People are not free to drop the data plans if they want.
You saying your son has a first gen iPhone on AT&T with no data plan? Your son uses wireless data without being charged for it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64
People do it all the time, i seen people with the very first of those phones who dropped the data service, and just use it a fancy phone. Hell my son has the first gen iphone from my wife and does not have data because we will not pay for it.
Android is not like Windows. Windows is a proprietary OS, Android is open source and free to be modified. How do you develop for an OS that can be very different from phone to phone?
Developers have been free to do anything they want from day one of Android. That hasn't caused any great defection of developers to it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superbass
I think the big developers will go for where the money and customers are. Same as already happens with the game industry, and in general on computers. If it wasn't for Apple itself, there would be very little quality software for OSX compared to Windows, and I think that trend will continue if Android ends up dominating the market share in a similar way to what Windows has.
Add to that being able to design a program without "big brother" apple saying yes or no, and without any surprises about what's allowed or isn't allowed, and I think Android will become the focus of most developers.
Even if Adobe manages to meet its targets and even if Flash 10.1 is as good as they're hoping, it requires an 800 MHz A8 processor - so only a tiny percentage of phones will run it. Let's be generous and say that 10% of smart phones will be 800 MHz A8 or higher and will be running a new enough version of Android to handle Flash by year end. (I'm feeling generous-the number will probably be far less than that).
Yet if you develop in Flash, your app can be seen on 10% of all the phones (or probably 5% of all mobile devices). If you develop in html 5, your app can be seen on all of those Android phones PLUS the 90% of phones which DON'T run Flash.
Which choice makes more sense?
I wasn't talking about developing in Flash. Didn't even mention it.
I don't understand what you're talking about "develop in html 5". iPhone apps aren't designed in html 5, they're designed in the iPhone SDK. Since Apple changed the developer's agreement, I think the only apps allowed are 100% programmed in the apple SDK. I think you've gotten a bit confused by half understanding the past few weeks' AI articles of flash vs html 5 on the internets. Has little to do with apps on iPhone vs Android.
I'm talking about apps being designed for the Android platform vs iPhone OS. Right now, it takes considerable work to re-code an iPhone app for Android or vice-versa. Whichever platform developers choose as their initial target will be a huge issue going forward. If the iPhone app marketplace begins to resemble the OSX gaming market, Apple will be in serious trouble, especially since it's apps that are really driving the iPhone's sales....
I don't entirely agree with this. There are Android phones that will never get an OS upgrade and others that may get an OS upgrade, depending on when the phone carrier releases it. There really is no clear idea of the upgrade path of all Android phones in general.
The iPhone 3G will absolutely get the OS upgrade it just won't be able to take advantage of all of the new features of that upgrade.
You're right. I'm not saying that 3G users are completely up a creek (unless they really cared about multitasking), I'm just saying that Apple doesn't shy away from deprecating older hardware in order to move forward. I actually respect them for having the guts to do this, even though it annoys some people. It keeps the industry movin forward.
As for the updates, it was a major consideration in my purchasing decision. However, google also pushes updates to the "bundled" apps like Google Maps independently of the OS version, to be downloaded through the Android Market. To my knowledge, Apple doesn't do that. Also, I'm a power user, and if i want android 2.2 when it comes out, I'll just root the phone. And i have the added perk of not having to (legally ambiguously) violate the DMCA to do that
Oh, my, well, let's just try to distract people from the fact that the Android market is young and already highly fragmented, with many (most?) existing users who may never, ever see an update even to their security-blown, bug-ridden device.
Android is not like Windows. Windows is a proprietary OS, Android is open source and free to be modified. How do you develop for an OS that can be very different from phone to phone?
Because google still has a standardized SDK for devs to use? And it's in phone-maker's best interest, if they change anything at all, to keep it compatible with the standards google has laid out. Heck, Mac OS is based on an open source kernel... that hasn't stopped people from developing mac software...
Market share has its place. But Apple is guiding the mobile internet by providing a superior user experience. Webkit did not dominate the web when it was adopted by Nokia, Google, and Palm. They adopted it because it is a superior rendering engine.
If they are really intent on strong arming developers. The reason iPhone app development has been so successful is because of Apple's guiding hand over it, even while developers complain about Apple's rules. They don't want to understand that one goes with the other.
The iPhone has been shaping the market from the day it was announced at MW '07. Before it went on sale, before it had any market share.
Those are valid points but Apple now faces credible competition from Android whereas when the iPhone was first released it basically had none.
It still arguably has the most mindshare of all the mobile phones but that can easily be lost especially at this early point in time. A significant and growing market share *helps* Apple to push its initiatives such as HTML5. I don't deny that having a superior mobile experience is attractive to developers and helps Apple push things in it direction but look how long web developers wrote web sites for IE 6. I'm sure there still are web developers that make their sites optimized for IE 6.
Should Android gain a significantly higher market share than the iPhone then it will be in a commanding position to push for changes it would like to see. For the most part Android and iPhone have been pretty much in agreement with what they want. At least initially Google, like Apple, was pushing for HTML5.
But that could change. Android seem to be more receptive to flash on its devices and Apple and Google are no longer as friendly as they were in 2007.
The poster that I responded to was making a claim that was in no way supported by the facts shown in the chart (loss of share due to people waiting for iPhone HD).
Sorry that I misunderstood the context of your response.
Quote:
Of course Q3 is the biggest since that's immediately after launch of new models. In this case the market share growth slowed during that quarter (even if volumes went up). After that it declided. I referenced only the chart and only the market share numbers as that was the topic at hand and shows a particular trend (Apple is not the only thing on end user's choice list).
Q3 share increased to about 28% from about 24% in Q2.
Quote:
If you want to discuss market share, these last few quarters have shown that the things that some even here have stated (and that has been dismissed by a larger part) are showing first signs of happening. Competition is catching up and joe average doesn't necessarily look only at the brand rather the combination of product image, price and UX. If the price is lower, UX comparable and image OK, that's competition already.
Will this downward marketshare trend for Apple (if it even is that yet) continue is a big IF. But these are the first signs that the competition is catching up and even surpassing Apple (for now only in market share in the US). If the market share drops too low, it will hurt absolute unit numbers as well (you'll lose mindshare).
A year ago between Jan and Apr, I was responding to many posts here at AI about how the competition was catching up and even surpassing Apple. G1, Omnia HD, N900, etc were all brought up to show that Apple had fallen behind. And yet come Q3, Apple gained share. So again since Sep, the competition has brought out better phones, better OSes, better App stores. We'll see what happens come Q3.
As I said earlier, Apple doesn't care that there are competitors that have larger market share in the arbitrarily defined market category of smartphones. Nokia and RIM platforms have always had larger share. The Android platform now has larger share, just like the others. Does this portend bad times to come or not?
Instead, by being focused on putting out a better iPhone (and better iPhone platform), Apple has increased AT&T activations by 800k-2million y-o-y for the last 4 quarters. It's actually growing faster than it did in the prior year. The only question is how many AT&T customers are there who might switch to a smartphone or upgrade from a prior iPhone. Apple/AT&T knows that answer better than I, but I think AT&T is fairly saturated, thus, my view that Apple should add more US carriers. But I could be wrong.
Android has had an astounding 2 quarters for Motorola and HTC over on the other 3 carriers in the US. But I think Apple and others see a flaw in the Android business model, in that Android-aligned hardware makers will make little to no profit (especially with all the 2-for-1sales). Thus the model is not truly sustainable long-term given the rate at which new models are introduced and the rate at which new technology needs to be added. Nokia, RIM, Samsung (partially), and now HP all see the critical importance of owning the OS to avoid the low-margin fate that has befallen all of the undifferentiated Windows/Linux PC mfrs.
Android is not like Windows. Windows is a proprietary OS, Android is open source and free to be modified. How do you develop for an OS that can be very different from phone to phone?
Android is open source, but that doesn't mean the core libraries/framework/APIs are different from phone to phone. At this point, basically any program designed with the Android SDK will run on an Android phone. Sure, a phone maker could make drastic alterations to the basic code, but I don't think that will ever be the norm.
Quote:
Developers have been free to do anything they want from day one of Android. That hasn't caused any great defection of developers to it.
That's because on day one iPhone OS was much more prevalent than Android. Now that there are more Android phones than iPhones, chances are a lot more developers will use it as their main platform. This is also just the tip of the iceberg with android phones, if you consider iPhone had a 1.5 year head start, and way more media coverage than any of the android phones.
It's nice to see that someone is actually paying attention here. I'm amazed at just how quickly so many people here mistook the results of a survey of a 150,000 sample for actual sales. People can say anything in a survey and you don't even know the demographic surveyed. I've yet to see any actual sales data even remotely compare to these survey results. Actual sales for Q4 2009 have put total Android based sales at 1/3 the level of iPhone sales and that of course doesn't include the iPod Touch much less iPad units.
Be careful - iPhone is getting plenty of overseas sales, while Android hasn't really made a big move offshore.
So in a US-only survey, the two could be comparable, with both in the range of about 3m units per quarter.
What you are describing is already not working. HTC has its "Enhanced Touch Sense" user interface and Motorola has its "Blur" user interface. They are not doing anything to make them compatible.
OS X's kernal is open source. But its used in a closed and proprietary OS that cannot be modified.
Quote:
Originally Posted by atomicpolywog
Because google still has a standardized SDK for devs to use? And it's in phone-maker's best interest, if they change anything at all, to keep it compatible with the standards google has laid out. Heck, Mac OS is based on an open source kernel... that hasn't stopped people from developing mac software...
Oh, my, well, let's just try to distract people from the fact that the Android market is young and already highly fragmented, with many (most?) existing users who may never, ever see an update even to their security-blown, bug-ridden device.
I can see by the de-evolution of your posts to device insults that you're not going to be worth continuing to discuss anything with. My original point that actual upgrading Android is not as complex of a process as j-somthing made it out to be. That point has been proven. Anything else you want to say is just you stroking your own ego.
Now that there are more Android phones than iPhones, ...
There are not more Android phones than iPhones.
Android only topped iPhone sales for one quarter (and only in this not-yet-shown-to-be-accurate survey). At least in the US where 2-year contracts reign, you have to include at least the seven quarters prior to determine which OS has the most phones in use.
Android is open source, but that doesn't mean the core libraries/framework/APIs are different from phone to phone. At this point, basically any program designed with the Android SDK will run on an Android phone. Sure, a phone maker could make drastic alterations to the basic code, but I don't think that will ever be the norm.
The capability of each phone is entirely different, the user interface of each phone are very different, how each phone works is radically different.
That's because on day one iPhone OS was much more prevalent than Android. Now that there are more Android phones than iPhones, chances are a lot more developers will use it as their main platform. This is also just the tip of the iceberg with android phones, if you consider iPhone had a 1.5 year head start, and way more media coverage than any of the android phones.
Just understand that you are making a future prediction, that's not the current reality.
Android has had an astounding 2 quarters for Motorola and HTC over on the other 3 carriers in the US. But I think Apple and others see a flaw in the Android business model, in that Android-aligned hardware makers will make little to no profit (especially with all the 2-for-1sales). Thus the model is not truly sustainable long-term given the rate at which new models are introduced and the rate at which new technology needs to be added. Nokia, RIM, Samsung (partially), and now HP all see the critical importance of owning the OS to avoid the low-margin fate that has befallen all of the undifferentiated Windows/Linux PC mfrs.
I don't actually know much about profit margins in the mobile business, but I was under the impression that the manufacturer sets the price they charge the carrier for the handsets, and then the carrier covers their loss on the 2-for-1 by signing people up for 2-year commitments to $30/mo data plans on their "free" phones. They already have enough margin on voice plans to give you a "free" new phone every 2 years... why wouldn't they be able to afford to make that free phone a cheap/free smartphone when they force you to pay more per month for the privilege of having one.
Doesn't seem surprising. There are multiple Android platform phones vs. essentially one iPhone family, and the current iPhone 3GS is nearing the end of its product lifecycle. It's interesting to note that phones such as Motorola's Droid are frequently the object of two-for-the-price-of-one sales and the like.
I think it has less to do with how many different Android models are available and more to do with the fact that ATT only addresses about 1/3 of the US market. By that I mean the number of suscribers, not geographic area. Android doesn't have to compete with iPhone on Sprint, Verizon, Tmobile, or any number of the smaller carriers across the country.
Regardless of the reason, Apple needs to get off it's ass and get iPhones on other networks. The more people who get on the Android bandwagon, the harder it will be to get them to switch to iPhone after they've invested hundreds of dollars on Android apps and games.
Back when iTunes music had DRM, how many folks bought 2nd and 3rd iPods because that's the only thing that would play their music? Right now Apple is letting Android have 2/3's of the US market unopposed, and it will cost them twice as much to get those folks to switch than it would to get them in the first place.
. Should Android gain a significantly higher market share than the iPhone then it will be in a commanding position to push for changes it would like to see. For the most part Android and iPhone have been pretty much in agreement with what they want. At least initially Google, like Apple, was pushing for HTML5.
But Android is not one unified platform. Motorola, HTC, Samsung and anyone else are not working together to advance Android. They are competing against each other to sell phones using a free OS.
Quote:
But that could change. Android seem to be more receptive to flash on its devices and Apple and Google are no longer as friendly as they were in 2007.
Google is receptive to Flash, that doesn't mean Flash will work out very well.
What you are describing is already not working. HTC has its "Enhanced Touch Sense" user interface and Motorola has its "Blur" user interface. They are not doing anything to make them compatible.
OS X's kernal is open source. But its used in a closed and proprietary OS that cannot be modified.
Sense and Blur are only skin-deep additions to the Android OS. They don't break application compatibility, and they don't have any bearing on the development process for app creators. Saying that they "aren't doing anything to make them compatible" is a nonsensical statement. You can download the same apps from the Android Market and they work exactly the same on Sense, Blur, or Stock Android.
Just understand that you are making a future prediction, that's not the current reality.
Nice, obtuse post.
Of course predictions refer to the future. Do you normally predict the present?
And sure, the Nexus and Incredible have different desktop/homescreens, but that doesn't mean the Android SDK is different for each phone. If I change the icons and background on my OSX desktop does iWork break? Of course not. The underlying system is the same.
Sure, Android is open source, but so is the OSX kernel. People could of course design a bunch of non-standards based versions of Android where no existing apps would work, but why would they?
Comments
You saying your son has a first gen iPhone on AT&T with no data plan? Your son uses wireless data without being charged for it?
People do it all the time, i seen people with the very first of those phones who dropped the data service, and just use it a fancy phone. Hell my son has the first gen iphone from my wife and does not have data because we will not pay for it.
Developers have been free to do anything they want from day one of Android. That hasn't caused any great defection of developers to it.
I think the big developers will go for where the money and customers are. Same as already happens with the game industry, and in general on computers. If it wasn't for Apple itself, there would be very little quality software for OSX compared to Windows, and I think that trend will continue if Android ends up dominating the market share in a similar way to what Windows has.
Add to that being able to design a program without "big brother" apple saying yes or no, and without any surprises about what's allowed or isn't allowed, and I think Android will become the focus of most developers.
That would be incredibly foolish.
Even if Adobe manages to meet its targets and even if Flash 10.1 is as good as they're hoping, it requires an 800 MHz A8 processor - so only a tiny percentage of phones will run it. Let's be generous and say that 10% of smart phones will be 800 MHz A8 or higher and will be running a new enough version of Android to handle Flash by year end. (I'm feeling generous-the number will probably be far less than that).
Yet if you develop in Flash, your app can be seen on 10% of all the phones (or probably 5% of all mobile devices). If you develop in html 5, your app can be seen on all of those Android phones PLUS the 90% of phones which DON'T run Flash.
Which choice makes more sense?
I wasn't talking about developing in Flash. Didn't even mention it.
I don't understand what you're talking about "develop in html 5". iPhone apps aren't designed in html 5, they're designed in the iPhone SDK. Since Apple changed the developer's agreement, I think the only apps allowed are 100% programmed in the apple SDK. I think you've gotten a bit confused by half understanding the past few weeks' AI articles of flash vs html 5 on the internets. Has little to do with apps on iPhone vs Android.
I'm talking about apps being designed for the Android platform vs iPhone OS. Right now, it takes considerable work to re-code an iPhone app for Android or vice-versa. Whichever platform developers choose as their initial target will be a huge issue going forward. If the iPhone app marketplace begins to resemble the OSX gaming market, Apple will be in serious trouble, especially since it's apps that are really driving the iPhone's sales....
I don't entirely agree with this. There are Android phones that will never get an OS upgrade and others that may get an OS upgrade, depending on when the phone carrier releases it. There really is no clear idea of the upgrade path of all Android phones in general.
The iPhone 3G will absolutely get the OS upgrade it just won't be able to take advantage of all of the new features of that upgrade.
You're right. I'm not saying that 3G users are completely up a creek (unless they really cared about multitasking), I'm just saying that Apple doesn't shy away from deprecating older hardware in order to move forward. I actually respect them for having the guts to do this, even though it annoys some people. It keeps the industry movin forward.
As for the updates, it was a major consideration in my purchasing decision. However, google also pushes updates to the "bundled" apps like Google Maps independently of the OS version, to be downloaded through the Android Market. To my knowledge, Apple doesn't do that. Also, I'm a power user, and if i want android 2.2 when it comes out, I'll just root the phone. And i have the added perk of not having to (legally ambiguously) violate the DMCA to do that
It's not 100% irrelevant
Oh, my, well, let's just try to distract people from the fact that the Android market is young and already highly fragmented, with many (most?) existing users who may never, ever see an update even to their security-blown, bug-ridden device.
Android is not like Windows. Windows is a proprietary OS, Android is open source and free to be modified. How do you develop for an OS that can be very different from phone to phone?
Because google still has a standardized SDK for devs to use? And it's in phone-maker's best interest, if they change anything at all, to keep it compatible with the standards google has laid out. Heck, Mac OS is based on an open source kernel... that hasn't stopped people from developing mac software...
Market share has its place. But Apple is guiding the mobile internet by providing a superior user experience. Webkit did not dominate the web when it was adopted by Nokia, Google, and Palm. They adopted it because it is a superior rendering engine.
If they are really intent on strong arming developers. The reason iPhone app development has been so successful is because of Apple's guiding hand over it, even while developers complain about Apple's rules. They don't want to understand that one goes with the other.
The iPhone has been shaping the market from the day it was announced at MW '07. Before it went on sale, before it had any market share.
Those are valid points but Apple now faces credible competition from Android whereas when the iPhone was first released it basically had none.
It still arguably has the most mindshare of all the mobile phones but that can easily be lost especially at this early point in time. A significant and growing market share *helps* Apple to push its initiatives such as HTML5. I don't deny that having a superior mobile experience is attractive to developers and helps Apple push things in it direction but look how long web developers wrote web sites for IE 6. I'm sure there still are web developers that make their sites optimized for IE 6.
Should Android gain a significantly higher market share than the iPhone then it will be in a commanding position to push for changes it would like to see. For the most part Android and iPhone have been pretty much in agreement with what they want. At least initially Google, like Apple, was pushing for HTML5.
But that could change. Android seem to be more receptive to flash on its devices and Apple and Google are no longer as friendly as they were in 2007.
The poster that I responded to was making a claim that was in no way supported by the facts shown in the chart (loss of share due to people waiting for iPhone HD).
Sorry that I misunderstood the context of your response.
Of course Q3 is the biggest since that's immediately after launch of new models. In this case the market share growth slowed during that quarter (even if volumes went up). After that it declided. I referenced only the chart and only the market share numbers as that was the topic at hand and shows a particular trend (Apple is not the only thing on end user's choice list).
Q3 share increased to about 28% from about 24% in Q2.
If you want to discuss market share, these last few quarters have shown that the things that some even here have stated (and that has been dismissed by a larger part) are showing first signs of happening. Competition is catching up and joe average doesn't necessarily look only at the brand rather the combination of product image, price and UX. If the price is lower, UX comparable and image OK, that's competition already.
Will this downward marketshare trend for Apple (if it even is that yet) continue is a big IF. But these are the first signs that the competition is catching up and even surpassing Apple (for now only in market share in the US). If the market share drops too low, it will hurt absolute unit numbers as well (you'll lose mindshare).
A year ago between Jan and Apr, I was responding to many posts here at AI about how the competition was catching up and even surpassing Apple. G1, Omnia HD, N900, etc were all brought up to show that Apple had fallen behind. And yet come Q3, Apple gained share. So again since Sep, the competition has brought out better phones, better OSes, better App stores. We'll see what happens come Q3.
As I said earlier, Apple doesn't care that there are competitors that have larger market share in the arbitrarily defined market category of smartphones. Nokia and RIM platforms have always had larger share. The Android platform now has larger share, just like the others. Does this portend bad times to come or not?
Instead, by being focused on putting out a better iPhone (and better iPhone platform), Apple has increased AT&T activations by 800k-2million y-o-y for the last 4 quarters. It's actually growing faster than it did in the prior year. The only question is how many AT&T customers are there who might switch to a smartphone or upgrade from a prior iPhone. Apple/AT&T knows that answer better than I, but I think AT&T is fairly saturated, thus, my view that Apple should add more US carriers. But I could be wrong.
Android has had an astounding 2 quarters for Motorola and HTC over on the other 3 carriers in the US. But I think Apple and others see a flaw in the Android business model, in that Android-aligned hardware makers will make little to no profit (especially with all the 2-for-1sales). Thus the model is not truly sustainable long-term given the rate at which new models are introduced and the rate at which new technology needs to be added. Nokia, RIM, Samsung (partially), and now HP all see the critical importance of owning the OS to avoid the low-margin fate that has befallen all of the undifferentiated Windows/Linux PC mfrs.
Android is not like Windows. Windows is a proprietary OS, Android is open source and free to be modified. How do you develop for an OS that can be very different from phone to phone?
Android is open source, but that doesn't mean the core libraries/framework/APIs are different from phone to phone. At this point, basically any program designed with the Android SDK will run on an Android phone. Sure, a phone maker could make drastic alterations to the basic code, but I don't think that will ever be the norm.
Developers have been free to do anything they want from day one of Android. That hasn't caused any great defection of developers to it.
That's because on day one iPhone OS was much more prevalent than Android. Now that there are more Android phones than iPhones, chances are a lot more developers will use it as their main platform. This is also just the tip of the iceberg with android phones, if you consider iPhone had a 1.5 year head start, and way more media coverage than any of the android phones.
It's nice to see that someone is actually paying attention here. I'm amazed at just how quickly so many people here mistook the results of a survey of a 150,000 sample for actual sales. People can say anything in a survey and you don't even know the demographic surveyed. I've yet to see any actual sales data even remotely compare to these survey results. Actual sales for Q4 2009 have put total Android based sales at 1/3 the level of iPhone sales and that of course doesn't include the iPod Touch much less iPad units.
Be careful - iPhone is getting plenty of overseas sales, while Android hasn't really made a big move offshore.
So in a US-only survey, the two could be comparable, with both in the range of about 3m units per quarter.
OS X's kernal is open source. But its used in a closed and proprietary OS that cannot be modified.
Because google still has a standardized SDK for devs to use? And it's in phone-maker's best interest, if they change anything at all, to keep it compatible with the standards google has laid out. Heck, Mac OS is based on an open source kernel... that hasn't stopped people from developing mac software...
Oh, my, well, let's just try to distract people from the fact that the Android market is young and already highly fragmented, with many (most?) existing users who may never, ever see an update even to their security-blown, bug-ridden device.
I can see by the de-evolution of your posts to device insults that you're not going to be worth continuing to discuss anything with. My original point that actual upgrading Android is not as complex of a process as j-somthing made it out to be. That point has been proven. Anything else you want to say is just you stroking your own ego.
Now that there are more Android phones than iPhones, ...
There are not more Android phones than iPhones.
Android only topped iPhone sales for one quarter (and only in this not-yet-shown-to-be-accurate survey). At least in the US where 2-year contracts reign, you have to include at least the seven quarters prior to determine which OS has the most phones in use.
Android is open source, but that doesn't mean the core libraries/framework/APIs are different from phone to phone. At this point, basically any program designed with the Android SDK will run on an Android phone. Sure, a phone maker could make drastic alterations to the basic code, but I don't think that will ever be the norm.
The capability of each phone is entirely different, the user interface of each phone are very different, how each phone works is radically different.
HTC Incredible vs. Nexus One
That's because on day one iPhone OS was much more prevalent than Android. Now that there are more Android phones than iPhones, chances are a lot more developers will use it as their main platform. This is also just the tip of the iceberg with android phones, if you consider iPhone had a 1.5 year head start, and way more media coverage than any of the android phones.
Just understand that you are making a future prediction, that's not the current reality.
Android has had an astounding 2 quarters for Motorola and HTC over on the other 3 carriers in the US. But I think Apple and others see a flaw in the Android business model, in that Android-aligned hardware makers will make little to no profit (especially with all the 2-for-1sales). Thus the model is not truly sustainable long-term given the rate at which new models are introduced and the rate at which new technology needs to be added. Nokia, RIM, Samsung (partially), and now HP all see the critical importance of owning the OS to avoid the low-margin fate that has befallen all of the undifferentiated Windows/Linux PC mfrs.
I don't actually know much about profit margins in the mobile business, but I was under the impression that the manufacturer sets the price they charge the carrier for the handsets, and then the carrier covers their loss on the 2-for-1 by signing people up for 2-year commitments to $30/mo data plans on their "free" phones. They already have enough margin on voice plans to give you a "free" new phone every 2 years... why wouldn't they be able to afford to make that free phone a cheap/free smartphone when they force you to pay more per month for the privilege of having one.
Doesn't seem surprising. There are multiple Android platform phones vs. essentially one iPhone family, and the current iPhone 3GS is nearing the end of its product lifecycle. It's interesting to note that phones such as Motorola's Droid are frequently the object of two-for-the-price-of-one sales and the like.
I think it has less to do with how many different Android models are available and more to do with the fact that ATT only addresses about 1/3 of the US market. By that I mean the number of suscribers, not geographic area. Android doesn't have to compete with iPhone on Sprint, Verizon, Tmobile, or any number of the smaller carriers across the country.
Regardless of the reason, Apple needs to get off it's ass and get iPhones on other networks. The more people who get on the Android bandwagon, the harder it will be to get them to switch to iPhone after they've invested hundreds of dollars on Android apps and games.
Back when iTunes music had DRM, how many folks bought 2nd and 3rd iPods because that's the only thing that would play their music? Right now Apple is letting Android have 2/3's of the US market unopposed, and it will cost them twice as much to get those folks to switch than it would to get them in the first place.
. Should Android gain a significantly higher market share than the iPhone then it will be in a commanding position to push for changes it would like to see. For the most part Android and iPhone have been pretty much in agreement with what they want. At least initially Google, like Apple, was pushing for HTML5.
But Android is not one unified platform. Motorola, HTC, Samsung and anyone else are not working together to advance Android. They are competing against each other to sell phones using a free OS.
But that could change. Android seem to be more receptive to flash on its devices and Apple and Google are no longer as friendly as they were in 2007.
Google is receptive to Flash, that doesn't mean Flash will work out very well.
What you are describing is already not working. HTC has its "Enhanced Touch Sense" user interface and Motorola has its "Blur" user interface. They are not doing anything to make them compatible.
OS X's kernal is open source. But its used in a closed and proprietary OS that cannot be modified.
Sense and Blur are only skin-deep additions to the Android OS. They don't break application compatibility, and they don't have any bearing on the development process for app creators. Saying that they "aren't doing anything to make them compatible" is a nonsensical statement. You can download the same apps from the Android Market and they work exactly the same on Sense, Blur, or Stock Android.
The capability of each phone is entirely different, the user interface of each phone are very different, how each phone works is radically different.
HTC Incredible vs. Nexus One
Just understand that you are making a future prediction, that's not the current reality.
Nice, obtuse post.
Of course predictions refer to the future. Do you normally predict the present?
And sure, the Nexus and Incredible have different desktop/homescreens, but that doesn't mean the Android SDK is different for each phone. If I change the icons and background on my OSX desktop does iWork break? Of course not. The underlying system is the same.
Sure, Android is open source, but so is the OSX kernel. People could of course design a bunch of non-standards based versions of Android where no existing apps would work, but why would they?