46% of smartphone buyers prefer Apple's iOS, 32% choose Google Android - Page 2

Wintards, just like Droidtards, are tasteless!

I wonder if the intention to buy an iPhone changes once a buyer is at the counter and sees how much cheaper an Android phone is to buy. Price has a way of changing one's mind. I went to purchase a particular make and model of automobile but once I saw the price of the vehicle I intended to buy, I ultimately purchased a different make.

Intention is one thing, execution is another.

WP7 is certainly the best "base" for a smartphone on the market.

It's not really that surprising, considering how late Microsoft were to the "next-gen" smartphone market they had a lot longer to study usage patterns and mobile phone paradigms than either Apple or Google.

IMO WP7 is missing the "trimmings" though. Mango will bring WP7 closer to the competition in features (and even ahead in some areas). However I use my iPhone/iPad combination daily and I really don't want to buy two data plans, so the lack of tethering in WP7 is basically a deal-breaker for me.

I'm hoping with the addition of the sockets API in Mango Microsoft will allow tethering apps into the marketplace. If so I will take WP7 into consideration next to the iPhone 5 during my next phone purchase.

The report says :

"Among consumers who plan to buy a smartphone in the next three months, the iPhone is the top choice, with nearly half of all prospective buyers choosing Apple.
"

Which apparently controls for price; however something is happening in the shops to change minds. Price? Android biased sales men? The fact that carriers get a better deal from Android phones. Something.


Yeah, Apple need to do something on price. However I am dubious about what Google mean by activations. Does it include new users of second hand phones? And your school is not representative of Ireland, which is a a major iOS hot point.


It's Apple's to win. They need a good cheap device.

"Wintards"? Now, now, no need to be rude.

I do suspect that the "57% very-satisfied" result for WM7 probably comes from the extremely low numbers available to be polled, that those polled don't want to say "my choice seriously SUCKED!", and that most of those using the WM7 phones are M$ employees, but hey! Who's splitting hairs?

It's also notable that although they enjoyed an allegedly high satisfaction rate, there was no mention of anyone actually intending to buy one in the next 90 days.

After all, how many WM7 phones are available on the market TODAY? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? >

I suppose my question is, what does "giving the WP7" a chance really mean? Buying one and returning it?
I'd say WP7 is the closest out of all the iOS clones out there and it looks like it was not hacked together, but I'm dismissing it based on app selection AND that it is an MS product. For all I know MS may decide to kill it like so many of their products.

I think it's fairly safe to say it's the best GUI that microsoft have ever developed, even if that is somewhat faint praise.

Personally, no matter how good it is I wouldn't buy a WP7 phone at this point because I'm unconvinced that the platform has a significant future. For all MS's deep pockets they've so far not gotten past 1% of US handset sales with this - and the US is their strongest market.

WP7 is a miracle of bad branding combined with a legacy of bad consumer experiences and an increasing wall of indifference from the retail channel.

More than there are models of iPhone

Perhaps some combination of the above, but perhaps even more so is that once potential buyers actually see Android-based phones, particularly the 4"+ display's on some, compared to the iPhone, the Android one's may simply be more impressive.

are 4"+ models outselling 3.7" models in the android space? If they're that impressive I'd presume they would be.

Yes, some of those really are that impressive. You've seen them on display haven't you? At the upper end, where they compete with the iPhone, phones like the Thunderbolt, DroidX2 and 3 and HTC Inspire all have large, bright displays and make an quite an impact if seen next to Apple's product. So those that can afford either an iPhone or a high-end Android may not be as impressed by the iPhone once they see both products side-by-side. What they came to buy and what they walk out with may change in that few minutes in front of the display shelves.

Less expensive Android phones would be more likely purchased BECAUSE they're less expensive, not because they outshine either the iPhone's or premium Android models.

But I'm sure you'd already thought of that Cloudgazer.

I doubt it controls for price. I genuinely thought the SGSII was selling sim free for about the same price as the IP4. When I actually went and checked the prices I found that not to be the case. I very much doubt the majority of respondents to such a survey actually had a hard grasp of the real price differentials.


Name me a high school in Ireland where the iOS to Android ratio among the student population is greater than 1:4

Have you ever used a WP7 device? Even I, as an iPhone4 user, am very impressed with the WP7 platform MS has put forward. Its surprisingly competent.

School, full of kids, with no money. WELL GEE I WONDER WHICH HANDSET WILL WIN, THE CHEAP ONE MAYBE?

With that being said, on the train to University almost every device I see is an iDevice. Some android devices show up now and then and the hipsters seem to have blackberry phones (maybe they got free hair spray with it )

HTC Desire and several of their other models and the Nexus One are made from aluminium and Gorilla glass - not the Apple - 'we'll drop some marketing jargon and hope people think it's Gorilla glass' - type of glass.

That what RIM keeps telling themselves.
But it's not working

this survey only considers people that are planning to buy a smartphone in the next 90 days. that's the first question. therefore, it captures all those people that are waiting for the new iphone. you clearly see the pattern that it always peaks before the iphone launch: june 08, 09, 10 and 11.

after those buyers get their new iphone the numbers drop again. clearly due to seasonality one can only look at year over year comparisons.

(I think you meant FUD?)

That's not true. For me personally, the iPhone was ruled out because of network selection. I use Wind Mobile in Canada (same frequency as T-Mobile USA), which the iPhone does not support. And there was no Windows Phone 7 devices available at the time when I signed up, that supported this network.

And this is no way in Hades, I'm going to give up my plan simply to sport a certain device I like (my plan is $40 for unlimited talk in North America, unlimited global text and unlimited data, with voicemail, caller ID, etc.).

That said, once I jumped on Android, I've noticed certain things, chiefly among them, is how much better the Google ecosystem works for me. This is now in play when I get my next smartphone. I used Hotmail before, but my Hotmail account has just become a giant junk engine. So I switched to GMail just before I got my Android phone. Since then, I've loved the integration of Android with Google's ecosystem. And it is on this point, that Microsoft is behind on my books. Not on integration but on the ecosystem. Microsoft's ecosystem is just not up to par. Hotmail doesn't compare with GMail. Bing Search is utterly terrible outside the USA. Doesn't even come reasonably close in Canada. Bing Maps is utterly ignorant on anything outside Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver. And the functionality Google keeps adding is incredible. There's a traffic widget just to check how long your drive home will be at a glance. There's navigation, not just by car, but on foot, bike and by transit (and Google covers more transit systems than Bing in Canada). Compare Bing New to Google News. Where's Microsoft's free equivlant to Google Docs? Compare Google Talk to MSN Messenger (who uses this any more?). On and on. And switching from Android to Windows Phone is a far bigger commitment than Android to iPhone (because it's more likely to be an ecosystem switch). At least, I can use a lot of these services on the iPhone.

Looking ahead, Google just seems to be pushing harder on certain things that I like. Apple's going with iCloud, which is nice. But if I get stuck out without an iDevice that has iWork on it, I'll be screwed. So even here, I'm more drawn to Google Docs, which I can access from anywhere, from my PC at work, to my Mac at home. Than there's advances like Google Wallet. I am enthusiastic about mobile commerce. And sick of wallet bulge. And that'll be a big part of my next smartphone purchase. But again, this is an area where Google is leading....and not just on Android. They are willing to put that Google Wallet app out on several platforms.

iOS is nice. But what bugs me is the lack of integration with web services. Sure, they fixed highly annoying items like notifications (to anybody but the diehard Apple fan this was a test of patience), folders and such. But at the end of the day, the level of service integration with web services is controlled and purposely limited by Apple. There's nothing like the Cloud2Device Messaging that you see on Android with Google Maps and web addresses (though I guess it's now on with the Read Later function). On Android, you can post something to Facebook in a click. Apple has decided to ignore Facebook and give you Twitter only...because they paid Apple for the privilege. And that's not the only example. The biggest one to me: why hasn't Apple pursued a navigation function on iOS (even though the Maps app is extremely well executed)? I suspect it's because they don't want to kill the sales of navigation apps from 3rd party providers. That maybe Apple's perogative, but once you get used to Google Maps Navigation, the thought that you pay $60 for (depending on opinion) worse or only marginally better functionality, would strike most people as odd. Tom Tom has offline capabilities. But no Street View. I can't find events on its maps. And even the POI database is not as up to date (compared to say Google Places and the Open Now function). From my perspective, this is not about what's best for the user. It's about what's best for Apple's business interests. iOS is certainly nicer and more polished than Android. But what Android lacks in spit and polish in more than massively makes up for in functionality. Especially if you routinely use several products from the Google ecosystem. Apple needs to open up a little more and allow for more functionality.

So there you go...just my perspective. Windows Phone 7 is a beautiful OS. I'm mystified why it hasn't caught on more. But I strongly suspect that it's for the reasons I listed above: functionality of the whole ecosystem (especially outside the USA). The other could be branding. If you don't like Windows on your computer or Windows Mobile 6, then you might associate Windows Phone 7 with it. The iPhone, sells, in my books, because it's well executed and has a strong brand behind it. But I wish, die-hard Apple fans, would see some of the rationale I've put forward above. There are a few of us out there that do buy Android for the increased functionality. We're not phone geeks who load a new phone ROM everyday. And we're not poor folk who can't afford an iPhone.

And finally for the usual crowd....no, I have no issues with Google invading my privacy to sell it to their advertisers. Microsoft has been doing the same with my Hotmail account for a lot longer than Google has been around. Ditto for Facebook (which I consider far, far more scary).

I will say this...it's going to be a very tough decision for me on the next smartphone if all three platforms have 4inch retina displays and come with NFC chips.

----

On the numbers, I believe them. I don't doubt that if you phone up random people and asked them what they wanted more of them would say iPhone. But once they actually start shopping around, and start looking at various features, that could change pretty quickly. And 90 days is a terrible window to look at. Most people I know don't start shopping till their contract ends. Maybe a month before at most.

To be fair, I've always thought of this like TVs. People go for the TVs with garishly bright colours. A more accurate colour profile would strike most people as dull in a TV store. I don't think this is a credit for Android. Personally, I would love a retina display type of screen on my next smartphone. It's almost why I'm holding off on a tablet. First company to get that kind of resolution and colour accuracy will get my hard earned dough (most likely to be Apple I suspect).

Cheap is not in Apple's DNA. The responded to the netbook craze with the MacBook Air which cost several thousand dollars initially. And then the iPad which costs more than most netbooks. The iPad may have done well because it was novel solution to the problem of, "I need a lighter and more portable computer that's cheaper and just as functional as a laptop." I don't they can pull off something that huge in the smartphone business.

I don't seem the competing broadly on price (off-contract pricing...where the differences can be huge). And if they must do it, I only see them doing it in markets where most phones are sold on-contract. This way they could sell the previous model iPhone for $0 or drop the current year model price to $150 or $100. Might save them in markets where phones are sold on-contract. But that's not a universal practice.

I find it a tad odd (and ironic) that while Apple loves to brag about how well off their user base is, that they might be rushing to make their phones as cheap as possible (without sacrificing too much profitability).

That my friend, is a very good point. Probably the main reason. Hat's off.

The AIR has modern state of the art design and expensive features - the SSD. And the iPad is not a netBook. iPads have top of the line mobile processors and screens, netbooks are cheaper small versions of an existing product. The entry level iPad was the cheapest tablet on release, it is pretty much the cheapest now, give or take $50, and they will probably reduce prices if a HD version comes out.

Apple does do cheap ( in price); however when it does cheap it does expensive as well. The ASP of the iPod Touch is way higher than the standard model. Apple is a mass market company which sells to the masses, with an enviable reputation for being expensive.


Every time people make this argument - which happens in every thread where someone mentions an iPhone phone reduction. I mention that Cook said he wanted to cede no market, that the iPhone was not to be for the rich and they were looking into innovative solutions for that. Every time.

It makes no difference. The same "Apple doesnt do cheap" line is repeated.



Apple have never released any marketing about how well off their user base is, so it wouldn't be too ironic for them to sell cheap, along with expensive. Not bottom of the market cheap, but cheap enough. iOS will help if iCloud takes off.

That's definitely going on, but even outside of those periods we see the 'intent to purchase' that they're measuring doesn't marry up to the actual sales numbers. It's always higher, which does fit a premium product that has a cheaper 'good enough' competitor.

How does that relate to people who were buying original iPhone at the time when Apple was completely irrelevant in mobile market?

Brand irrelevant today is not necessarily brand irrelevant tomorrow. Apple users of all should know that.

I'm also looking forward WP7, but I will wait for Nokia. I'm happy with my 3Gs but I want to try something as different as possible... which is why I am not interested in Android (too much like iOS on GUI level) but likewise not much interested in iOS5. My wife, on the contrary, wants to keep it as much the same as it is now, so she will be strong candidate for iPhone 5.

Ah, yesss. Give me a tasty iTard any time of the day...

Not many, and they are - on average - lower quality devices than what goes for Android. In a word, manufacturers went off with half-as*ed effort with their first go on WP7.

Two things could change that:

Nokia. They will be iPhone for WP7. They are more than capable of creating high quality, desirable devices.

Royalties. Even if Apple/MS/RIM (a.k.a the Rockstar Unholy Trinity ) don't block Android completely, there is more than decent chance that, with all the royalties on top of it, Android will be more expensive for manufacturers than buying WP7 licenses. Samsung and others don't do Android because they are believers, but because it is supposed to be cheap(er)... and that could easily change.

True that. We should know after September if Microsoft are going to forge a coherent computing platform or if they are going to cast WP7 off to the side.

If Windows Phone gets orphaned, I can't see it drastically increasing markeshare - Nokia deal or not.

It still might end up in third place, but it won't be more than single digits or at best the very low teens.

There's a difference between 'emerging from obscurity' and 'sinking into irrelevancy'. The former has mystery and excites curiosity - the latter is familiarity breeding contempt.

WP7 needs a hail mary pass, which Nokia may yet prove to be - but it's a longshot.

I've said it before, Microsoft are the Bluebeard of tech, there's an attic at Redmond full of the bodies of their previous partners.

That history would indicate that WP7 is far likelier to doom Nokia than Nokia is to save WP7.