or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple's iPhone marketshare dips in Q4, Samsung falters under pressure from low-cost OEMs
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple's iPhone marketshare dips in Q4, Samsung falters under pressure from low-cost OEMs - Page 2

post #41 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr View Post
 

The state of things in the Android mobile device market is nowhere near the same, and it makes a huge difference from the perspective of the developer.  They can't just "choose" to go Android.  They have to choose to go "Android for Kindle", or "Android for Samsung S4", etc, etc, etc.  Yes, I know that there will be only modest tweaks for each variant, but when the number of variants are large, it drives cost up (especially when it comes to test and ongoing support).  Fragmentation isn't just a word, it's a way of life when you are developing Android products.  So, your analogy to the Mac/PC world is broken in a very important way. 

This just isn't true at all. Windows has and retains a much wider range of hardware that it runs on. The reason it does so is because there are specific interfaces to write drivers for.

 

Android works in a similar fashion, but your choice is basically between using Google's Play APIs or going with an alternate market and app framework like Amazon. The situation with weird bugs on specific platforms is basically identical to Windows.

 

Fragmentation is a real thing, but because apps target the lowest version they need for support, and the market is automatically filtered of incompatible apps, it's not as bad as people make out.

post #42 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by tzeshan View Post
 


I disagree.  Apple market share in US is over 40%.  The users are mostly affluent and spend more time web browsing.  I don't think Apple should rely on ads for revenue.  This will be contradictory to the strategy I propose. Also Apple has repeatedly said giving its user best experience is its goal.  Reducing ads definitely will give users better experience. 


I never meant to imply Apple does or should rely on ad revenue. I'm just saying that they have picked a strategy of simply replacing Google on their devices. We've all seen complaints about maps, many justified and Siri still needs quite a lot of work. Like them or not, Google are tough to compete against when Android is barely funded by them and mostly driven by manufacturers and consumers.

post #43 of 86
I've seen some comments about how apples market share doesnt matter, because developers want active users as their audience. I think apple is in a good position right now in large part because of Tim cook, and he's learning more everyday. I do think android is still a threat because the 'cheap' phones are no longer crap. They aren't just glorified feature phones anymore. The cheap android phones can play angry birds and where's my water now, and I don't think apple would be untrue to itself to offer more low end options, like it did with the iPod. The App Store is important, and if the market gets filled with enough 'glorified feature phones' that actually work well and download apps, market share may start to matter. I say stay ahead of the curve. Apple has a lot of pressure from Wall Street to increase their margins, but I think they need to cater to their long term goals.
post #44 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by tzeshan View Post

I think Apple has an easy strategy to compete with Google.  Apple should work as hard as possible to reduce ads on the mobile devices.  This will not only reduce Google revenue it also makes the users feeling much comfortable. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsTheInternet View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by tzeshan View Post

 
I think Apple has an easy strategy to compete with Google.  Apple should work as hard as possible to reduce ads on the mobile devices.  This will not only reduce Google revenue it also makes the users feeling much comfortable. 

Apple's strategy seems clear already, they are using their own advertisement network. The problem is that they have no presence on Android devices and it seems likely they never will, wheras Google's presence is all over the Internet and on every platform. Apple's ad revenues therefore are tied directly to their device sales. That's not typically the case for Google.

I've been thinking about ads, data charges, streaming, carriers, etc...

I think the way this is going to shake out in the next few (5 or so) years is that the carriers (and CableCos into the home) are going to embrace advertising big time! They will reduce the rates on cell services and WiFi services by and recoup their investment increasing ads...
Edited by Dick Applebaum - 1/27/14 at 10:44am
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #45 of 86
Smartphone market share is a red herring. The overall cell phone market is almost the same as last year, so the share of that market is much more revealing. Apple is gaining market share there as fast as any mass market technology has ever grown (at least in the US -- I don't know the international numbers). They just started later than smartphones did, so it takes awhile to catch up. It would be almost impossible for Apple to be doing any better, since they're matching the exponential growth rate of smartphones in general, just with a delayed starting point.
post #46 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post

Apple will never compete with the cheap phones. Why doesn't BMW release a sub $10000 car or Tiffany's sell costume jewelry? There is no money in it for them.

 

This is absolutely the wrong outlook for Apple.  I agree that Apple shouldn't compete at the very lowest levels, but there is an enormous gap below the 5C that they need to fill.  A high-quality $250 phone is not out of Apple's reach.  Such a phone wouldn't matter so much in America, the land of carrier subsidies, as it would overseas in developing markets.

 

Edit: I've said it before and I'll say it again - the Moto G is a device that should be striking fear into the hearts of Apple and Samsung.  It costs less than $200 and gives the user a great experience with an unbelievable value quotient.  The average person doesn't need any more from a phone.  The G is the future of the low-end market, and it will probably have an impact on the market's idea of what a phone should cost, even at the high end.


Edited by wakefinance - 1/27/14 at 10:42am
post #47 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakefinance View Post
 

 

This is absolutely the wrong outlook for Apple.  I agree that Apple shouldn't compete at the very lowest levels, but there is an enormous gap below the 5C that they need to fill.  A high-quality $250 phone is not out of Apple's reach.  Such a phone wouldn't matter so much in America, the land of carrier subsidies, as it would overseas in developing markets.

 

Has anyone come out with any actual NUMBERS on PROFITS concerning sales to these "developing markets?"  I mean real, hard numbers?  Like, we made $x Billion in profits in India last year?

post #48 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronJ View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by wakefinance View Post

 

This is absolutely the wrong outlook for Apple.  I agree that Apple shouldn't compete at the very lowest levels, but there is an enormous gap below the 5C that they need to fill.  A high-quality $250 phone is not out of Apple's reach.  Such a phone wouldn't matter so much in America, the land of carrier subsidies, as it would overseas in developing markets.

Has anyone come out with any actual NUMBERS on PROFITS concerning sales to these "developing markets?"  I mean real, hard numbers?  Like, we made $x Billion in profits in India last year?

I don't think so...


I've always thought that the best strategy to sell into "developing markets" is to manufacture/assemble/distribute in those same markets...

You have the potential to receive benefits (reduced taxes/tariffs, etc., govt. underwriting, etc.) -- a rising tide...

Why can't an iPhone for the India Market be built/assembled/distributed/repaired/supported in India?
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #49 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by teepzo View Post

Its like saying Ferrari who sold 50% more cars this year is in trouble because worldwide market share is down with Chinese car makers selling more. It tells us nothing.

So until these clowns do proper research, I wouldnt be investing in their business, that's the only true metric you can gain from these published figures, as they reflect poorly on their business practice.

The comparison of apple's iphone to Ferrari is extremely old and just plain doesn't work.  Sure both are "premium" brands, but nowhere near to the same extent... First, apple's phones are expensive, 2-3x as expensive as a typical android phone.  A new Ferrari is ~10x as expensive as a normal car (assuming most cars are $20k-$30k).  More importantly, one must consider market share (isn't this what brought your comparison on?).  Ferrari sells about 7300 cars in a year... compared to a total market of ~60,000,000 cars sold in a year.  This represents ~.012% of the automobile market.  Even increasing that to compensate for price differential, the total number produced is inconsequential.

 

In comparison, Apple owns a HUGE share of the smartphone market.  Somewhere around 30-40% based on these numbers. Because Apple has such large margins, they are also making HUGE profits on these phone sales.... However this has little relevance to current investors.

 

Investors know what profits apple is making, and care about what profits they think they will make next year.  Right now APPL is valued at ~$550, and it is earning $39.75 per share, or a return of ~7% (assuming investors got all of the profit back this year, which they won't).  The analysts new numbers showing that the iphone's market share is reducing means that Apple is not going to be able to substantially increase their iphone sales (particularly as the smartphone market is maturing).  They aren't putting more money into apple because they don't think it's possible for apple to increase sales enough at this point... Apple is a mature company they aren't going anywhere any time soon, but in the next 5 years it's more likely that Apple's market share (and profits) will decrease from the record high that they're at (or stay relatively flat) then that they will increase dramatically.

 

Either way, Apple's market share is WAY too bit for them to not care about it.  The problem with being big is that it's significantly harder to keep growing.  Hell, Apple could triple the number of macs sold this year, and hardly make a dent on their bottom line... This makes it extremely hard for apple to grow according to the expectations that they have set.  This is why investors have pulled out of apple, and Apple's stock price is stabilizing.  No, Apple is not doomed, but can they continue to grow like they have in the past?

 

Phil

post #50 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsTheInternet View Post
 

The situation with weird bugs on specific platforms is basically identical to Windows...

I'll run with your assertion that the situation is identical in terms of support variations.  But let's not lose sight of the fact that in order to bring my comparison into proper perspective, you essentially pointed out that Microsoft had to deal with a lot more variation than I was suggesting, and you did not dispute that the Android developers have to deal with a similar amount.  You used the word "identical".  So here's where the situation becomes different...  most third party developers don't have the time or the bankroll that Microsoft had to address platform specific bugs.  The testing and support under that situation is time consuming and costly.  This supports my position, even if I am forced to acknowledge a potential flaw in my argument.  In your zeal to correct me, it seems to me that you ended up supporting my position.

 

Also, you acknowledge that there are other frameworks of development than Google Play's API.  (We both called out the Kindle.)  If so, then would it not be proper to leave the Kindle numbers out of a comparison between the iOS App market and that of Google Play?  In other words, shouldn't we compare all such frameworks independently, i.e. iOS versus Kindle, versus Google Play, etc?  Note that the Kindle is the #2 platform behind iOS in the web usage statistics, so I think the distinction is relevant and important.  Samsung has also opened their own App Store, and if they take it a step further and require digital signatures from that venue in order to run apps on their device, then we shall have to take up the conversation again.  There is talk that Samsung will further build out its own walled-garden in order to grab some of the advertisement or sales revenue that Google and Amazon enjoy currently.  I doubt that they will really jump ship on Android for Tizen, but I could easily see them decide to fork Android like Amazon did to gain control and revenue.   It just seems to me that lumping all Android devices together to reach a conclusion is a dubious process.

 

The bottom line is that: (1) you can't just add all Android-based devices together and compare them to iOS devices;  some allowance must be made to show that Amazon (and perhaps others in the future) differ from one another as much as they differ from iOS, at least in the ways that affect the consumer) and (2) the iOS App market place is accelerating its pace of downloads and sales even at a time where the iOS device market is declining in market share.  The reasons for this should be understood and seen to be very different from what happened under Mac vs PC.

post #51 of 86

A year or more ago the cheap low end Android smartphones truly were incapable of doing much of anything. Phones like the original LG Optimus from 4 years ago for example only had a 3.2" display, very limited storage, and a very slow CPU. If you paid less that $400 for a phone you were assured of having a very inferior and frustrating experience. But that really is no longer the case. At $349 for 16GB and only $399 for 32GB the Nexus 5 is an extremely capable phone and matches up pretty well with even the 5s on a number of tests. 

http://www.v3.co.uk/v3-uk/review/2322580/iphone-5s-vs-nexus-5-vs-galaxy-s4-head-to-head-review

 

The iPhone certainly has a better build quality and is a better phone overall than the Nexus 5 but at $399 for the 32GB version unlocked vs. $749 for the unlocked 5s is the advantage that big? My point is that Apple can no longer count on all these cheap and low end phones to offer a terrible experience as was the case a few years ago. The Nexus 5 has LTE, a 5" display with a higher PPI than the iPhone, 32GB of storage, and can play games and surf the web very fast and beats the 5s in battery life. Like the iPhone no bloatware or crapware from the carrier is installed either on Nexus phones. 

https://play.google.com/store/devices/details/Nexus_5_32GB_Black?id=nexus_5_black_32gb&hl=en

 

These so called low end phones are already better than the most expensive so called "premium" phones from just a year or two ago. I think this will end up hurting Samsung more than Apple as consumers choose to save money and buy phones like the Nexus 5 because they do everything that is required and do it well. iPhone customers tend to be far more loyal and the stickiness of the iOS ecosystem also helps keep them in the fold. But even Apple might start to bleed some customers if these low end phones continue to narrow the gap in features and people start to be more attracted to the Uncarrier model introduced by T-Mobile. Plenty of people will keep buying the iPhone as long as they can get one for $199 or $299 but not too many would be willing to shell out $649.

 

Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience. 

Reply

 

Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience. 

Reply
post #52 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakefinance View Post
Edit: I've said it before and I'll say it again - the Moto G is a device that should be striking fear into the hearts of Apple and Samsung.  It costs less than $200 and gives the user a great experience with an unbelievable value quotient.  The average person doesn't need any more from a phone.  The G is the future of the low-end market, and it will probably have an impact on the market's idea of what a phone should cost, even at the high end.

 

same could be said about the Nexus 5.  The 5c could be well position if they can sell it around $350 when the 6 gets out.

post #53 of 86
So many of forum members lining up to piss on Apple's grave.... what is it about these forums that attracts these types?

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #54 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post



I've been thinking about ads, data charges, streaming, carriers, etc...

I think the way this is going to shake out in the next few (5 or so) years is that the carriers (and CableCos into the home) are going to embrace advertising big time! They will reduce the rates on cell services and WiFi services by and recoup their investment increasing ads...


I've seen instances of carriers replacing adverts with their own advertising network on third party sites via their transparent HTTP proxying. It's a horrible mess but I generally just open a VPN to avoid it. Google's been a big proponent of HTTPS though (as has Apple to be fair, their security is also quite good) and so the chance of ISPs doing this without injecting a new CA on the devices is increasingly limited.

post #55 of 86
I'm finished. Going to remove Appleinsider from my shortcut bar and google currents. They don't provide any useful information - good bye, everyone and I've enjoyed reading all your comments of the years.
post #56 of 86
I think it's time to stop talking about smartphone marketshare and simply talk about cellphone marketshare. The metrics I'm interested in are is the overall cellphone market changing and how is Apple doing as a percentage of that market. Essentially all phones will soon be running a smartphone OS. Smartphones as a category is becoming meaningless as no one agrees on what is now required to be a "smartphone".

If Apple is still growing its share of the total cellphone market, it's doing just fine.
post #57 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr View Post
 

most third party developers don't have the time or the bankroll that Microsoft had to address platform specific bugs.  The testing and support under that situation is time consuming and costly.  This supports my position, even if I am forced to acknowledge a potential flaw in my argument.  In your zeal to correct me, it seems to me that you ended up supporting my position.

Oh don't get me wrong, I'm not really disagreeing with you much, I just wanted to slightly correct you. For example here you are quite close, but you mistake where the testing/support costs typically lie. Microsoft rarely get involved with individual bits of hardware, they provide a reference implementation that everything must conform to. This is essentially analogous to Google's compatability kit which certifies Android devices. In both cases if bugs are found, the pressures are placed on generally the hardware manufacturer and the app developer. Little touches Microsoft or Google.

 

Quote:
Also, you acknowledge that there are other frameworks of development than Google Play's API.  (We both called out the Kindle.)  If so, then would it not be proper to leave the Kindle numbers out of a comparison between the iOS App market and that of Google Play?  In other words, shouldn't we compare all such frameworks independently, i.e. iOS versus Kindle, versus Google Play, etc?

That depends on what you're trying to measure. Relatively few apps will use Amazon or Google APIs explicitly, and most can be run on 'AOSP', ie Android but without any third party frameworks. If you're trying to measure device penetration or version distribution etc then it is worth splitting out Kindles and unofficial Play devices too.


 

Quote:

Note that the Kindle is the #2 platform behind iOS in the web usage statistics, so I think the distinction is relevant and important.  Samsung has also opened their own App Store, and if they take it a step further and require digital signatures from that venue in order to run apps on their device, then we shall have to take up the conversation again.  There is talk that Samsung will further build out its own walled-garden in order to grab some of the advertisement or sales revenue that Google and Amazon enjoy currently.  I doubt that they will really jump ship on Android for Tizen, but I could easily see them decide to fork Android like Amazon did to gain control and revenue.   It just seems to me that lumping all Android devices together to reach a conclusion is a dubious process.

 

Agreed, although I did a quick Google and from what I can find the use share is around 5-10% either side of equal.


 

Quote:

The bottom line is that: (1) you can't just add all Android-based devices together and compare them to iOS devices;  some allowance must be made to show that Amazon (and perhaps others in the future) differ from one another as much as they differ from iOS, at least in the ways that affect the consumer) and (2) the iOS App market place is accelerating its pace of downloads and sales even at a time where the iOS device market is declining in market share.  The reasons for this should be understood and seen to be very different from what happened under Mac vs PC.

 

Well the whole platforms are different. The closest the PC has to an 'App Store' is perhaps Steam, which does extremely well so really I think it's impossible to judge at the moment. I'm just going to wait and see. It's good for the consumer either way.

post #58 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post


I don't think so...


I've always thought that the best strategy to sell into "developing markets" is to manufacture/assemble/distribute in those same markets...

You have the potential to receive benefits (reduced taxes/tariffs, etc., govt. underwriting, etc.) -- a rising tide...

Why can't an iPhone for the India Market be built/assembled/distributed/repaired/supported in India?

 

Makes sense to me.

post #59 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac View Post
 

the Nexus 5 is an extremely capable phone

...

The iPhone certainly has a better build quality and is a better phone overall than the Nexus 5 but at $399 for the 32GB version unlocked vs. $749 for the unlocked 5s is the advantage that big?

 

This is exactly why I bought a Nexus 5. It's exacerbated by this:

  • Nexus 5 32Gb - £339.00 ~ $560
  • iPhone 5s 32Gb - £629.00 ~ $1040
  • iPhone 5c 32Gb - £469.00 ~ $777

 

That's an awfully big difference for me too. I just can't justify spending an extra £290, nearly an extra N5 16Gb for the 5s. It's not the only concern of course but as you said, the N5 is a very capable phone.

post #60 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsTheInternet View Post
 

 

This is exactly why I bought a Nexus 5. It's exacerbated by this:

  • Nexus 5 32Gb - £339.00 ~ $560
  • iPhone 5s 32Gb - £629.00 ~ $1040
  • iPhone 5c 32Gb - £469.00 ~ $777

 

That's an awfully big difference for me too. I just can't justify spending an extra £290, nearly an extra N5 16Gb for the 5s. It's not the only concern of course but as you said, the N5 is a very capable phone.

Could you kindly tell us what is your monthly data plan fee?

post #61 of 86
Originally Posted by Joe Mecca View Post
I'm finished. Going to remove Appleinsider from my shortcut bar and google currents. They don't provide any useful information - good bye, everyone and I've enjoyed reading all your comments of the years.

 

Now if only the rest of the trolls would do that.

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 #62 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsTheInternet View Post
 

 

This is exactly why I bought a Nexus 5. It's exacerbated by this:

  • Nexus 5 32Gb - £339.00 ~ $560
  • iPhone 5s 32Gb - £629.00 ~ $1040
  • iPhone 5c 32Gb - £469.00 ~ $777

 

That's an awfully big difference for me too. I just can't justify spending an extra £290, nearly an extra N5 16Gb for the 5s. It's not the only concern of course but as you said, the N5 is a very capable phone.

 

But a lot more goes into it than just what you dish out of pocket at at buy time.  At least for me.

 

For instance, there's essentially no way I would ever abandon the iOS ecosystem at this point.  Not only do I have thousands of dollars invested in it over the years, but I'm completely familiar with it, it is like an old friend -- an old friend I trust.

 

Also, here in the US where we have subsidized prices, I don't really have to pay (out of pocket) for a new iPhone.  That's why I upgrade every year now.  Last year, for instance, Gazelle gave me $30 more than I paid for for my iPhone 5.  So, I was able to upgrade to a 5S, with double the storage, for $69.

 

So, to me, at least here, a lot more considerations than the initial price tag go into the decision making process.

post #63 of 86

The high end of the smartphone market is quite saturated. Moreover, since most flagship devices like the iPhone 5s, the nexus 5, Moto X,  etc, are more or less comparable in functionality, there is not much incentive for anyone who already has one of those devices to switch, particularly if he has already invested in the ecosystem. The marketshare of various companies at the high end probably will look quite similar a year from now. Therefore, the next marketshare battle is going to be fought in the low end. Samsung needs to up its game if it's going to compete the with the likes of the Moto G. 

post #64 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac View Post

A year or more ago the cheap low end Android smartphones truly were incapable of doing much of anything. Phones like the original LG Optimus from 4 years ago for example only had a 3.2" display, very limited storage, and a very slow CPU. If you paid less that $400 for a phone you were assured of having a very inferior and frustrating experience. But that really is no longer the case. At $349 for 16GB and only $399 for 32GB the Nexus 5 is an extremely capable phone and matches up pretty well with even the 5s on a number of tests. 
http://www.v3.co.uk/v3-uk/review/2322580/iphone-5s-vs-nexus-5-vs-galaxy-s4-head-to-head-review

The iPhone certainly has a better build quality and is a better phone overall than the Nexus 5 but at $399 for the 32GB version unlocked vs. $749 for the unlocked 5s is the advantage that big? My point is that Apple can no longer count on all these cheap and low end phones to offer a terrible experience as was the case a few years ago. The Nexus 5 has LTE, a 5" display with a higher PPI than the iPhone, 32GB of storage, and can play games and surf the web very fast and beats the 5s in battery life. Like the iPhone no bloatware or crapware from the carrier is installed either on Nexus phones. 
https://play.google.com/store/devices/details/Nexus_5_32GB_Black?id=nexus_5_black_32gb&hl=en

I agree that there are some amazing Android phones starting at $349

But how much of the smartphone market is made up of phones below $349?

When the market share numbers come out each quarter... they simply say "Android has 80% of the smartphone market" but with no breakdown by price, quality or capability. A cheap Android phone carries the same weight as a flagship Android phone in terms of market share.

Like you said... $349 gets you a pretty nice Android phone. But we know there are Android phones being sold in some parts of the world for $80 unlocked. And those happen to be in some very populous countries.

So isn't it safe to say that there are still quite a few cheap crappy Android phones being sold today?

We only ever talk about the famous flagship Android phones... Galaxy S4, Note 3, LG G2, Nexus 5, HTC One, etc... but those don't make up the majority of Android. We're forgetting about the "other" category which includes tons of cheap Android phones in China, India, etc.
post #65 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by d4NjvRzf View Post
 

The high end of the smartphone market is quite saturated. Moreover, since most flagship devices like the iPhone 5s, the nexus 5, Moto X,  etc, are more or less comparable in functionality, there is not much incentive for anyone who already has one of those devices to switch, particularly if he has already invested in the ecosystem. The marketshare of various companies at the high end probably will look quite similar a year from now. Therefore, the next marketshare battle is going to be fought in the low end. Samsung needs to up its game if it's going to compete the with the likes of the Moto G. 

 

However, there are only two companies on Planet Earth making any profits from selling smartphones, and those two are obviously Apple and Samsung.  Everyone else -- EVERYONE -- is losing money.

 

Now, for a company like Google, they don't really give a $#%@, since HW isn't their business anyways.  And for someone like LG, it doesn't really matter, since they make most of their money with other stuff.  

 

But you look at someone like RIM ... ouch.  And HTC?  Moto had to be bought up by Google.

post #66 of 86

Two comments on the general discussion going on so far...

 

1.) Developers abandoned the Mac not just because of market share, but because of how difficult it was to code for the Classic Mac OS at the time when the growth of Windows was exploding.  With Apple using Motorola/PPC processors at the time, there was a significant amount of diversity between Windows/Intel and Mac code bases where the low market share made it not worth it for many software developers when it came to the bottom line.  When Apple switched to OS X running on Intel, many vendors came back to developing for the Mac because it did not take a significant amount of work to port their Windows/Intel code back to OS X on x86, and where the potential to add another 10% of the PC market share to your list of potential customers made the additional work worth it.  Fast forward to iOS, Apple is already using ARM based CPU's, as is all of Apple's primary mobile competitors (Samsung, HTC, Motorola/Google, etc).  Keeping code bases between the different platforms, despite the different development tools, isn't that difficult for developers, even if Apple continues to lose market share.

2.) These market share numbers are misleading in terms of Android activations.  Many inexpensive "dumb phones" and feature phones are now using Android as a base operating system.  Though many times they may not be used/implemented/enabled for all their smartphone features, they are still being counted among Android activation numbers.  The most important numbers should be the comparison of Apple iOS versus Android on smartphones sold by primary manufacturers (Samsung, HTC, Motorola/Google), in terms of market share.  Those companies are Apple's primary competition for customers, and if Apple begins to lose significant amounts of share to those primary manufacturers, then there are going to be problems down the road.  I don't think comparing Apple's numbers against what could be entirely different markets gets you anywhere.

Apple/iOS will continue to be the "market leader", despite market share numbers, for the next three years.  After that, we'll see where the competition is in terms of market share, customer satisfaction, and profit.

post #67 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

Now if only the rest of the trolls would do that.


His post said he joined Apr 13. lol

post #68 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by tzeshan View Post
 


His post said he joined Apr 13. lol

 

I noticed that, too.

 

OTOH, he could have been reading this site for years before joining.  If we want to give him the benefit of the doubt. :)

post #69 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by philgar View Post
 

The comparison of apple's iphone to Ferrari is extremely old and just plain doesn't work. .....

 

Either way, Apple's market share is WAY too bit for them to not care about it. ....

 

Phil

Absolutely Phil

 

The point I think you miss here, is that the research figures dont tell us anything.  As we really dont know what the metrics are. Of course the Ferrari example is just that. What I am saying is that we have no idea from THESE figures what is going on. You say that Apple's Market share is WAY to big, but how is that defined.

 

Now we can get some clues from the data. Japan and US figures give some indication that wealthier society's and hence wealthier buyers appear to prefer Apple. But we have no accurate way of telling if this is where Samsung is gaining losing ground or whether or not other players are getting a foothold.

 

Europe shows an Android trend, but again what part of the European market? We still have no real clues only guesses. Like I pointed out with my Father in Law. That example is to show how the data COULD mean anything, but its by no way indicative.

 

Its not even an indication whether or not another manufacturer is buying market share, as I was using in a limited writing timeframe to highlight with Ferrari.

 

The facts here are so broad, it can hide so much. No Product Manager could decipher any meaningful trend or data from THESE figures. All they are useful for is that the research company hopefully can get some headlines, but even that I doubt will be of business use to them, as the only ones who would pay them for this data should see that this would be worthless.

 

Now if they had data which was broken up into price bands, product features etc you might get some clue, but in reality they wont have these figures, how can you tell how many $20 phones are being sold by street vendors for example in Vietnam, China, Mexico.. Ever been there some have phones that include models like Nokia 3210's (Not exactly that model, but you get the drift).  Are the "sales" quoted to end users or distributors or dealers.

And the figures only tell us how may iphones Apple sells, but not the mix. Likewise if Samsung never sold one S4, during this eriod, THESE figures will not tell you that. You have to use other information, and what and how reliable is that. Figures from Samsung? Who used various figures even in their recent court case. And really why would they want others to know that.

 

So back to my point, rather than my examples.

 

THESE figures mean nothing.

post #70 of 86
Quote:

Apple's iPhone marketshare dips in Q4, Samsung falters under pressure from low-cost OEMs

 

 

Excuse me, Mr. Headline-writer, but Apple's iPhone marketshare is, and always has been, 100%.

 

Apostrophes matter.

post #71 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by tzeshan View Post
 

Could you kindly tell us what is your monthly data plan fee?

 

I have a Nexus 4 that I bought for $300. I pay $30/month w/out contract. Data is unlimited, throttled at 5GB. Granted the same plan would work with an unlocked iPhone, but the $300 phone is a significant price difference. All the apps my family and I use work the same on their iOS 7 devices as on my Nexus 4. All the devices are a pleasure to use, I just didn't feel like tossing an extra $350 into a phone -- and bought a Canon speedlight instead.

post #72 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post


I trust Apple knows what it's doing compared to advice from some random guy on the internet.
Apple will never compete with the cheap phones. Why doesn't BMW release a sub $10000 car or Tiffany's sell costume jewelry? There is no money in it for them.

Exactly. Once they hit the bottom for low end competitions, no one wants an Apple product anymore. One example: Rock & Republic jeans: it's $200+ pair of jeans were symbol of luxury until they became Kolh's store brand at $45/pair and no one even bought them.

post #73 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakefinance View Post

This is absolutely the wrong outlook for Apple.  I agree that Apple shouldn't compete at the very lowest levels, but there is an enormous gap below the 5C that they need to fill.  A high-quality $250 phone is not out of Apple's reach.  Such a phone wouldn't matter so much in America, the land of carrier subsidies, as it would overseas in developing markets.

Edit: I've said it before and I'll say it again - the Moto G is a device that should be striking fear into the hearts of Apple and Samsung.  It costs less than $200 and gives the user a great experience with an unbelievable value quotient.  The average person doesn't need any more from a phone.  The G is the future of the low-end market, and it will probably have an impact on the market's idea of what a phone should cost, even at the high end.

1. How much money are those companies making?
2. How can you release cheap hardware and not cannibalize the premium iphone.
3. How can you make 30-40 margins on cheap hardware that isn't using cheap, out if date components.
post #74 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by tzeshan View Post
 

Could you kindly tell us what is your monthly data plan fee?


I don't have one. I pay $17 or so for unlimited access on the months that I need it. There's a lot of UK MVNOs now, https://giffgaff.com/ is the company that really kicked it all off.

post #75 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronJ View Post
 

 

But a lot more goes into it than just what you dish out of pocket at at buy time.  At least for me.

 

For instance, there's essentially no way I would ever abandon the iOS ecosystem at this point.  Not only do I have thousands of dollars invested in it over the years, but I'm completely familiar with it, it is like an old friend -- an old friend I trust.

That's true, but I am not tied down to iTunes or iOS and so I have a relatively free choice. To be honest I consider being tied down a huge negative, as I don't like the way OSX is going and I don't really love the style of iOS7 so being able to just opt out is fine with me.

post #76 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by waterrockets View Post
 

 

I have a Nexus 4 that I bought for $300. I pay $30/month w/out contract. Data is unlimited, throttled at 5GB. Granted the same plan would work with an unlocked iPhone, but the $300 phone is a significant price difference. All the apps my family and I use work the same on their iOS 7 devices as on my Nexus 4. All the devices are a pleasure to use, I just didn't feel like tossing an extra $350 into a phone -- and bought a Canon speedlight instead.

 

I see things in exactly the same way. I bought a pair of Nexus 7s for family members too and that was about as much as I saved. They're not the best tablets around but they don't need to be, they'll get dropped or scratched eventually and I prefer to replace a < £200 device than a ~£450+ one.

 

Oh, and I bought a Nissin with what I had left :)

post #77 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post

1. How much money are those companies making?
2. How can you release cheap hardware and not cannibalize the premium iphone.
3. How can you make 30-40 margins on cheap hardware that isn't using cheap, out if date components.

1. Samsung is quite profitable and has models in the lowest price brackets. Like Apple would have to do, Samsung uses the margins on high end devices to cover the reduced margins on low end devices.

2. There would be clear differentiation in the hardware that would basically eliminate cross shopping. Touch ID, the high end camera, the metal body, the coprocessor, and maybe more would be cut to each the lower price point. The software and user experience of the high end model could remain more or less intact.

3. Margins could probably hit 30%. Back to the Moto G example, if Apple can match that phone in capability and quality for the same cost as Motorola (though I suspect Apple can do better since they have the supply chain sorted out), then a $250 price point gives a 28% margin even if we imagine Moto to be selling at cost.
post #78 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakefinance View Post

1. Samsung is quite profitable and has models in the lowest price brackets. Like Apple would have to do, Samsung uses the margins on high end devices to cover the reduced margins on low end devices.

2. There would be clear differentiation in the hardware that would basically eliminate cross shopping. Touch ID, the high end camera, the metal body, the coprocessor, and maybe more would be cut to each the lower price point. The software and user experience of the high end model could remain more or less intact.

3. Margins could probably hit 30%. Back to the Moto G example, if Apple can match that phone in capability and quality for the same cost as Motorola (though I suspect Apple can do better since they have the supply chain sorted out), then a $250 price point gives a 28% margin even if we imagine Moto to be selling at cost.

1. How much is from the high end phones. How much is from the low end. Need I remind you that Sammy said they might miss expectations and that Apple is more profitable?
2. So basically they can sell the 4S for free w contract. Oh wait.

3. How well is the Moto G selling and how much margins does it provide to Google? Here's the thing, WS will kill Apple for MS and lower margins. So why bother trying to please WS?
post #79 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsTheInternet View Post
 

That's true, but I am not tied down to iTunes or iOS and so I have a relatively free choice. To be honest I consider being tied down a huge negative, as I don't like the way OSX is going and I don't really love the style of iOS7 so being able to just opt out is fine with me.

 

It's interesting to me that you interpreted what I said as my being "tied down."

 

I'm not "tied down" by any means.  If I wanted an Android phone, say a Samsung GS4 or whatever, I would go out tomorrow and buy one.  I don't want one, though.  And a big part of the reason why I don't want an Android phone is because I don't TRUST Android.  I've been using iOS, in one iteration or another, since 2007 and the original iPhone.  In that time, I've had 8 different iPhones/iPads.  I know how the stuff works, I know what to expect, I trust both the OS and the App Store.

 

Trust is important to me.  Having a sense of familiarity is important to me.  I have both of these with iOS, while also appreciating both the hardware and software design.

 

Hope that clarifies things.

post #80 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronJ View Post
 

 

It's interesting to me that you interpreted what I said as my being "tied down."

 

I'm not "tied down" by any means.  If I wanted an Android phone, say a Samsung GS4 or whatever, I would go out tomorrow and buy one.

 

Right but as you pointed out you have thousands of dollars invested in the platform and you are intimately familiar with its use. That is being tied down whether or not you consider that a negative thing.

 

 

I do not distrust Android or iOS. I also don't have much in the way of purchases that can only work with iTunes or lightning etc. Everything is mp3 and usb so I don't have the same restrictions. I'm not criticising, just commenting.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Apple's iPhone marketshare dips in Q4, Samsung falters under pressure from low-cost OEMs
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple's iPhone marketshare dips in Q4, Samsung falters under pressure from low-cost OEMs