Apple's iPhone tops US smartphone shipments, but Android devices take 44% - Page 4

Nope -- http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2...otal-share.ars.

This is a common mistake made in these types of discussions. Apple's smartphone marketshare is absolutely unprecedented in the company's computer-selling history (iPod is another story, obviously). The Mac was a money loser for its first few years on the market, and the bulk of Apple's profits came from the apple 2 for most of the 1980s. Even the Apple II was not nearly as big of a deal as man people believe today, at least in terms of marketshare.

The huge volume of iPhones that Apple now sells gives them the economies of scale that they never had with the Mac, and the ability to really leverage their vertical integration like never before.

In related news, sales of all General Motors cars combined were greater than sales of the Toyota Camry.

Who cares? Apple isn't interested in market share. They're interested in profits - and have done extremely well for the last 10 years or so.

No.

Android may be the most popular smart phone OS in the US... but "more people" (57% vs 43%) are buying something else.

Thank you for playing, Asian Bob.

Just like how I view iOS's notification system as "clunky" and Android's as 'elegant".

Your point 2 does not make a whole lot of sense, given that a high end Android phone costs the same as an iPhone 4 and you can get an iPhone 3G3 for $99. Cost of ownership simply is not a differentiating factor.

This is why I say that Android doesn't have legs. Yes, it can do well in the short term, because you're quite right that consumers aren't focused on an esoteric issue like fragmentation. But consumers will eventually feel the effects of fragmentation, even though they don't know that fragmentation is the cause. When they find that they can't upgrade their OS because they bought the "wrong" Android phone, or that they can't install an app their friend has because they bought the "wrong" Android phone, or that they can't call google to get support for Android, or that the UI on their new Android phone is strangely different from the UI on their old one (or their friend's) -- that's when the effects of fragmentation will be felt. That's when user satisfaction numbers start to decline. That's when people start looking to alternatives.

Consider this -- we all know that the Mac "lost" the desktop war, right? If so, how is it that Apple has been making marketshare gains with the Mac for the last 5 years straight? At least part of the answer is that Apple provides many of the same advantages in the Mac that it provides in the iPhone, and even though Apple lacks the huge economies of scale with the Mac that it has with the iPhone, those advantages are still compelling for many people. In a way, the iPhone combines the advantages of the Mac with huge economies of scale that the Mac never had. Android is Windows, but with greater fragmentation (and resulting entropy) and less control/responsibility for the platform being taken by the OS creator.

(But I totally agree that Apple should get the iPhone on Verizon ASAP)

I would say "blows out of the water" is rather subjective. As an Android user, I'd certainly say that Android is more difficult to use compared to the iPhone. That said, it's not the insurmountable learning curve that most posters on here make it out to be. I'd argue that it's only marginally more difficult to use than the iPhone. And that the loss of ease of use is being traded for a huge increase in functionality. That works for some. Not for others.

In my observation though, for those who criticize, it's a comfort level issue. I've never owned an iPhone, so I find it awkward to use one. I'm always feeling for the hard back button and I miss haptic feedback when I type. I am sure, most iPhone owners handling an Android device, probably feel just as awkward and so they write off Android completely as "unusuable". And that's what I disagree with.

I think the iPhone has it's biggest drawbacks on hardware actually. Beautiful as the iPhone 4 is, the lack of a keyboard option, the lack of choice in screen sizes, with the iPhone 4 actually having a screen on the smaller end of even most Android devices, probably costs it a few sales (not that Jobs is crying over these lost sales).

Anyway, I really think the differences between the platforms are vastly overblown. And certainly, among my friends and family, nobody seems to think the iPhone is sooo much more superior than my Android device. In most cases, they are actually torn. They love the increased functionality (free navigation for example) but will readily admit that they are used to the iPhone, have paid up for many apps and so they can't imagine switching. I would imagine it's that way for most users. I really think this contest will come down to new smartphone buyers, not existing ones.

True. And his first point about Most people flocking to Verizon instead of AT@T last quarter is dead wrong. AT&T gained something like 2.6 million net new customers, whereas Verizon got less than a million. Sprint's number was in the 400,000's. This is with the common lore about AT&T being so bad that people rather wait or pass on the iPhone and stay with Verizon instead. So who is selling and who is buying all these Android-based phones?

Go back and look at Smartphone sales by Motorola (3.8 million), HTC (6.3 - all Android based?), Samsung (7.9 million -total, not just Android) , and Sony Ericsson (5.2 million) which came out in the last week or so. Add them all up (the Android-based ones) and compare them with Apple's 14.1 million. So i't about 23 million versus 14 million assuming they are all Android based and not Windows Mobile/Phone, or Bada, etc.

http://www.techzone360.com//topics/t...d-the-ugly.htm
"Since its launch in June, Galaxy S has been rolled out in 90 countries and has been selected by 210 carriers worldwide. Samsung projects sales of 10 million units by the end of 2010."

Projected 10 million units in 7 months, or less than 5 million average per quarter.


Again re Samsung - http://forums.appleinsider.com/newre...eply&p=1744617
"Driving this was the worldwide release of its Galaxy S i9000 smartphone, as well as its bada-based Wave model. Samsung has now sold 7 million Galaxy S smartphones and 2 million Wave devices since their launches)."

This would suggest about (7/9)x7.9=6.2 million were Android-based. Now you are comparing 21.3 vs. 14.1. These numbers are worldwide shipments. Now if you ask what portion of sales were to markets like China where Android-based phones have a huge advantage, and consider the popular lore in US about relative quality of Verizon and AT&T networks, as well as the numbers of new subscribers for the quarter, you'd have to admit that there is something not quite right about the chart in this article.

Thanks for the link. I was trying to find a reference before making my post, but didn't find anything good. So I was going on memory. Perhaps the stat I am remembering was for GUI based computers (ie, Mac v Windows, etc). Take out all the DOS-running PCs and perhaps that's where the 20% figure was coming from?

I'll believe it when I see it. I am in the minority here but somehow I doubt Verizon will pass up the control they have, through their Android handsets, for a handset on which they basically have no revenue generating opportunities beyond the handset sale.

While their Android lockdown has been bad for consumers, it's been remarkably good for Verizon.

And I suspect that's exactly why they may have passed on Windows Phone 7. No opportunity to push their own services.

The most bang for the buck for developers is iOS. While Android marketshare has grown considerably, profit for Android developers hasn't matched that growth. Android users aren't spending money on apps in the same way that they are on iOS devices. Free (Ad based) apps are great for users, but not so great for developers. With Apple loosening their grip on the AppStore guidelines, they give yet more reasons for developers to continue to develop for iOS 1st and then Android.

Marketshare is an undefined variable. the iPhone only has 4% of the handset market in the world yet where are devs making the most money on 3rd-party apps for handsets? Java-based apps had a near monopoly of the “marketshare” and still outnumber anything that only runs on Android because Android also runs Java, but where are the devs that want to make money?

The reason you are wrong and will continue to be wrong is your inability to look at the big picture. It’s not about marketshare, it’s about the developer’s realistic goals of making as much money as possible for the amount of the effort they put into their app. Devs don’t care if Java apps are the most common for any handset to use across the globe if 1) people aren’t going to seek them out, 2) people aren’t going to pay for them because they specifically choose a cheap or free wth contract phone because they are cheap, or 3) because the amount of effort to debug and test across a non-linear cycle of HW and OSes with fluctuation complications of other 3rd-party apps that can and will affect their product. That’s to name a few of the big ones. If you are a lone developer and you haven’t considered these issues then you have already failed. Apple may have streamlined the system to make such devs profitable but they can’t fix stupid.

edit: Succinctly pipped by depannist

Oh please. First off, most apps are written so they run on 1.6. Next, the vast majority (something like 3/4 of the Android installed base) is on 2.1 or higher and that number is growing rapidly month by month.

Not to say fragmentation isn't real and something that has to be addressed sooner rather than later, but it is overblown, and unless you have a very dated handset, you really aren't going to suffer massively for picking up an Android device. For the most part, the fragmentation boogieman is more FUD than fact.

And the proof is in the pudding. If it's that big an issue, why aren't Android sales stumbling?

Please pass on that tidbit to Rovio.

There are two vectors for Androids growth.

1) The US - apparently 50% of the smart phone market. Where they sell 9.1 M, or half their total. 43% of the US market.
2) China, probably most of the rest. Androids are not really visible anywhere else. I have not seen one in the wild in the UK, for instance. A few angry geeks where I work. Thats it.

So Android has 43% of the US market, and that is half it's market. Pretty much. Apple's market is mostly outside the US, where it sells 9 M, about equal to Android. And so,when both markets, China and US come available next year with the release of the iPhone CDMA phone. Android;s day is done.

Next year: The empire strikes back.

We should also be aware of the fact that

1) Android users have very little software lockdown. Its all free to them.
2) Surveys show that Android users are less reluctant to switch.

Copy and paste?

I as already stated in this thread once: It's not simply about cost at point of purchase, but cost after purchase. The number of free applications in the Android market versus... every other app store is heavily in favor of free apps. It's cheaper to own an Android phone with you pay so little for apps.

http://techcrunch.com/2010/07/05/distimo-june-2010/

who said, in a recent press release

"The Android Market version is currently ad-supported, but Rovio said it will soon add a paid version that will not include ads. "We will bring it out once we have sorted out some of the problems we seem to have with some devices. Not that many, but still," Rovio said. The company went with an ad-supported model first because "paid apps have not done very well on Android," it said."

Put it this way.
with 100% market share out for the taking, lets say Apple has 30%. That is 30% all by themselves. meanwhile the remaining 70% is composed of lets say 20 different handset makers, each with like 20 different variations of cell phone. I think you'd agree that Apple is doing just fine. This is a numbers game. Period. Apple's margins in this cell phone business may be small but they are competing with no one in their margin.
HELLO!!!!!

I'd be more than glad to help Apple "eclipse" Android-based smartphone shipments....
if they (Apple) would make it available to the OTHER cell phone providers- users (who are waiting for it) here in the States - besides AT& T, Verizon (and 17 countries in Europe)!

Switched over to Verizon to try out the Droid X after using iPhone's for 2 years.
While there is a couple nice features i like from Android , In my usage iOS works best.

My Major compaint about Android is the Forced upgrade to 2.2 that caused problems with the device and apps having the be forcefully closed/

Really hoping there is a Verizon iPhone coming , Would cost to mucch to switch at this time

I could care less that Android is outselling the iphone. I have the iphone 4 and the ipad 16 gig with wifi and 3G. I'm in lala land.
And more more more means nothing nothing nothing.didn't you get the memo!

That kind of post is wrong headed, if there were 100 phone manufactures Apple could have 2% of the market and be the biggest manufacturer of phones. It has to compete in the OS market as well.

( of course the OS stats should also include iOS on all devices, in particular iPods).

It means lots lots lots to me as a developer. In fact i dont think that the iPhone market is viable at < 10% given the low margins on phone software.

If that were the case then why isnt Apple licensing their OS or simply giving it away to gain more of this precise marketshare at the cost of profit? Why is the App Store so successful despite Apple barely having any marketshare when they announced it. Why are others copying Apple at every turn when Symbian, WinMo, BB OS and others have had excessive OS marketshare over Apple for most of the past 3.5 years? Why would MS not be including support for their 15% WinMo 6.x and earlier in WinPh7 when marketshare is the only valid measure? Think people!

You can say the same thing against iOS if you add up all the numbers against it (73.8% vs. 26.2%). So you can also twist it to say that "more people" are buying something else other than iOS.

What's your point?

What 17 countries are they?

Apple isn't iicencing because they are a hardware and an OS provider. They were successful at the start because there really wasn't any other way for a normal home dev. to produce apps for the others, and the SDK;s weren't up to it. That isn't the case now. If Android is 50% of the market, then people will produce for that first, and Apple second. If at all.

And that kind of talk is defeatist. Apple can win the smartphone war by getting to 40% of the US market - since they have 28% of the market one one carrier ( which is 25% of the total US carrier market) that is not an impossibility.

( China is less important).

This game is between Android and Apple, for the mind of developers. Apple needs to be larger, or as large as Android. They can do it. They need to move quickly now.

For Motorola, is is $216/handset for the most recent quarter.

More knee-jerk!

http://www.androphones.com/2010-android-phones.php



Really, what is the point of all this shit?



Oh Jesus!

That argument still doesn't definitively say that Android users have a lower level of disposable income. All it shows is that the developers for Android are more willing to release their apps for free. If the app is good, then there will be no shortage of people willing to pay for it. There are plenty of paid apps on the Market that have > 250,000 downloads.

Another thing to wonder about that link is whether or not it includes in-app purchases. There are lots of apps that are listed as free in the Market, but includes ads and if you donate to the developer through a PayPal link from within the app, it removes the ad. This has the same effect as just purchasing the app up-front.

The trend of conveniently forgetting that there are other iOS devices out their?

iPads, iPod Touch's (Apple TV's in future?), all ready and able to run mostly the same Apps.

Watch Windows Mobile 7 start eating into Androids share.



People who buy Android phones aren't generally "people people", they are more basement dwelling, tinkering people.

And people that buy iDevices aren't really people either. They're more shells that have Apple mind control devices operating for a brain.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=kViAnfQn5c8

See! I can make overly false generalizations too!

Apple released it's figures for app sales. Android? How many sales?

Still though Apple cant rest on this.

But you and others are claiming that Apple is losing some imagined race because they arent allowing their OS to run on any and all HW. The solution, if this really was something Apple cares about, is to allow iOS to run on any and all HW. The fact they arent means you are absolutely and 100% wrong about your assertion that marketshare is the primary goal over profit.


Its silly to talk about some war that is between Apple (a company) or the iPhone (a full HW product) and Android (an OS foundation).

The chances of Apple getting 40% of the market is irrelevant to Apple getting more profit YoY in a market. Exhibit A: Apple was losing marketshare when Atom CPUs made cheap netbooks possible yet Apple didnt release a netbook, instead they continued to dominate and increase their profits in the PC market and eventually released a tablet that isnt even counted with PC sales.

Again, so much for your theory that marketshare, not profit, is the primary focus for companies.


1) Who mentioned China? I didnt mention China.

2) China will be a very important market.


The game is trying to make a maximum net yield. There is no Android v Apple (again, a freely distributed foundational mobile OS v. a CE company), its about trying to make the most profit possible. That is what smart devs are looking for.

I wont develop for Android in a million years. I would rather stab myself in the eye.

A choice between the two, I say develop for Android. While Android likely wont make you money, stabbing yourself in the eye likely will cost you money. Of course, if you live in a country that covers your health care, then go for it.

Bigger share of new phones being sold, I meant. Not bigger overall. Though bigger overall will happen. With all that said Google will still do fine and Apple will do better than both of them, monetarily-speaking.

Not sure what your point is.