Apple's iPhone maintains lead over Blackberry, Android in US - Page 3

Enterprise, small business, and public, all where the money is at for everyone else. Apple as DED pointed out doesn't seem to care about the enterprise, probably because they don't understand it like they do their core audience, as if the enterprise needs flashy 27" all in one laptops posing as desktops for their clients.

Again you have misread the data, AND mischaracterized what I said.

The data from Admob is correct, it's the way that macrumours used to state and to draw conclusions is wrong, the data does not:

• comparing two different categories from of devices with different usage patterns is wrong period, nothing can mitigate that this is 100% invalid statistical method.
• macrumours, by aggregating all smartphones together and leaving iPod touch is also invalid, these people from macrumors really need to go to statistics 101 sometime.
• iPod touch is certainly a wildly successful device, and many are sold to people who don't really want any type of service plan, but want some benefits of a mobile device. But it has a very different usage pattern and set of services than an iphone or any other smartphone (just try to access some web enabled app on the highway).
• the correct comparison would be to fix all dimensions that are intended to be independent, and then compare devices between iOS and android, which make only the iPhone vs. android Phone comparison valid.
• CNN/fortune doesn't really do much better in that area than macrumour, they completely omitted to say how and when the data were collected (by when, I mean at which point in the lifecycle of the product, while at registration? during normal use? while installing some app?, while switching a network?), and the fact that it's opt-in should tell you that the result is skewed.
• The sample size of under 1000 for a single degree of freedom with a binary split is more than enough, but they are trying to draw implications from many dimensions of variability, especially given the numerous age categories. They also did not consider any residuals in the vectors given that they collected information on a number of DVs, the overall homoscedasticity in these models are going to be highly suspect.

This is a problem in general with random internet sites posting articles with authors with no training in any of the area that they are writing in. And quoting articles on internet about complex statistical analysis doesn't usually help your cause.


It's not about self bias, it's about who filled out those surveys; if it's when these phones are activated, then there is a high probability of statistical bias (not self bias).


Whether it is significant depends on the variance and p-value of the analysis, not something you can find by looking at a difference in percentage. Even just looking at difference between the two, the right way would be to say that the difference is 16-17%, not 8%


That is an opinion with your own conjecture, and as usual, I respect that as a possibility. But to make it an assertion, you would need some emperical data of that process actually happening.

That is a sure bet.

Google is barely managing, with some 40+ Android iPhone copies, to surpass Apple's one (or at most two) phone(s). And they've had practically forever to do it.

THAT is the real story here.

Now the difference is only going one way.. UP. Bring on the big Red.

The two "devices" are iPhones and Android phones. Both are in the same category. Why is this hard to understand? Ignore the column that says iPod Touch. It is irrelevant to this comparison.


Incorrect. What they said is that for all three phone platforms measured about 25% of respondents were under 24.


This has absolutely nothing to do with the percentage of iPhone, Android Phone and WebOS phone users under 24 that answered the survey. Zero, nada, zilch.


The dimensions ARE fixed as much as they can be in a survey of this kind. There is no comparison of iOS vs Android except in your mind. The comparison is between iPhone users and Android users that responded to the survey.


Yes, this is selection bias and I noted that. It's also done by AdMob which introduces another set of biases.

If you want to know the methodology simply read the article and follow the links. CNN did not hide that from you.

"All data in the feature section is based on an opt-in survey taken by users on their mobile device. Respondents were sourced by responding to mobile ads throughout AdMob's iPhone OS, Android and webOS networks. There was no incentive offered to participate in the survey.

There were 963 total respondents: 318 Android, 244 iPhone, 356 iPod touch and 45 webOS. The survey was run from February 5th - February 16th.

The geographic representation of the respondents was designed to approximate the distribution of users in the AdMob network. The respondents were sourced from English-speaking countries in the AdMob network. "


You know, after a certain point you're simply trying to bluster your way past the point that you have no data whatsoever to support your assertion that iPhone users are significantly older than Android users.

They are reporting the demographics of the respondents. You can use this data to extrapolate to the wider population as long as you understand the inherent biases of an opt in survey of users of ad driven apps. Unless you have data to show that there is an inherent age bias this information is probably representative of the age demographics of the entire population for that time period.


Given that AdMob and Nielsen generate these reports for Advertising purchasers do you really believe that

a) There is significant statistical analysis in determining the ages of respondents? (ans: no)
b) They are likely to completely hose up the categorization of age demographics? (ans: unlikely)

Whether the reported demographics matches that of the target population is debatable but not for their uses: the demographics of the eyeballs that view ads.


For someone who asserts expertise in statistics you seem not to grasp this fairly basic nature of opt-in surveys...there is always selection bias in opt in surveys.


Given that Nielsen did not provide methodology in their blog I'll go along with their analysis...that the age difference is slight. Not having any desire to pay $$$ for their actual report which lists their collection methodology I'll live with that assessment.


How odd that you require empirical data when you steadfastly provide none of your own while rejecting data that has already been provided.

Find me a source that shows that iPhone users are predominantly in the 44+ demographic.

Also, you don't need data to make an assertion. That's what makes it an assertion vs a statement of fact.

HUH? The same data that DED quotes is what backs up my argument. If you read the studies he quotes separate from his interpretation, you will walk away with a VERY DIFFERENT conclusion than the bizare ones he comes up with. There is no wishful thinking on my part, I am an iPhone owner, but I do not have any stock in Apple, Google, AT&T or Verizon. I have no skin in the game other than a desire for honesty and factual accuracy in journalism and blogging.

Outpacing is a pretty clear term. Pace means speed. Android phones are selling faster. They have not overtaken the iphone in market share yet, but they have certainly outpaced the iphone based on the metrics from a variety of sources. If you don't think Android has outpaced the iphone, I would love to see your data to back it up and your argument why Gartner, Nielson, wall street and the tech press are all wrong and why DED is right.

As for the Gartner research, go read their study and look at the numbers. The data they published in no way implied that the growth in Android sales came from the mysterious other category. The unit sales they reported for HTC, Motorola, and Samsung were more than enough to cover their estimated number of Android phones sold. DED appears to have made the assumption that any Android sales represented unit GROWTH for these manufacturers and since their year over year numbers were not up that much, the Android phones must be in the other category. That is a phenomonally stupid set of assumptions. Android sales heavily canabalized sales of other HTC, Motorola, and Samasung devices from a year earlier. They all sold more phones in total, but many of their sales of non-Android phones declined sharply once they had decent Android offerings. NO ONE other than DED is claiming that there are tens of millions of no name Android phones flooding the market, certainly Gartner did not and is not making that claim.

iPhones probably have remained in service longer than some of the other phones. Even when people upgrade to the latest version, they pass their old iPhone on to a friend or family memeber, or sell it to someone else who continiues to use it. Many of the original iPhone 2G's and iPhone 3G's remain in service, while a lower percentage of blackbery and windows mobile phones from that era are still in use. That trend could certainly change once there are 3 year old Android phones, and also as Apple leaves the earlier hardware further and further behind in software updates.

Thanks, tbh I wasn't expecting an answer, and certainly not one that made sense. What you suggest is the only feasible explanation -- second-hand reuse of older handsets, which is NOT identified in the survey as a new purchase (even though it should be, imo). I remain skeptical if the extent of this phenomenon is sufficient to explain the numbers, especially knowing that phones out of warranty have a limited lifespan due to battery and screen accidents. I admit thought that, short of assuming that the numbers reported by Nielsen are complete rubbish, I have no better explanation.

So you are denying what you said yourself earlier, this is the sentence of yours that I responded to:


I guess it doesn't surprise me that you are denying what you said in plain words in your previous post.


You apparently think so, not me. You are the first one to bring statistics of iPod touch purchase and usage into the discussion, I never did. The only thing I ever mentioned before is that I own an iPod (and always have at least one at any time), in an exchange about who is an "apple hater" and such. This is an iPhone forum with discussions on iPhones and other phones in competition.


I never compared iOS carte blanche with Android OS as a whole, the only think I ever compared was devices on cellular network with iOS vs with android. I think I have made this abundantly clear in my previous posts, you might want to read those again before posting.


The link to admob piece by businesswire contains no reference to selection bias, or bias of any kind within the design of the study. This is the only portion of the article that referred to the study:

Methodology, no it's not in the article, except for some vague references such as "opt-in" and "in Februrary", which do not stand up in the standards of any academic work.


Of course it was conducted by mobile ads, what do you think admob as a company does? Of course, it also doesn't answer the questions that I posed at all, whether it was conducted when the device was purchases, registered, during installation of an app, visiting certain site, etc, etc.


Not relevant to our discussion, almost everyone in the industry knows what markets admob serves anyways, so mostly redundant information.


My quarrel is not with your iphone vs android phone stats, it's always been with your dragging in another entire category of devices into an irrational comparison, let me refresh your mind on another place where you mentioned (among numerous instances):

I have never said that their iPhone stats were wrong, and in fact, this is what I said about it:
You can't run away from what you said earlier so easily.


You apparently have never done any first hand study involving rigorous statistical methods, or statistical inference, and don't know how terms like "extrapolate", "representative" and "inherent" are normally used in such domains. I rest my case.


You are right, it is "debatable", so are the conclusions that you think admob and nielsens have drawn, so what's the quarrel here?


Why, because the links you have provided does not define the methodology, period. Calling something opt-in survey does nothing to define the methodology. A large portion of all statistical data in the IT industry come from opt-in surveys, it means nearly nothing to state that something is an "opt-in survey".


If you are willing to draw that kind of that kind of conclusion, then you better be willing to pay for that. That and a statistical package such as SAS or SPSS.


You are right, my saying that iPhone users are typically older is a conjecture (and is a much simpler conclusion to draw than yours, mine simply involves analysis of two bimodal distributions in the same DF), and based on some small sample of data I see around my own life. Of course it is not a statistically valid conclusion to draw given the small sample that I have, and I never claimed it to be. If I ever have the resources to conduct a large scale data collection, I would, but I'm just an average student. You on the other hand, try to draw some conclusions from ambiguous and imprecise data that does not in any way warrant the type of conclusions that you want, so you simply push aside all guidelines of sound scientific research to forge toward the conclusion that you want.

the iphone was at 35% for one quarter.

Everybody stop getting their knickers in a twist. All of Android's growth is US and China based. I think the situation will reverse with more carriers, that is 40-30% iPhone - Anroid split. Of course the iOS Android split will be larger.

All ad mob surveys have a bias, as iOS apps will more commonly use iAds.

That is a reasonable conjecture. The survey likely overestimates the number of android users over that time period (Feb 2010 was before the big push of Droid Eris, Evo, Droid X, etc in the spring and summer). So in fact, Android probably still have a longer way to go in catching up to iOS in terms of cellular devices in users' hands than the survey suggests. Of course, we won't know unless we get some more precise data and more detailed description of the methodology.

Edit:
wait, then again, was iAd first implemented only during the summer? Or was there some type of limited release earlier in the year? I don't remember precisely.

I guess Eric Silvka is also misreprented the data over on MR.

•

iPhone Continues to Hold Off Android in U.S. Smartphone Market Share

He also lists some additional stat that is interesting...

In its study, Net Applications finds that iOS usage surged across the board between November and December as new customers came on board in the holiday season, with iOS usage share growing 24.3% month-to-month to claim 1.69% of total Internet browser usage. The iPad led Apple's charge with 33.3% share growth, with the iPod claiming 25% growth and the iPhone 20% growth. While Android experienced a slightly higher rate of share growth of 29%, its overall share of 0.40% remained far behind that of iOS, illustrating the impact of Apple's broader iOS ecosystem that extends well beyond smartphones.

Summer in the US, worldwide by the Fall.

LOL. Nice.

I don't wear knickers
To me, the numbers don't mean much, since I am not a shareholder of any company that has a stake in the game. I'm a user, and I'm glad Apple did what they did, and I like the user experience & service that I get from Apple. I hope they keep enough market share & profit to continue doing what they do. Beyond that, there will always be a non-Apple market (duh) and how that's divided up among other companies has only marginal fascination for me. All other handset makers out there are unlikely to do what Nokia, Palm, and RIM have done in becoming vertically integrated. It's cheaper for them to license an OS and integrate COTS parts from suppliers than to do any real engineering. For them, the obvious choices are: Android, WP7, Symbian. And only one of those choices has any real traction in the market right now.

No, he did not make the claim that Android sales were not outpacing iPhone sales. He put the focus on the market share numbers, which is acceptable bias, but he did not make any false statements.



A surge in iOS usage in November and December tied to iPad and iPOD growth exceeding the growth of Android phones and iPhones is both to be expected, and completely irrelevant to smart phone market share. It may be relavant to an app developer, but we were talking about smart phones which the iPad and iPod clearly are not.

Google's multi vendor and multi carrier strategy is going to win the market share battle as long as they have a relatively competitive product. When it comes to market share, their strategy is superior so the product does not need to be superior to "win" the volume battle. If you have the slightest clue about business you would know market share is not the most important metric in many industries, so it is not like Apple is the loser here. Google is an ad based company whose profits are driven by marketshare. Apple makes the majority of their money from sales to consumers and their profits are driven by profit margins. If Apple wanted to win the market share battle, iphones would be free with a contract or maybe $49 with a buy one get one offer every 2 weeks on all major carriers. The Apple fanboys on this forum would be pleased, and so would iOS developers, but Apple shareholders, not so much. Most Apple shareholders like the current premium product margins better than the 3%-5% they would get in a high volume approach.

You can argue strategy until you are blue in the face, but both Apple and Google are more profitable than the traditional phone providers and I am pretty confident that they are both run by people who understand what they are doing better than you do. Sure Jobs could focus on getting iOS revenue from ads rather than from consumers, and Google could switch to charging for Android, but I am not holding my breath for either. They both have strategies that work and there is obviously room in the market place for them to both make a boatload of money at the same time with their different approaches. Why idiot customers need to be so concerned about their team winning or losing is beyond me. Why an idiot blogger like DED needs to lie about the data to pump up his team and why people actually defend him is even more puzzling. Grow up and learn to use your brain.

You might want to adjust your attitude in future postings.

I don't think this remark was addressing anyone in particular. Attitudes aside, AIaddict is making a lot of sense. I for one am willing to heed the advice.

I think, however, that Jobs wants to win this war and will take a hit in margins for volume. The way to do that is to have more than two models of phones. Until this year that wasnt possible as the 3G was a much worse device than the 3GS - it was not worth continuing. Now, as with the iPod nano and the entry level iPod touch, Apple can maintain it's brand and reduce the price on the 3GS - the cheapest model - come June whilst continuing to sell it.

So three models.

1) iPhone 5 - dual core maybe, retina display. NFC chip and integrated wallet software. New Form factor. Premium price.
2) iPhone 4. As now. Retina display. Reduced price from Summer.
3) iPhone 3GS. As now. Very reduced price.

The iPhone 3GS can play infinity blade, and despite it's age holds up with Android phones released this year. In terms of processor power its not that different from the iPhone 4 so it will handle iOS 5.
It is a viable machine for a year, or two.


And even now you can get it on ( slightly expensive) contracts in the UK for £100, or less. With a price reduction it could be the "free" one on a normal contract.

As they go forward they can change the cheaper model every year. ( That said I prefer the form factor of the 3GS).

That will reduce margins somewhat, but maintain the brand, and any reductions in margins will come at the "cost" of a large increase in volume. In other words the reduction in margins for the iPhone ( which have to reduce sometime as with all commoditized items) will depend on how many 3GS's (or the cheapest model) are sold, which in itself would be a factor in the success of this model. That is: if the 3GS is 25-30% of the iPhone market, it is probably selling to people who would not have bought iPhones otherwise thus increasing the overall market. If it is 50% of all iPhones sold then it reduces overall margins more but doubles the iPhone market ( not a major worry to investors ).

I think therefore the stock price will hold up because of Apple's increase in the market as it even as it reduces it's overall iPhone ASP. That reduction has to happen over time anyway.

( Not that the stock price matters to Apple's day to day operations, unless they intend to sell some preferred stock sometime).

They do something like this for the iPod. The cheapest iPod touch, with a retina type display, is a mere $229. Yet the ASP of the iPod touch line is assumed to be much higher. Nevertheless, Apple have produced an iPhone without the Phone for retail $229, much cheaper than any off-contract iPhone. They can clearly afford to reduce prices on their line, particularly if they are using old components and have their manufacturing down pat - as with the 3GS.

i totally expect this to happen, and I see it taking back share from Android ( along with the Chinese and Verizon phones).

No, I'm not denying anything. Do you understand the meaning of the word AND in that statement?

They compared phones to phones AND threw in iPod data because they had it.

The iPod section apparently confuses you so you should ignore it.


I quoted the methodology for you. The link to that is in the ARTICLE. Here is the link provided in the ARTICLE you failed to click on:

http://metrics.admob.com/2010/02/jan...etrics-report/

Look on page 3 in the PDF you can download from that link. You will find the quoted text there.

You can lead a horse to water...


This is completely answered in the quoted text which you apparently did not read:

"Respondents were sourced by responding to mobile ads throughout AdMob's iPhone OS, Android and webOS networks."

Answer: When clicking on an ad they were given an option to fill out a survey. That's how we found them and that's when they took the survey.

Is english your first language?


This is directly quoted from the methodology paragraph in the PDF you did not read because you didn't click on the link that describes Admob's methodology. At least in as much detail as the bother to provide a non-paying public. Given that they aren't submitting that to a peer reviewed journal that's good enough to get the general idea of what they did.


So you agree that macrumors is correct in saying that iPhone and Android demographic is largely similar? This was the primary point I made and you keep avoiding. That is why I keep telling you to forget about the iPod for the moment.


You still have no data of your own do you? You have no case and you should probably look up what those words mean again.


Wow...fancy way of stating "I have no supporting data". Does it really take 50 words to say what you can in 5?

Hint: This does not obscure the lack of data/work/effort to professors. A rolling of the eyes is the typical response.


That's amusing. You're the typical guinea pig we used for our HCI/HSI studies...so yeah, I have published using "rigorous statistical methods" and presented results at a conference...granted the heavy statistical lifting was done by that statistician on my team but we co-developed the experiment. My stat classes are from long long long ago.


Nope. Not at all. I clearly stated that the data available from these surveys, flawed as they may be, do not support your assertion that iPhone users are predominantly older and technically less sophisticated than Android users.

You do understand this is trollish right? I could state that Android users are typically less well educated and have lower income but while true (due to the slight age difference) that implies something completely wrong (that they are dumb and cheap).

Population wise, they pretty much all fit the same smartphone demographic with minor variances that are likely just temporary or a function of what data and how it was collected.

Apple isn't dumbing down the UI to target the old foggies demographic but to make the product better to use. Google...good lord. The UI's are designed by committees of engineers. Providing UI "choice" is the typical coder failure mode for UI design. I dunno what's best so I'm gonna let the users pick what to use.

Actually the situation is even more interesting. Google has an ad driven business model so the Android market (by design or neglect) drives devs toward an ad based vs paid model. At least this is how the Angry Bird devs feel.

If true, all ad based metrics will favor Android over iOS given the different business models of the two app markets.

iAds is simply Jobs firing a shot across Google's bow. Should be amusing if Apple allows iAds onto WP7 and Android...that won't be a shot across the bow but an honest to goodness broadside.

deleted

Edited by MacRulez - 5/4/12 at 1:06pm

you are the one who brought it up in the first place, good for you that you intend to pretend that I brought it up. I have said multiple times that this is irrelevant and statistically unsound. Up until this moment you have championed its significance.


That is mostly given, the real question is at which point in the lifecycle did that happen, and the actual form and wording of the survey itself, which remains unanswered.
yes to the last question.


those are not rigorous reporting of statistical methodology, and cannot pass from any standard used in academia or the IT industry. Period.


I don't agree or disagree with anything from that article. Until they conduct analysis according to some semblance of research, there is nothing to confirm or to falsify.


no, as I have said from the beginning, these are not from any statistical data, but my own experience, please read my earlier posts before replying again.


again, read before reply.


good for you that you have good collaboration on your work. I work in hardware system design and AI, and I have some decent grasp of basic stats concepts, not great. I thought that other areas of CS like HCI would have more, but what do I know.


At the risk of sounding like a broken record, read my posts again, all of them, before you reply again.

android users with median lower Income?, I would readily agree.
I don't, know what apple's business strategy would be, and notbeing an HCI person, I don't have inside information on their interface design.
The only one trolling would be you, taking SOMEONE'S STRAIGHTFORWARD OBSERVATION, and turning it into a pissing contest with a slew of shoddy data and even shoddier observations. You are the one who really needs to learn forum posting ettiquette, not me.

So with all the carriers in the U.S plus buy one crap get one crap free, and also with one penny for a crapdroid, and they still behind iOS. This shows that quality over quantity.

You certainly do disagree...with significant resistance. Still can't get a straightforward "Yeah, the data doesn't really support my contention" out of you.


Why would you readily agree? It's based on the same data you reject as unusable for any sort of analysis. That Android users are only slightly younger than iPhone users.


It's a biased observation with a biased conclusion we've heard all to often before (iPhones are for grandma). Even when shown there is conflicting data, you insist your personal observations are somehow more relevant than the reported numbers.

But but but...it doesn't match my preconceived notions! They must have done their analysis wrong! They don't know statistics! They didn't report their methodology! They didn't meet the standards of academia! Blah blah blah. Yeah, everyone is clueless but you.

No the data doesn't support my contention, that's true. It doesn't support yours either. And since the collection of data is left in murky water, and the unprofessional analysis by Fortune/macrumours, it doesn't really support or refute anyone's thesis, it's a simply a failed or at best incomplete piece of research. It's not necessarily your fault of course, but it doesn't help you either.


They are clueless, the people who reported on it, yes, they certainly are. Especially with a site like macrumours; the fact that they are willing to put macRUMORS as part of their name and site url should tell you something about their standard of reporting or treating the veracity of data.

iPhones compete better among older, and less well versed in computing devices, population is actually a large positive, and bodes well for iOS in the future (as I have said from the beginning). As the older population is the largest slice of the untapped market in mobile devices (by the way, a device wed to wifi is not mobile in any practical sense of the word), and could be the huge growth story for Apple in the next 5 years. Only someone who has no idea how the IT industry works would think that it would be meant as a slight. Or perhaps someone who has a profound and viceral bias against older folks; I certainly have never given a whiff of suggestion to that end in this thread; on the other hand, you and a couple others, hmmmmmm......