or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Android gaining on Apple iOS in mobile web market share
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Android gaining on Apple iOS in mobile web market share

post #1 of 349
Thread Starter 
Android's share of U.S. mobile web traffic climbed to 25% in August in its best one month gain since Nov. 2009.

Web statistics company Quantcast published the data, which tracked U.S. mobile web consumption in the month of August, on Friday. Android saw a 2% gain in mobile web market share while all other platforms lost share.

In an earlier post, Quantcast noted that it "does not include Apple's iPad in mobile web consumption analysis," although it did not specifically state whether the iPad's figures are excluded from the most recent data set. According to Net Applications, which includes the iPad in its figures, iOS is now the third most popular Web browsing platform globally.

Over the past year, Apple has lost ground to Google, losing 11% of the mobile web consumption market while Google picked up 17% more market share. iOS still maintains a significant lead with 56% of the market, more than twice that of Android, but current growth trends could cause problems for Apple in the near future. If Google can maintain another year of comparable growth, Android will be nearly neck-and-neck with iOS.

The mobile web race continues to be mostly between Google and Apple, as RIM's market share dipped from 10% to 9% last quarter and the combined market share of all other platforms hovered around 10%.



Google's multi-carrier, multi-manufacturer strategy seems to be working. During the second quarter of this year, shipments of Android-based smartphones outpaced iPhones for the first time.

Wall street analysts have warned that Apple may be nearing saturation on the AT&T network in the U.S. Shaw Wu with Kaufman Bros. suggests that a deal between Apple and Verizon could help the iPhone regain some lost market share. With its 93 million subscribers, Verizon could more than double Apple's potential iPhone customer base in the U.S.
post #2 of 349
Competition's a good thing.
post #3 of 349
Unless Apple licenses iOS, it has no chance of fending off Android. Android will be as ubiquitous as Windows and Apple will be at 6%, again.
post #4 of 349
"In an earlier post, Quantcast noted that it "does not include Apple's iPad in mobile web consumption analysis," although it did not specifically state whether the iPad's figures are excluded from the most recent data set."

And, how then, if I may ask, can these data be accepted AT ALL? No iPad searches included AT ALL? Why not exclude iPhones as well?

Just more FUD and drivel from the vanquished, IMHO.
post #5 of 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by Postulant View Post

Unless Apple licenses iOS, it has no chance of fending off Android. Android will be as ubiquitous as Windows and Apple will be at 6%, again.

They don't need to license iOS. That would be pointless because the whole point is optimizing the hardware/software combination. There's no way Apple would optimize the software for another manufacturer's hardware. So all you would have is a bunch of crap devices running iOS subpar and taking sales away from Apple. Stupid.

What they need to do is get iPhone on other carriers. ATT only represents about 1/3 of the US mobile market. That gives Android a 3-to-1 addressable customer base advantage over iPhone. That an imbalance Apple needs to fix if they want to compete with Android on a level playing field in the US.
post #6 of 349
Really. Now I know the haterz will roll down shortly, but c'mon. The market can support more than one platform, and the first out of the gate (so to speak) is the one that everyone looks at and compares to. The question is, is Android taking market away from iOS or latent market and from other platforms? Postulant has 6% been bad for Apple?

This is a growth market, there's still a lot of elbow room and they haven't really tapped its potential. And does it always have to be about Microsoft? Why go there? All other mobile web platforms dropped as Android climbed. Since Android ships on as many as 20-30 different models of smartphones, how can that not have an impact?

Are you saying that Apple has proven that they didn't learn ANYTHING from all those years of product marketing and development? Or are you just grabbing easy handles in lieu of a deeper look at what is actually going on (can't really fault you for doing that btw, cuz a lot of pundits and "experts" do the <for them> lazy-ass thing and don't bother to get down into what's going on)?

Or perhaps you are right. Apple has learned nothing over the years and are roundly condemned to squander all their advantages in a wide and growing market, just like they did before. 30 years ago. Because no company (like GE for example) can sustain continued success for an extended period of time without abjectly failing.
post #7 of 349
Android is gaining share for two reasons: buy-one-get-one firesales and the lack of iPhone on Verizon. The sun is shining for Android now, but the one-two punch of Oracle's lawsuit and iPhone on Verizon will hit Android like nuclear winter. The clock is ticking, Google...

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply
post #8 of 349
@ LewisBlackmore: "And does it always have to be about Microsoft? Why go there? "

Microsoft? You mean KIN? Zune? Why *did* you go there, Lewys? We thought this was about Android vs. iOS vs. 148,239 mutant branches of Linux lumped together as one.

Microsoft is such a has-been. Or is that "had-KIN"? LOLLLLz there, bro!. Jes' keepin' it real and real light yo.

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply
post #9 of 349
The iPhone is at saturation. They need to open up to other carriers in order to have growth.

And whether you believe in it or not, the antennagate probably scared off many who might have thought about getting their first iPhone.
post #10 of 349
Why would Apple care if their share of mobile browsing was declining? It's not as if their advertising model depends on eyeball looking at internet ads (e.g. Google's ad model); Apple depends on in-application viewing.

So I really don't see how this matters.



Also, I'm not sure why so many people think Android's day of decline begins when the iPhone comes to Verizon. Android still sells strongly in the UK, even though the iPhone is available on many carriers. I don't see why the US would be any different

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology...k-market-share

Happily, that at least gives US iPhone consumers a choice in carrier. For instance, my house sits in a Verizon weak spot (my cell usually reports a signal strength of -105 dbm or so); with iPhone carrier competition, there is at least some market choice
post #11 of 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackintosh View Post

The iPhone is at saturation. They need to open up to other carriers in order to have growth.

And whether you believe in it or not, the antennagate probably scared off many who might have thought about getting their first iPhone.

May as well shut them down and give the money back to shareholders.
post #12 of 349
Though not specifically referenced in the AI post, these Quantcast Mobile OS Share numbers are solely for the USA.
post #13 of 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by Postulant View Post

Unless Apple licenses iOS, it has no chance of fending off Android. Android will be as ubiquitous as Windows and Apple will be at 6%, again.

I don't think so. Check out the differences worldwide. Apple has been rising worldwide - at an even faster rate than Android - but falling in the US. That's AT&T, not an "open" OS like Android.

http://www.electronista.com/articles...or.use.online/

Note: These numbers do include iPad, but there are less than 5 million of them, compared to 60 million iPhones, so I don't think they would skew the results terribly.
post #14 of 349
Over at mobiThinking they have assembled some interesting GLOBAL numbers which put the US numbers in perspective:

Global Marketshare by OS (2009)
Symbian (mostly Nokia): 46.9%, RIM: 19.8%, iOS (iPhone handsets only): 14.4%, Microsoft Windows Mobile: 8.7%, Linux: 4.7%, all Others: 19.0%.

Global Marketshare of smartphone handset by maker (2009)
Nokia: 38.9%, RIM: 19.8%, Apple: 14.4%, HTC:4.3%, Samsung: 3.3%, all Others: 19%.

>Mobile subscribers will surpass 5 billion in 2010 (that's over 70 percent of the world population) and growing rapidly, led by China and India.

Specific comparison:
*China 747.4 million subscribers in 2009, growing to est. 1,311.7 million in 2014 eMarketer (February 2010)
* India 525.2 million subscribers in 2009, growing to est. 853.0 million in 2014 eMarketer (February 2010)
* USA 285.6 million subscribers in 2009 CTIA (December 2009)

> Half a billion people accessed mobile Internet worldwide in 2009. Usage will double within five years as mobile overtakes the PC as the most popular way to get on the Web. However, with 233 million mobile Web users in China alone - this could be very conservative.

> By 2011, over 85 percent of new handsets will be able to access the mobile Web. BUT these are not all smartphones. Makers are finding new ways of simplifying access on feature phones. So mobile web numbers will be mixed.

> The top five mobile network operators worldwide that derive more of their revenue from data than other operators are all Asian: Smart Philippines, Globe Philippines, SoftBank Japan, NTT DOCOMO Japan, KDDI Japan. NOTE: not a single US carrier in this list!

And finally: Apple sold 25.1 million phones in 2009 – while this sounds impressive it is only 2.2 percent of all new handsets globally. Nokia sold nearly three times as many smartphones (67.7 million) as Apple and 17 times as many handsets in total (431.8 million). So right wrong or indifferent, Apple is NOT the company to beat - it is Nokia, and following Nokia - RIM.

mobiThinking correctly calls out these and other equally interesting facts. This is playing out on a global scale and US sales are diminutive compared to the China and India juggernauts. So while the ardent platform disciples gibber and hiss at each other over Android and iOS here in the US - the actual market scales are much, much bigger than this. We are not anywhere near full market penetration for mobile web globally and the US almost doesn't matter. And while getting on Verizon would be nice, China and India are the nuts to crack for best growth -for either Apple or Google.

So the actual question to ask is, what measure does Apple use to judge success? Obviously it isn't market dominance, SJ stated that he would be happy with 1% of the worldwide market for the iPhone. At 2.2% - this means that the iPhone has surpassed their target handily within 3 years of its inception - from here on out it's all gravy as far as Apple is concerned. What is Google's stated target for Android? Smartphone market segment domination? Anyone? Simply to surpass whatever Apple accomplishes?? Have they even stated what it is??? And if they haven't stated it, how are they going to know when they make it?
post #15 of 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterO View Post

Though not specifically referenced in the AI post, these Quantcast Mobile OS Share numbers are solely for the USA.

ah, thanks for the heads up. made a couple edits to specify that they were US figures.
post #16 of 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by SockRolid View Post

@ LewisBlackmore: "And does it always have to be about Microsoft? Why go there? "

Microsoft? You mean KIN? Zune? Why *did* you go there, Lewys? We thought this was about Android vs. iOS vs. 148,239 mutant branches of Linux lumped together as one.

Microsoft is such a has-been. Or is that "had-KIN"? LOLLLLz there, bro!. Jes' keepin' it real and real light yo.

Postulant's statement:

Quote:
Android will be as ubiquitous as Windows and Apple will be at 6%, again.
post #17 of 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by Postulant View Post

Unless Apple licenses iOS, it has no chance of fending off Android. Android will be as ubiquitous as Windows and Apple will be at 6%, again.

And did Apple perish with that measly 6% of the overall personal computer market? Nope. Why not?

Because Apple's 6% is the top 6%. For example, in July 2009, Apple's U.S. market share of all personal computers costing more than $1000 was 91%. Read it and weep:

http://www.businessinsider.com/apple...rm-says-2009-7

What's that? You say you can screw together your own pee cee for two hundred bucks? Well good for you. I did that years ago. Jumpers, BIOS settings, and all that. That puts you and me in the tiny minority who actually bothered to roll their own. You can make your own car too if you want. Is it worth the trouble? No.

Let's take the automotive analogy a little further. Guess what BMW's US market share is. It was 1.9% in June 2009. That's minuscule, but do you think BMW is going to retreat from the US market because they can't out-sell Toyota? I think not:

http://rumors.automobilemag.com/6554...ear/index.html

So now we can compare iPod touch market share, iPhone share, and iPad share against Android devices in those same categories, just to be fair. Yes, all those Apple devices run iOS, but...

Oh wait, there aren't any Android tablets on the market yet? Oops. And what? There aren't any competitors (Android or otherwise) to iPod touch yet? After how many years? I thought Android development began years before iPhone OS aka iOS.

The reason Android is so far behind iOS in development is because the original Android phones were near-perfect clones of Blackberry. Small screens, chiclet keyboards, and wobble buttons galore. Look it up in Wikipedia. Google was so intent on killing Microsoft that they ganged up against them by copying the most successful smartphone on the market. The Blackberry.

Fast forward to today and look what Android has been hastily hacked into. A quick and dirty mashup that resembles iOS. So quick and dirty that Google tried to do an end around on the Java license. And that can only result in doom.

Oracle's lawsuit has merit. Android's Java implementation is not 100% compliant with the Java reference spec, which means Google has not implemented Java at all according to the license agreement. You are either 100% compliant or you are in violation of the agreement. It's that simple.

Oracle's lawsuit also has legal precedent. Microsoft settled with Sun for a measly $20 million for Java non-compliance. But do you think Larry wants money? Hah. Larry wants blood. The lawsuit requires Android software to be "impounded and destroyed." Google won't be able to buy their way out of this one. Giving away free shovelware just hasn't built up that much karma for them.

So if you think "barely good enough" Android is going to thrive and overwhelm Apple in some way, you are either ignorant or you are in serious denial. Even if Android manages to survive the Oracle lawsuit somehow (and I don't see how) and the eventual bombshell of iPhone on Verizon and the hopeless fragmentation of 1.x, 2.x, and any number of hardware mutations on the market, Apple will still own top top end of the market. And that means huge profit share.

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply
post #18 of 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackintosh View Post

The iPhone is at saturation. They need to open up to other carriers in order to have growth.

And whether you believe in it or not, the antennagate probably scared off many who might have thought about getting their first iPhone.

Agreed.
post #19 of 349
Apple relies only on its own creativity. It cannot otherwise fronts the media darling Microsoft and free advertising that Google and other giants enjoy from the majority of journalists. Look at the shameful BBC piece on the Samsung tablet against iPad.
How many iPad killer was announced already?

Apple should be praised for standing alone, not vilified.


But i guess people love hegemony ( like Apple cannot put an iPhone alongside any Droid phone or Windows phone ).
post #20 of 349
You all seem to take these numbers as a fact altough they may be lies. If this firm excludes the iPad but includes them for Apples competitors (type Archos, Dell streak etc) the numbers are skewed.

It's like presenting a political poll where you include Native Americans if they vote Republican but not if they're Democrats. How can numbers like these be taken seriously.
post #21 of 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by 0yvind View Post

You all seem to take these numbers as a fact altough they may be lies. If this firm excludes the iPad but includes them for Apples competitors (type Archos, Dell streak etc) the numbers are skewed.

It's like presenting a political poll where you include Native Americans if they vote Republican but not if they're Democrats. How can numbers like these be taken seriously.

agreed. The only real comparison between the two is ALL iOS DEVICES compared with ALL ANDROID DEVICES, otherwise we have no idea whether the result are skewed, either deliberately or unintentionally.
post #22 of 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by SockRolid View Post

And did Apple perish with that measly 6% of the overall personal computer market? Nope. Why not?

Because Apple's 6% is the top 6%. For example, in July 2009, Apple's U.S. market share of all personal computers costing more than $1000 was 91%. Read it and weep:

http://www.businessinsider.com/apple...rm-says-2009-7

What's that? You say you can screw together your own pee cee for two hundred bucks? Well good for you. I did that years ago. Jumpers, BIOS settings, and all that. That puts you and me in the tiny minority who actually bothered to roll their own. You can make your own car too if you want. Is it worth the trouble? No.

Let's take the automotive analogy a little further. Guess what BMW's US market share is. It was 1.9% in June 2009. That's minuscule, but do you think BMW is going to retreat from the US market because they can't out-sell Toyota? I think not:

http://rumors.automobilemag.com/6554...ear/index.html

So now we can compare iPod touch market share, iPhone share, and iPad share against Android devices in those same categories, just to be fair. Yes, all those Apple devices run iOS, but...

Oh wait, there aren't any Android tablets on the market yet? Oops. And what? There aren't any competitors (Android or otherwise) to iPod touch yet? After how many years? I thought Android development began years before iPhone OS aka iOS.

The reason Android is so far behind iOS in development is because the original Android phones were near-perfect clones of Blackberry. Small screens, chiclet keyboards, and wobble buttons galore. Look it up in Wikipedia. Google was so intent on killing Microsoft that they ganged up against them by copying the most successful smartphone on the market. The Blackberry.

Fast forward to today and look what Android has been hastily hacked into. A quick and dirty mashup that resembles iOS. So quick and dirty that Google tried to do an end around on the Java license. And that can only result in doom.

Oracle's lawsuit has merit. Android's Java implementation is not 100% compliant with the Java reference spec, which means Google has not implemented Java at all according to the license agreement. You are either 100% compliant or you are in violation of the agreement. It's that simple.

Oracle's lawsuit also has legal precedent. Microsoft settled with Sun for a measly $20 million for Java non-compliance. But do you think Larry wants money? Hah. Larry wants blood. The lawsuit requires Android software to be "impounded and destroyed." Google won't be able to buy their way out of this one. Giving away free shovelware just hasn't built up that much karma for them.

So if you think "barely good enough" Android is going to thrive and overwhelm Apple in some way, you are either ignorant or you are in serious denial. Even if Android manages to survive the Oracle lawsuit somehow (and I don't see how) and the eventual bombshell of iPhone on Verizon and the hopeless fragmentation of 1.x, 2.x, and any number of hardware mutations on the market, Apple will still own top top end of the market. And that means huge profit share.

In the motor industry there is so many different brands, that all have there own uniqueness in them. This used to be the same for computer's until Microsoft standardised everything. In the phone market it looked like fresh air with the different brands models and makes, untill Google standardised everything. Google will standardise everything and Apple will play 2nd fiddle. But I bet you they will stay in double figures. Why? Well unlike the computers, there aimed at everyone and they produce them fast enough to keep the price down (unlike Mac which is produced so slow and so little demand).
post #23 of 349
this really doesn't matter because Android is really about mobile advertising and the Android partners are only concerned with moving as many phones per quarter as possible.
Behind Android on the cell phone maker's part is a competitive market.

Moto for instance got to save tons of money by not creating their own mobile OS. So they rely on Google to make a name for itself in this new smartphone game. This is sheer prostitution on the part of the cellphone makers. They haven't a clue on earth about the Android OS. They only care that they can make bank selling phones.
And in the end all those Android phones that are being littered onto the used market will eventually suck the sells out of the new Android stuff. Moreover,Google is working so fast to up the ante of Android that they are literally shooting themselves in the foot. DON'T THEY KNOW THE TERM "SELF-PRESERVATION"?
And when Android eye candy starts to slow the cell phone makers will be up a creek. They can't afford to have a slow down.
Besides, what do they have up their sleeves without Android?
NOTHING!
post #24 of 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by Postulant View Post

Unless Apple licenses iOS, it has no chance of fending off Android. Android will be as ubiquitous as Windows and Apple will be at 6%, again.

Umm... I don't think so. Not this time around. It could be 50-50 or at worst 70-30 lead to Android. iOS is just remarkably different from OS X and in the massive growth area of phones and tablets and maybe soon ultra-portable 11"-13" laptops.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VinitaBoy View Post

"In an earlier post, Quantcast noted that it "does not include Apple's iPad in mobile web consumption analysis," although it did not specifically state whether the iPad's figures are excluded from the most recent data set."

And, how then, if I may ask, can these data be accepted AT ALL? No iPad searches included AT ALL? Why not exclude iPhones as well?

Just more FUD and drivel from the vanquished, IMHO.

If it is not clear whether iPads are included or not, yup, I'm putting that report in the bin. Why bother otherwise.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackintosh View Post

The iPhone is at saturation. They need to open up to other carriers in order to have growth.

And whether you believe in it or not, the antennagate probably scared off many who might have thought about getting their first iPhone.

100% wrong. It is barely reaching supply-demand in the US. However saturated it may be anyway, there's still literally hundreds of millions of people outside the US that do want an iPhone4 and/or iPad. Whatever the case is in the US, globally, it is simply, a matter of Apple having to make more iPhone4s, white iPhone, and more iPads. It's that simple. Anyone taking the US situation and saying "Apple is d00med" is just plain ridiculous. Nice try, no cigar, not even close.

Apple has two main challenges right now. Focus operations on delivering global availability of iOS products and supporting such products and services. Reworking the Mac OS X base to streamline with their iOS offerings, ie, time to really make mainstream computing on "traditional" laptop and desktop form factors vastly different from Windows, in an iOS kind of way. Yes, purist Mac users cringe at the very thought. But let's face it. OS X 10.7 is going to be very iOS-influenced.
post #25 of 349
From my perspective as an individual, it is not who has the biggest market share, but who has the better product. Now of course, the thing still has to be compatible, and in this case even the Android devices are running Webkit based browsers, so there's no problem.
post #26 of 349
Quantcast numbers could be wrong as many noted that it didn't included iPad previously, now that the iPod touch got released and starts shipping next week or so it will add to those numbers. Also this is a mobile web use for USA only. Other demographics shows mobile web use around the globe to be dominated by a huge margin by iOS.
Google indeed is doing right to proliferate with its multi carrier strategy, good for them. But not all the phones that carry Android are worth to buy, many leaves customers still wishing for a better product and the ones that are good are still tied to a 2 year contract or get them without contract for above of $500.
Shaw Wu can be miss leading many times and that is the kind of crap that makes stock goes down for a company that do almost 100% perfect.
It is not much in USA for Apple to open to Verizon, if they get Tmobile that needs less tweaking in the hardware than spend lots more on design, component and production for a CDMA Verizon's iPhone, they will get around 10 to 15 millions potential users cause not all of the 30M base will jump and buy an iPhone, the same goes for 90+ millions of Verizon.
Apple will eventually launch other phone to go along with the iPhone and maybe one that is carrier free or unlocked from the get go.
Also this report places Apple like it is Motorola that once dominated all and lost half of the share. It is not the same. The iphones are flying of the shelf, Apple can't catch up with demand and the white iPhone is not even out there.
post #27 of 349
good to see 2 good platforms competing well and doing well.

The minute one dominates too much the innovation slows.
What I got... 15" i7 w/8 gigs ram,iPad2 64gig wifi, 2.0 mac mini, 2.0 17" imac, appleTv, Still running my old G4 466 upgraded to 1.2GHz maxed ram as a pro tools machine, and 2 iphones.
Reply
What I got... 15" i7 w/8 gigs ram,iPad2 64gig wifi, 2.0 mac mini, 2.0 17" imac, appleTv, Still running my old G4 466 upgraded to 1.2GHz maxed ram as a pro tools machine, and 2 iphones.
Reply
post #28 of 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

100% wrong. It is barely reaching supply-demand in the US. However saturated it may be anyway, there's still literally hundreds of millions of people outside the US that do want an iPhone4 and/or iPad. Whatever the case is in the US, globally, it is simply, a matter of Apple having to make more iPhone4s, white iPhone, and more iPads. It's that simple. Anyone taking the US situation and saying "Apple is d00med" is just plain ridiculous. Nice try, no cigar, not even close.

Apple has two main challenges right now. Focus operations on delivering global availability of iOS products and supporting such products and services. Reworking the Mac OS X base to streamline with their iOS offerings, ie, time to really make mainstream computing on "traditional" laptop and desktop form factors vastly different from Windows, in an iOS kind of way. Yes, purist Mac users cringe at the very thought. But let's face it. OS X 10.7 is going to be very iOS-influenced.

Even a broken clock is right twice a day. Learn some tolerance for an opinion other than your own. I don't know about you, but I have a job and a family so I don't have time to personally interview everyone in the world to find out why they do or do not have an iPhone 4.

Regarding your comment about morphing OSX into iOS on the Mac, the very notion of taking something as brilliant as the Mac and crippling it into an iPhone or iPad is the worst idea in the world.

Therefore I'm sure Steve Jobs will be doing it soon. He seems bent on ruining everything he touches.
post #29 of 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by VinitaBoy View Post

"In an earlier post, Quantcast noted that it "does not include Apple's iPad in mobile web consumption analysis," although it did not specifically state whether the iPad's figures are excluded from the most recent data set."

And, how then, if I may ask, can these data be accepted AT ALL? No iPad searches included AT ALL? Why not exclude iPhones as well?

Just more FUD and drivel from the vanquished, IMHO.



The number of iPads is insignificant in the universe of browsers. Hell, the number of iPads is insignificant compared to the number of other iOS devices in the wild.
post #30 of 349
Not counting iPad usage makes this analysis useless.

Android's days are numbered as the iPhone exclusivity with AT&T draws to a close. Once Americans can choose a carrier they like, iOS will crush Android.

An interesting comparison would be looking at the trend among AT&T customers. I'll bet that all of the iOS devices are destroying the 'droids in that arena.

Android is getting its 15 minutes of fame, just like its parent, Linux, did a few years ago. Linux as a consumer product is an abject failure that once seemed like a real Windows-killer. The anarchy in the Android world will similarly drive away most ordinary consumers. At least people running server farms will have a mobile OS they like
post #31 of 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by LewysBlackmore View Post

Are you saying that Apple has proven that they didn't learn ANYTHING from all those years of product marketing and development?



They learned a huge lesson: People buy devices in large part based on what they can do with them. Apps. Apps. Apps.
post #32 of 349
APPLE STOPPED CARING ABOUT MARKETSHARE A LONG LONG TIME AGO. They measure success now by profits. As long that doesn't drop it's all that matters.

iPhone users are using APPS more than they are on their browsers. I think Steve mentioned before that more and more people (at least iPhone users I assume) don't do search anymore but instead are using apps for everything. These apps access the web just to get data, that's it. I sure don't "Google" where I want to go eat anymore. If I want to check the scoreboards. There's an app for that.
post #33 of 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by pwj View Post

Why would Apple care if their share of mobile browsing was declining? It's not as if their advertising model depends on eyeball looking at internet ads (e.g. Google's ad model); Apple depends on in-application viewing.

So I really don't see how this matters.


Excellent point. Apple gets revenue from the use of Apps by their customers. I guess that is what iAds is all about.

However, Apple is trying to use their mobile browsers to change the technology used by web developers and owners. They will be unable to meke much headway if they are not a major dominant force in web browsing.
post #34 of 349
A declining percentage does not mean fewer people - it means that more people who never had a smart phone to browser the web (or had one and did not use it because it was so lame) - are now doing so.

Since iOS is limited to a single carrier in the US - a more interesting comparison might be what percentage of Users are on iOS vs Other - which still would result in a declining share for the iOS - as the competition ramps up. The only truly fair comparison would be to look at what percentage of customers who have access to an iOS device do in fact use one vs what percentage of users who have access to only android actually use one. Even in that case if the numbers end up equal that would not be too surprising. In other words - if AT&T has 50 million subscribers and 50% of them use iOS compared to Verizon has 50 million subscribers and 50% of them use Android OS. Or even if it was more like AT&T has 25 million with 50% iOS and Verizon has 100 million with 50% Android - then you would have an idea of how popular web browsing on a mobile device is. Or to say it yet another way - if you have 25 million subscribers using your device and you have 100% of the market and the competition has no device - then comes out with such a device they would have to sell 25 million of them just to be equal to you - and if your sales utterly stop for that entire time -then you share decreases down to 50% - even though your actual numbers have not changed - just the overall total you use for the basis of comparison has changed. maybe a more interesting number would be how many users per 1000 are iOS vs android - that would provide more meaningful number of the relative popularity of each OS. if on day 1 zero out of 1000 are android and 1000 out of 1000 are iOS - then on day 100 only 50 out of every 1000 are android that is not much but if 1 year in 500 out of 1000 are android that is different.

Or in other words - a decreasing percentage of an increasing number could still very easily be an over al increase where it counts.

In fact since AT&T offers other devices which can browse the web but do not us iOS - that data would also be interesting to see - how many who are on or choose AT&T do not choose an iOS device.

Perhaps I missed it - but did the data include both WiFi and Cellular data use?

Remember - there are lies, then there are damn lies, and then there are statistics.
post #35 of 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by SockRolid View Post

And did Apple perish with that measly 6% of the overall personal computer market? Nope. Why not?

Because Apple's 6% is the top 6%. For example, in July 2009, Apple's U.S. market share of all personal computers costing more than $1000 was 91%. .


Sony used to be there too with television sets. Now they ain't nothing.

Watch out for hubris. Everything is changing very fast, especially in the sandbox that Apple plays in.
post #36 of 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by pwj View Post

Why would Apple care if their share of mobile browsing was declining? It's not as if their advertising model depends on eyeball looking at internet ads (e.g. Google's ad model); Apple depends on in-application viewing.

So I really don't see how this matters.



Also, I'm not sure why so many people think Android's day of decline begins when the iPhone comes to Verizon. Android still sells strongly in the UK, even though the iPhone is available on many carriers. I don't see why the US would be any different

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology...k-market-share

Happily, that at least gives US iPhone consumers a choice in carrier. For instance, my house sits in a Verizon weak spot (my cell usually reports a signal strength of -105 dbm or so); with iPhone carrier competition, there is at least some market choice

I agree with this poster. If iPhone had come to Verizon a year ago, it might have put a dent in Android. BUT...it's now too little, too late. VErizon is heavily invested in Android with the biggest lineup of any carrier. The whole DROID moniker is probably almost as well known as the iPhone brand at this point. And overseas, Android is gaining like crazy. Remember through all of this: Android is now #1 in the U.S., having surpassed even Blackberry in sales, and not because of buy-one-get-one deals. There aren't many of those. And, worldwide, Android has surpassed Apple as well. My prediction is within the next few years, iPhone will be like what the Mac was 20 years ago while Android follows the path that Windows followed back then as well--niche vs. ubiquity. The iPad, however, is another story. It's too early to know how that will play out, but with Android tablets coming out within the next couple of months from multiple manufacturers on multiple carriers, it could follow the same trajectory.
post #37 of 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtron View Post

They learned a huge lesson: People buy devices in large part based on what they can do with them. Apps. Apps. Apps.

Developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers...
post #38 of 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by SockRolid View Post

And did Apple perish with that measly 6% of the overall personal computer market? Nope. Why not?

Because Apple's 6% is the top 6%. For example, in July 2009, Apple's U.S. market share of all personal computers costing more than $1000 was 91%. Read it and weep:

http://www.businessinsider.com/apple...rm-says-2009-7

What's that? You say you can screw together your own pee cee for two hundred bucks? Well good for you. I did that years ago. Jumpers, BIOS settings, and all that. That puts you and me in the tiny minority who actually bothered to roll their own. You can make your own car too if you want. Is it worth the trouble? No.

Let's take the automotive analogy a little further. Guess what BMW's US market share is. It was 1.9% in June 2009. That's minuscule, but do you think BMW is going to retreat from the US market because they can't out-sell Toyota? I think not:

http://rumors.automobilemag.com/6554...ear/index.html

So now we can compare iPod touch market share, iPhone share, and iPad share against Android devices in those same categories, just to be fair. Yes, all those Apple devices run iOS, but...

Oh wait, there aren't any Android tablets on the market yet? Oops. And what? There aren't any competitors (Android or otherwise) to iPod touch yet? After how many years? I thought Android development began years before iPhone OS aka iOS.

The reason Android is so far behind iOS in development is because the original Android phones were near-perfect clones of Blackberry. Small screens, chiclet keyboards, and wobble buttons galore. Look it up in Wikipedia. Google was so intent on killing Microsoft that they ganged up against them by copying the most successful smartphone on the market. The Blackberry.

Fast forward to today and look what Android has been hastily hacked into. A quick and dirty mashup that resembles iOS. So quick and dirty that Google tried to do an end around on the Java license. And that can only result in doom.

Oracle's lawsuit has merit. Android's Java implementation is not 100% compliant with the Java reference spec, which means Google has not implemented Java at all according to the license agreement. You are either 100% compliant or you are in violation of the agreement. It's that simple.

Oracle's lawsuit also has legal precedent. Microsoft settled with Sun for a measly $20 million for Java non-compliance. But do you think Larry wants money? Hah. Larry wants blood. The lawsuit requires Android software to be "impounded and destroyed." Google won't be able to buy their way out of this one. Giving away free shovelware just hasn't built up that much karma for them.

So if you think "barely good enough" Android is going to thrive and overwhelm Apple in some way, you are either ignorant or you are in serious denial. Even if Android manages to survive the Oracle lawsuit somehow (and I don't see how) and the eventual bombshell of iPhone on Verizon and the hopeless fragmentation of 1.x, 2.x, and any number of hardware mutations on the market, Apple will still own top top end of the market. And that means huge profit share.

Wow, there are so many factual errors and conjecture in this post, it will take too much effort to counter. Jeez.
post #39 of 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtron View Post

The number of iPads is insignificant in the universe of browsers. Hell, the number of iPads is insignificant compared to the number of other iOS devices in the wild.

Huh? The iPad is selling close to the same rate for Macs... And it hasn't even launched outside of several select countries. It comprises at least(?) a quarter of iPhone4 sales, at very rough estimations. I don't have time to get into the numbers but we're definitely looking at about 2 to 3 million iPads a month. That's significant in terms of mobile browsers, tablet browsers, netbooks and iOS devices. Not least, it's significant in terms of desktop browsers because as iPads start to (if they haven't already) outsell Macs, iPads will have a bigger browser share of the web compared to Mac browser share.
post #40 of 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackintosh View Post

Regarding your comment about morphing OSX into iOS on the Mac, the very notion of taking something as brilliant as the Mac and crippling it into an iPhone or iPad is the worst idea in the world.

That was my opinion of the iPad. Now I'm not as certain as I once was.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackintosh View Post

Therefore I'm sure Steve Jobs will be doing it soon. He seems bent on ruining everything he touches.

I'm even less certain of this.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Android gaining on Apple iOS in mobile web market share