or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Nielsen: Android overtakes Apple's iOS in latest US smartphone sales
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Nielsen: Android overtakes Apple's iOS in latest US smartphone sales - Page 4

post #121 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrochester View Post

Here's an interesting article about marketshare.

http://www.techztalk.com/techwebsite...p-rising-in-us

This one is good too.
These visualisations are great.

http://www.asymco.com/2010/10/05/the...mobile-phones/

C.
post #122 of 176
I long for Android OS 3.0 and a suitably well selling Android Tablet, just to force stupid "analysts" like this to stop using such flawed data by excluding the iPod Touches/iPads from this sort of commentary. The real story is the battle for the mobile OS on all mobile devices, and not the most popular phone OS.

The fact that the graphs don't use "iOS" and still use "iPhone OS" just makes these stand out as being either produced by someone without a clue, or by someone with an agenda to cook the figures.
post #123 of 176
As of species, the flies are outnumbering humans by a vast percentage. (But they have lower income). Statistics can be fun.

The numbers are about mindshare. Android got a big boost this spring (esp. second quarter) when it passed the iPhone (not the iOS) in new sales in the US - and the commenters are making the most of it for weeks and weeks. Even with outright misinformation, like in the Newsweek article from Oct 3:
Quote:
"Rubin says... Android now has leapt past Apple to become the biggest smart-phone platform in the United States, the third-biggest worldwide, and by far the fastest growing."

See?
1) Confusing rate of growth with installed user base
2) Confusing full "platform" of Android with the iPhone section of the iOS platform
3) Lying about the world wide installed user base.
Fastest-growing being the only true statement here, and only during the second quarter of US sales. I think Android deserves credit for that growth, but not at the cost of reality.

And Newsweeks's Daniel Lyons goes on with the traditional lie about history:
Quote:
The struggle between Google and Apple today looks a lot like the battle between Apple and Microsoft in the PC era. Back then, Apple leapt out to an early lead with the Macintosh, whose revolutionary operating system ran only on Apple machines. But Microsoft came up with a version of Windows that could compete with the Mac. Because Microsoft licensed its software to all of the world’s computer makers, it eventually controlled 90 percent of the market.

Apple never had more than 12-14% market share compared to DOS PCs. That cannot be called a "lead" in anybody's book. Not anywhere near the lead Apple has had with the iPod and iPhone.

This kind of mindshare propaganda will certainly go on, at least until the autumn sales have been published. If I were a tech jornalist I'd halt the fortune telling and long-time prospect forecasts until the end of November or new year. But my page views would go down and I'd lose the job, probably.
post #124 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by stuffe View Post

I long for Android OS 3.0 and a suitably well selling Android Tablet, just to force stupid "analysts" like this to stop using such flawed data by excluding the iPod Touches/iPads from this sort of commentary. The real story is the battle for the mobile OS on all mobile devices, and not the most popular phone OS.
The fact that the graphs don't use "iOS" and still use "iPhone OS" just makes these stand out as being either produced by someone without a clue, or by someone with an agenda to cook the figures.

Agreed - but according to Andy Rubin, the creator of Android (as cited in the Newsweek article), it's the version after 3.0 gingerbread that's optimized for tablets:
Quote:
Right now Rubins engineers are putting the finishing touches on the next version of Android, code-named Gingerbread, which is scheduled to ship before the end of this year. Theyre also developing a version of Android called Honeycomb, which is designed to run on tablet computers and will follow on the heels of Gingerbread.

So I guess LG (who recently postponed their tablet saying Android 2.2 wasn't good enough) will have to wait a bit longer.
post #125 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd View Post

Apple give real results and claimed to be outpacing the Market.


.

Let's see those real results! Let's see those claims!

I think you must made that stuff up from ill-formed memories. I don't think Apple made any such claims.

Got some cites?
post #126 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd View Post

What you said was that no iPad app could run on the iPhone.

That is not what he said. Here is what he said:

"Yeah, that's why I can't run an application specifically written for the iPad on an iPhone. As a matter of fact, they can't currently even run the same version of iOS, can they???? "
post #127 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Davewrite View Post

how many times do I have to explain this?

DID YOU ACTUALLY READ MY POSTS? Did you follow the thread?

1) "This whole post assumes that consumers give a rats ass about profits, which I can assure they don't."
DUDE: my first post was to those that were saying that Android was making all this money and that it was way better than Apple's model of revenue. It's the Droid fans who brought up the revenue issue.

but since you brought up the topic of users and profits...
Perhaps some users don't give a rat's ass about profits but they certainly should. WHY? Perhaps you should ask the no profit Palm users (in limbo as Palm is being slowly digested by HP). go ask the msft KIN phone users, the Win Mo 6 users...
also go ask the AMIGA users, the people who bought BETAMAX players, the OS2 users...
No profits can mean END of LINE for your product or at best it means nothing for R&D, bad customer service, sucky hardware as OEMs cut costs, go ask the no profit NETBOOK users about that...

2)"Incidently, each extra Android device on the market is an additional revenue stream for Google through the sale of products, services and advertising."

Shoot, are you DENSE or what? THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I SAID does NOT happen EVERY TIME. I explained it sideways and backwards with examples that even small brained reptiles could understand.

here AGAIN (for like the third time):
"in the situations WHEN CARRIERS LOAD BING, YAHOO OR BAIDU ON THEIR PHONE, WHEN PEOPLE OPEN THEIR OWN APP STORES AND LOCK GOOGLE OUT, WHEN PHONES ARE BUILT SO THAT THEY LOCKED DOWN TO THIER OWN NON GOOGLE APPS AND CAN'T ACCESS GOOGLE ANDROID MARKET GOOGLE MAKES LESS OR NOTHING".

get it? If a phone runs Bing Google gets zilch from search. If they run non google maps, services etc same thing.
If users buy apps from a NON google store and they are sprouting: Google gets zilch.
Some phones in Asia come with Baidu not Google and are locked down. You can't even download apps from Google android market. Google profit from them Zero.
If advertisers use other ad agencies and not Google's Admob, google loses revenue
etc (all I explained in DETAIL in my first posts)

I even gave an EXAMPLE in my first post:
"Engadget on Moto Backflip:
"Yahoo has replaced Google as the default search provider throughout the phone. It's crazy: the home screen widget, the browser, everything's been programmed to use Yahoo.
It's filled to the brim with pre-loaded AT&T stuff: AllSport GPS, AT&T Maps, AT&T Music (which takes the place of the standard Music app), AT&T Navigator, AT&T Wi-Fi Hotspots, Mobile Banking, MobiTV, MusicID, Where, and YPmobile. We strongly prefer the approach of offering a special branded Android Market portal where you can download your carrier's recommended apps."

Another:
Electronista:
"Verizon's decision to force the use of Bing as the core search engine on the Samsung Fascinate may be part of a larger change that could undermine Android itself, .... Verizon's approach also prevents owners from choosing an alternative short of installing unofficial firmware, an investigation found."

I also explained that if people are looking at Google ads on their phones they are NOT (probably) looking AT THE SAME TIME at ads on their laptops or desktops: page view GAIN for Google ZERO.


Man you DON"T READ and you SPOUT!




I remember about a zillion years ago when I sold stereos for a failing company. It was a Washington's Birthday Sale, which was, at the time, a big deal in the CE world. Our store was nearly empty. The competitor down the street was packed.

I listened as one of the salesmen, who used to hold a mid-level position at the competitor, tell us all about how the competitor was losing money and that their strategy could never work. He had complex reasons why they could never make any money doing what they were doing.

The guys I worked for went belly up. The competitor became a national chain.

You remind me of the bitter former mid-level guy with his complex theories about how those guys could not possibly be making any money.
post #128 of 176
The iOS vs Android is nothing at all like Mac vs PC. Mac vs PC could have been labeled "easy to use but expensive" vs "the business culture"... try to neatly package iOS or Android. Totally different dynamics.
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #129 of 176
While the Mac vs. PC story is always cited as an "Apple fail" - it has an interesting coda.
Apple is now the most profitable personal computer manufacturer too. It makes more money sellng Macs than any Windows box maker.

When any manufacturer, be they cellphone or computer, gives up on software development and outsources it to Microsoft or Google. They lose the ability to differentiate their products.
They become a commodity, sold only on a simple price/features axis. And the exact same process is happening to Android phones. They become interchangeable and generic. Very cheap, with lots of features.

This isn't bad news for consumers, but it is bad news for those manufacturers, who have to settle for 5% profit margins.


C.
post #130 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

While the Mac vs. PC story is always cited as an "Apple fail" - it has an interesting coda.
Apple is now the most profitable personal computer manufacturer too. It makes more money sellng Macs than any Windows box maker.

When any manufacturer, be they cellphone or computer, gives up on software development and outsources it to Microsoft or Google. They lose the ability to differentiate their products.
They become a commodity, sold only on a simple price/features axis. And the exact same process is happening to Android phones. They become interchangeable and generic. Very cheap, with lots of features.

This isn't bad news for consumers, but it is bad news for those manufacturers, who have to settle for 5% profit margins.


C.

That's fine, because we are consumers.
post #131 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrochester View Post

That's fine, because we are consumers.

It not entirely fine.

If you look at the PC, you see a product that has stagnated because its progress is tied to a single vendor.

The hardware manufacturers are so impoverished there is now no possibility of them innovating new software technologies. Competition and innovation have effectively ceased. All efforts are invested in shaving down production costs, or shoehorning in an extra widget.

I would argue that this is not an entirely good thing. Markets perform best when there are multiple vendors with independent solutions to offer.

C.
post #132 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

It not entirely fine.

If you look at the PC, you see a product that has stagnated because its progress is tied to a single vendor.

The hardware manufacturers are so impoverished there is now no possibility of them innovating new software technologies. Competition and innovation have effectively ceased. All efforts are invested in shaving down production costs, or shoehorning in an extra widget.

I would argue that this is not an entirely good thing. Markets perform best when there are multiple vendors with independent solutions to offer.

C.

That's fine, because the product already does what I need it to do, so I'm looking to get hold of it for the cheapest price, as do the vast majority of consumers. Most people don't need to pay extra for a Mac when the cheaper option already does everything they need, and more.
post #133 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrochester View Post

Most people don't need to pay extra for a Mac when the cheaper option already does everything they need, and more.

Obviously this statement can't be true... or the Mac would be dead... instead, it's growing.
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #134 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

Obviously this statement can't be true... or the Mac would be dead.

Because some people need things the Mac does that a PC doesn't, but most don't.
post #135 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrochester View Post

That's fine, because the product already does what I need it to do, so I'm looking to get hold of it for the cheapest price, as do the vast majority of consumers. Most people don't need to pay extra for a Mac when the cheaper option already does everything they need, and more.

Perhaps Wall Mart's fine clothing lines meet all your apparel requirements too?


C.
post #136 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

Perhaps Wall Mart's fine clothing lines meet all your apparel requirements too?


C.

Exactly, now we're on the same wave length. For most people, there simply isn't any reason to pay the extra as something cheaper will do the job just as well, so the money might as well not be wasted.
post #137 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrochester View Post

Exactly, now we're on the same wave length. For most people, there simply isn't any reason to pay the extra.

But fortunately, in clothing, in automobiles, and in technology there is a high end. And that high end is where all the innovation and development happens.

New ideas trickle down to the low end.

The problem with single vendor solutions is that there is no high end. No alternatives and only limited choices. The product range turns into a Soviet-style car-dealership featuring just one model.

And that model causes products to stagnate and it hurts consumers and vendors.

C.
post #138 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrochester View Post

Because some people need things the Mac does that a PC doesn't, but most don't.

I think you're wrong.

Think of it this way... if the Mac share is increasing yet it is more expensive then what does that tell you. To me it says that people really do see a difference, for the better, in the Mac operating system.

For instance... if Apple moved their profit margin down 10% to the low 20's I would assume, by your thinking, that Mac sales would skyrocket.

Why would that be?

This doesn't sound like a scenario where PCs are the same as Macs but are cheaper to buy.
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #139 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

But fortunately, in clothing, in automobiles, and in technology there is a high end. And that high end is where all the innovation and development happens.

New ideas trickle down to the low end.

The problem with single vendor solutions is that there is no high end. No alternatives and only limited choices. The product range turns into a Soviet-style car-dealership featuring just one model.

And that model causes products to stagnate and it hurts consumers and vendors.

C.

So the trick is a balance. A large enough high end to innovate, and a bottom heavy low end to benefit from this innovation when it becomes affordable. At a guess, this is where most people sit.
post #140 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

When any manufacturer, be they cellphone or computer, gives up on software development and outsources it to Microsoft or Google. They lose the ability to differentiate their products.
They become a commodity, sold only on a simple price/features axis. And the exact same process is happening to Android phones. They become interchangeable and generic. Very cheap, with lots of features.

This isn't bad news for consumers,

C.



I disagree. This isn't a race to the bottom with white goods, like the early PC was. Phones are personal.

In the PC race, they all looked alike, and all had a bewildering array of weird specs that made them read "C\> " or "]".

Today, with cellphones, the manufacturers are differentiating their products. They can add a cool overlay to make it theirs and appeal to specific market segments. They can make a cheap pink one with a smaller screen for middle school girls. They can make a balls to the wall model for techies, and they can make a full-featured one with all the latest apps for the iPhone switchers.

I don't think the current (and especially, the future) cellphone market is at all like the commodity market of the pre-Windows 95 beige box computer market.

Cellphones are not beige computers. They are everything from a lifeline for the elderly to a status symbol for the insecure, and everything in between.

And Android is absolutely ripe for product differentiation, rather than generic sameness. Indeed, it is specifically contemplated that it will be overlaid and modified and pared down and used for lots of different stuff.

Including cellphones that are absolutely perfect for specifically selected consumer segments.
post #141 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

I think you're wrong.

Think of it this way... if the Mac share is increasing yet it is more expensive then what does that tell you. To me it says that people really do see a difference, for the better, in the Mac operating system.

For instance... if Apple moved their profit margin down 10% to the low 20's I would assume, by your thinking, that Mac sales would skyrocket.

Why would that be?

This doesn't sound like a scenario where PCs are the same as Macs but are cheaper to buy.

I'd also add that a lot of Apple sales are probably driven by their current 'in fashion' status. Just look at how some of the biggest segments of the market that are purchasing Apple products are students or young adults where being in fashion and trendy is a fairly high priority. Time will tell if Apple's current success is built on actual credability, or whether it's just as a result of their being 'in vogue'.
post #142 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrochester View Post

I'd also add that a lot of Apple sales are probably driven by their current 'in fashion' status. Just look at how some of the biggest segments of the market that are purchasing Apple products are students or young adults where being in fashion and trendy is a fairly high priority. Time will tell if Apple's current success is built on actual credability, or whether it's just as a result of their being 'in vogue'.

Apple are within a few months of becoming, in-terms of market-cap, the largest company in the world being traded. Larger than Exxon.

You think that is because of a fad?

C.
post #143 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by appl View Post

I disagree. This isn't a race to the bottom with white goods, like the early PC was. Phones are personal.

In the PC race, they all looked alike, and all had a bewildering array of weird specs that made them read "C\> " or "]".

Today, with cellphones, the manufacturers are differentiating their products. They can add a cool overlay to make it theirs and appeal to specific market segments. They can make a cheap pink one with a smaller screen for middle school girls. They can make a balls to the wall model for techies, and they can make a full-featured one with all the latest apps for the iPhone switchers.

I don't think the current (and especially, the future) cellphone market is at all like the commodity market of the pre-Windows 95 beige box computer market.

Cellphones are not beige computers. They are everything from a lifeline for the elderly to a status symbol for the insecure, and everything in between.

And Android is absolutely ripe for product differentiation, rather than generic sameness. Indeed, it is specifically contemplated that it will be overlaid and modified and pared down and used for lots of different stuff.

Including cellphones that are absolutely perfect for specifically selected consumer segments.

But consumers are not stupid. They know that what can be done on one Android phone can be done on another with the same sort of spec. If the HTC is a few dollars cheaper than the Samsung, people will switch.

This is the commodity effect that inevitably takes place when all manufacturers get the most important component from a single vendor.

Like global thermonuclear war, the only way to win is not to play.

C.
post #144 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

Apple are within a few months of becoming, in-terms of market-cap, the largest company in the world being traded. Larger than Exxon.

You think that is because of a fad?

C.

Partly, yeah. You can't argue that Apple haven't created themselves an image of being cool, and for some people, that is enough of a reason to purchase their products. That's why I said the biggest test will be when Apple falls out of fashion; will they still be the largest company in the world by market-cap?
post #145 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrochester View Post

I'd also add that a lot of Apple sales are probably driven by their current 'in fashion' status. Just look at how some of the biggest segments of the market that are purchasing Apple products are students or young adults where being in fashion and trendy is a fairly high priority. Time will tell if Apple's current success is built on actual credability, or whether it's just as a result of their being 'in vogue'.

This sounds like fantasy.

I can't give you real market data but I have plenty of anecdotal evidence (ie. switchers) that tells me people are not buying Apple products just because they are trendy.
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #146 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

This sounds like fantasy.

I can't give you real market data but I have plenty of anecdotal evidence (ie. switchers) that tells me people are not buying Apple products just because they are trendy.

Some people will, some people won't. When I walk into my local Apple shop it's overwhelmingly filled with teens and young adults. I'll repeat this only once more, but this is why it'll be interesting to see if Apple can retain this level of success when they have fallen out of fashion and someone else becomes the industry darling.
post #147 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrochester View Post

Some people will, some people won't. When I walk into my local Apple shop it's overwhelmingly filled with teens and young adults. I'll repeat this only once more, but this is why it'll be interesting to see if Apple can retain this level of success when they have fallen out of fashion and someone else becomes the industry darling.

How long will we have to wait?
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #148 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post

The siutation with Android and 2.2 is the same situation with the iPhone and v4 of its software. You need the hardware that can support and handle the software. The latest handsets have either been updated to 2.2 or are soon to be updated to 2.2 because they have the power to run it.

Are the results in yet on power consumption using flash on a phone... and, please, anecdotal evidence won't cut it... "a friend of my cousin's brother-in-law's wife's aunt..."
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #149 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

How long will we have to wait?

Who knows?

Quote:
Are the results in yet on power consumption using flash on a phone... and, please, anecdotal evidence won't cut it... "a friend of my cousin's brother-in-law's wife's aunt..."

Says he who gave anecdotal evidence 4 messages above...
post #150 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post

See this is the main problem on this forum and with people like you and the Hermit. You don't have to be a flaming fanboy to own AAPL or enjoy your Apple products.

Is there some sort of award or citation for being able to get someone to name you directly in an AI reply?

lol
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #151 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrochester View Post

Partly, yeah. You can't argue that Apple haven't created themselves an image of being cool, and for some people, that is enough of a reason to purchase their products. That's why I said the biggest test will be when Apple falls out of fashion; will they still be the largest company in the world by market-cap?

It's that fad for oil which has kept Exxon up there for all those years.
All the kids are using it (daddio)

C.
post #152 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archipellago View Post

Not the issue.

Over here in UK, the picture is pretty similar and iPhone is on all networks.


problem for Apple is their greed and the total cost of ownership compared to a similar Android phone is far higher.

Same Carrier, same tariff, same data allowance.

Galaxy S = 24mths x £20 & free phone = TCO £480

iPhone 4 = 24mths x £30 plus £99 for phone = TCO £819

the S is arguably a better piece of hardware, certainly a better phone so why would people pay 70 or 80% for the inferior product?

this isn't a big mystery.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Onhka View Post

Could you supply a reference?

Could you supply a reference?

The only one I have says that the Free Galaxy S lists at £30 a month.

Am I to gather that you are still looking? Unless you are jus BS'ing us.

I am leaning towards the latter.
post #153 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

It's that fad for oil which has kept Exxon up there for all those years.
All the kids are using it (daddio)

C.

Yep, popular or not, they can stand on the credibility of their product.
post #154 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

Perhaps Wall Mart's fine clothing lines meet all your apparel requirements too?

As opposed to what? Other apparel shops where all their products are billboards advertising the store they were purchased from?

In general, I haven't seen where more expensive clothing is necessarily any better, except for maybe the more formal stuff. Trendier, yes, but that shortens the useful life vs. something more conservative.

Sorry, mine is just an off-topic aside. It just seems there's a classist vibe going on here. Walmart also sells Apple products. Between 30 and 33 items according to their web site.
post #155 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by appl View Post

I remember about a zillion years ago when I sold stereos for a failing company. It was a Washington's Birthday Sale, which was, at the time, a big deal in the CE world. Our store was nearly empty. The competitor down the street was packed.

I listened as one of the salesmen, who used to hold a mid-level position at the competitor, tell us all about how the competitor was losing money and that their strategy could never work. He had complex reasons why they could never make any money doing what they were doing.

The guys I worked for went belly up. The competitor became a national chain.

You remind me of the bitter former mid-level guy with his complex theories about how those guys could not possibly be making any money.


I sound like a bitter person? No don't think so but you sure sound like an old fart who does not have enough brain cells left to think.

Does your reply actually contribute much to the discussion of my thread?
first can you refute my 'complex theories' instead of quoting 'personal experiences' which count for little. I can also quote personal stories that people who didn't watch trends or calculate finances fell flat on their faces or point to news examples (Apple's rivals are full of them)

Also did you know I'm replying to all those people who gave 'complex theories' about how Android is making more money than Apple ("every Android unit sold gives revenue to Google, "Google will be pretty far ahead, income wise." etc") and that Apple's phone strategy is doomed. Like I said you guys spout without following the thread. So these Droid fans giving their complex financial theories are also like " the bitter former mid-level guy with his complex theories about how those guys could not possibly be making any money"? -- sort of cancels out your criticisms huh? lol.


Lastly as I have pointed out (you probably haven't read... )
When Android was announced in 2007 Google was a larger company than Apple. In 2009 Apple passed Google. Today after 3 years of Android Apple is about 100 Billion LARGER than Google in market cap (approx 270 to 169 b) and in the last few weeks the gap widened more. It seems that reality is actually trending to the reverse of what you believe.

I own both Google and Apple stocks and if you follow stocks in recent times Apple has outperformed google by a wide margin.
I believe I've added to the knowledge base for example my quoting the recent market cap growth of Apple vs Google during Android's rise is something which many are not aware but is really striking, what did your post contribute?
post #156 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

In general, I haven't seen where more expensive clothing is necessarily any better.

There's a useful analogy in fashion.
The lines in the cheapest stores are good value, but many are derivative of the catwalk fashions from the previous year.
The fashion industry has vigorous competition from multiple designers each trying to set trends. All the interesting activity happens at the high end.
The low end market benefits by taking these trends and making them accessible.

That's a pretty healthy state of affairs. You get plenty of choice and quality, even if you never leave Wall Mart.

Now imagine a word without that vigorous top end competition. Where there is only Wall Mart. Rapidy, you'd end up with a stagnation and lack of imagination. Because a single vendor has too much control, and there are no rewards for innovation and change.

You end up with a Soviet style car-showroom, where you can have any model of car, as long as it is a Trabant.

That's the problem of outsourcing software development to Microsoft and Google.

C.
post #157 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Apple on path to surpass Exxon as worlds most valuable company


Does Apple care about market cap?
post #158 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

Think of it this way... if the Mac share is increasing yet it is more expensive then what does that tell you. To me it says that people really do see a difference, for the better, in the Mac operating system.

You have no way of knowing whether it it the OS that is causing purchases or whether it is other factors that are causing purchases. For all you know, people buy a Mac despite it not having the "regular" OS they have always used in the past.

My guess is that lots of different people buy Macs for lots of different reasons.
post #159 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post

Let see so we have iPad and iOS record sales and we have Android record sales which promotes Flash as a benefit over iOS. So it appears to me that Apple has done nothing to slow down Flash or help move to HTML5 or any other alternative.

Are you stupid? Every major video site has switched to HTML5, and almost every major site supports iOS.
post #160 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

But consumers are not stupid. They know that what can be done on one Android phone can be done on another with the same sort of spec. If the HTC is a few dollars cheaper than the Samsung, people will switch.
C.

IMO, very few consumers buy due to specs. Some do, but if that were true in general, the iPhone and the iPad would not sell nearly as well as they do.

Instead, I think people buy what they like. A cellphone is not a spec-dependent beige box. There is plenty to differentiate any HTC from any Samsung, despite one of the aspects of them, the OS, being the same.

Don't these guys have special overlays, similar to MotoBlur? Or do they differentiate with big screens, or small form factor, or lots of chrome? Special "this phone only" software? Plain-vanilla Froyo with lots of cool apps preinstalled?

ISTM that Android phones are anything but commodity devices.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Nielsen: Android overtakes Apple's iOS in latest US smartphone sales