Android-based smartphone shipments leapfrog Apple's iPhone - Page 3

And interestingly in Canada, you'll note how two of the carriers (Bell and Telus) are now using Android devices to differentiate themselves from the prime iPhone pusher (Rogers). Just look at Bell's promotion of the Samsung Vibrant (same as the Euro Galaxy S). They are pushing that just as much as the iPhone 4. And mere weeks after the iPhone 4 launch, Rogers is already moving to promote the Samsung Captivate (their Galaxy S variant). Also, all their plans are no longer iPhone exclusive. They are now all smartphone plans (whereas back in the day the 6GB for $30 was iPhone exclusive).

While a Verizon iPhone will certainly hamper Android's growth, I am really skeptical it will stop Android dead in its tracks. Just look at how much Android has grown in the UK, in a market where several carriers carry the iPhone:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/07...android_sales/

If the iPhone was truly the Android killer people make it out to be, then how could something like this have happened?

It's just that we're moving into the phase where the iPhone and iOS won't have the touchscreen all-singing, all-dancing smartphone market to themselves anymore. And as Android emerges as a competitor you'll have a new equilibrium in the smartphone business. And just like the PC business, the iPhone will be a premium product like the Mac. And Android will be used by the vast majority of ordinary users.

Heck, the iPhone is already by price, a more expensive product. Sure it's same price as Android phones on contract. But you have to pay for all the differentiators (like navigation software) and that's not cheap. It's good for Apple's profits (they aren't paying to develop nav software), but expensive for users. And it's up to them individually to decide if the iPhone experience represents a better value proposition than the competitors.

Personally, I think there's merits to both platforms. I like Android on a phone. But as far as tablets go, nothing has topped the iPad yet.

They did make more profit on phone sales alone than all of them combined on all phone model sales.

Extreme, I don't think, for a moment, that Google cares about selling Android .... it only wants it to be on as many devices as possible to increase it's search business, wouldn't you agree? Google is a search company, first and foremost, IMHO.

Nobody buys an iPhone in Q2, because they know a new one is just around the corner. This “news” is nothing more than flamebait.

People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. ... just sayin' ...

Just because people keep saying this does not make it true.

They're both touch based. And that's about where the similarity ends. Desktop and widgets are huge differentiators. As is the notification system (drop down blind vs. pop-ups). I actually prefer the Android UI (particularly the stock UI on the Nexus One) to iOS.

The way you use the phones is fundamentally different. If you're an Android user you put on widgets for thinks like Facebook, twitter, sports scores, news, calendar, weather and even toggle switches for connectivity options. You glance down at those widgets to get info. You don't open individual apps. Notifications stay in the blind, until you action them. They don't pop-up and interrupt you.

You also more hard buttons, which again, changes the way you use the phone. Hard back button is something that takes a lot of getting used to (having it and then not having it on iOS). Hard search key is very hand feature. Short press, right into search. Long press into search via voice-to-text.

...which brings up the next feature. voice to text and voice command integration. It's amazing on Android. And an area Apple could really catch up on.

So with all that, how is one a copy of the other? If anything I'd argue Android is more Palm OS like, than anything.

Just wondering .... who "tests" the chairs you repair?

Ok? So? You still haven't shown why asking that question is important.

Again, why does a single Android device need to outsell the iPhone one on one? Will Android as a whole die if one doesn't?

Android is on more phone models sold by more carriers, while the iPhone is made by one company and sold by a single carrier in the US. So, this doesn't surprise me one bit.

Android will become the "budget" phone for those who can't get or afford an iPhone. Apple has always catered to the higher-end of the consumer scale, which doesn't necessarily translate into market dominance, but, does translate into large profits for the company and high customer satisfaction.

...for Microsoft. WnMo 7 better be something extra special! What are the odds?

The funny thing about this is that I'm sure that Motorola, HTC, and the other manufacturers of phones don't care one bit about this. Motorola, for example, is more interested in the number of phones Motorola sells! In fact, they might even prefer not to be lumped together under one banner, as that makes them look more like a faceless commodity brand.
The only company that this is a victory for is Google. It's like how Microsoft dominating the PC market was a victory for Microsoft but not so much the companies who made the PCs (how are the victorious PC manufacturers such as Dell, Acer, Compaq, etc. doing compared to poor little underdog Apple in the computer business these days?).

Is that really relevant in the grand scheme of things?

And personally I only consider OS vs. OS figures relevant. Saying Android is beating the iPhone is useless information for most people except the handful that own stock in one of these OEMs.

The bigger the success ... the bigger the bull's eye. It just comes with the territory.
I think that's because is most people find it easier to attack success than it is to achieve it.... sad, but true. \

And KDE isn't a knockoff of Windows because of a few different details (for one, the start button is a giant K and not a Windows flag!). Deny it all you want. It's not like the whole design of Android phones changed after the iPhone came along.

Good luck with that anti-trust!

They're already selling all they can deliver ... if demand is higher than supply (and it is) then why create more demand?

Exactly what I was going to say! :-) If you compare device to device...phone to phone then the iPhone will outsell all phones..one to one.
Apple does a great job of promoting the iPhone as well. the have a great marketing department! Othetr than the Droid...android phones really aren't promoted as well as the iPhone is.....

Profitability for whom? Google? Manufacturers? Developers?

I would say that the only person possibly suffering on Android is developers because users arent as hardcore about apps as much as iOS users are.

Totally agree. Android 2.2+ is a good OS for phones. I am thrilled to see multiple good OSes for phones that are competing and pushing aside the mediocre to bad phones, in particular Windows Mobile. Although iOS started much of this revolution, it is great to see that there are two good platforms taking off and MS isn't a part of it due to their incompetence, so they won't be able to get a monopoly and stifle the competition.

The reason it is so beneficial to have multiple good platforms is that it will prevent stagnation in the market, which is great for consumers.

Astute observation and I agree. Android and iOS aren't so much in competition with each other as they are in competition with Symbian, Blackberry OS and Windows Mobile. But the rate at which Android is rising, being reminiscent of the iPhone, it's inevitable that people will compare them, and inevitable that they will find themselves in competition once the rest get relegated to the back benches.

Extreme, please remember .... one doesn't stop playing with toys because they grow old ..... they grow old because they stop playing with toys. (I only wish I was 43 again ... hell, I've got socks older than you ..hehe)

Android will eventually overtake iOS, but only because it’s taking the low-end market.

Go back and read this thread from aug 2008
http://forums.appleinsider.com/showthread.php?t=90104
go down to post #14

Read the back and fourth I have with you Apple folk....

I just wanted to say

I told you so!

In fact all iOSes put together (Touch, iPads and iPhones) are slightly under 18 million per quarter which is less than just the Android phone sales in the last quarter. At the rate at which the Android phones are being sold per day is increasing, and adding Android Tablets to the mix in the last quarter of this year or the first quarter of next year and all the Android non phone, non tablet devices (Sony's new gaming platform, in-car devices etc.) that number is going to only explode.

The second quarter ended in June. iPhone 4 launched on June 24th. In other words, the iPhone 4 was only on sale for 7 out of the 91 days covered in the second quarter. Apple was selling the year old iPhone 3GS for most of the quarter. There will be a massive spike in iPhone sales in the third quarter.

Is that why high-end Androids which are selling well cost as much or more than the iPhone?

The iPhone will be a premium device but not in the way you envision it. The main price differentiator for the iPhone will come not through the phone but through the apps. Free navigation on Android. Nice, but expensive TomTom app on the iPhone. Free wifi hotspot functionality on Android. Some better implemented app with the same functionality on the App store.

But "budget" phone in the sense you imagine it? Hardly.

I beg to differ. The PC makers were doing quite well in the late 90s. It's just that we are now reaching the end of the PC era and transitioning to the mobile era. And the ones who can't make the transition will suffer for it.

Apple in a sense is the first PC maker to make that transition. Dell and Acer are now starting down that path. HP bought Palm. So you can see where this is going.

Lets remember that Android is gaining markets share because the phones are being given away.

These numbers are pretty pathetic, if you think about it

So did the whole concept of desktop and widgets come along before or after the iPhone?

Glad to see that modesty isn't one of your faults ..... but your ability to predict an almost certain to happen event .... well, to quote Shania Twain .... That don't impress me much.

Except what you said hasn't happened yet. Android besting the sales of a year old iPhone 3GS is nothing to write home about, and it certainly doesn't mean the iPhone has failed.

A three year old could have come up with your argument, it's nothing to write home about. Who would have thought that devices built by multpile manufacturers, and available through more carriers, but using the same OS could have more total sales volume than a device built by one manufacturer???

Correct me if I am wrong but I had read somewhere that all combined Apple had something like 300-400 000 activations per day. I don't think Android has surpassed all of iOS yet. Just the iPhone.

That Sony PSP Android is going to be interesting. I am curious to see how well that does. Kind of an oddball to have a closed proprietary platform (Sony PSP) running on a wider open platform. It'll be interesting to see if that puts a dent in iPod Touch sales at all.

Go to a T-Mobile store and take the Samsung Vibrant for a ride. That's with 2.1 and some flaws that will get fixed with a firmware update next month. One of the reasons why Android didn't seem to take off for the first year was because the hardware was so woefully behind the OS. It was only since the original Droid on Verizon since November of last year that the hardware has caught up with the software. The Samsung Galaxy S (on all 6 carriers in the US) and 100 carriers worldwide is possibly the first Android device that is ahead of the OS. There will be features added in Gingerbread (Android ver 3 later this year) that will make this impressive device truly rock. As it stands now, it's already significantly better than iPhone 4 in almost every respect.

Some clear, level headed points, but fail to mention that Apple didn't necessarily start the change to the marketplace, just made people more aware of it. Android and a capacitive touch based phones existed before the iPhones conception. LG was the first to dip their toe in this area; developing their touch based phone at the end of 2004. Apple wasn't the first App Market as GetJar existed well before Apple came into the game. I remember using GetJar for my flip phones to find free and paid apps. Apple wasn't the first to integrate an app store into their phones either. Almost all the carriers beat them to the punch, Verizon being one of the few carriers forcing you to use their app store or no apps at all. Apple was the first to merge GetJar's openness to developers and Verizon's death grip approval process into one, so kudos there because that worked out greater than anyone expected (not sarcasm).

The music industry is now heading from rampant piracy to rampant low margin digital downloads. While Apple has been instrumental into getting people to pay for music, they've accidentally killed the "big" music industry. The upside is they've allowed for the "small" music industry to have a fighting chance against the big marketing budgets the bigger distributors take advantage of. So this one is tough call. Apple didn't create a single download application for all your music, they created the single download application for all your legal music.

The iPod wasn't a first either, nor was it a first player widely accepted into the mass market. Rio takes that claim. But there is no doubt that Apple became king when they paired the iPod with iTunes. That was a match made in heaven. The next innovative thing Apple accomplished was turning their iPods into fashion accessories. People were/are buying iPods in various colors not because they can get their favorite color, but because they can use the iPod to complement what they were wearing. Ingenious on Apple's part.

I wouldn't call the current Apple an "inventor" of anything except for the ability to market their products so well, that they suddenly become the inventors of pre-existing technology. In marketing, we wouldn't say Apple was an inventor, we would say Apple is an early adopter; leveraging little known technology for a strategic edge. Nothing wrong with that, because NO ONE does it as beautifully as Apple, and NO ONE can deny that.

When Apple was an inventor (Apple ][, Lisa, Newton, Mac) they didn't make money and no one really cared about them. Hell, even Jobs will admit Apple was desperate when they hired him back. When Apple became an innovator, the world bowed before their might.

Moto went from a loss making entity to profit. Ditto for Sony Ericson. HTC had bumper profits. Samsung has a huge hit on their hands with the Galaxy S. The Android hardware manufacturers seem to be doing just fine.

I didn't overlook that point in fact the post after I confirmed this is always going to be the case if the articles continue to compare an operating system against a hardware device.

So if they wanted to be fair they should compare iOS and Android.

Also at least here in the US there are many phones that are only available thru one carrier. Spint has the Evo and Verizon has the Droid and Incredible.

In any case you can't knock a company like Google or even Microsoft for that matter if they decide not to get into the hardware business like Apple. Apple at anytime can decide to allow their iOS or OSX on any device but they choose not too.

I am also a person that could care less about marketshare I just like good competition because it makes for better devices.

For some their choice is always going to be Apple but clearly more people are like me. I use Windows, OSX, iOS and Android. Most won't use that many operating systems but many people do use Windows and have an iPhone or any number of combinations.

Yes it is relevant. What do you think is more relevant to Motorola? The number of units the Droid X sells or the number of total units all Android phones combined sells?

Would Motorola prefer the Droid X outsell the iPhone, or would Motorola prefer all Android sales combined outsell the iPhone?

You're right sometimes we just want different toys.

This report is largely focusing on handset sales. So profitability for handset manufacturers.

Okay, you have a point.

But, I still think comparing Android (an OS) to the iPhone (hardware + OS) isn't a fair or good comparison. What I meant by "budget" is that Android can be installed on phones by different makers, some of which will be high-end like the iPhone, some of which will no doubt be more cheaply made to appeal to the masses. This is comparable to Windows which runs on any compatible computer, and Macs/OSX, which is a closed, proprietary system. Some people like the open messiness of Windows and all the configuration required to get exactly what you want. Others prefer elegant simplicity of Apple computers and OS.

To each his own.