Android-based smartphone shipments leapfrog Apple's iPhone - Page 5

Never said they were ignore. Just saying that the public goes "Oh, nice" when a new Android device is released, but "OH! WOW!!!" when a new iPhone is released. There is a big difference. Tech blogs like Engaget and Gizmondo, as well as Android specific blogs and some Linux blogs carry it. So too does some general media. But when an Apple event is held, EVERYONE is tuning in.

Whatever floats your boat. Fine Android copied it. Now the question is, after 4 iterations of their mobile OS why has Apple not been able to implement their own 1984 technology on the platform?

And it's not like there's no demand for this stuff. People are jailbreaking just to get desktop/widget functionality. Don't tell me that if a facebook or twitter widget came out on the iPhone that pretty much every iPhone user would not have it installed over night.

No one agreed with you because your reasoning was severely flawed. This is what you wrote:


While it was pretty easy to imagine a world where Android sales topped iPhone sales back then since you only had to look at how mac vs pc sales progressed (hence my 3 year old could do that comment), the reasons you stated were incorrect, and your definition of failure is even further off the mark. Considering that Apple is one of the most profitable computer manufacturers and the most profitable handset manufacturer, I think they are quite content with what you consider failure... It's no wonder people disagreed with you.

That's what happens when you put out a phone once a year. If Apple was putting out handsets every few months, the press wouldn't be falling over themselves to cover it either. But, good for Apple for having PR and marketing savvy.

Yet, how is this important to the topic at hand?

While I'm sure all the Android OEMs would love to have that kind of attention, I don't think it's any reason to religate Android to the back burner. Every device that has come out has sold incredibly well so far.

However, when Google holds an event, they get the same reaction as an Apple event. They hold the heart and brains of Android. The OEMs just add the limbs.

Sorry to keep this detour going, Jetz. I'm going to stop it right here.

No, but combined with the iPhone 4's release, next quarter may be different. Plus, see below.


No, iPod Touch and iPad are not included - which is another reason the numbers are misleading.


Yes, some people like Android. But when you look at customer satisfaction rates, the iPhone is in the mid-90's while Android phones (all together since there isn't data for individual phones) is in the low 70s. I think a very large part of the recent success of Android was the fact that there just wasn't much of a decent alternative to the iPhone until recently. Now that there's something else to consider, a lot of people grabbed one to try it out (particularly the people who can't or won't use an iPhone for some reason). As they find out how clunky Android is (as evidenced by the poor user satisfaction ratings (rating), many of them are likely to switch to something else.

Did Apple realize there was a demand for it? Just because you can doesn't always mean you should.

And yet no lawsuit from the normally litigiously-minded Apple for all this apparent IP theft? Methinks Apple's lawyers and BOD are slipping if they are letting this one go.

Yes, it is getting off-topic a bit. I'm not dismissing the Android platform at all. It's just that as things sit, it's inferior to the iPhone in many important ways. I'm convinced that if the iPhone gets announced in January for Verizon, you'll see a lot of wind leave the sails of Android. Many Android users are simply those that don't want AT&T and won't switch to own one. When it comes to their favorite carrier, I'm sure given a choice, most would prefer the iPhone - prices being equal.

I have some friends that have Android that we all play in a trivia league together. All 4 of them got excited when one of them said she heard that the iPhone was coming to Verizon. Her and the other 3 were crushed when I told them that this rumor was an ongoing thing for about 2 years now and it wasn't likely.

Fair enough. Then I can guess their stick to their cat and mouse game with the Jailbreakers.

Come on, until recently people were jailbreaking to get customizable backgrounds. Jailbreaking, imo, is far more common on the iPhone than rooting on Android. And all that says is that users want those features. Apple should be working at putting them in. And widgets are after all optional. Nobody forces you to put them on your desktop. I fail to see the harm in adding this kind of functionality and how it's one of those, "just because you can, doesn't mean you should situations." If we were talking multi-tasking on the iPhone 2G, I would have agreed with you. For a Facebook widget, no so.

[QUOTE=jragosta;1695498]Yes, some people like Android. But when you look at customer satisfaction rates, the iPhone is in the mid-90's while Android phones (all together since there isn't data for individual phones) is in the low 70s. I think a very large part of the recent success of Android was the fact that there just wasn't much of a decent alternative to the iPhone until recently. Now that there's something else to consider, a lot of people grabbed one to try it out (particularly the people who can't or won't use an iPhone for some reason). As they find out how clunky Android is (as evidenced by the poor user satisfaction ratings (rating), many of them are likely to switch to something else.[/QUOTE]

http://gizmodo.com/5604496/new-smart...ing-blackberry

Seems to me that the vast majority of Android users prefer to get another Android device in the future. Also seems to me that it's an indication that they like Android.

DUH!

My point isn't to knock the iPhone its a very good phone and I like iOS better. My point is that Apple is no longer a premium product at least cost wise in the smartphone market. They all cost around the same with a 2 year contract.

Only time will tell in regards to satisfaction. As far as the experience I can tell you Android 2.2 which I just loaded on my Evo about a week ago is by far the fastest OS on the market right now and works extremely well.

I disagree. The UK experience, I cited earlier says otherwise. Undoubtedly when the phone launches on Verizon, you'll get that large group that really wants iPhones that'll make the switch. However, over the longer term, I really doubt the iPhone is going to prove to be some kind of Android killer. It'll just slow it down. More speed bump, than road spikes.

Just look at markets where the iPhone is available on every carrier. Android market share keeps growing in all those markets.

As for your friends, watch what happens when the iPhone does launch on Verizon. Here in Canada, where it's available on every carrier, there's a very "Meh" factor. It's just not that cool any more to have an iPhone because so many people have one. And the carriers have all started promoting Android devices as differentiators. And they are actively promoting things like Google Navigation. That's what's keep Android growing. You'll have the same situation in the US. And just watch, only about half your friends in that group will actually make the jump when the time comes.

Bingo. That said, I think Apple is best positioned among all the handset makers to position themselves as a premium and exclusive product. Just throw in a mobileMe subscription for free with any iOS device dammit.


I get the same impression. I think a lot of those who felt dissatisfied felt that way because they were using 1.5/1.6 handsets. Now that this segment of the user base is about 35% of Android's user base (as of August's stats) and falling fast, I think user satisfaction is going to go up. Especially as they discover features like voice-to-text. And once you get 2.2, well, that just feels like you got a brand new phone with features like mifi.

That sounds about right. Like others have said its funny to see Android with all of its many manufacturers finally unseat RIM and Apple who make only a small handful. Throw in the buy-one-get-one free from Verizon its a no brainer.

Android will definitely be the PC windows of the smart phone category. I am still waiting for the striped down $50 android phone. I am surprised no one has made one yet.

This is no different than Motorola putting an iFuse in the Droid X and making life more complicated for rooters? Apple simply wants to maintain control.

I'm not going to dance around the fact that Apple has become so dominant for a time, that they've seemed to have become rather complacent. They haven't been so avante garde in the development of any of their products like they once were. They've become rather conservative, instead.

I agree they should be, at the very least, investigating these options.

They have:

http://www.cincinnatibell.com/consum...natibell_blaze

"At the critical juncture in the late 80s, when they should have gone for market share, they went for profits."

Who do you think said that?

I agree...

As has been pointed out multiple times, price is not a determinant, particularly when you can get a 3GS for $99 (or free as some have mentioned).

The iPhone is not a premium product based on price.

Ahh... but all those things (Apple ][, Lisa, Newton, Mac) were not inventions (with the possible exception of the Newton).

-- Lots of microcomputers predated the Apple ]{
-- Several graphics computers predated the Lisa and Mac

What Apple did then, as now, is put together a reasonable set of high-quality components (hardware and software) in a clean, attractive, utilitarian and user-friendly package-- then market the hell out of it!


What do I care if you've got a camera with more megapixels-- I can take pictures with mine!

.

Still can't figure out why this doesn't/didn't apply to "Plays for Sure" and the iPod. For a hint - see below.


Couldn't agree more. CDMA should have been on the 3GS at the latest.


This is NOT how Steve Jobs sees it. Here's the whole quote from 2004. BTW - Gruber has a great piece on this.

"If thats so, then why is the Mac market share, even after Apples recent revival, sputtering at a measly 5 percent? Jobs has a theory about that, too. Once a company devises a great product, he says, it has a monopoly in that realm, and concentrates less on innovation than protecting its turf. The Mac user interface was a 10-year monopoly, says Jobs. Who ended up running the company? Sales guys. At the critical juncture in the late 80s, when they should have gone for market share, they went for profits. They made obscene profits for several years. And their products became mediocre. And then their monopoly ended with Windows 95. They behaved like a monopoly, and it came back to bite them, which always happens.


That 1% of all phones was ONLY for the first year. Not for the entire life of the product.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-X_n...eature=channel

Also notice: multiple, resizable, overlapping windows-- all with 128 K of RAM and an 8 MHz 68000 CPU.

.

Wholy crap...
You are making the same argument that was made in the thread i posted 2 years ago.
If you did as i told you to... and read all the back and fourth posts you would see that topic was already covered.

Remaining profitable is always a good thing, but having a huge market share like Microsoft did made them transcend the normal profit/loss business model. They became a monopoly and could do almost anything they wanted.

Apple iPhone will remain profitable, but again they had an opportunity to truly dominate a market... but squandered the chance because of "control".

Android will be ubiquitous in the handheld OS. Apple will have there nice little corner with there nice little profits.

I will be back in a few years to gloat. (Again)

There are LOTS of $30-$60 "Android" phones out there...

Yeah, they run as well as you'd expect. \

Yup, still running Android 1.6, too.

That's what I thought! Except I was going to say that Diesel-engined cars outsold the Mercedes AMG SL65.

What is that supposed to prove? That Diesel is better than gasoline engines? Or that the Mercedes AMG SL65 sucks?

Of course AT&T isn't turning down new customers, but customers are turning down AT&T. To argue otherwise is disingenuous at best. How many surveys have been done that show U.S. iPhone owners' biggest complaint is the network it's on? Hell, my wife and I paid $600 to terminate our AT&T contracts early because we were so sick of dealing with them, and we were loving our iPhones.

The day iPhones become available on another carrier, my wife and I plan to go with that carrier (if they choose not to go with Sprint, which is who we're with now). I can guarantee you we're not the only people who feel the same way.

Seriously, if people want to compare apples to apples (pun kinda intended...sorry), they need to compare smartphones where the software and hardware were made by the same company. Since we're comparing Google and Apple, let's compare the iPhone (choose any model you want) and compare it to the Nexus One. That's a truly level playing field where Google attempted to sell their own phone with their own mobile operating system, and it failed miserably.

You over state the "big picture". Android could be the top selling mobile OS in the world. Companies selling the phone can still go out of business. Motorola, Samsung, HTC don't all pat each other on the back about Android. They are fighting against each other for customers.


Motorola has been saved from deaths door. But they are not doing great. They just aren't spiraling out of control anymore. They need to continue to sell a lot more phones.

Only Apple knows, iOS seems to be doing fine without it.

Yes you should care. Few people would choose to invest in a product from a company that may not stay in business. For developers if Motorola goes out of business that is less phones to sell your apps to.

or maybe iOS 4.3, or maybe never...........

You cannot compare today to 30 years ago. Those widgets are black and white, the graphics are very rudimentary compared to what is expected today. The software is nothing the same.

Do you really think it will take 2 or 3 years for Apple to take first place? Aren't they poised to take it sooner than that?

Lets analyze what you wrote and this truthiness you think youve predicted.

But first, a ProTip: Notice that for each thread there is a consecutive numeric value attributed with each post. This number is a hyperlink to that post so there is no reason to write in the post number when posting the link. Makes things easier.

So lets begin You wrote that "The iPhone will fail the same way the original Macs did because of the tight hardware/software control.
Where has it failed? The iPhone sold about 9M units in a quarter people mostly waited for a new iPhone. Its also the MOST PROFITABLE handset on the market, almost besting all other vendors combined.

Now, I know from rereading that thread that you dont understand the concept of business and how companies try to make money or that Apple has chosen not to license iOS because its entire desire to create iOS is to sell its hardware, the same way Motorolas desire to use the free Android OS to make money on HW sales. But its a reality that you need to accept and realize that Apple is not only far from failing but also the MOST PROFITABLE handset vendor on the planet, and that wont be ending anytime soon.


YOu start off posting the obvious, but I mention it because you fail to see it was Apple that flipped the market on its head with the iPhone. It was lackadaisical, at best, before the iPhone and every smartphone user should thank Apple for revitalizing that market segment.

There is nothing there at no one didnt already know before you. Most seem to know it prior to 2007 with the idea and concept of a phone by Apple.


They lost the PC war yet they are they are the most profitable PC maker in the world, and by a wide margin. Again, you are focusing on unit sales of an OS, which makes absolutely no sense until you reach the event horizon of such low sales that you dont have apps to support your platform. Apple does and the open standard they and others pushed from ports to protocols to browser engines have pushed those goal posts further back so that an OS can have even less marketshare than Apple had in the 90s and still have a viable platform.

You seem to think Apple needs to win some marketshare of their OS to be successful, but consider following unrealistic scenario. Apple gets the worldwide marketshare of HP with about 22%. That means 22% of the worlds PCs ship with Mac OS X. That also means about 77% of the worlds PC ship with Windows. You still call that a fail for Apple, yet they are now making about 80% of all PC profits worldwide yet they have ¼ of the OS marketshare of Windows. Do you not see how your foolish focus on comparing a freely licensed OS to a vendor owned OS makes you look like and idiot and why no one agreed with you then or now?

As far as Android is concerned, anyone with two braincells to rub together expected it to eventually be top dog in the number of units shipped on smartphones compared to any of the vendor owned OSes because its free and can be used by a much larger pool of vendors. One vendor v. potentially infinite number of vendors. Its pretty fraking simple.

To conclude, youve prognosticated nothing. All youve done is bring up a thread that shows not only the long time members, but also the newer ones, that your ability to think critically is severely hindered.

Do you have an example of these widgets?

The term can be used in multiple ways, but without clarification people might think you mean little windowed apps you can move around on your tiny screen.

That makes no sense to me, however, having a screen with different information that can be set up to be shown altogether, like LockInfo, could be considered widgets. For Apple to do this for the lock screen or a drop down from the Menu Bar or with a Home Button click or whatever would need an API. They would have to be sold via the App Store.

I simply cant see windowed widgets made with HTML, CSS, and JS. If you disagree, please make an argument for them. I simply cant see it.

As long as you promise that we don't have to hear from you for a few years .... hell, I'm all over that!

This is just nutty, almost everything you say here is inaccurate.
The point is though, that they haven't relative to iPhone. There isn't a single Android device that has sold anything near to even the worst selling iOS device.


This is just pure fantasy. I've been following the tech media since before Google existed and *never* has a Google event got anything like the attention Apple events get.

This is the best analogy.

Everyone except the Android promoters notices right away that the comparison is faulty because it compares multiple handsets to a single model, but most don't see that there is another level of inaccuracy in that what this study really does is compare an OS to a device, which is total nonsense.

The Android side of the equation covers every device in the world that runs Android, whereas the for other side of the equation they just place the iPhone and leave out the millions of other devices running iOS.

It's the emergence of a new mobile platform, the only proper comparison is devices running iOS vs devices running Android. If that's the metric used, iOS squashes Android like a bug in every single market and will likely continue to do so.

Which is only fitting because Android is a copy of iOS and owes it's very existence to iOS.