mixed bag - ALL devices using Android vs. only SOME of the devices using iOS.
Once again, you have to ask the right question before looking for the answer.
1. If you're an average developer, you're more interested in all the devices running a given OS (or, more likely, the revenue generated by each platform which favors iOS even more heavily).
2. If you're a developer of software that requires phone hardware, then your analysis makes sense - How many phones are there using Android OS vs iOS (although you'd more likely be interested in global numbers).
3. If you're an investor, profits will be more relevant.
4. If you're a customer, none of those matter directly, although future availability of software will be important, so you might look at #1 above.
5. If you're a simple Apple-basher, you would look at ALL Android phones put together against just the iPhone - as you are doing.
Why the hell does everyone have to be an Apple basher if you aren't a totally koolaid drinking fanboy?
If you look at the title of the thread its about "smartphones" not iPad or the iPod Touch because they are not smartphones. If someone wants to pull data to include those I could give a shit less.
However this thread is directly related to smartphone OS marketshare and has nothing to do with anything else.
All I care about is competition seeing without Android there would be no competition. RIM and Windows Mobile are pretty much going downhill at a rapid rate.
On a side note Android 2.2 was released to my Evo on the 2nd which proves one major point and that is SJ is totally full of shit about Flash not being able to run on a mobile device.
When you start to look at companies are either good or evil then it is time to take your hands off the keyboard and do something else because you just sound like a total idiot.
Its so funny that Apple fanboys like yourself now have to find a new villian in Google.
In the UK there is hardly any Androids. Why? iPhone comes Sim-free. I bet it's the same in many other countries too. When iPhone goes sim free the game will feature Black Berry and iPhone. Android and all it's unfortunate supporters will find the only reason why people went with it, is because of FUD about AT&T being a bad network. Soon as they try the iPhone out on other networks and these other networks get some payload, the'll find the same problems. Guess what? Will they return it for an Android? Hell NO! They'd rather suffer with there BB or iPhone then have to turn back to that FOSS POS known as Android.
No androids phone in the UK? Really?
Have you gotten out of your mom's basement in the past 2 years?
If you have you'll know how android is becoming popular.
There're so many androids in the UK some of the popular ones being
Samsung Galaxy, Htc Desire, HTC Hero, Motorolla milestone, sony xperia
When you start to look at companies are either good or evil then it is time to take your hands off the keyboard and do something else because you just sound like a total idiot.
Its so funny that Apple fanboys like yourself now have to find a new villian in Google.
When you start to think that good and evil doesn't apply to companies, and the individuals who run them, you've abandoned all moral principles. Google has been a villain all along, the difference is that now peole are beginning to realized it.
Excluding corporate sales and using only 7 days of iPhone 4 sales, Android "leads" in the U.S.
LOL
Yes. At the time the data was gathered, the iPhone 4 sales were probably not factored in. You have to take the snapshot at some point and report it otherwise you'd be left waiting forever because new phones are released almost every month.
I'm sure when NPD does the Q3 snapshot, the iPhone 4 sales will be included. If that puts Apple back on top, then so be it. However, you have to remember that as big as the iPhone 4's release was, it still has to battle against the multiple Android phones that were released and not counted the same for Q2. As well as whatever new phones are released by the time the Q3 figures are gathered.
We will have to wait and see if the iPhone 4's release was enough to put it back on top in the US.
When you start to think that good and evil doesn't apply to companies, and the individuals who run them, you've abandoned all moral principles. Google has been a villain all along, the difference is that now peole are beginning to realized it.
All companies are out to do one thing and that is to make money. Apple is no different. Steve Jobs hasn't exactly won any awards for being a nice guy. In fact most will agree he is a dick.
All companies are out to do one thing and that is to make money. Apple is no different. Steve Jobs hasn't exactly won any awards for being a nice guy. In fact most will agree he is a dick.
I don't know the guy personally, so all I can go on are his quotes.
It's my opinion that he could be a bit nicer and more humble. Yes, he's a busy CEO, but that doesn't mean that he can't stop every now and then and actually write a good, "normal" length response to a customer. Plenty of other CEOs have done it, so it's not impossible.
His responses like (paraphrasing here) "Not an issue. Hold it differently." comes across feeling like "it's not my fault, it's yours". Just a simple "I appreciate you coming to me with the issue you have with your [insert iDevice here]. I will let our technicians know and hope to resolve your issue shortly." is a much better way of going about it. It doesn't take much longer to write and has a feeling of caring towards it.
Some times, I don't know if the "elitist" attitude Apple users are protrayed as is coming from him or if he's starting to fit himself to the stereotype.
Now, give us the sales of any individual model of the latest 16 GB Androids.
You can't have it both ways. You can't claim that Android is doing better than Apple based on ALL Android phone sales and then ask us to ignore all the highest volume BOGO phones.
I'm not asking you to ignore anything. The article is about platform sales volume, but then throws in a vague reference to a single device price/profit metric as a red herring (with zero specific data to back it up). BOGO is portrayed as an artificial driver of sales in the article, yet there is no evidence to support that claim.
My point was that BOGO can be good, bad, or irrelevant. We simply don't know from the data presented.
Even if all Android sales were BOGO Droids, how does that make the sales volume any less significant? The device manufacturer still gets paid twice. The carrier takes in $199 less up front yet makes many times that on the back end in data revenues -- on a network that is otherwise underutilized and would have had the same fixed costs with $0 revenue without the sale.
Apple chose a "one size fits all" hardware strategy and has always made it a "us versus other platforms" comparison. Isolating individual Android models is irrelevant. Segmenting the Motorola Droid X from the HTC Droid Incredible because they have different screen sizes and cosmetically different cases does not prove anything. The overall experience is the same, despite minor hardware differences. Trying to draw conclusions from that would be like saying because Apple sells more 16GB iPhones than 32GB iPhones, the 16GB is "better".
Funny, if you read past the headline, you would notice that Android handset sales have produced little revenue for Google "by design" and that Google's intent was to make the web more accessible from smartphones in order to encourage more mobile searches.
Per the article, the strategy worked, and Android is "Google's biggest and most promising opportunity to date".
All companies are out to do one thing and that is to make money.
The process of making money is not exempt from morality. One can make money morally, or one can be evil. Corporations don't make decisions. Individuals who work in corporations do. So, if those individuals decide to act immorally, the corporations "actions" become immoral. The old, "It's just business," is a lie: a rationalization that individuals make to soothe their consciences for their own personal immoral behavior. It's as simple as that. If you can't understand it, then you simply have no moral sense yourself, otherwise, it would be quite apparent.
Funny, if you read past the headline, you would notice that Android handset sales have produced little revenue for Google "by design" and that Google's intent was to make the web more accessible from smartphones in order to encourage more mobile searches.
Per the article, the strategy worked, and Android is "Google's biggest and most promising opportunity to date".
The key here is that Google is only responsible for the costs of developing the Android OS itself. OEMs are the ones that take up the costs for manufacturing and distribution the devices themselves, which is the largest part of the whole process.
I believe a top Google staff member said that all revenue Google makes is more than enough to cover the expense of continuing to develop Android.
As long as the OEMs continue putting out devices and the consumers keep eating them up, I see no reason why Google would stop developing Android in the near-term.
Comments
Besides, the important point in all this is that Google has now shown its hand, and it's holding three 6s. The mark of the beast:
LOL. Are you serious. You really need an increase in your medication.
What you're ignoring is the most important thing. WHAT IS THE ANALYSIS FOR?
If you want an academic analysis of which OS is on more phones (for a limited time and geography), then you're OK. But if you want to actually DO something with the information, that analysis is probably useless. It is discussed in my previous post. You're clearly in group #5.
I'm not ignoring what you're failing to see yourself. As you have pointed out with the bolded part, that is probably exactly what the data is gathered for.
I'm sure it's also got a valid use in advertising. We've all seen the commercials where a company state that because of research done by Group X (generally JD Power or NPD or the like), their product is the best selling/best performing/best whatever. That in turn, generates more sales.
The same can be said for all the JD Power studies that shows who's more satisfied with their choice of smartphones that everyone likes to cheer for when it's reported here. No one seems to be questioning the reason for those studies when the iPhone's on top. Again, this can also be used for advertising purposes just like NPD's data.
These data collections are always needed at some level just to we know the current state of things. How would any of these companies listed in the study know for a fact who's actually selling the most if these studies weren't done? Apple, Google, RIM, and Microsoft could all claim that they sold the most because "their research shows". We need these independent studies so we have a baseline that's not influenced by a primary player.
How is it not meaningful? If you want to look at all mobile phone sales in the US for the quarter/year, then you have to limit the iOS to all iterations of the iPhone, as all other iOS devices don't qualify as a mobile phone (in the tranditional sense). And I agree. Fairness isn't a concept on these boards (it is an Apple-themed site, after all). It's what the individual wants to make of it.
All I've done is confirmed that it isn't a meaningful analysis for you. There are clearly people who find these statistics and numbers meaningful, otherwise a large organization like NPD wouldn't have bothered to do the study in the first place.
Lot's of people find meaning in meaningless things, every day. They're still meaningless.
LOL. Are you serious.
Yes.
And no.
Sorry, you're using a distorted figure - as usual.
If you are comparing operating systems (as you claim), you need to include iPod Touch and iPad in Apple's column.
You're trying to compare a mixed bag - ALL devices using Android vs. only SOME of the devices using iOS.
Once again, you have to ask the right question before looking for the answer.
1. If you're an average developer, you're more interested in all the devices running a given OS (or, more likely, the revenue generated by each platform which favors iOS even more heavily).
2. If you're a developer of software that requires phone hardware, then your analysis makes sense - How many phones are there using Android OS vs iOS (although you'd more likely be interested in global numbers).
3. If you're an investor, profits will be more relevant.
4. If you're a customer, none of those matter directly, although future availability of software will be important, so you might look at #1 above.
5. If you're a simple Apple-basher, you would look at ALL Android phones put together against just the iPhone - as you are doing.
Why the hell does everyone have to be an Apple basher if you aren't a totally koolaid drinking fanboy?
If you look at the title of the thread its about "smartphones" not iPad or the iPod Touch because they are not smartphones. If someone wants to pull data to include those I could give a shit less.
However this thread is directly related to smartphone OS marketshare and has nothing to do with anything else.
All I care about is competition seeing without Android there would be no competition. RIM and Windows Mobile are pretty much going downhill at a rapid rate.
On a side note Android 2.2 was released to my Evo on the 2nd which proves one major point and that is SJ is totally full of shit about Flash not being able to run on a mobile device.
Yes.
And no.
When you start to look at companies are either good or evil then it is time to take your hands off the keyboard and do something else because you just sound like a total idiot.
Its so funny that Apple fanboys like yourself now have to find a new villian in Google.
In the UK there is hardly any Androids. Why? iPhone comes Sim-free. I bet it's the same in many other countries too. When iPhone goes sim free the game will feature Black Berry and iPhone. Android and all it's unfortunate supporters will find the only reason why people went with it, is because of FUD about AT&T being a bad network. Soon as they try the iPhone out on other networks and these other networks get some payload, the'll find the same problems. Guess what? Will they return it for an Android? Hell NO! They'd rather suffer with there BB or iPhone then have to turn back to that FOSS POS known as Android.
No androids phone in the UK? Really?
Have you gotten out of your mom's basement in the past 2 years?
If you have you'll know how android is becoming popular.
There're so many androids in the UK some of the popular ones being
Samsung Galaxy, Htc Desire, HTC Hero, Motorolla milestone, sony xperia
and so many more.
As a matter of fact android has grown by 350% in the Uk. http://thenextweb.com/mobile/2010/07...rowth-in-2010/
When you start to look at companies are either good or evil then it is time to take your hands off the keyboard and do something else because you just sound like a total idiot.
Its so funny that Apple fanboys like yourself now have to find a new villian in Google.
When you start to think that good and evil doesn't apply to companies, and the individuals who run them, you've abandoned all moral principles. Google has been a villain all along, the difference is that now peole are beginning to realized it.
Excluding corporate sales and using only 7 days of iPhone 4 sales, Android "leads" in the U.S.
LOL
Yes. At the time the data was gathered, the iPhone 4 sales were probably not factored in. You have to take the snapshot at some point and report it otherwise you'd be left waiting forever because new phones are released almost every month.
I'm sure when NPD does the Q3 snapshot, the iPhone 4 sales will be included. If that puts Apple back on top, then so be it. However, you have to remember that as big as the iPhone 4's release was, it still has to battle against the multiple Android phones that were released and not counted the same for Q2. As well as whatever new phones are released by the time the Q3 figures are gathered.
We will have to wait and see if the iPhone 4's release was enough to put it back on top in the US.
When you start to think that good and evil doesn't apply to companies, and the individuals who run them, you've abandoned all moral principles. Google has been a villain all along, the difference is that now peole are beginning to realized it.
All companies are out to do one thing and that is to make money. Apple is no different. Steve Jobs hasn't exactly won any awards for being a nice guy. In fact most will agree he is a dick.
Lot's of people find meaning in meaningless things, every day. They're still meaningless.
I'm not going to type it out again, so please read the post above yours. I beleive I make a fair point for the use of the data NPD gathered.
Again, it's not meaningless because you find it to be meaningless.
All companies are out to do one thing and that is to make money. Apple is no different. Steve Jobs hasn't exactly won any awards for being a nice guy. In fact most will agree he is a dick.
I don't know the guy personally, so all I can go on are his quotes.
It's my opinion that he could be a bit nicer and more humble. Yes, he's a busy CEO, but that doesn't mean that he can't stop every now and then and actually write a good, "normal" length response to a customer. Plenty of other CEOs have done it, so it's not impossible.
His responses like (paraphrasing here) "Not an issue. Hold it differently." comes across feeling like "it's not my fault, it's yours". Just a simple "I appreciate you coming to me with the issue you have with your [insert iDevice here]. I will let our technicians know and hope to resolve your issue shortly." is a much better way of going about it. It doesn't take much longer to write and has a feeling of caring towards it.
Some times, I don't know if the "elitist" attitude Apple users are protrayed as is coming from him or if he's starting to fit himself to the stereotype.
OK. I"ll accept that.
Now, give us the sales of any individual model of the latest 16 GB Androids.
You can't have it both ways. You can't claim that Android is doing better than Apple based on ALL Android phone sales and then ask us to ignore all the highest volume BOGO phones.
I'm not asking you to ignore anything. The article is about platform sales volume, but then throws in a vague reference to a single device price/profit metric as a red herring (with zero specific data to back it up). BOGO is portrayed as an artificial driver of sales in the article, yet there is no evidence to support that claim.
My point was that BOGO can be good, bad, or irrelevant. We simply don't know from the data presented.
Even if all Android sales were BOGO Droids, how does that make the sales volume any less significant? The device manufacturer still gets paid twice. The carrier takes in $199 less up front yet makes many times that on the back end in data revenues -- on a network that is otherwise underutilized and would have had the same fixed costs with $0 revenue without the sale.
Apple chose a "one size fits all" hardware strategy and has always made it a "us versus other platforms" comparison. Isolating individual Android models is irrelevant. Segmenting the Motorola Droid X from the HTC Droid Incredible because they have different screen sizes and cosmetically different cases does not prove anything. The overall experience is the same, despite minor hardware differences. Trying to draw conclusions from that would be like saying because Apple sells more 16GB iPhones than 32GB iPhones, the 16GB is "better".
Google: The search party is over
Even Google's most successful new product, the Android operating system for smartphones, generates scant revenue for the company.
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2010/07/...party-is-over/
...Android Insider.
I have to wonder where all the iPhone-hating Android Lovers will go when Google bails on their beloved Android OS...
...and you know they will when Google recognizes that Android is unable to deliver significant ad revenue!
My [investment] money says this will [begin to] happen in early 2011, and be a fait accompli by the end of 2012!
.
how much money is Google getting from all these Market share? NEAR ZERO!
Google: The search party is over
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2010/07/...party-is-over/
Google is doomed?
how much money is Google getting from all these Market share? NEAR ZERO!
Google: The search party is over
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2010/07/...party-is-over/
Funny, if you read past the headline, you would notice that Android handset sales have produced little revenue for Google "by design" and that Google's intent was to make the web more accessible from smartphones in order to encourage more mobile searches.
Per the article, the strategy worked, and Android is "Google's biggest and most promising opportunity to date".
.
...Android Insider.
I have to wonder where all the iPhone-hating Android Lovers will go when Google bails on their beloved Android OS...
...and you know they will when Google recognizes that Android is unable to deliver significant ad revenue!
My [investment] money says this will [begin to] happen in early 2011, and be a fait accompli by the end of 2012!
.
I think Ballmer said the same thing when Android first came out two years ago...
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-10083590-94.html
Is that you Ballmer?!
All companies are out to do one thing and that is to make money.
The process of making money is not exempt from morality. One can make money morally, or one can be evil. Corporations don't make decisions. Individuals who work in corporations do. So, if those individuals decide to act immorally, the corporations "actions" become immoral. The old, "It's just business," is a lie: a rationalization that individuals make to soothe their consciences for their own personal immoral behavior. It's as simple as that. If you can't understand it, then you simply have no moral sense yourself, otherwise, it would be quite apparent.
Funny, if you read past the headline, you would notice that Android handset sales have produced little revenue for Google "by design" and that Google's intent was to make the web more accessible from smartphones in order to encourage more mobile searches.
Per the article, the strategy worked, and Android is "Google's biggest and most promising opportunity to date".
The key here is that Google is only responsible for the costs of developing the Android OS itself. OEMs are the ones that take up the costs for manufacturing and distribution the devices themselves, which is the largest part of the whole process.
I believe a top Google staff member said that all revenue Google makes is more than enough to cover the expense of continuing to develop Android.
As long as the OEMs continue putting out devices and the consumers keep eating them up, I see no reason why Google would stop developing Android in the near-term.