or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Editorial: Apple's iOS is the new Windows
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Editorial: Apple's iOS is the new Windows - Page 4

post #121 of 201
Originally Posted by igriv View Post
As opposed to pervasive vendor lock-in (as practiced by Apple — notice that you cannot play iTunes on your android device without going through some amount of pain…

 

But you can do it.


…you can not read your iCloud mail [except through the clunky web app]…

 

But you CAN do it.


…you can not open your iWork documents…

 

But you… CAN… do it.


…I could go on…

 

Please do. In fact, you've not yet started.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #122 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredD View Post

Thats ignoring the network effect. Loss of market share is not inevitable.  It did not happen to Windows for example. Apple is losing market share because its them against all the other OEMs.  iOS would have maintained market share if other OEMs could license the OS, but of course we know that will never happen.

Basically because iOS is closed from a licensing POV the market share loss was inevitable. And at a critical point that also means a loss of influence. When Apple gets to 10% market share, like in the PC business, do you really think games will be released on iOS first? Or social apps?  What would be the point, except for a trial run?

I would have though long time Mac users would have known market share very much does matter, no matter what Apple's profits are.

The iPhone has never dominated the market share game. Developers look to make money. Surveys have shown iOS users spend more money on apps than Androiders. It's also doubtful that iOS will fall to 10% as the iPad and iPhone still dominate individual sales. In addition their usage share is relatively higher than the estimated market share.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

How did they leverage their way in? Not one single manufacturer is forced to use Android they chose to and can totally keep Google out of it. Samsung did just that with the first Galaxy S, but Google got smart and put all its apps in the Play Store, before then Google apps were built in to the OS.

What were their choices? Develop their own OSes? License an out of date windows mobile? Or take a free OS?
post #123 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

How did they leverage their way in? Not one single manufacturer is forced to use Android they chose to and can totally keep Google out of it. Samsung did just that with the first Galaxy S, but Google got smart and put all its apps in the Play Store, before then Google apps were built in to the OS.

Are you purposely being obtuse? Your argument is like MS' "How are we leveraging anything when we allow other internet browsers to be installed?" They offer up something seemingly "cheap" to gain market share quickly and then generate fees at the other end. Are you really going to claim those billion "activations" and all those services they charge vendors for aren't there to generate any revenue under the guise of a "free" OS? If there was no one attaching themselves to Google's services then you'd have a point, but that's the exception, not the rule. Now it's a completely other argument as to whether this is illegal or not but their actions of "giving away" an OS are quite clear so please stop trying to paint Google as being altruistic.
Edited by SolipsismX - 5/5/13 at 1:15pm

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #124 of 201

I thought he was going to say bloated and buggy.

post #125 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredD View Post

Thats ignoring the network effect. Loss of market share is not inevitable.  It did not happen to Windows for example. Apple is losing market share because its them against all the other OEMs.  iOS would have maintained market share if other OEMs could license the OS, but of course we know that will never happen.

 

Basically because iOS is closed from a licensing POV the market share loss was inevitable. And at a critical point that also means a loss of influence. When Apple gets to 10% market share, like in the PC business, do you really think games will be released on iOS first? Or social apps?  What would be the point, except for a trial run?

 

I would have though long time Mac users would have known market share very much does matter, no matter what Apple's profits are.

Oh heck, you're back again. Making stupid arguments.

 

You just don't get it, do you? Apple makes almost all of its money on hardware. In fact, it's pretty much the only company making money hand-over-fist in HW (granted, Samsung is showing some measure of success too, but I'd wait at least a couple of more years to see if that's sustainable).

 

In the HW game, market share and profits have a complicated relationship -- it's probably inverse-V-shaped: it is positively correlated up to point where you've got most of the high-end customers, but it starts to get negative as you start to scape the increasingly marginal customer. Apple takes a lion's share of the profits in each of its segments since it understands this. 

 

All Apple needs to attract the best ecosystem (network effects) is a sufficiently large share of the high-end customer, not 90%, share. Apple does not need or want the riffraff -- and the relentless pressure for scraping the bottom of the barrel -- that the extra share will bring beyond a point.

 

Its share in markets such as the tablets, smartphones, and music players will go to 10% only in your dreams. In the only market where it has a global share less than 10% (Macs) its share is poised to grow massively in the next decade (as countries such as India, China, Indonesia, Brazil and so on get wealthier: no one who can afford it wants to be caught dead toting a PC in those markets).

post #126 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garamond View Post

 

10 years? You missed it by quite some years, my friend. Apple was on the verge of bankruptcy back in 1996, but has had a tremendous rise since that time. But I guess there are many new iOS-fans around that doesn't know the history ;)

 

Time flies when you're having fun!

"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
post #127 of 201

I actually think that Apple is doing everything in its power to NOT be the next Windows.  Two things I want to point out.

 

1)  Apple has thus far kept things very secure in iOS.  They refuse to add features and capabilities until they figure out how to do it in a way that does not compromise that security.  Microsoft was in a rush with Windows.  They rushed to add a features and made security an afterthought.  Most notably was the idiotic decision to integrate IE into the operating system.

 

2) I believe Apple is actively trying to avoid making decisions that could be used to build an anti-trust case   Apple does not reject an app simply because it competes with it an Apple product.  Apple clearly wants to avoid being branded anti-competitive.  They removed Google maps, released their on maps, then approved a stand-alone Google Maps app.  They just approved Google Now, which is clearly a Siri competitor.  Every time I see a "Apple will never approve it", I just laugh.  As long as Apple approves and disapproves apps on a published set or standards, app makers and trust busters will have a hard time building a case.  

 

I think Apple learned a great deal from Microsoft about how NOT be Windows.  Apple may make their own mistakes, but I doubt they're going to repeat the ones made by Microsoft.

post #128 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post

What were their choices? Develop their own OSes? License an out of date windows mobile? Or take a free OS?

All of the above. Why couldn't they make their own OS? Apple did it, Palm did it, and BB did it. Do Apple, Google, and MS have the only programmers able to make a mobile OS? Nobody forced them to hitch their wagon to Android.
Edited by dasanman69 - 5/5/13 at 2:21pm
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #129 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Are you purposely being obtuse? Your argument is like MS' "How are we leveraging anything when we allow other internet browsers to be installed?" They offer up something seemingly "cheap" to gain market share quickly and then generate fees at the other end. Are you really going to claim those billion "activations" and all those services they charge vendors for aren't there to generate any revenue under the guise of a "free" OS? If there was no one attaching themselves to Google's services then you'd have a point, but that's the exception, not the rule. Now it's a completely other argument as to whether this is illegal or not but their actions of "giving away" an OS are quite clear so please stop trying to paint Google as being altruistic.

That's different, MS definitely leveraged the power that they already had. They new quite well that although other browsers could be installed it wasn't easy to do so. Obviously Google is trying trying to make money, they are after all a business, but you cannot tell me that they've forced their way to where they are. Amazon has disconnected themselves from them, and Samsung doesn't mention them at all. I wouldn't be surprised if in the near future the exception becomes the rule.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #130 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Didn't Apple bring a kid up on stage once to demo how easy it was to code in a language they'd created? Maybe that was NeXT…

 

Most likely Apple and the precursor to HTML. It sure as hell wasn't MVC OO Programming and the NeXT Paradigm. We weren't that delusional.

post #131 of 201
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post
Most likely Apple and the precursor to HTML. It sure as hell wasn't MVC OO Programming and the NeXT Paradigm. We weren't that delusional.


That's quotable.

 

"We weren't that delusional." —mdriftmeyer on children programming for NeXT lol.gif

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #132 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by graxspoo View Post
The point is, for a long time iPad was really the only game in town. That's no longer the case, and Apple's share of the tablet market has slipped below 50%.

Right. Market share slips because they are no longer the only game in town.

Not because the other tablets coming to market are that much better. It's simply that they exist and fill a shelf in a store. Someone will purchase, thus taking share from Apple.

post #133 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post

Right. Market share slips because they are no longer the only game in town.
Not because the other tablets coming to market are that much better. It's simply that they exist and fill a shelf in a store. Someone will purchase, thus taking share from Apple.

Not much a cause for concern as long as the sales of iPads continue to rise.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #134 of 201

I'm amazed at the amount of sheer crap and downright lies that the Android fanboys infesting this Apple-enthusiast forum are spewing out in the hopes it gets picked up and mistaken for fact.  Amazing.  Are these iHaters really believing their nonsense?

post #135 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

You just don't get it, do you? Apple makes almost all of its money on hardware. In fact, it's pretty much the only company making money hand-over-fist in HW (granted, Samsung is showing some measure of success too, but I'd wait at least a couple of more years to see if that's sustainable).

 

All Apple needs to attract the best ecosystem (network effects) is a sufficiently large share of the high-end customer, not 90%, share. Apple does not need or want the riffraff -- and the relentless pressure for scraping the bottom of the barrel -- that the extra share will bring beyond a point.

 

 In the only market where it has a global share less than 10% (Macs) its share is poised to grow massively in the next decade (as countries such as India, China, Indonesia, Brazil and so on get wealthier: no one who can afford it wants to be caught dead toting a PC in those markets).

I know you identify with Apple, but Apple's profits doesnt actually directly help you. A more ubiquitous iOS would actually be a lot more useful to its users, due to the aforementioned network effect. Not best for Apple's profits, but for its users certainly.

 

Regarding your sufficiently large percentage of high-end users, doesnt Apple have close to 100% of high end PC users, and how did that network effect go then in securing software for the platform? 

 

In Europe Apple has much less than 20% market share and dropping.  Worldwide it was obviously 17% and dropping, and if we exclude USA, where Apple is holding their own (due to operator subsidies), it is closer to 14% and presumably also dropping. Is 10% really that far away?

 

This statement is already looking funny and out of touch with the trend.

 

Its share in markets such as the tablets, smartphones, and music players will go to 10% only in your dreams.

post #136 of 201
Eric Schmidt and Mark Zuckerberg are standing on the shoulders of Steve Jobs. If there was never an iPhone, do you really think Google would have spontaneously generated Android? Would Facebook be so ubiquitous without the popularization of an easy to use and understand pocket computer by Apple?
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
post #137 of 201
Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post
If there was never an iPhone, do you really think Google would have spontaneously generated Android?


They would have spontaneously generated a clone in every way of BlackBerry OS. 1tongue.gif


Would Facebook be so ubiquitous without the popularization of an easy to use and understand pocket computer by Apple?

 

This I'm not so sure. Facebook just got integration in iOS 6, and I don't remember its rise being punctuated by the existence of its app (or even web access to the site) on iOS. But that could very well be my memory.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #138 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post

Eric Schmidt and Mark Zuckerberg are standing on the shoulders of Steve Jobs. If there was never an iPhone, do you really think Google would have spontaneously generated Android? Would Facebook be so ubiquitous without the popularization of an easy to use and understand pocket computer by Apple?

Really? That list can go on and on. Would there be a iPhone if there weren't any smartphones before it? Apps like Facebook is what helped the iPhone become so popular. Since the first iPhone was 5 years ahead of it's time i think we would've had the first really useful touch screen devices by now.
Edited by dasanman69 - 5/5/13 at 3:09pm
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #139 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

… This I'm not so sure. Facebook just got integration in iOS 6, and I don't remember its rise being punctuated by the existence of its app (or even web access to the site) on iOS. But that could very well be my memory.

 

No one can know what would have happened if the iPhone didn't exist but Facebook was wildly popular in it's web based form and already a "thing" before the iPhone took off.  Arguably, the existence of mobile devices accelerated things a lot, but we will never know by how much and by the standards that existed at the time, it was already very, very popular.  

 

I remember quitting Facebook in disgust at least a year or more before I ever had an iPhone, and I remember using an app to access it in 2008-9 and all my Facebook friends being "amazed" that you could do that with a smartphone instead of having to use the web interface.  

post #140 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac View Post

The future for HTC, Sony, RIM, Motorola, Nokia and others are on far shakier ground unless they learn how to increase their profits.

They would have to first learn how to make a profit before learning to increase it.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #141 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredD View Post

Thats ignoring the network effect. Loss of market share is not inevitable.  It did not happen to Windows for example. Apple is losing market share because its them against all the other OEMs.  iOS would have maintained market share if other OEMs could license the OS, but of course we know that will never happen.

 

Basically because iOS is closed from a licensing POV the market share loss was inevitable. And at a critical point that also means a loss of influence. When Apple gets to 10% market share, like in the PC business, do you really think games will be released on iOS first? Or social apps?  What would be the point, except for a trial run?

 

I would have though long time Mac users would have known market share very much does matter, no matter what Apple's profits are.

 

I guess others have already pointed it out but this is just the biggest pile of horse shit I've read in a long time.  Almost everything you say is wrong.  

 

In the first place, iOS *isn't* actually "losing market share," the reports that say so are based only on channel shipments which are not even close to the same thing as saying that a product has "X% share of the market."  The market consists of more than just your channel partners.  iOS is *gaining* (true) market share on Android almost daily.  More people use it than Android and it's pretty much *always* been that way so far.  More people buy iPhones than any other phone in the market.  It's the market leader in fact with all three models (5, 4, 4s), both selling more, and being more popular than all the other devices on the market.  

 

Secondly, the market share loss (if it were actually happening), is not at all "inevitable" because Apple doesn't licence it's OS.  A licensed OS had no inherent superiority over a non-licensed one.  

 

Finally, as a long-time Mac user I can tell you that the fact that OS X didn't always have the huge market share it does now, did not in any real way affect my enjoyment and use of the platform all these years.  There was a brief period in the dark days before Steve Jobs returned where some software wasn't made available for the platform, but we are talking maybe six months out of the entire lifespan of Apple.  All the standard apps that we use now were available for mac almost all along and now that the Mac has a HUGE market share and everyone is using it, there are no apps that have become available (at least not any that I use or have heard about), that weren't there before.  

 

Basically, you are just taking this wild (and easily disproven) account of Android market share rising and beating out iOS, and weaving it into a private fantasy for yourself where Apple's iOS market share shrinks to a small fraction ("10%"), of the market.  You just don't want to admit that you read that report wrong.  

 

Android dominance over iOS isn't going to happen, it isn't happening now and it won't happen in the future.  There are absolutely no indicators that iOS is slipping in popularity.  There is nothing to indicate that it's (true) market share is going down, in fact all indicators are that it's going up.  Something north of 90% of the tablet computers in use out there are iPads.  The three most popular phones on the planet are all iPhones.  

 

Get used to it. 

post #142 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post 

 

In the first place, iOS *isn't* actually "losing market share," the reports that say so are based only on channel shipments which are not even close to the same thing as saying that a product has "X% share of the market."  The market consists of more than just your channel partners.  iOS is *gaining* (true) market share on Android almost daily.  More people use it than Android and it's pretty much *always* been that way so far.  More people buy iPhones than any other phone in the market.  It's the market leader in fact with all three models (5, 4, 4s), both selling more, and being more popular than all the other devices on the market.  

 

Android dominance over iOS isn't going to happen, it isn't happening now and it won't happen in the future.  There are absolutely no indicators that iOS is slipping in popularity.  There is nothing to indicate that it's (true) market share is going down, in fact all indicators are that it's going up.  Something north of 90% of the tablet computers in use out there are iPads.  The three most popular phones on the planet are all iPhones.  

Wow! Denial is not only a river in Egypt.  I wonder how many of your fellow Apple fans agree with your rather crazy statements.

 

Maybe if it was 45:55%, but Android outsells iOS 3:1.  Is there some gigantic secret landfill full of Android phones which were shipped but not sold?

 

Remember USA <> World.

post #143 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac View Post

But you must remember that profits are universal regardless of boundaries. The U.S. represents around 50% of people where companies are actually selling phones that make any money. All those cheap and disposable Android crap in the third world aren't buying apps and helping out the Android ecosystem other than to be added to some statistic like you have used.   Apple, Samsung, Nokia, HTC, etch all have to answer to their shareholders and creditors, Android might be outselling the iPhone 3:1 around the globe but you can't ignore the fact that Apple is making around 65% of the entire profit in this sector. That model is unsustainable in the long run for many of these Android makers. 33% or whatever share Apple has globally is a massive number of people.

 

Would you rather run a lemonade stand and only serve 10 people a day but make a profit of $200 daily or run one serving 100 people a day and bring home a profit of $125 requiring 10 times the work with far less money to show for it? 

Europe is hardly the 3rd world, and Apple makes 61% and rising of their revenue overseas. Even in the developing world like China there are consumers who you are willing to ignore but which Apple is desperate to convert to iOS. 

 

Apple does not have 33% share of the market worldwide - only 17%.

 

Would you rather run a lemonade stand and only serve 10 people a day but make a profit of $200 daily or run one serving 100 people a day and bring home a profit of $125 requiring 10 times the work with far less money to show for it? 

 

Even in your hypothetical equation there comes a point when the answer favours Android.

post #144 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by pedromartins View Post
  • iOS has the best users

 Would you like to qualify this?

I will NEVER pay $679 for an 8GB plastic cell phone
Reply
I will NEVER pay $679 for an 8GB plastic cell phone
Reply
post #145 of 201
Originally Posted by hentaiboy View Post
Would you like to qualify this?

 

Of any mobile platform? 1tongue.gif

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #146 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredD View Post

Wow! Denial is not only a river in Egypt.  I wonder how many of your fellow Apple fans agree with your rather crazy statements.

Maybe if it was 45:55%, but Android outsells iOS 3:1.  Is there some gigantic secret landfill full of Android phones which were shipped but not sold?

Remember USA <> World.
And iOS Apps outsell Android 3:1. Which means the average iOS user generates 9x the revenue of the average Android user. And iTunes generates 6x the revenue for music, movies and TV shows that Google Play/Music does.

Is there some gigantic landfill of Android users who never buy anything?

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #147 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by hydr View Post

It just means that more players are entering the playing field.

...and the more players or shipments, the more promotion for the the particular tablet concept invented with the iPad, which helps Apple.
post #148 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac View Post

I think he was referring to the statistic that showed iOS users spend a lot more money on apps. Certainly if you are an app developer that is a very important metric to consider. 

also important to consider if you are an advertiser or a content owner looking to get paid. (newspapers, magazines, music, etc).  Even unpaid content... remember, by some measures, iOS browser use is 75% of mobile browser use... So a iPhone browser on average hits 4X as many pages as an Android user.   That's 4X more ads being displayed (if not in flash;-).  

 

The math on Android indicates 'feature phone' people (I need one function and a phone) buying smart phones.  Maybe it's just texting, or Facebook, or ebay, or amazon, the issue is, they don't seem to seek added value (more web pages, more apps, more music, more movies, etc.)

 

And that math  (I use my phone more, therefore I'm optimizing my life around it's functionality) coupled with iTMS/App Store... makes for serious stickiness the next upgrade round.   

 

And android... switching hardware/carriers creates a whole new interface, new look and feel, new, set of features.   Not optimal.  Smart Android users will know the details of jelly bean vs jelly roll vs jelly sandwich vs verizon vs us cellular vs att and make saavy 'android centric' choices, but the 'feature phone' people, as soon as they see an iPhone that does the feature they need at the price point they like, they'll switch. and likely stick.

post #149 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

How did they leverage their way in? Not one single manufacturer is forced to use Android they chose to and can totally keep Google out of it. Samsung did just that with the first Galaxy S, but Google got smart and put all its apps in the Play Store, before then Google apps were built in to the OS.

They leveraged their way in by using all of their search and advertising profits to pay for development of an OS that they planned to give away for free. What part of that don't you understand?

It's sad that the fandroids are so hopelessly weak in logic that all they can come up with is silly arguments like yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal View Post

I'm amazed at the amount of sheer crap and downright lies that the Android fanboys infesting this Apple-enthusiast forum are spewing out in the hopes it gets picked up and mistaken for fact.  Amazing.  Are these iHaters really believing their nonsense?

It's always been that way. In the 90s, it was the Windows-using Apple haters who spent countless hours on Apple forums spreading their bile. Now its the fandroids.

I'm convinced that it's a mental illness related to narcissistic personality disorder. These people can't stand the idea that anyone would choose to use a product other than theirs and so they come to the Apple forums to spread their hatred and bitterness.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #150 of 201
Quote:
Key to stoking that demand was Apple's strong product: it served clearly valuable purposes, notably being an iPod (which many users were already very familiar and comfortable with), being a very decent web browser (which users also readily recognized as a great thing) and being a cell phone (something that packed not just clear utility, but also brought with it a clear business case for a sale: you need a phone anyway, might as well get this super smart one rather than a complex, difficult to use one that wasn't great at serving as an iPod or browsing the web).

 

Ugh, will someone PLEASE hire a copy editor for DED? 
 

post #151 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

They leveraged their way in by using all of their search and advertising profits to pay for development of an OS that they planned to give away for free. What part of that don't you understand?

Again they don't give it away. It's taken by whoever wants it and can use it even to shut them out of it. What company would give something to a competitor that was going to use it against them? I don't think it will be long before they're forked by Samsung since they tried it once already. Maybe not HTC, but Samsung and Motorola both had the resources and means to develop their own OS. Google did not force it upon them, but rather they used it in a desperate attempt to counter Apple.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #152 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredD View Post

Wow! Denial is not only a river in Egypt.  I wonder how many of your fellow Apple fans agree with your rather crazy statements.

 

Maybe if it was 45:55%, but Android outsells iOS 3:1.  Is there some gigantic secret landfill full of Android phones which were shipped but not sold?

 

Remember USA <> World.

 

The facts are out there "Fredd".  You know as well as I do that everything I said was correct.  

post #153 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post

Eric Schmidt and Mark Zuckerberg are standing on the shoulders of Steve Jobs. If there was never an iPhone, do you really think Google would have spontaneously generated Android? Would Facebook be so ubiquitous without the popularization of an easy to use and understand pocket computer by Apple?

History says Google acquired Android before iPhone was launched. In the absence of iPhone, Android would not have turned out the way it is. But it was on the way to being "spontaneously generated".

post #154 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

Again they don't give it away. It's taken by whoever wants it and can use it even to shut them out of it. What company would give something to a competitor that was going to use it against them? I don't think it will be long before they're forked by Samsung since they tried it once already. Maybe not HTC, but Samsung and Motorola both had the resources and means to develop their own OS. Google did not force it upon them, but rather they used it in a desperate attempt to counter Apple.

Your attempts at playing semantics aren't working. It's the same thing. Next you'll be arguing that they don't use a blue 'e' so they can't be compared. The bottom line is both companies give away a product in an effort to secure customers for other products. It doesn't matter that you can fork Android and not use Google's services at all, their assumption is that vendors will use it and those that don't are likely still adding to Google's eyeballs and ecosystem… which is exactly what is happening. You queried, "Why couldn't they make their own OS?" and the answer is most don't have the know-how or resources to make that happen. Google's goal to shore up a lot of marketshare right away was to give it away."Look it's free. How wonderful is that. What can go wrong?" with the clear assumption they would reap the benefit of most of the advertising dollars from the platform. The option to fork is there but when it pulls your brand from the ecosystem you don't win which is why Google has reported over 1 billion "activations" which I'm repeatedly told are only counted if they are using Google's services, not from a forked OS. So why isn't Google worried that everyone will fork Android? For the obvious reasons already stated. Samsung could (and I think should) fork it and that is the gamble Google took when they hatched this Trojan OS but they probably figured, and rightly so, that the chances of a single vendor getting an excessive dominance to make that happen would be slim. I think Samsung needs another 10 or 15% of Android marketshare before that's really viable for them as a move.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #155 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

 

Android dominance over iOS isn't going to happen, it isn't happening now and it won't happen in the future.  There are absolutely no indicators that iOS is slipping in popularity.  There is nothing to indicate that it's (true) market share is going down, in fact all indicators are that it's going up.  Something north of 90% of the tablet computers in use out there are iPads.  The three most popular phones on the planet are all iPhones.  

 

Get used to it. 

I don't believe iOS is slipping in popularity either. But I also don't think it's true that 90% of tablets in use are iPads. Reading is a form of use, no? And is it true that iPhones 4, 4S and 5 remain the three most popular ones "on the planet"? Can you cite recent statistics to back that up (now this is a proper situation to ask for this)?

post #156 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

But I also don't think it's true that 90% of tablets in use are iPads. Reading is a form of use, no?

I wouldn't count eReaders as tablets. They are in a tablet form factor, but that's like including notebooks as AIOs. The Kindle Fires are less capable than the iPad and Nexus tablets but they are still tablets.
Quote:
And is it true that iPhones 4, 4S and 5 remain the three most popular ones "on the planet"?

It depends on what you mean by "ones" and where you're looking. On Instagram and Flickr the iPhones seem to be wildly popular. I'm not a camera guy so I don't pay too much attention to those specs. If you mean handsets by "ones" then I'm sure there are cheap phones that sell many more units, so I'd limit such a query to smartphones and specifically higher-end smartphones to exclude what i consider to be feature phones posing as smartphones simply because they have an older version of a modern OS (Android) on old HW.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #157 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post

Eric Schmidt and Mark Zuckerberg are standing on the shoulders of Steve Jobs. If there was never an iPhone, do you really think Google would have spontaneously generated Android? Would Facebook be so ubiquitous without the popularization of an easy to use and understand pocket computer by Apple?
History says Google acquired Android before iPhone was launched. In the absence of iPhone, Android would not have turned out the way it is. But it was on the way to being "spontaneously generated".

You've bought up the same point many times before, and your point has been refuted convincingly each time.

Wow, you don't give up, do you!?
post #158 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by hydr View Post
Well-written article ... ...
I for one can not be any more excited about what the future will bring in terms of Apple problem-solving products. It will be amazing.
 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


What are these 'problems' you speak of?

 

Problems like: How can we have, instantly available to us from the Cloud anywhere we happen to be, Penelope Garcia from the BAU, Abby Sciuto from NCIS and Finch from "Person of Interest", to solve in real-time any logistical questions and decision-making issues when they crop up as obstacles to be negotiated successfully, right now...???

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
post #159 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Your attempts at playing semantics aren't working. It's the same thing. Next you'll be arguing that they don't use a blue 'e' so they can't be compared. The bottom line is both companies give away a product in an effort to secure customers for other products. It doesn't matter that you can fork Android and not use Google's services at all, their assumption is that vendors will use it and those that don't are likely still adding to Google's eyeballs and ecosystem… which is exactly what is happening. You queried, "Why couldn't they make their own OS?" and the answer is most don't have the know-how or resources to make that happen. Google's goal to shore up a lot of marketshare right away was to give it away."Look it's free. How wonderful is that. What can go wrong?" with the clear assumption they would reap the benefit of most of the advertising dollars from the platform. The option to fork is there but when it pulls your brand from the ecosystem you don't win which is why Google has reported over 1 billion "activations" which I'm repeatedly told are only counted if they are using Google's services, not from a forked OS. So why isn't Google worried that everyone will fork Android? For the obvious reasons already stated. Samsung could (and I think should) fork it and that is the gamble Google took when they hatched this Trojan OS but they probably figured, and rightly so, that the chances of a single vendor getting an excessive dominance to make that happen would be slim. I think Samsung needs another 10 or 15% of Android marketshare before that's really viable for them as a move.

I'll agree that there are similarities between Google and MS, but there are also differences. MS had a huge preexisting user base that they exploited that they basically forced to use IE. When the "oh snap we need to followAApple's lead not BB's" version of Android came out BB was king with the iPhone quickly gaining. Google decided to allow their OS to be used by anyone to gain some market share but I don't think anyone would think BB would take the nosedive that it did. It's funny because how many times have I read on here how important making the software and hardware is but how did that work out for BB and Palm? They most certainly had the know-how and resources. Why did they fail? And yes BB is well on it's way to failure. If they couldn't slow down Apple's growth who could? So now tell me ol' Seeker of Truth if what Google has done is so wrong where are the antitrust/anticompetitive suits?
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #160 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

You've bought up the same point many times before, and your point has been refuted convincingly each time.

Wow, you don't give up, do you!?

I agree with stelligent that it wasn't spontaneous but I disagree with the implication that Google bought Android OS when they in fact bought software intended to run on other mobile OSes. Who knows when Google decided to convert Android into an OS. This may be the contention that Steve Jobs had with Eric Schmidt, and perhaps Google wouldn't have considered such an undertaking at all if they had thought there would be no opportunity for them to come in under the potential iPhone game changer. Or perhaps that was their plan all along. We may never really know, but we do know that at some time after they decided to make Android a mobile OS they completely shifted gears on the type of mobile OS they would make.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Editorial: Apple's iOS is the new Windows