One needs to look more closely at how "smartphone" is defined. And, more to the point, how people are actually using their phones to accomplish a variety of tasks.
What has been happening is that the overall "smartphone" is growing significantly as "dumb" and "feature" phones are replaced with "smartphones". Apparently, according to various analysts, "smartphones" now comprise just north of ALL mobile phones and are rapidly going to subsume all mobile phones as all mobile phones soon become "smartphones" simply because technology and mobile OSs are advancing.
At the same time, one wonders if putting Android on a phone, any phone, makes it a "smartphone" by definition. That certainly seems to be the case. Most of the Android phones produced and sold in the world are not Samsung S3 equivalents, which, as we can see from real sales data, do quite poorly against the iPhone. It is only when the iPhone is compared to ALL "smartphones" from ALL manufacturers, on ALL carriers in ALL the world, that you can come to your conclusion that Apple's poor little iPhone is not doing so hot all on its lonesome. Now, Apple only ever sold "smartphones", so it didn't have a look in at more than half the market of all mobile phones. Plus, Apple is only available on at most half the carriers in the world, while Samsung is available on pretty much all carriers in the world (Nokia too). So, Apple has at least half the world's mobile subscriptions yet to address for the future! Great position to be in!
Therefore, even where Apple shows a "loss" or flatline in "smartphone" marketshare, it is actually holding its own or growing in userbase, because the "smartphone" market is growing in leaps and bounds -- regular mobile phones are being replaced by "smartphones". Having said that, a flat line on Android smartphones on Verizon and ATT is significant, because that is a closed market. We know how many phones they sold, we know how many subscribers they have, we know how many new subscribers they have, we know what phones they could have chosen. ATT and Verizon consistently sell more iPhones than all Android smartphones. End of story. But the whole world is not a closed market -- there are all kinds of issues regarding availability on carriers, there are infrastructure issues, economics, politics, etc. The iPhone has yet to be in a position to even begin to address half the world market. Whole countries aren't really markets we can make good comparisons about either, unless we have more detail -- we don't know if the iPhone can even address all of Germany, Italy, Spain, France, UK, etc. Is the iPhone available on all carriers and equally available as an option to all the citizens of those countries to the degree that an Android phone -- ANY Android phone -- is? I doubt it. So, what good are your charts at telling us what the ATT and Verizon charts can tell us about iPhone vs Android smartphone?
Apple is competing against non-consumption. It can go nowhere but up. Apple was not in the phone business, then in 2007 it was. It sells a couple models of a very particular phone: a smartphone for sure (in fact it redefined the category and established the benchmark). Samsung, like Nokia et al has long made all sorts of phones of every description (hundreds of them), and had long-term relationships with all the carriers. It has always sold millions of phones. So now its phones run Android instead of whatever they ran before. So? It is really competing with other similar OEMs (HTC, Nokia, LG, etc.) many of whom it has just about run out of business. The iPhone against "Android" is just not the real issue: EVERYTHING is Android... until a consumer tries an iPhone. But how is Android doing against Samsung where a real comparison can be made (like on a single carrier)? Pretty darn good.
In fact, when real life usages are examined (web surfing, buying, online apps and services, various kinds of computing tasks...), the iPhone is represented DISPROPORTIONATELY. Why? Maybe because people actually use the iPhone as a real "smartphone" but don't use their Android upgrade in those ways. Android is put on any and all kinds of phones now. It is the default OS, replacing the previous generation of default mobile OS. This is just what all phone manufacturers have been putting on all their phones, regardless. So, of course the segment of ALL mobile phones represented by "smartphones" was bound to explode. By definition. Yes, that is down to Android. Whoopee! A lot of these billions of Android activations are on basic phones that, yes, can email and surf, if you really want to -- but apparently their owners don't use them for that... because, apparently, they are practically UNunsable for that. Or the owner just picked up whatever phone upgrade the salesman pushed on him, and that happened to run a version of Android (probably a three year-old version, never to be upgraded).
Clearly, the iPhone is doing better than any other single phone -- probably better than the next 5 "smartphones" that can really be compared with it in terms of capability and every day real-life use cases that people choose them for. So, as the "smartphone" market inevitably grows to take over all mobile phones and people expect more of their phone, the potential market for iPhone only grows and grows. Android is already in there, and no-one really cares -- sometimes it provides capability and utility to the phone owner, sometimes it doesn't, depends on the phone, the Android version, the person and their expectations, etc. But at least we won't have to differentiate between the "smartphone" market and the rest of the mobile phone market much longer -- it'll just be one huge pile of global mobile subscriptions numbering in the billions, with the potential of one or more for every person on earth. If Apple gets 20% of that against EVERYONE else, whatever the mix of OSs, it will be doing phenomenally well! Jobs was shooting for 1%.