Android-based smartphone shipments leapfrog Apple's iPhone - Page 7

Faulty logic. While there maybe 60 or even a thousand Android models*, you cannot make the leap to say it takes all of these models to equal or surpass the iPhone sales. It could be that only 3 of the top selling Android are enough. Or 10 or 20. Unfortunately, the numbers do not break down between Android models.

*Are there even 60 models currently for sale? Or is that number all of the Android models ever released? There seems to be models introduced and retired every couple weeks.

Google's business isn't search. Google's business is ads. Search is just another mechanism (the most successful) to sell ads by gathering eyeballs through a free service. Like gtalk, gmail, android, etc.

iAd is a direct threat to Google's growth potential on the mobile market. One that may never appear on Android but who knows...maybe by allowing Bing Apple has arranged a quid pro quo with MS for iAd on WinPhone7.

Depends on how pissed Jobs really is with Google. iAds appear to be a competitive advantage for iOS app developers...one Apple isn't likely to give up to MS except for other strategic reasons. Like taking Google down a peg or two. Something Ballmer would get on board with I'm sure.

For $275M that's kinda chump change to annoy Google with. Given that Apple is selling every iOS product it can make, Android hasn't had much impact to Apple's bottom line.

The REAL metric is whether Android can beat iOS on the tablet side. That's a whole new market that Apple wants to dominate. Apple could never make/sell enough smartphones to dominate that market...but tablets are a good possibility.

One MS is worried about but probably not nearly as worried as the possibility that Android will do well on tablets. No iPad sale really takes away from a windows sale. Every Android tablet sale probably means one less Win7 tablet sale.

As we all know, there are lies, damn lies, and statistics. Could there be three Android devices together beating the iPhone numbers? I doubt it, but the world may never know. The fact is the sales numbers were very close when all sixty Android phones were put together. In other words, it took sixty of them to get just a little ahead. Draw your own conclusions.

And here is some bonus reading just for playing.

http://www.tipb.com/2010/08/13/andro...Pad%2C+iPod%29

A ton of models sold on a ton of carriers... to compete with Apple's ONE phone.

That's not winning, it's called churning out as much crap as possible because you can't produce any one killer device that can cut the mustard.

Wondroid Mobile by Googlesoft. Same old strategy the also-rans employ. Google has already conceded the Platinum end of the market to Apple, and then some.

A rather twisted way of thinking. Samsung sold 65.3 m devices vs Apples 8.7 m in the same period.

Then ask yourself, where does a large proportion of the components that make up those 8.7 m come from?

Vertical integration - win, win.

This is only the first time this has happened? Damn, I can't believe how well the iPhone sells. I never imagined, even in my worst fanboy moments 4 years ago, that it would sell this well.

I didn't read the whole article, (since reading about how an entire mobile OS is outselling 1 product is nauseatingly stupid) but could we compare all iOS devices to all Android devices? I'd be far more interested in those numbers.

Ok. Didn't know you wanted to be that specific about the "50" number. I thought you meant that no grouping of Android phones in general would ever outsell the iPhone.

But this always goes back to my question earlier of why this really matters. Sure it's impressive that the iPhone (3G, 3GS, 4) sold so well. But I don't believe it was ever Google's plan to have any single OEM partner outsell the iPhone one-on-one. Would they like to? Sure. But in the long term, I don't think anyone truly cares. Each OEM has a very successful line of Android phones that nets them plenty of money to develop the next line of devices.

Yes, I was agreeing with the poster I replied to.

Here's a bonus to your bonus article:

http://www.androidcentral.com/gartne...-androids-huge

Devices, not smartphones and not small limites product lineup all using the same components. How many of those 65.3M Samsung phones have 802.11n or Categpry 5 HSUPA or even the same high-end display panel type?

It's a very different world when you wait to see what aging components have been stockpiled before you design you phone than one where are designing and telling your manufacturing partner what to make.

Ditto! Cut to the end and saw what needed to be said had already been said. At best, you can maybe say Apple is selling 2 devices, but even then, they are virtually the same thing.

Its not winning, but it's not losing either. The software is made by Google. Its mostly buggy, sloppy, with a typical unreliable google beta feel to it. The hardware is made by the lowest bidders, each model more of a piece of junk than the next.

None of that even has a prayer of adding up to what Apple does with the iPhone, but no one expects it to. Google knows there is a bigger market of people who buy something other than an iPhone, than there ever will be for the second place spot.

Just like it has always been for pcs. Apple will make the best, and someone else will make something for everyone else, who don't care or know better.

Apple has always been associated with premium products. It's a given and it's not going away. I'm sure that if 2 or 3 years down the line, iOS is relegated to the top 10% and Android running on the majority of the rest of the market, Google would have no qualms about conceding the "platinum end" to Apple.

Remember, Google wants Android on as many devices as possible out there to drive search and ads. Google's overall strategy is better suited for taking up the market just below the "platinum" level.

Now, you are getting closer to the truth. These comparisons are stupid and misleading. The only part I would challenge you on is the idea that Google does not care is any one device competes with the iPhone. The Hero, and later, the Nexus One were direct competitors. They were the Google branded iPhone killers of their day. They are both dead. It is not that Google never cared; they just gave up after failing so badly. Otherwise, I agree.

It's certainly not Google's plan and they certainly don't care, except that it would be a milestone for Android.

I do think it's inevitable that many vendors will surpass Apple's iPhone in unit sales using the same OS. If they don’t it’s because they are incompetent. There are just too many longterm opportunities for cheap phones to ship with Android.

For example, I don't see anything keeping Android 2.1 off a cheap "feature phone" that is free with contract. A device that offers some of the integration and connectivity to the cloud for snycing contacts and calanders. Perhaps working as a simple USB thumb drive, too, but mostly still a basic phone without the huge touchscreen and complex feature set. I'm thinking of a couple years down the road when Android is shipping as version 4 or 5 on the latest devices.

There are more people in all countries in Asia combined than in the US. That doesn't mean it takes every country in Asia to exceed the population of the US. All Android units combined outsold the iPhone does not mean it took all sixty of them. It only means that is how many were included in the numbers.

This isn't hard. Very, very basic math. That article doesn't say much, other than all Androids together exceeded sales of the iPhone. We know that. That is accepted. Now, can you say with certainty that Android only beats the iPhone only if you include every Android model? No way you can say that reasonably. That is simply flawed and very poor logic. It is possible but you cannot make that claim honestly by citing only the overall numbers.

Stats might lie, but logic never will.

I would agree that Google did try with their Nexus One as a direct competitor. They made some major mistakes in their selling plan. The biggest one was that they didn't have any physical stores where they could put the device on display and let users play with it. Not many people I know of are willing to put down hundreds for a device they've never tried.

However, I think the silver lining in them creating the N1 was that it created a kind of baseline for all the OEMs to reference. All the high-end Android phones that came out after the N1 all revolved around similar specs. And the newer phones being released don't dip below the N1.

Well, if these stats include the Asian forks of Android, and it's not clear whether they do or not, then they can't be relied on to mean anything.

I agree. I believe that this will always be how Android devices will be split. The latest version for the high-end phones, and the "just passed" version for feature phones. High-end would have 3.0 while feature phones will get 2.1.

I think this will be by design because if all phones had the latest version of Android, then what would separate the high-end from the feature phones as a selling point (as hardware becomes cheaper and cheaper to manufacture)? Apple must have all their iDevices on the latest version because they aren't marketing any of them as feature phones.

You mean the Chinese implementation of Android? Have they even released that to manufacturing yet? I'd read it the announced it was coming but didn't think they were ready to start shipping units.

That's my question, whether it's included or not.

except toyota makes a lot more CARS, than the camry.

It's amazing how defensive people get on a news item.

Anyway. So what, Both platforms are selling wildly. Great for competition, good for us.

Its interesting to study these very dynamic business models. Its even more diverse than what weve seen with Windows PCs v. Macs for the last couple decades because the OS vendor isnt the one making sure their OS works with as many devices as possible due to the nature of the phone as an appliance.

One reason I tend to like Apple is that we are reasonable certain iOS will be brought three years of their phones and PMPs next to (if not slightly before) they release their next phone. This is unprecedented and is virtually impossible for other handset vendors to compete with without incurring excessive costs and delays trying to do so.

On the HW side, Apple has a double-edged sword of a limited product line that allows for economy of scale and diseconomy of scale from volume sales increasing profit per unit and the potential lack of components for manufacturing, respectively. For this reason I have to expect Apple to diverge the product line at some point, like they did with the iPod. I also expect this to happen with the Mac as weve already seen this occur with Intels latest chips.

Its funny how the OS seems to be the most compared yet its really a pointless metric due to divergent business models, so long as the OS has a large enough user base to be viable.

Well as of a month ago they reportedly had sold 1.3 million such devices - the Wave and Galaxy S, after them being on the market for roughly six weeks for the wave and less for the Galaxy. They reportedly anticipate selling 10 m Waves this year. I would imagine they will be selling a lot of Galaxys as well.

I bought one of those Waves and find it superb.

And Staples sold 500 billion paperclips in the same time frame. So what? Why are you comparing Samsung's total sales - including dumb phones that Apple doesn't have an interest in) with Apple's smartphone sales?


Just as Apple sells a lot more iDevices than the iPhone.

The rest of the world is as tin-foil paranoid as you. Get over it.

I'll trade my supposed loss of privacy for the convenience that comes with cloud-device integration.

And it works well with my Mac too. Another bonus.

Based on this Android outsold iOS which included the iPad and iPod Touch.

http://www.androidcentral.com/gartne...-androids-huge

Cloud integration is far more innovative than Facetime, essentially another video calling app when it comes down to it. And yes it's gimmicky. Anybody who lacks bias can see it. iPhone 4 to iPhone 4. Only on wifi. How much opportunity is there to actually use it with those kinds of restrictions? That's what makes it a gimmick.

I have several friends who have had iPhone 4s for months now (in the US) and a few weeks here in Canada. I asked around. Not a single one has used Facetime even once. Why? Too much of a hassle to to track down other iPhone 4 users and compel them to find wifi and get a video chat going. Basically, this'll only be handy if you can convince those closest to you to also take up an iPhone 4.

I'll take it more seriously when it's more universal (multi-platform), runs on 3G (so you can video chat with anybody, anytime, anywhere) and has a desktop client (or at least a tie-in to say iChat). Till then, it makes for nice Apple TV spots pushing iPhone 4s to couples in long distance relationships (nice niche market I suppose).


The problem with people like you is that you can't imagine a world where people use what's best for them. I use a Mac at home, an Android on the go, and I will be getting an iPad (just debating to buy it now or wait for gen 2).

You can see everything in black and white, Microsoft vs. Apple type of situations if you wish. The rest of the world is a little more sophisticated than that and we can see the benefits of different platforms and choose accordingly. For example, tieing an iPad to my unlimited data plan using my Android's wifi hotspot feature. I know that kind of usage is beyond your comprehension. But people actually think like that in the real world. Not everybody wants a second telco bill every month for the mere privilege of being a total Apple fanboy. But hey if you want to tie your technological advancement to one company, good for you. That's not me.

Yes, it's tin-foil paranoia not to trust Google, how's that net neutrality pact with Verizon sit with you? pretty happy with that too? You're exactly the sort of mark they are looking for.

I debunked that yesterday when you posted that link in this very thread.

What is likely happening is Android is outselling all iOS devices now, but they did not for the last quarter.

http://forums.appleinsider.com/showp...&postcount=219

http://www.pcworld.com/businesscente...html?tk=hp_blg

To me, it's not something to get so worked up as you over. It came, it went, and our lives haven't changed for the worse.

+1

I don't think it's easy to topple Google in the search business. But what Apple can probably do well is that Siri kind of stuff. Android's now bringing similar features on stream with the Places app and Voice Search. And Apple should (and probably will) launch some kind of local search feature using Siri.

As far as the cloud goes, I really don't think Apple needs to tackle search to have a solid cloud product that interests consumers. What's attractive about Google's cloud? It's all the stuff like GMail, Calendar, Contacts, (to some extent) Google Talk, etc. This all stuff that Apple could easily match.

The problem here though is Apple's insistence on charging for this stuff. I get why they do it (ad-free). But ultimately, as Android gets better and better on base usability of the device, and feature differentiation starts to matter more, iOS is going to feel like a nickel-and-diming experience to the average consumer. And let's face it, while the average iPhone user is a more premium customer, just as much of that premium factor comes from the fact that they are smartphone users as they are Apple users. And once these consumers start figuring out that things like Navigation, e-mail, photo-sharing are free on Android, it'll only help the migration.

Personally, I think there's a case to be made for Apple to actually position itself as a premium brand (right now they say they are, but their prices say otherwise). Charge more for their handsets than other OEMs but offer ad-free, superb cloud services (MobileMe) for free right out of the box. Who would not pay $300 for an iPhone (on contract) if it included free lifetime MobileMe? As it stands though, if you are a heavy user of Google's services (maps, Gmail, search, news, etc.) why would you choose anything else over an OS optimized to run with those services?

As for navigation, I really think Apple should bite the bullet and acquire TomTom (that pile of cash has to be good for something). iPhone with free TomTom would probably be more compelling than Nokia's navigation or Android with Google Navigation.

Missed your earlier post. In any case I alway have to laugh at the fanboys that say they could care less about market share until its proven there is no way they can gain the top market share. Even though the past has proven market share has nothing to do with profit.

Living in Canada, where net neutrality is mandated for both wired and wireless internet, I could not care less about what happens in the US. The world is a lot bigger than the USA. And so is the internet.

Besides which, from everything I've read, Google only seems to have cut this deal because your legislators and regulators were lazy and Google was worried that the absolute lack of regulation could actually lead to far worse outcomes.

Just because you have a broken legislative system and useless regulators who can't do their jobs properly, don't assume the rest of the world has those problems too.

The CRTC imposed net neutrality across the board here in Canada months ago. And it didn't take endless telco/ISP/content provider roundtables to do it. They had some industry consultation, some public consultation and ruled on it. I can't believe the FCC is actually trying to negotiate a deal in the US. What's up with that? They are regulator. Why can't they regulate?

Government that works. You guys should try it in that great republic of yours sometime.

I don't want to get mouse nervous or anything but I just drove by and I think I saw Eric Schmidt stilling outside his house.

I think we all care about it, but its just a single metric and means very little in most cases, especially when comparing a freely available OS to one that only comes installed on a single vendors OS.

I dont think anyone who has thought ahead would not expect iOS to be behind Android eventually. I even stated earlier that I fully expect many individual vendors using Android across their devices to surpass Apples use of iOS across their devices in a given quarter.

And they call Apple fans kool aid drinkers. You guys are completely delusional or none too bright if you actually believe this nonsense you are parroting. Google and Verizon have teamed up for a full frontal assault on net neutrality, and it will end up affecting you, wherever you live, if they get away with it. Face it, "Do no evil," is officially tossed out the window, even the pretense of it.

I remember you posting about the Android growth rate a while back but I have to say I didn't expect it to happen this year.

Having experience long term with both operating systems I have to say iOS is far better then Android overall. Which simply tells me what I have said all along most people simply aren't power users and as long as they have their social network apps and email they are more than happy.

The one thing I wish would happen is a 4.3 inch iPhone now that I have become use to that size. I know you like the smaller size but I have really become use to the bigger smartphone.

Mouse serious question. You are worried about Google and Verizon when it comes to net neutrality and I agree with you there is certainly something going. However what I don't understand is how you are okay and by the way bash me when I get onto Apple for their total control of content and telling us what we are allowed to view or install on devices we own.

Their Dev user agreement that was totally setup to block Adobe.

When Apple pulls this nonsense you tell everyone its them trying to provide the best user experience when all they are really doing is controlling content for their benefit to get you to buy into their entire ecosystem so they can profit.

Thats what makes Apple fans koolaid drinkers. The double standard.

You are correct in many ways when it comes to Google yet you give Apple a free pass for doing the same thing putting lockdowns and controls on everything to benefit their bottom line.

If you're so concerned, then what are you doing here on an Apple internet forum ranting? Shouldn't you be down at your legistator's office yelling and screaming at them? Or maybe outside the FCC with a picket sign?

Don't get me wrong. I, for one, understand what this "deal" could mean for net neutrality. But I'm just not as worked up about it as you are.

I personally see no reason to get my pitchfork and torch out of the closet yet.