From Oct 08 to Dec 09 (15 months, 2 Christmas quarters), Canalys estimates that 8.5m Android-based phones have shipped. That includes Droid (including 2-for-1 deals with Droid Eris), but not Nexus One. During that period, 207m smartphones were shipped (Canalys figures). That's 4.1%.
From Jul 07 to Oct 08 (15 months, 1 Christmas quarter), Apple shipped 13m iPhones. That includes the unsubsidized iPhone 2G and $199 iPhone 3G. During that period, 180m smartphones were shipped (IDC numbers, as I don't have Canalys smartphone numbers for 2007). That's 7.2%. (And in 4 out of the next 5 quarters matching the Android period above, iPhone at least doubled its shipments compared to the year before.)
Conclusion: Even though smartphones were more popular, Android sold less than iPhone over a comparable period in their life-cycle. And even if Android doubles its sales for 2010 (over 2009), it's still trailing the iPhone.
I know numbers. I'm not saying that Android is outselling iPhone, nor that it had better start than iPhone.
All I'm saying is they look like having nice momentum, and new models are emerging almost constantly, each bettering (or trying to) previous release. With iPhone, you know there is one new model every year, and if you don't really like new model (as in it doesn't give you enough reasons to replace your current model), you know you will have to wait another year for next release. With Android, there seems to be a new model just around the corner at all times, and there is much bigger variation in the way devices look and feature.
Dynamics of Android market are pushing phone (not software) development much faster - again, the way I perceive it. When I was choosing my phone, September last year, I was looking at everything. I didn't like WinMo at all. Pre I did like but was not available here in NZ. I compared iPhone and Androids and found iPhone more "desirable", both in hardware/design/look and software. But 6 months down the track, I am finding new emerging Android phones more "desirable". iPhone will improve with release 4 this summer, but even if it gets higher resolution screen, better camera, faster hardware... it will be the first time that iPhone is the one catching up to Android phones hardware wise.
Regarding software... well, I haven't had a chance to play with any Android phone so far so I don't know how would I compare them. Is Android already good enough to compete? Or is it still that much inferior to iPhone OS? Would it be reason enough to turn me away from the platform, even if I prefer Android devices to iPhone hardware and features wise... but that is not my point. My point is that for me, Android went from uninspiring devices with unknown software, to desirable devices with (still) unknown software. And I know that their penetration is improving dramatically relative to platform's start.
And I haven't even seen anything but couple of HTC and Motorola models. With Samsung, LG, Sony, Dell... in the queue, I think that Android influence on the market will be significant. I also think Apple is perfectly aware of that.
I know numbers. I'm not saying that Android is outselling iPhone, nor that it had better start than iPhone.
All I'm saying is they look like having nice momentum, and new models are emerging almost constantly, each bettering (or trying to) previous release. With iPhone, you know there is one new model every year, and if you don't really like new model (as in it doesn't give you enough reasons to replace your current model), you know you will have to wait another year for next release. With Android, there seems to be a new model just around the corner at all times, and there is much bigger variation in the way devices look and feature.
Dynamics of Android market are pushing phone (not software) development much faster - again, the way I perceive it. When I was choosing my phone, September last year, I was looking at everything. I didn't like WinMo at all. Pre I did like but was not available here in NZ. I compared iPhone and Androids and found iPhone more "desirable", both in hardware/design/look and software. But 6 months down the track, I am finding new emerging Android phones more "desirable". iPhone will improve with release 4 this summer, but even if it gets higher resolution screen, better camera, faster hardware... it will be the first time that iPhone is the one catching up to Android phones hardware wise.
Regarding software... well, I haven't had a chance to play with any Android phone so far so I don't know how would I compare them. Is Android already good enough to compete? Or is it still that much inferior to iPhone OS? Would it be reason enough to turn me away from the platform, even if I prefer Android devices to iPhone hardware and features wise... but that is not my point. My point is that for me, Android went from uninspiring devices with unknown software, to desirable devices with (still) unknown software. And I know that their penetration is improving dramatically relative to platform's start.
And I haven't even seen anything but couple of HTC and Motorola models. With Samsung, LG, Sony, Dell... in the queue, I think that Android influence on the market will be significant. I also think Apple is perfectly aware of that.
With the new Android phones however, the advances are mostly very small, when comparing one to the other. Some even go backward. The Nexus One, for example, has a worse screen than the Droid. Two very different phones though.
With the iPhone, people know what they want. It's actually a much easier choice. Apple also makes larger improvement between phones from year to year. Same for the OS. Google is making slight improvements, and getting rid of bugs that shouldn't have been there with each small release. And just a few phones get that.There's no way, like with the iPhone and iPod Touch for everyone to get the updates at once, keeping everyone current. In fact, most phones are well out of date, and will never be current with the OS. The fact that there are so many different Android phones doesn't make them better, just different. It's much more difficult to decide which phone to purchase, with each top newer one being slightly more sophisticated than the last one.
When you buy an iPhone, you know that something slightly different won't be out a few weeks later, invalidating your purchase. It has value.
It's likely that you will be at least partly wrong. Without acknowledging Android's problems as well as its benefits, you can't make a useful analysis of its future.
That is easily possible. Heck, pro-analysts are often wrong. Why wouldn't I be..?
But I am aware of Android's problems. I just think some of them are a bit exaggerated; again, from my point of view.
Phone OS updates, for example. Unless in case of serious bugs, I believe that most users will be using their Android phones with included OS revision and replace it when they replace their phone. I know that some of my iPhone acquaintances do that anyway, no matter how easy it is to update iPhone OS. Additionally, I think most people will be/are using their smart phones with included apps, maybe a few downloaded titles. While Apps store is great for advertising purposes (and also for people who actually like pushing the limits of their phone usage) I think it doesn't matter much for majority of people.
Not for people in tech forums like this, obviously... but for ordinary people, phone camera and screen resolution - I would expect - can be stronger magnet than the lure of the Apps Store.
What evidence is there that Android (I assume, you mean the OS and not the hardware) has a quicker development cycle?
Actually I did mean hardware.
Quote:
Touch sensitivity and responsiveness (and hang-ups or errors in that process) are a very real complaint about Android phones. Just read the reviews by Pogue, Mossberg, Baig, etc.
OK, will have a look.
Quote:
And what has been revolutionary about Android phones? A larger screen? OLED? More pixels? More megapixels in camera? Cut and paste? Faster processor? Autocomplete virtual keyboard? Multi-touch?
I didn't say revolutionary... I think. I said it is developing faster than iPhone. And more... sells. More pixels. More Hz. More... anything. Non technical people don't necessarily understand dpi, lpi, dynamic contrast ratio... they do "understand" word MORE, and more is better. That is why Apple is putting so much emphasis on more apps, even if number of useful ones is nowhere close.
Quote:
What have people received with Android updates? Shouldn't all of those features been in its first release, especially since Android came after the iPhone, though Android development supposedly started back as early as 2004 (around the same time as iPhone)? I'm having trouble with your logic.
Interestingly, likewise I'm not sure what you are referring to here
That is easily possible. Heck, pro-analysts are often wrong. Why wouldn't I be..?
But I am aware of Android's problems. I just think some of them are a bit exaggerated; again, from my point of view.
Phone OS updates, for example. Unless in case of serious bugs, I believe that most users will be using their Android phones with included OS revision and replace it when they replace their phone. I know that some of my iPhone acquaintances do that anyway, no matter how easy it is to update iPhone OS. Additionally, I think most people will be/are using their smart phones with included apps, maybe a few downloaded titles. While Apps store is great for advertising purposes (and also for people who actually like pushing the limits of their phone usage) I think it doesn't matter much for majority of people.
Not for people in tech forums like this, obviously... but for ordinary people, phone camera and screen resolution - I would expect - can be stronger magnet than the lure of the Apps Store.
The OS updates are a big thing though. Google is fooling people in the marketplace. If you've got 2.0 and the new one is 2.1, it's not a big deal for most things. But if you've got 1.6, which even new phones are coming out with (a couple even with 1.5!), then there are a whole lot of programs you can't run, no matter what the hardware.
But you don't know the programs are available unless you're unlucky enough to know someone who's got a phone with a newer OS. Then they tell you about a popular program, but it's not in your version of the marketplace. Very frustrating. That's Google's way of pretending to you that there's nothing out there that you're missing. Not nice! If Apple did that, you would be screaming about it.
Read the links I posted to Vinea. This is all true. Yes, some of the headlines are loud, but the info inside is correct.
That is why Apple is putting so much emphasis on more apps, even if number of useful ones is nowhere close.
Let's look at that one thing. More than one aspect to it. Apple now has more than 170,000 active apps in the store. Android has more than 30,000. You really aren't going to say that a greater percentage of Android apps are useful are you? Because when people say that sort of thing, their credibility drops quickly. Apple simply has far more "useful" apps than does Android, and always will unless some drastic happens.
In addition, you can read about comparisons between Android and iPhone apps. Every time you do, you will see that iPhone apps are considered superior, app to app. That's true even if the apps are from the same developer.
Well. It's been months already, and most have still not been upgraded. Sprint seems to show little interest, and Verizon is dragging its feet. We'll see how it works.
I know numbers. I'm not saying that Android is outselling iPhone, nor that it had better start than iPhone.
Then how on earth can you say it has more momentum than the iPhone?
Quote:
All I'm saying is they look like having nice momentum, and new models are emerging almost constantly, each bettering (or trying to) previous release.
No, you're saying it has unbeatable momentum and that's clearly false if it's less than that of the iPhone during the same period.
Quote:
With iPhone, you know there is one new model every year, and if you don't really like new model (as in it doesn't give you enough reasons to replace your current model), you know you will have to wait another year for next release. With Android, there seems to be a new model just around the corner at all times, and there is much bigger variation in the way devices look and feature.
Which really matters how much given 2 year contracts and replacement cycles?
Quote:
Dynamics of Android market are pushing phone (not software) development much faster - again, the way I perceive it. When I was choosing my phone, September last year, I was looking at everything. I didn't like WinMo at all. Pre I did like but was not available here in NZ. I compared iPhone and Androids and found iPhone more "desirable", both in hardware/design/look and software. But 6 months down the track, I am finding new emerging Android phones more "desirable". iPhone will improve with release 4 this summer, but even if it gets higher resolution screen, better camera, faster hardware... it will be the first time that iPhone is the one catching up to Android phones hardware wise.
This is because it's in the middle of the 1 year cycle. In any case, the major components are largely on 1+ year cycles like the CPU and GPUs. By the time we see large numbers of Cortex A9 based phones hopefully the 4th gen iPhone will also have the A9.
Quote:
My point is that for me, Android went from uninspiring devices with unknown software, to desirable devices with (still) unknown software. And I know that their penetration is improving dramatically relative to platform's start.
Evidently less dramatically than the iPhone at the same period of its life.
Read the links I posted to Vinea. This is all true. Yes, some of the headlines are loud, but the info inside is correct.
Not really.
The reason the Android Marketplace only shows you the apps you can run is to avoid folks buying apps they can't run. Not some nefarious plot by Google to keep you from knowing what you are missing.
If all the 1.5 and 1.6 phones are updated as scheduled by 2H2010 the issue is short lived and all those articles are simply wrong regarding how severe the problem will be.
Will fragmentation occur? Yes. Will it impede the Android market share? Yes. Will it annoy some devs. Sure.
Enough that it's doomsday and any of these alarmist statements become true? Highly unlikely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
We won't be talking about Android phones vs iPhones after a year or so
Yeah right...by 2011 the Android market will have disintegrated. Not.
Quote:
In a couple of years, Android will not be one united OS. There will be several versions that are mostly incompatible with each other
Except that by 2H2010 they expect every handset to be upgradable to 2.x...which leaves a year and a half for multiple incompatible versions to reappear by 2012.
Quote:
Android may cease to be significant in the future, even if a lot of phones use it. Eventually, most Android phones will be listed on the charts as "other".
Eventually even the iPhone is going to get listed as "other". But not anytime soon for either platform. The probablility that Android will cease to be significant in the next few years is near zero.
This is the equivalent of claiming that Apple is doomed because it's doing so well. What?
The only thing gloomy on the horizon is that trademark dispute and the Apple lawsuit. But then you could claim the same issue regarding the iPhone with the Nokia and Apple dispute.
The reason the Android Marketplace only shows you the apps you can run is to avoid folks buying apps they can't run. Not some nefarious plot by Google to keep you from knowing what you are missing.
It would be very easy for them to grey out the apps that can't be bought, knowing which phone is being used. That's no excuse.
Quote:
If all the 1.5 and 1.6 phones are updated as scheduled by 2H2010 the issue is short lived and all those articles are simply wrong regarding how severe the problem will be.
Except that not all of those phones can be upgraded. The situation is that they will TRY to upgrade all of the 1.5 and 1.6 phones that CAN be upgraded. And of course, that leaves out all of the earlier phones, which, really, aren't all that old yet.
Quote:
Will fragmentation occur? Yes. Will it impede the Android market share? Yes. Will it annoy some devs. Sure.
Enough that it's doomsday and any of these alarmist statements become true? Highly unlikely.
I wouldn't say that it's unlikely. It's certainly possible. If someone said that MS would be discontinuing Win Mobile in favor of a new OS that was much simpler, in three years, people would have scoffed at that as well. But it's happening.
Quote:
Yeah right...by 2011 the Android market will have disintegrated. Not.
That's your word. But fragmentation will cause problems as is already happening.
Quote:
Except that by 2H2010 they expect every handset to be upgradable to 2.x...which leaves a year and a half for multiple incompatible versions to reappear by 2012.
I'd like to see a link that says that EVERY Android handset out now will be upgradable to 2.x.
Quote:
Eventually even the iPhone is going to get listed as "other". But not anytime soon for either platform. The probablility that Android will cease to be significant in the next few years is near zero.
This is the equivalent of claiming that Apple is doomed because it's doing so well. What?
The only thing gloomy on the horizon is that trademark dispute and the Apple lawsuit. But then you could claim the same issue regarding the iPhone with the Nokia and Apple dispute.
Maybe the iPhone will be listed that way ten years from now when Apple is on to something else. But it's a long way away, if at all.
It's not that Android won't be significant, in total. It's even possible that some years from now that more Android based phones will sell than iPhones. That's not the point. But that if fragmentation continues on the present course, and some become incompatible, as it looks as though some will, then like Linux, there will be too many different versions that aren't compatible with each other that there won't really BE an Android market anymore. Already some carriers are setting up their own Android stores.
I'm saying that if Google doesn't work this out better, and leaves it to the programming teams to do what they want, it will be a mess. There's no vision at Google. It's as though the coders are left to their own devices to throw out whatever makes them happy, whenever they want to. That's typical of the way Google handles software releases. The joke about Google, and we all know it, is that things are in perpetual beta. But they can't do that with phones.
Name them if they are so many. Maybe one model (the G1) is plausible but the rumor is all. So how can you claim many?
I don't have to. Some are mentioned in the links I already posed. But you have to support your claim, made a couple of times that every handset will be upgradable to 2.x. Find a link where Google says that. If true, it should be pretty simple.
It would be very easy for them to grey out the apps that can't be bought, knowing which phone is being used. That's no excuse.
It's the way they chose to implement it. The burden of proof is on those that claim some nefarious plot.
Quote:
Except that not all of those phones can be upgraded. The situation is that they will TRY to upgrade all of the 1.5 and 1.6 phones that CAN be upgraded. And of course, that leaves out all of the earlier phones, which, really, aren't all that old yet.
It should be easy enough to list some US examples other than the G1. Hero and Tatto are supposed to be able to. Same for the CLIQ.
Quote:
I wouldn't say that it's unlikely. It's certainly possible. If someone said that MS would be discontinuing Win Mobile in favor of a new OS that was much simpler, in three years, people would have scoffed at that as well. But it's happening.
Willing to put money on it? The destruction of the Android market in a year? Riiight.
WinMobile 6.5 was an interim release because WinMobile 7 (now known as Windows Phone 7 Series) was late and didn't ship in 2009. MS certainly didn't abandon the WinMobile platform any more than Win7 abandoned Vista. Moving to Silverlight, XNA and full .NET is basically an evolution of the .NET Compact Framework to that of a more fully featured stack. None of the current phones will upgrade and 7 isn't expected out till later this year...gee around the same time as the Cortex A9 phones come out rather than the 1Ghz A8 Snapdragon.
Microsoft Pink is probably more of a significant departure than WinPhone7.
Quote:
That's your word. But fragmentation will cause problems as is already happening.
If you seriously think the Android market will disintegrate by 2011 then put your money where your mouth is. Ain't happening unless Google allows the Android trademark to slip away.
Quote:
I'd like to see a link that says that EVERY Android handset out now will be upgradable to 2.x.
Maybe the iPhone will be listed that way ten years from now when Apple is on to something else. But it's a long way away, if at all.
Same for Android.
Quote:
I'm saying that if Google doesn't work this out better, and leaves it to the programming teams to do what they want, it will be a mess.
Right, those guys are completely clueless and leave it all up to the programming teams. Wha?
Quote:
There's no vision at Google. It's as though the coders are left to their own devices to throw out whatever makes them happy, whenever they want to.
Android itself shows that Google has a vision for it's long term success. Likewise all the other Google apps are geared toward one thing: driving eyeballs to Google.
If it's one thing that Google doesn't lack, its vision toward that singular purpose.
Quote:
That's typical of the way Google handles software releases. The joke about Google, and we all know it, is that things are in perpetual beta. But they can't do that with phones.
The reality on the ground says different. While Android is no iPhone it's no slouch either. And given how quickly the revs are coming out and the teething pains of getting 2.1 on the other phones it's beta.
The thing about beta software for Google is that it typically works pretty well.
Quote:
If they wise up, then it will be different.
And if Steve Jobs would wise up and sell an xMac, then it will be different.
I don't have to. Some are mentioned in the links I already posed. But you have to support your claim, made a couple of times that every handset will be upgradable to 2.x. Find a link where Google says that. If true, it should be pretty simple.
Right now, this is just a rumor.
We'll see. 2H2010 isn't that far away. Neither is 2011 when Android is supposed to disintegrate by your timetable.
It's the way they chose to implement it. The burden of proof is on those that claim some nefarious plot.
I can confirm this (the blocking for compatability part). I got my DROID recently, so it's "officially" at Android 2.0.1. Google Earth was released for Android 2.1 somewhere around the same time. When I was browsing the Market, it did not come up as an option for my phone.
I got adventerous and decided to root it and install a custom OS to it that had elements of Android 2.1. After taking all of 15 minutes to do that, I went back to the Market to redownload the apps that I wiped. When I searched the keyword "Google", what shows up? Google Earth.
Quote:
The reality on the ground says different. While Android is no iPhone it's no slouch either. And given how quickly the revs are coming out and the teething pains of getting 2.1 on the other phones it's beta.
The thing about beta software for Google is that it typically works pretty well.
I agree with this sentence. Navigation, for example, is technically "beta", but it integrates into Android and Maps pretty damn well. I even have a folder on one of my Home screens that has my most traveled-to and important places for one-touch GPS navigation.
So far, the only hitch I've had with Navigation is that it thinks one of my friends lives on the other side of the street to where he actually lives. Which is a water hazard for a golf course. Kind of funny, but at that point, we can use some common sense and process of elimination to determine that driving the car into a body of water is not the correct thing to do.
I agree with this sentence. Navigation, for example, is technically "beta", but it integrates into Android and Maps pretty damn well. I even have a folder on one of my Home screens that has my most traveled-to and important places for one-touch GPS navigation.
So far, the only hitch I've had with Navigation is that it thinks one of my friends lives on the other side of the street to where he actually lives. Which is a water hazard for a golf course. Kind of funny, but at that point, we can use some common sense and process of elimination to determine that driving the car into a body of water is not the correct thing to do.
I really do expect Android to become far more stable (in terms of releases rather than use...which is pretty solid as is) over the next year or so and thinking about it, Android major releases and dot releases are pretty much already coming at the same pace as the iPhone OS...major release once a year and dot releases as needed every few months.
March 2009 saw 1.1. 1.5 was in May. 1.6 in September and 2.0 in October, 2.1 in January.
For iPhone it was June 07 for 1.0, July for 1.0.1, August for 1.0.2 and 1.1 in September. Several more 1.1.x point releases and then 2.0 in July of 08 then new point releases every month or every other month until 3.0 in June of 09.
While adoption of 3.x is pretty much complete for the iPhone the iPod Touch still lags a little. As of January 2010 AdMob was saying 32% of touches still on 2.x.
Just like many iPhone devs began ignoring 2.x users on the App store (as in, if it works great but not jumping through hoops to avoid important 3.0 features like Core Data), once the majority of Android handsets go to 2.x the 1.x support will dwindle.
iPhone 4.0 should be a major enhancement just like 3.0. We'll see that rolling window again but this time with the original iPhone 2G potentially getting left behind if it includes 3rd party multitasking.
I don't have to. Some are mentioned in the links I already posed. But you have to support your claim, made a couple of times that every handset will be upgradable to 2.x. Find a link where Google says that. If true, it should be pretty simple.
Right now, this is just a rumor.
What I don't understand is this fixation on the doomsday senario that all Android phones must be able to upgrade to 2.x or Android will fail.
Will there be really old models that can't get the 2.x update? Sure. It's been shown that you can get 2.1 onto a G1, but it runs really slow. People with G1s will be told "if you want Android 2.1, you have to get a new phone, the hardware's just too old" by T-Mobile and I believe a majority of them will understand.
At the time those phones came out, Android was nowhere near as full-featured as it is now. The hardware didn't need to be as high-end to run the OS well. And it was more of an oddity, kind of like the Bada OS.
All the phones around the time of the DROID's release to now all have relatively high-end (and similar) specs and should have no issues running Android 2.x. Some extra features may get left out here and there (i.e. live wallpapers), but the core OS functions that matter will be the same. What I'm saying is that going forward, keeping up with the OS updates (hardware-wise) should be no problem.
Hardware gets outdated. That's the progress of technology. There will always be a point where we have to stop supporting the really old stuff just to be able to move forward. There will be small pockets of people that keep Android phones that won't get the 2.x update for whatever reason. For most others, they'll have moved on to a phone that does support it already.
The iPhone has a similar issue. There are pockets of people out there still holding onto the original iPhones. Sure they can install the latest OS on it, but it'll be missing features too, because the hardware's outdated. And there will be apps they can't install because it was written to access functions/hardware that isn't there.
I didn't say revolutionary... I think. I said it is developing faster than iPhone. And more... sells. More pixels. More Hz. More... anything. Non technical people don't necessarily understand dpi, lpi, dynamic contrast ratio... they do "understand" word MORE, and more is better. That is why Apple is putting so much emphasis on more apps, even if number of useful ones is nowhere close.
You said Apple's updates were evolutionary, implying that Android's were somehow better or not evolutionary, which would be revolutionary.
Don't you think Apple has looked at all these same things - more pixels, OLED, more Hz - and at the performance or financial drawbacks or side effects of each? Look the new Evo will have a 4.3" screen in a bigger slab form factor. Which do you think came first in their design - a bigger form factor (to fit in the 4G WiMax circuitry) or the 4.3" screen?
Apple has a long history of leaving things out or not joining with others in adding some feature. Most of the time, they have been right as to what has been important to user experience.
Quote:
Interestingly, likewise I'm not sure what you are referring to here
You wrote "What did you actually receive with iPhone OS updates? Copy&Paste, multimedia messages, video recording..? All of them should have been included in first release - from my point of view - and you would not need updates if your software was more featured"
If that is the case, then shouldn't all the Android updates have been available in its first release as well, since iPhone OS 2.0 was already available?
First of all, iPhone is - or was - ultimate gadget, and was addressing gadget lovers as well. Compass, accelerometer, orientation sensor... are, at the end of the day, gadgets. Still, people were buying them, not only gadget lovers.
Second... I am a bit in photography and it is simple fact that number of pixels sell. I personally don't agree with that, but most people I know will ask first for number of pixels when considering camera. Don't underestimate average consumer and his/her approach that more is always better... and new Androids are offering more pixels. More processing speed. More camera resolution (and more cameras for some). More storage (via replaceable flash cards).
People will go for that. Not only gadget lovers.
You are revising history. Many gadget lovers found the first iPhone lacking. It had no 3G, no MMS, no video camera, no compass, a puny camera and didn't run 3rd party apps. Some even argued that it was NOT a smartphone. Even when the 3GS was released, technically, the Samsung Omnia and Nokia N97 could be argued as being better gadgets (and some on AI did). At the end of the day, Apple's devices (including Macs) are almost never at the leading edge hardware-wise, but they are at the leading edge in terms of user experience, which includes a combination of hardware, UI, design, and software.
But gadget lovers buy gadgets and focus on the "more" and are gobbling up the Droids and less so, the N1s. (73% of Android owners are male according to AdMob, And 47% are between 18-34. That's where most gadget lovers reside.) But the sales numbers still show that greater numbers of PEOPLE are buying iPhones than all Android-based phones combined.
Apple is about to sell 7-8m iPhones during this quarter, it's best first calendar quarter ever and almost double it's previous best 1st quarter. They're buying iPhones that technology-wise are 6 to 9 months older than the Droid, Eris, CLIQ, and N1. Schmidt said 60,000 Androids are shipping a day. That's 5.5m Androids in the quarter. We can see what people are buying.
Comments
So let's talk platform.
From Oct 08 to Dec 09 (15 months, 2 Christmas quarters), Canalys estimates that 8.5m Android-based phones have shipped. That includes Droid (including 2-for-1 deals with Droid Eris), but not Nexus One. During that period, 207m smartphones were shipped (Canalys figures). That's 4.1%.
From Jul 07 to Oct 08 (15 months, 1 Christmas quarter), Apple shipped 13m iPhones. That includes the unsubsidized iPhone 2G and $199 iPhone 3G. During that period, 180m smartphones were shipped (IDC numbers, as I don't have Canalys smartphone numbers for 2007). That's 7.2%. (And in 4 out of the next 5 quarters matching the Android period above, iPhone at least doubled its shipments compared to the year before.)
Conclusion: Even though smartphones were more popular, Android sold less than iPhone over a comparable period in their life-cycle. And even if Android doubles its sales for 2010 (over 2009), it's still trailing the iPhone.
I know numbers. I'm not saying that Android is outselling iPhone, nor that it had better start than iPhone.
All I'm saying is they look like having nice momentum, and new models are emerging almost constantly, each bettering (or trying to) previous release. With iPhone, you know there is one new model every year, and if you don't really like new model (as in it doesn't give you enough reasons to replace your current model), you know you will have to wait another year for next release. With Android, there seems to be a new model just around the corner at all times, and there is much bigger variation in the way devices look and feature.
Dynamics of Android market are pushing phone (not software) development much faster - again, the way I perceive it. When I was choosing my phone, September last year, I was looking at everything. I didn't like WinMo at all. Pre I did like but was not available here in NZ. I compared iPhone and Androids and found iPhone more "desirable", both in hardware/design/look and software. But 6 months down the track, I am finding new emerging Android phones more "desirable". iPhone will improve with release 4 this summer, but even if it gets higher resolution screen, better camera, faster hardware... it will be the first time that iPhone is the one catching up to Android phones hardware wise.
Regarding software... well, I haven't had a chance to play with any Android phone so far so I don't know how would I compare them. Is Android already good enough to compete? Or is it still that much inferior to iPhone OS? Would it be reason enough to turn me away from the platform, even if I prefer Android devices to iPhone hardware and features wise... but that is not my point. My point is that for me, Android went from uninspiring devices with unknown software, to desirable devices with (still) unknown software. And I know that their penetration is improving dramatically relative to platform's start.
And I haven't even seen anything but couple of HTC and Motorola models. With Samsung, LG, Sony, Dell... in the queue, I think that Android influence on the market will be significant. I also think Apple is perfectly aware of that.
I know numbers. I'm not saying that Android is outselling iPhone, nor that it had better start than iPhone.
All I'm saying is they look like having nice momentum, and new models are emerging almost constantly, each bettering (or trying to) previous release. With iPhone, you know there is one new model every year, and if you don't really like new model (as in it doesn't give you enough reasons to replace your current model), you know you will have to wait another year for next release. With Android, there seems to be a new model just around the corner at all times, and there is much bigger variation in the way devices look and feature.
Dynamics of Android market are pushing phone (not software) development much faster - again, the way I perceive it. When I was choosing my phone, September last year, I was looking at everything. I didn't like WinMo at all. Pre I did like but was not available here in NZ. I compared iPhone and Androids and found iPhone more "desirable", both in hardware/design/look and software. But 6 months down the track, I am finding new emerging Android phones more "desirable". iPhone will improve with release 4 this summer, but even if it gets higher resolution screen, better camera, faster hardware... it will be the first time that iPhone is the one catching up to Android phones hardware wise.
Regarding software... well, I haven't had a chance to play with any Android phone so far so I don't know how would I compare them. Is Android already good enough to compete? Or is it still that much inferior to iPhone OS? Would it be reason enough to turn me away from the platform, even if I prefer Android devices to iPhone hardware and features wise... but that is not my point. My point is that for me, Android went from uninspiring devices with unknown software, to desirable devices with (still) unknown software. And I know that their penetration is improving dramatically relative to platform's start.
And I haven't even seen anything but couple of HTC and Motorola models. With Samsung, LG, Sony, Dell... in the queue, I think that Android influence on the market will be significant. I also think Apple is perfectly aware of that.
With the new Android phones however, the advances are mostly very small, when comparing one to the other. Some even go backward. The Nexus One, for example, has a worse screen than the Droid. Two very different phones though.
With the iPhone, people know what they want. It's actually a much easier choice. Apple also makes larger improvement between phones from year to year. Same for the OS. Google is making slight improvements, and getting rid of bugs that shouldn't have been there with each small release. And just a few phones get that.There's no way, like with the iPhone and iPod Touch for everyone to get the updates at once, keeping everyone current. In fact, most phones are well out of date, and will never be current with the OS. The fact that there are so many different Android phones doesn't make them better, just different. It's much more difficult to decide which phone to purchase, with each top newer one being slightly more sophisticated than the last one.
When you buy an iPhone, you know that something slightly different won't be out a few weeks later, invalidating your purchase. It has value.
It's likely that you will be at least partly wrong. Without acknowledging Android's problems as well as its benefits, you can't make a useful analysis of its future.
That is easily possible. Heck, pro-analysts are often wrong. Why wouldn't I be..?
But I am aware of Android's problems. I just think some of them are a bit exaggerated; again, from my point of view.
Phone OS updates, for example. Unless in case of serious bugs, I believe that most users will be using their Android phones with included OS revision and replace it when they replace their phone. I know that some of my iPhone acquaintances do that anyway, no matter how easy it is to update iPhone OS. Additionally, I think most people will be/are using their smart phones with included apps, maybe a few downloaded titles. While Apps store is great for advertising purposes (and also for people who actually like pushing the limits of their phone usage) I think it doesn't matter much for majority of people.
Not for people in tech forums like this, obviously... but for ordinary people, phone camera and screen resolution - I would expect - can be stronger magnet than the lure of the Apps Store.
What evidence is there that Android (I assume, you mean the OS and not the hardware) has a quicker development cycle?
Actually I did mean hardware.
Touch sensitivity and responsiveness (and hang-ups or errors in that process) are a very real complaint about Android phones. Just read the reviews by Pogue, Mossberg, Baig, etc.
OK, will have a look.
And what has been revolutionary about Android phones? A larger screen? OLED? More pixels? More megapixels in camera? Cut and paste? Faster processor? Autocomplete virtual keyboard? Multi-touch?
I didn't say revolutionary... I think. I said it is developing faster than iPhone. And more... sells. More pixels. More Hz. More... anything. Non technical people don't necessarily understand dpi, lpi, dynamic contrast ratio... they do "understand" word MORE, and more is better. That is why Apple is putting so much emphasis on more apps, even if number of useful ones is nowhere close.
What have people received with Android updates? Shouldn't all of those features been in its first release, especially since Android came after the iPhone, though Android development supposedly started back as early as 2004 (around the same time as iPhone)? I'm having trouble with your logic.
Interestingly, likewise I'm not sure what you are referring to here
That is easily possible. Heck, pro-analysts are often wrong. Why wouldn't I be..?
But I am aware of Android's problems. I just think some of them are a bit exaggerated; again, from my point of view.
Phone OS updates, for example. Unless in case of serious bugs, I believe that most users will be using their Android phones with included OS revision and replace it when they replace their phone. I know that some of my iPhone acquaintances do that anyway, no matter how easy it is to update iPhone OS. Additionally, I think most people will be/are using their smart phones with included apps, maybe a few downloaded titles. While Apps store is great for advertising purposes (and also for people who actually like pushing the limits of their phone usage) I think it doesn't matter much for majority of people.
Not for people in tech forums like this, obviously... but for ordinary people, phone camera and screen resolution - I would expect - can be stronger magnet than the lure of the Apps Store.
The OS updates are a big thing though. Google is fooling people in the marketplace. If you've got 2.0 and the new one is 2.1, it's not a big deal for most things. But if you've got 1.6, which even new phones are coming out with (a couple even with 1.5!), then there are a whole lot of programs you can't run, no matter what the hardware.
But you don't know the programs are available unless you're unlucky enough to know someone who's got a phone with a newer OS. Then they tell you about a popular program, but it's not in your version of the marketplace. Very frustrating. That's Google's way of pretending to you that there's nothing out there that you're missing. Not nice! If Apple did that, you would be screaming about it.
Read the links I posted to Vinea. This is all true. Yes, some of the headlines are loud, but the info inside is correct.
That is why Apple is putting so much emphasis on more apps, even if number of useful ones is nowhere close.
Let's look at that one thing. More than one aspect to it. Apple now has more than 170,000 active apps in the store. Android has more than 30,000. You really aren't going to say that a greater percentage of Android apps are useful are you? Because when people say that sort of thing, their credibility drops quickly. Apple simply has far more "useful" apps than does Android, and always will unless some drastic happens.
In addition, you can read about comparisons between Android and iPhone apps. Every time you do, you will see that iPhone apps are considered superior, app to app. That's true even if the apps are from the same developer.
Well. It's been months already, and most have still not been upgraded. Sprint seems to show little interest, and Verizon is dragging its feet. We'll see how it works.
But many older phones won't be upgraded.
They say by 2H 2010. They are still on schedule.
They say by 2H 2010. They are still on schedule.
So they say. When it happens, if it happens then we'll know. But many phones can't be upgraded, and that's that.
I know numbers. I'm not saying that Android is outselling iPhone, nor that it had better start than iPhone.
Then how on earth can you say it has more momentum than the iPhone?
All I'm saying is they look like having nice momentum, and new models are emerging almost constantly, each bettering (or trying to) previous release.
No, you're saying it has unbeatable momentum and that's clearly false if it's less than that of the iPhone during the same period.
With iPhone, you know there is one new model every year, and if you don't really like new model (as in it doesn't give you enough reasons to replace your current model), you know you will have to wait another year for next release. With Android, there seems to be a new model just around the corner at all times, and there is much bigger variation in the way devices look and feature.
Which really matters how much given 2 year contracts and replacement cycles?
Dynamics of Android market are pushing phone (not software) development much faster - again, the way I perceive it. When I was choosing my phone, September last year, I was looking at everything. I didn't like WinMo at all. Pre I did like but was not available here in NZ. I compared iPhone and Androids and found iPhone more "desirable", both in hardware/design/look and software. But 6 months down the track, I am finding new emerging Android phones more "desirable". iPhone will improve with release 4 this summer, but even if it gets higher resolution screen, better camera, faster hardware... it will be the first time that iPhone is the one catching up to Android phones hardware wise.
This is because it's in the middle of the 1 year cycle. In any case, the major components are largely on 1+ year cycles like the CPU and GPUs. By the time we see large numbers of Cortex A9 based phones hopefully the 4th gen iPhone will also have the A9.
My point is that for me, Android went from uninspiring devices with unknown software, to desirable devices with (still) unknown software. And I know that their penetration is improving dramatically relative to platform's start.
Evidently less dramatically than the iPhone at the same period of its life.
Read the links I posted to Vinea. This is all true. Yes, some of the headlines are loud, but the info inside is correct.
Not really.
The reason the Android Marketplace only shows you the apps you can run is to avoid folks buying apps they can't run. Not some nefarious plot by Google to keep you from knowing what you are missing.
If all the 1.5 and 1.6 phones are updated as scheduled by 2H2010 the issue is short lived and all those articles are simply wrong regarding how severe the problem will be.
Will fragmentation occur? Yes. Will it impede the Android market share? Yes. Will it annoy some devs. Sure.
Enough that it's doomsday and any of these alarmist statements become true? Highly unlikely.
We won't be talking about Android phones vs iPhones after a year or so
Yeah right...by 2011 the Android market will have disintegrated. Not.
In a couple of years, Android will not be one united OS. There will be several versions that are mostly incompatible with each other
Except that by 2H2010 they expect every handset to be upgradable to 2.x...which leaves a year and a half for multiple incompatible versions to reappear by 2012.
Android may cease to be significant in the future, even if a lot of phones use it. Eventually, most Android phones will be listed on the charts as "other".
Eventually even the iPhone is going to get listed as "other". But not anytime soon for either platform. The probablility that Android will cease to be significant in the next few years is near zero.
This is the equivalent of claiming that Apple is doomed because it's doing so well. What?
The only thing gloomy on the horizon is that trademark dispute and the Apple lawsuit. But then you could claim the same issue regarding the iPhone with the Nokia and Apple dispute.
So they say. When it happens, if it happens then we'll know. But many phones can't be upgraded, and that's that.
Name them if they are so many. Maybe one model (the G1) is plausible but the rumor is all. So how can you claim many?
Not really.
The reason the Android Marketplace only shows you the apps you can run is to avoid folks buying apps they can't run. Not some nefarious plot by Google to keep you from knowing what you are missing.
It would be very easy for them to grey out the apps that can't be bought, knowing which phone is being used. That's no excuse.
If all the 1.5 and 1.6 phones are updated as scheduled by 2H2010 the issue is short lived and all those articles are simply wrong regarding how severe the problem will be.
Except that not all of those phones can be upgraded. The situation is that they will TRY to upgrade all of the 1.5 and 1.6 phones that CAN be upgraded. And of course, that leaves out all of the earlier phones, which, really, aren't all that old yet.
Will fragmentation occur? Yes. Will it impede the Android market share? Yes. Will it annoy some devs. Sure.
Enough that it's doomsday and any of these alarmist statements become true? Highly unlikely.
I wouldn't say that it's unlikely. It's certainly possible. If someone said that MS would be discontinuing Win Mobile in favor of a new OS that was much simpler, in three years, people would have scoffed at that as well. But it's happening.
Yeah right...by 2011 the Android market will have disintegrated. Not.
That's your word. But fragmentation will cause problems as is already happening.
Except that by 2H2010 they expect every handset to be upgradable to 2.x...which leaves a year and a half for multiple incompatible versions to reappear by 2012.
I'd like to see a link that says that EVERY Android handset out now will be upgradable to 2.x.
Eventually even the iPhone is going to get listed as "other". But not anytime soon for either platform. The probablility that Android will cease to be significant in the next few years is near zero.
This is the equivalent of claiming that Apple is doomed because it's doing so well. What?
The only thing gloomy on the horizon is that trademark dispute and the Apple lawsuit. But then you could claim the same issue regarding the iPhone with the Nokia and Apple dispute.
Maybe the iPhone will be listed that way ten years from now when Apple is on to something else. But it's a long way away, if at all.
It's not that Android won't be significant, in total. It's even possible that some years from now that more Android based phones will sell than iPhones. That's not the point. But that if fragmentation continues on the present course, and some become incompatible, as it looks as though some will, then like Linux, there will be too many different versions that aren't compatible with each other that there won't really BE an Android market anymore. Already some carriers are setting up their own Android stores.
I'm saying that if Google doesn't work this out better, and leaves it to the programming teams to do what they want, it will be a mess. There's no vision at Google. It's as though the coders are left to their own devices to throw out whatever makes them happy, whenever they want to. That's typical of the way Google handles software releases. The joke about Google, and we all know it, is that things are in perpetual beta. But they can't do that with phones.
If they wise up, then it will be different.
Name them if they are so many. Maybe one model (the G1) is plausible but the rumor is all. So how can you claim many?
I don't have to. Some are mentioned in the links I already posed. But you have to support your claim, made a couple of times that every handset will be upgradable to 2.x. Find a link where Google says that. If true, it should be pretty simple.
Right now, this is just a rumor.
It would be very easy for them to grey out the apps that can't be bought, knowing which phone is being used. That's no excuse.
It's the way they chose to implement it. The burden of proof is on those that claim some nefarious plot.
Except that not all of those phones can be upgraded. The situation is that they will TRY to upgrade all of the 1.5 and 1.6 phones that CAN be upgraded. And of course, that leaves out all of the earlier phones, which, really, aren't all that old yet.
It should be easy enough to list some US examples other than the G1. Hero and Tatto are supposed to be able to. Same for the CLIQ.
I wouldn't say that it's unlikely. It's certainly possible. If someone said that MS would be discontinuing Win Mobile in favor of a new OS that was much simpler, in three years, people would have scoffed at that as well. But it's happening.
Willing to put money on it? The destruction of the Android market in a year? Riiight.
WinMobile 6.5 was an interim release because WinMobile 7 (now known as Windows Phone 7 Series) was late and didn't ship in 2009. MS certainly didn't abandon the WinMobile platform any more than Win7 abandoned Vista. Moving to Silverlight, XNA and full .NET is basically an evolution of the .NET Compact Framework to that of a more fully featured stack. None of the current phones will upgrade and 7 isn't expected out till later this year...gee around the same time as the Cortex A9 phones come out rather than the 1Ghz A8 Snapdragon.
Microsoft Pink is probably more of a significant departure than WinPhone7.
That's your word. But fragmentation will cause problems as is already happening.
If you seriously think the Android market will disintegrate by 2011 then put your money where your mouth is. Ain't happening unless Google allows the Android trademark to slip away.
I'd like to see a link that says that EVERY Android handset out now will be upgradable to 2.x.
Here's the rumor one.
http://androidandme.com/2010/02/news...equire-a-wipe/
Maybe the iPhone will be listed that way ten years from now when Apple is on to something else. But it's a long way away, if at all.
Same for Android.
I'm saying that if Google doesn't work this out better, and leaves it to the programming teams to do what they want, it will be a mess.
Right, those guys are completely clueless and leave it all up to the programming teams. Wha?
There's no vision at Google. It's as though the coders are left to their own devices to throw out whatever makes them happy, whenever they want to.
Android itself shows that Google has a vision for it's long term success. Likewise all the other Google apps are geared toward one thing: driving eyeballs to Google.
If it's one thing that Google doesn't lack, its vision toward that singular purpose.
That's typical of the way Google handles software releases. The joke about Google, and we all know it, is that things are in perpetual beta. But they can't do that with phones.
The reality on the ground says different. While Android is no iPhone it's no slouch either. And given how quickly the revs are coming out and the teething pains of getting 2.1 on the other phones it's beta.
The thing about beta software for Google is that it typically works pretty well.
If they wise up, then it will be different.
And if Steve Jobs would wise up and sell an xMac, then it will be different.
Right.
I don't have to. Some are mentioned in the links I already posed. But you have to support your claim, made a couple of times that every handset will be upgradable to 2.x. Find a link where Google says that. If true, it should be pretty simple.
Right now, this is just a rumor.
We'll see. 2H2010 isn't that far away. Neither is 2011 when Android is supposed to disintegrate by your timetable.
It's the way they chose to implement it. The burden of proof is on those that claim some nefarious plot.
I can confirm this (the blocking for compatability part). I got my DROID recently, so it's "officially" at Android 2.0.1. Google Earth was released for Android 2.1 somewhere around the same time. When I was browsing the Market, it did not come up as an option for my phone.
I got adventerous and decided to root it and install a custom OS to it that had elements of Android 2.1. After taking all of 15 minutes to do that, I went back to the Market to redownload the apps that I wiped. When I searched the keyword "Google", what shows up? Google Earth.
The reality on the ground says different. While Android is no iPhone it's no slouch either. And given how quickly the revs are coming out and the teething pains of getting 2.1 on the other phones it's beta.
The thing about beta software for Google is that it typically works pretty well.
I agree with this sentence. Navigation, for example, is technically "beta", but it integrates into Android and Maps pretty damn well. I even have a folder on one of my Home screens that has my most traveled-to and important places for one-touch GPS navigation.
So far, the only hitch I've had with Navigation is that it thinks one of my friends lives on the other side of the street to where he actually lives. Which is a water hazard for a golf course. Kind of funny, but at that point, we can use some common sense and process of elimination to determine that driving the car into a body of water is not the correct thing to do.
I agree with this sentence. Navigation, for example, is technically "beta", but it integrates into Android and Maps pretty damn well. I even have a folder on one of my Home screens that has my most traveled-to and important places for one-touch GPS navigation.
So far, the only hitch I've had with Navigation is that it thinks one of my friends lives on the other side of the street to where he actually lives. Which is a water hazard for a golf course. Kind of funny, but at that point, we can use some common sense and process of elimination to determine that driving the car into a body of water is not the correct thing to do.
I really do expect Android to become far more stable (in terms of releases rather than use...which is pretty solid as is) over the next year or so and thinking about it, Android major releases and dot releases are pretty much already coming at the same pace as the iPhone OS...major release once a year and dot releases as needed every few months.
March 2009 saw 1.1. 1.5 was in May. 1.6 in September and 2.0 in October, 2.1 in January.
For iPhone it was June 07 for 1.0, July for 1.0.1, August for 1.0.2 and 1.1 in September. Several more 1.1.x point releases and then 2.0 in July of 08 then new point releases every month or every other month until 3.0 in June of 09.
While adoption of 3.x is pretty much complete for the iPhone the iPod Touch still lags a little. As of January 2010 AdMob was saying 32% of touches still on 2.x.
Just like many iPhone devs began ignoring 2.x users on the App store (as in, if it works great but not jumping through hoops to avoid important 3.0 features like Core Data), once the majority of Android handsets go to 2.x the 1.x support will dwindle.
iPhone 4.0 should be a major enhancement just like 3.0. We'll see that rolling window again but this time with the original iPhone 2G potentially getting left behind if it includes 3rd party multitasking.
I don't have to. Some are mentioned in the links I already posed. But you have to support your claim, made a couple of times that every handset will be upgradable to 2.x. Find a link where Google says that. If true, it should be pretty simple.
Right now, this is just a rumor.
What I don't understand is this fixation on the doomsday senario that all Android phones must be able to upgrade to 2.x or Android will fail.
Will there be really old models that can't get the 2.x update? Sure. It's been shown that you can get 2.1 onto a G1, but it runs really slow. People with G1s will be told "if you want Android 2.1, you have to get a new phone, the hardware's just too old" by T-Mobile and I believe a majority of them will understand.
At the time those phones came out, Android was nowhere near as full-featured as it is now. The hardware didn't need to be as high-end to run the OS well. And it was more of an oddity, kind of like the Bada OS.
All the phones around the time of the DROID's release to now all have relatively high-end (and similar) specs and should have no issues running Android 2.x. Some extra features may get left out here and there (i.e. live wallpapers), but the core OS functions that matter will be the same. What I'm saying is that going forward, keeping up with the OS updates (hardware-wise) should be no problem.
Hardware gets outdated. That's the progress of technology. There will always be a point where we have to stop supporting the really old stuff just to be able to move forward. There will be small pockets of people that keep Android phones that won't get the 2.x update for whatever reason. For most others, they'll have moved on to a phone that does support it already.
The iPhone has a similar issue. There are pockets of people out there still holding onto the original iPhones. Sure they can install the latest OS on it, but it'll be missing features too, because the hardware's outdated. And there will be apps they can't install because it was written to access functions/hardware that isn't there.
I didn't say revolutionary... I think. I said it is developing faster than iPhone. And more... sells. More pixels. More Hz. More... anything. Non technical people don't necessarily understand dpi, lpi, dynamic contrast ratio... they do "understand" word MORE, and more is better. That is why Apple is putting so much emphasis on more apps, even if number of useful ones is nowhere close.
You said Apple's updates were evolutionary, implying that Android's were somehow better or not evolutionary, which would be revolutionary.
Don't you think Apple has looked at all these same things - more pixels, OLED, more Hz - and at the performance or financial drawbacks or side effects of each? Look the new Evo will have a 4.3" screen in a bigger slab form factor. Which do you think came first in their design - a bigger form factor (to fit in the 4G WiMax circuitry) or the 4.3" screen?
Apple has a long history of leaving things out or not joining with others in adding some feature. Most of the time, they have been right as to what has been important to user experience.
Interestingly, likewise I'm not sure what you are referring to here
You wrote "What did you actually receive with iPhone OS updates? Copy&Paste, multimedia messages, video recording..? All of them should have been included in first release - from my point of view - and you would not need updates if your software was more featured"
If that is the case, then shouldn't all the Android updates have been available in its first release as well, since iPhone OS 2.0 was already available?
First of all, iPhone is - or was - ultimate gadget, and was addressing gadget lovers as well. Compass, accelerometer, orientation sensor... are, at the end of the day, gadgets. Still, people were buying them, not only gadget lovers.
Second... I am a bit in photography and it is simple fact that number of pixels sell. I personally don't agree with that, but most people I know will ask first for number of pixels when considering camera. Don't underestimate average consumer and his/her approach that more is always better... and new Androids are offering more pixels. More processing speed. More camera resolution (and more cameras for some). More storage (via replaceable flash cards).
People will go for that. Not only gadget lovers.
You are revising history. Many gadget lovers found the first iPhone lacking. It had no 3G, no MMS, no video camera, no compass, a puny camera and didn't run 3rd party apps. Some even argued that it was NOT a smartphone. Even when the 3GS was released, technically, the Samsung Omnia and Nokia N97 could be argued as being better gadgets (and some on AI did). At the end of the day, Apple's devices (including Macs) are almost never at the leading edge hardware-wise, but they are at the leading edge in terms of user experience, which includes a combination of hardware, UI, design, and software.
But gadget lovers buy gadgets and focus on the "more" and are gobbling up the Droids and less so, the N1s. (73% of Android owners are male according to AdMob, And 47% are between 18-34. That's where most gadget lovers reside.) But the sales numbers still show that greater numbers of PEOPLE are buying iPhones than all Android-based phones combined.
Apple is about to sell 7-8m iPhones during this quarter, it's best first calendar quarter ever and almost double it's previous best 1st quarter. They're buying iPhones that technology-wise are 6 to 9 months older than the Droid, Eris, CLIQ, and N1. Schmidt said 60,000 Androids are shipping a day. That's 5.5m Androids in the quarter. We can see what people are buying.