"the iPhone OS taking a 50 percent share of all worldwide smartphone operating systems."
What has that got to do with traffic - seems to me you are making a rather large logic leap here. Share of operating systems does not equal worldwide mobile traffic.
Admob tracks ad requests from and ad impressions delivered to mobile devices from over 15000 web sites and applications. It determines which mobile devices are accessing those sites/using those apps. Each of these mobile devices are running an operating system. Thus, it can determine how often devices using a particular operating system are visiting web sites/using applications. From that, it can divide up the total number of ad requests across the devices (each with an operating system) and by summing, get a percentage (or share) for each operating system.
So devices using the iPhone OS (namely, iPhone and iPod touch) made 40% of the ad requests (or about 5.6B out of 14.1B) at those 15000 worldwide web sites/applications tracked in Feb 2010.
One recent report alleged that Google willingly overpaid in its $750 million acquisition of AdMob simply to keep the company away from Apple. But the iPhone maker quickly responded by purchasing mobile advertiser Quattro Wireless for $275 million.
Insiders have reported that right after he acquisition was formalized Steve, using a disposable phone reportedly dialed a private line of Mr. Schmidt's and soon has he answered Steve mocked and I quote: 'NANNY NANNY POO POO! NANNY NANNY POO POO!' before quickly hanging up, stomping on the disposable phone with his foot and rushing like a madman to the break room located on the other side of the building where he tried his best to look like everything was normal... The insider continued, "He wasn't fooling ANYONE, since he was clearly seen scarfing down a moon pie and drinking directly from the milk jug in the public fridge, while giggling uncontrollably.
Somehow I don't think you'd ever find 'moon pie' on the approved vegan diet menus, and certainly not milk!!"
Do these figures include the iPod touch as well, or just the iPhone "smartphone" ?
The 50% is just iPhone share of the smartphone market.
Adding in all mobile handsets (iPod Touch, PSP, DS, etc), Apple has 40%, with the iPhone accounting for 24% and iPod touch 16.1%. In third place is the Moto Droid with 3.8%. All the Android-based phones total up to about 11.5%.
The one thing the Admob studies do show is that there really is another class of phone, dubbed by Google as superphone, that is used to access the web. This class includes iPhone, Android-based phones and (maybe the Palm Pre/Pixi). If expanded to mobile handsets, it includes the iPod touch as well.
Conservatively, there might be about 50m iPhone/Android/WebOS handsets in use, and they account for 75% of requests. And there have been about 270 million Symbian, Blackberry, and WinMo smartphones sold over the past two years, and combined they account for the other 25%.
Note: Admob might disproportionately track iPhone and Android devices, although Symbian did account for a large share back in 2007-2008.
"the iPhone OS taking a 50 percent share of all worldwide smartphone operating systems."
What has that got to do with traffic - seems to me you are making a rather large logic leap here. Share of operating systems does not equal worldwide mobile traffic.
What is clear is we have a clash of claims if it is true that iPhone OS is now 50% of all Internet traffic.
A: They must be including iPod Touch
B: They aren't using Nokia's absurd notion of smartphone including millions of throw aways.
What plausible explanation would Apple have to recompile a bunch of critical core libraries with an unreleased, unproven, brand-new LLVM 2.7 compiler immediately prior to the release of OS X 10.6.3? Why wouldn't they simply stick this into the 10.6.4 release?
Please explain that.
This scenario that you originally proposed at MacRumors was terribly intriguing, but there is very little compelling reason to believe such a scenario.
Please present a solid argument why Apple would showstop a minor maintenance OS release to shoehorn a unproven compiler tool late into the build.
What is clear is we have a clash of claims if it is true that iPhone OS is now 50% of all Internet traffic.
A: They must be including iPod Touch
B: They aren't using Nokia's absurd notion of smartphone including millions of throw aways.
That's 50% of all smartphone Internet traffic as tracked by AdMob at its 15000 websites and applications. And it does include all Nokia's smartphones, such as the Nokia N70, N73, N95, 5800 Expressmusic, N80, E63, 6600, 6300, N72, 7610, E71, 6120c, 3230, 6630, 6210.
When all mobile Internet devices are included, that is, add in featurephones, iPod touch, PSP, DS, etc., iPhone OS accounts for 40% of all mobile Internet traffic as tracked by AdMob. Featurephones include Nokia 5130, 3110c, 7210, N2700, 6233, 2600c.
One interesting note: In India, iPhone is sixth (4.8%) in smartphone traffic despite its supposedly outrageous pricing.
If that is true, then why is Google trying to kill the iPhone?
That's a bit of hyperbole from Jobs - part of a rah-rah pep rally speech to the troops.
The real message is that Google believes mobile is THE future, and that the handset is key to its future success because that will be what is used to access its search and advertising cash cow. Although Android started out as a way for Google to defend itself from Microsoft or Nokia dominance in the handset market, Google is now also defending against Apple becoming the dominant/majority handset and thus, Apple gaining leverage over Google and being able to increase friction in getting to Google's services.
It seems that Apple thought it was in a complementary partnership in that Apple offered Google prime real estate via Mail, Maps, and the search box in Mobile Safari on the iPhone. But Google's attempt to clone everything in the iPhone, including branding its own handset, makes it clear to Apple that there is no partnership, and that Apple rather than Microsoft or Nokia is the real Google cloning target.
The danger to Apple is that Google can subsidize the handset software and hardware with advertising revenue, thus, it can sell its handsets more cheaply to both carriers and directly to consumers. As Apple makes little to no profit from iTunes, App Store, or Mobile Me, it cannot subsidize. (Apple actually subsidizes its OS with handset sales.)
There are five parts to this chain: user device, OS, apps, services (including advertising), and the communication pipe. Google is doing what it can to commoditize everything except the advertising service (which is Google proprietary). With the acquisition of Placebase and Quattro, Apple looks like it is doing what it can to commoditize everything except the user device (and OS). Depending on what market it was in, Microsoft has tried to commoditize different things but always not the OS; it's unclear to me what it's strategy is in mobile. And Nokia looks to be using the Apple commoditization strategy - make money on the handsets, though it differs from Apple as Nokia aims to do this through large volumes instead of high margin, and commoditize everything else.
"the iPhone OS taking a 50 percent share of all worldwide smartphone operating systems."
What has that got to do with traffic - seems to me you are making a rather large logic leap here. Share of operating systems does not equal worldwide mobile traffic.
The logic comes from analyzing the data. Admob said "we're getting x amount of hits from these websites with these smartphones. Last month we got y number of hits. Last year we got z number of hits. iPhone OS makes up 50% of these hits. Last year they were only 35%. That's an increase in their share of the hits."
They're not making the assumption that iPhones are 50% of the smartphones out there, but in terms of smartphone traffic to the sites they serve, iPhones hit it the most.
And out of context, your quote loses this:
"Apple remains the far-and-away leader in presence in the ad network."
See that? "in the ad network". That part is important. Not "in general mobile presence", or "in general mobile traffic", or even "in smartphone sales".
It might be gaining some traction after all. Of course there are caveats (the 3GS at the end of its life cycle for example, and the source might not be the most reliable). But it is impressive that a phone that's largely sold unsubsidized and unadvertised with no floor models at any carrier would beat the iPhone in any month, anywhere.
It might be gaining some traction after all. Of course there are caveats (the 3GS at the end of its life cycle for example, and the source might not be the most reliable). But it is impressive that a phone that's largely sold unsubsidized and unadvertised with no floor models at any carrier would beat the iPhone in any month, anywhere.
That site and article are questionable. I see nothing backing it up to show what metrics were included.
It looks like 3 sells the iPhone in Hong Kong and Macau but not in the UK. If they are going by their company stats alone then having more Nexus One's activated in February than iPhones doesn't seem unlikely.
PS: Naming your company '3' makes it tough to google.
Comments
I honestly think if someone can hack the Evo for stealth tethering, I'll drop my landline when I get it.
I honestly think if someone can hack the Evo for stealth tethering, I'll drop my landline when I get it.
Why would it need to get hacked? The EVO allows tethering 8 devices at a time out of the box.
The article states:
"the iPhone OS taking a 50 percent share of all worldwide smartphone operating systems."
What has that got to do with traffic - seems to me you are making a rather large logic leap here. Share of operating systems does not equal worldwide mobile traffic.
Admob tracks ad requests from and ad impressions delivered to mobile devices from over 15000 web sites and applications. It determines which mobile devices are accessing those sites/using those apps. Each of these mobile devices are running an operating system. Thus, it can determine how often devices using a particular operating system are visiting web sites/using applications. From that, it can divide up the total number of ad requests across the devices (each with an operating system) and by summing, get a percentage (or share) for each operating system.
So devices using the iPhone OS (namely, iPhone and iPod touch) made 40% of the ad requests (or about 5.6B out of 14.1B) at those 15000 worldwide web sites/applications tracked in Feb 2010.
One recent report alleged that Google willingly overpaid in its $750 million acquisition of AdMob simply to keep the company away from Apple. But the iPhone maker quickly responded by purchasing mobile advertiser Quattro Wireless for $275 million.
[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]
Insiders have reported that right after he acquisition was formalized Steve, using a disposable phone reportedly dialed a private line of Mr. Schmidt's and soon has he answered Steve mocked and I quote: 'NANNY NANNY POO POO! NANNY NANNY POO POO!' before quickly hanging up, stomping on the disposable phone with his foot and rushing like a madman to the break room located on the other side of the building where he tried his best to look like everything was normal... The insider continued, "He wasn't fooling ANYONE, since he was clearly seen scarfing down a moon pie and drinking directly from the milk jug in the public fridge, while giggling uncontrollably.
Somehow I don't think you'd ever find 'moon pie' on the approved vegan diet menus, and certainly not milk!!"
Do these figures include the iPod touch as well, or just the iPhone "smartphone" ?
The 50% is just iPhone share of the smartphone market.
Adding in all mobile handsets (iPod Touch, PSP, DS, etc), Apple has 40%, with the iPhone accounting for 24% and iPod touch 16.1%. In third place is the Moto Droid with 3.8%. All the Android-based phones total up to about 11.5%.
The one thing the Admob studies do show is that there really is another class of phone, dubbed by Google as superphone, that is used to access the web. This class includes iPhone, Android-based phones and (maybe the Palm Pre/Pixi). If expanded to mobile handsets, it includes the iPod touch as well.
Conservatively, there might be about 50m iPhone/Android/WebOS handsets in use, and they account for 75% of requests. And there have been about 270 million Symbian, Blackberry, and WinMo smartphones sold over the past two years, and combined they account for the other 25%.
Note: Admob might disproportionately track iPhone and Android devices, although Symbian did account for a large share back in 2007-2008.
Why would it need to get hacked? The EVO allows tethering 8 devices at a time out of the box.
you gotta pay for it though
stealth tethering = Sprint doesn't know you're tethering
... has been Nokia's Symbian mobile platform.
Technically Symbian isn't Nokia's anymore.
The article states:
"the iPhone OS taking a 50 percent share of all worldwide smartphone operating systems."
What has that got to do with traffic - seems to me you are making a rather large logic leap here. Share of operating systems does not equal worldwide mobile traffic.
What is clear is we have a clash of claims if it is true that iPhone OS is now 50% of all Internet traffic.
A: They must be including iPod Touch
B: They aren't using Nokia's absurd notion of smartphone including millions of throw aways.
If that is true, then why is Google trying to kill the iPhone?
Umm... competition?
If that is true, then why is Google trying to kill the iPhone?
You're either an iGenius/iLuv alt or you've spent too much time locked in the garage with your mom's car running.
B: They aren't using Nokia's absurd notion of smartphone including millions of throw aways.
Can you please provide a list of models of Nokia phones that they class as a smartphone and you class as a throw away?
What is clear is we have a clash of claims if it is true that iPhone OS is now 50% of all Internet traffic.
A: They must be including iPod Touch
B: They aren't using Nokia's absurd notion of smartphone including millions of throw aways.
You still haven't answered my question at MacRumors.
What plausible explanation would Apple have to recompile a bunch of critical core libraries with an unreleased, unproven, brand-new LLVM 2.7 compiler immediately prior to the release of OS X 10.6.3? Why wouldn't they simply stick this into the 10.6.4 release?
Please explain that.
This scenario that you originally proposed at MacRumors was terribly intriguing, but there is very little compelling reason to believe such a scenario.
Please present a solid argument why Apple would showstop a minor maintenance OS release to shoehorn a unproven compiler tool late into the build.
Thank you in advance.
What is clear is we have a clash of claims if it is true that iPhone OS is now 50% of all Internet traffic.
A: They must be including iPod Touch
B: They aren't using Nokia's absurd notion of smartphone including millions of throw aways.
That's 50% of all smartphone Internet traffic as tracked by AdMob at its 15000 websites and applications. And it does include all Nokia's smartphones, such as the Nokia N70, N73, N95, 5800 Expressmusic, N80, E63, 6600, 6300, N72, 7610, E71, 6120c, 3230, 6630, 6210.
When all mobile Internet devices are included, that is, add in featurephones, iPod touch, PSP, DS, etc., iPhone OS accounts for 40% of all mobile Internet traffic as tracked by AdMob. Featurephones include Nokia 5130, 3110c, 7210, N2700, 6233, 2600c.
One interesting note: In India, iPhone is sixth (4.8%) in smartphone traffic despite its supposedly outrageous pricing.
What is clear is we have a clash of claims if it is true that iPhone OS is now 50% of all Internet traffic.
A: They must be including iPod Touch
B: They aren't using Nokia's absurd notion of smartphone including millions of throw aways.
Well when you flood the market with a lot of junk it's pretty easy to turn around and claim huge market share.
If that is true, then why is Google trying to kill the iPhone?
That's a bit of hyperbole from Jobs - part of a rah-rah pep rally speech to the troops.
The real message is that Google believes mobile is THE future, and that the handset is key to its future success because that will be what is used to access its search and advertising cash cow. Although Android started out as a way for Google to defend itself from Microsoft or Nokia dominance in the handset market, Google is now also defending against Apple becoming the dominant/majority handset and thus, Apple gaining leverage over Google and being able to increase friction in getting to Google's services.
It seems that Apple thought it was in a complementary partnership in that Apple offered Google prime real estate via Mail, Maps, and the search box in Mobile Safari on the iPhone. But Google's attempt to clone everything in the iPhone, including branding its own handset, makes it clear to Apple that there is no partnership, and that Apple rather than Microsoft or Nokia is the real Google cloning target.
The danger to Apple is that Google can subsidize the handset software and hardware with advertising revenue, thus, it can sell its handsets more cheaply to both carriers and directly to consumers. As Apple makes little to no profit from iTunes, App Store, or Mobile Me, it cannot subsidize. (Apple actually subsidizes its OS with handset sales.)
There are five parts to this chain: user device, OS, apps, services (including advertising), and the communication pipe. Google is doing what it can to commoditize everything except the advertising service (which is Google proprietary). With the acquisition of Placebase and Quattro, Apple looks like it is doing what it can to commoditize everything except the user device (and OS). Depending on what market it was in, Microsoft has tried to commoditize different things but always not the OS; it's unclear to me what it's strategy is in mobile. And Nokia looks to be using the Apple commoditization strategy - make money on the handsets, though it differs from Apple as Nokia aims to do this through large volumes instead of high margin, and commoditize everything else.
The article states:
"the iPhone OS taking a 50 percent share of all worldwide smartphone operating systems."
What has that got to do with traffic - seems to me you are making a rather large logic leap here. Share of operating systems does not equal worldwide mobile traffic.
The logic comes from analyzing the data. Admob said "we're getting x amount of hits from these websites with these smartphones. Last month we got y number of hits. Last year we got z number of hits. iPhone OS makes up 50% of these hits. Last year they were only 35%. That's an increase in their share of the hits."
They're not making the assumption that iPhones are 50% of the smartphones out there, but in terms of smartphone traffic to the sites they serve, iPhones hit it the most.
And out of context, your quote loses this:
"Apple remains the far-and-away leader in presence in the ad network."
See that? "in the ad network". That part is important. Not "in general mobile presence", or "in general mobile traffic", or even "in smartphone sales".
http://www.3g.co.uk/PR/March2010/Goo...iPhone-3G.html
It might be gaining some traction after all. Of course there are caveats (the 3GS at the end of its life cycle for example, and the source might not be the most reliable). But it is impressive that a phone that's largely sold unsubsidized and unadvertised with no floor models at any carrier would beat the iPhone in any month, anywhere.
Apparently the Nexus One isn't as much of a flop as people thought it was:
http://www.3g.co.uk/PR/March2010/Goo...iPhone-3G.html
It might be gaining some traction after all. Of course there are caveats (the 3GS at the end of its life cycle for example, and the source might not be the most reliable). But it is impressive that a phone that's largely sold unsubsidized and unadvertised with no floor models at any carrier would beat the iPhone in any month, anywhere.
That site and article are questionable. I see nothing backing it up to show what metrics were included.
It looks like 3 sells the iPhone in Hong Kong and Macau but not in the UK. If they are going by their company stats alone then having more Nexus One's activated in February than iPhones doesn't seem unlikely.
PS: Naming your company '3' makes it tough to google.
PS: Naming your company '3' makes it tough to google.
I did a google search for 3, and it was the second result, how is that "tough"?
I did a google search for 3, and it was the second result, how is that "tough"?
Of course you would have a hard time with reading comprehension. RIF there buddy!
Giving you the benefit of the doubt (yet again) post the query you made that revealed the detailed answer in the 2nd result.