But where Apple does sell on multiple carriers, they do well. Canada is a great example. We've got the iPhone on all 3 carriers. And iPhones abound. That said Android is gaining traction. And with all 3 carriers selling the iPhone, Android handsets are now marketed by the major carriers as differentiators, the way the lone iPhone carrier (Rogers) used to market the iPhone. One carrier (Telus) still has ads and store banners proclaiming the Motorola Milestone, and its far more prominent than the iPhone. So who knows how things will play out.
Living in the US with one carrier, I don't see those types of ads.
What you're pointing out is quite interesting.
I think the carriers make more money on Android phones than on iPhone (assuming the plans are the same) as the subsidy for iPhone is about $400, and I think it's less for the other phones (even if those phones are free). So I can see why Telus might be proclaiming the Milestone more than iPhone.
If you are going to come up with a "conclusion" at least make an effort to use numbers that are meaningful. You are tossing in thinks, extrapolations, and other fluff without any detail. And you additionally only select AT&T activations and some small percentage of that as smartphones. Is this meant to say this is the percentage that represents iPhone? Since you measure Android on a worldwide basis why would you use only AT&T as the iPhone basis?
Wow, you really have trouble with reading comprehension. So simplifying for such as you:
NPD estimated US sales of Android smartphones and Apple smartphones (i.e., iPhone) based on a survey. People question it. So let's see if we can corroborate the survey with whatever data we have.
There is NO public data on iPhone sales in US but AT&T reported iPhone activations serves as a useful proxy, since AT&T is the only carrier for iPhone in US.
There is NO public data on Android sales in US. Android phones in US consist primarily of Motorola, HTC, and Samsung phones.
There IS public data on worldwide sales of Motorola (2.3 to 2.8M) and HTC (2.6 to 2.8M) smartphones, but none on Samsung smartphones (but can deduce it is less than 2.3M since not in top 5). US sales for each are only a subset of worldwide sales. HTC smartphones include WinMo phones, so need to discount further.
So iPhone units sold in 1Q10 in US is about 2.7M. Android units sold in 1Q10 worldwide is about 5M. Most Motorola smartphone sales in 1Q10 was in US, so maybe 2M. So even if only 700K of the 2.6M HTC are Android and sold in US (and this is likely given Hero/Eris, Dream/G1, Magic/myTouch, Nexus One, etc and given AdMob US data), it puts Android in the same ballpark as iPhone. (Samsung has Galaxy, Moment, Behold in US but none seem to be a big hit.)
I don't get why people say this is a bad thing. As a consumer, I'd be happy if people cut me a deal (which is what BOGO is....it's not free). I find it odd that people on here think its a good thing that Apple doesn't cut prices or offers special deals to gain marketshare. Good for shareholders. Not so good for me as a consumer (of Apple products). And where were all these people when the iPhone was first launched for $600 and the price dropped. Were they all upset that Apple 'discounted' the iPhone?
Good on Verizon and their partner OEMs for competing. People act like that's a bad thing for us consumers. If Apple and AT&T were smart, they would counter by offering the last gen iPhone for free on contract and convert every high school kid onto the iPhone platform for life....and who knows, we might see that yet! It's like smoking. The phone companies have to get 'em young!
As long as Apple keeps innovating in a way that leads to products with a great user experience, I want Apple to exist. I want to have the opportunity to choose the Apple paradigm because all the other electronics/computer companies have bought into a different paradigm that leads to mostly crappy copycat products. In order for Apple to exist, they need to maintain a fair profit to keep innovating.
Also as a consumer, I'm willing to pay a fair premium for the better user experience, but I don't want to be gouged. So I do want good competitors to exist to keep Apple (and their partners like AT&T) in check. I would like nothing more than to see AT&T (and VZW) forced to lower prices.
So for me, there is a tension, and it's not black and white.
Eh, you have a point there. I was thinking in broad terms or moral ethics. They didn't sacrifice a million kids or stole from the poor or used oil derived from currently endangers species in the delivery trucks to initiate the BOGO deal. That we know of...
Err...Ahhh, I think that oil comes from the dinosaurs... and they were extinct before... even one as old as me
If Apple does not care about market share and volumen, then why did they drop the price of the original iPhone by hundreds of dollars?
That's easy! They had a goal of penetration into a market new to them... They miscalculated (screwed up) and overpriced their offering (the iPhone) to meet that goal.
They recognized that, and were agile enough to adjust their price so they could meet their goal...
If Apple does not care about market share and volumen, then why did they drop the price of the original iPhone by hundreds of dollars?
Apple doesn't care about being number 1 in market share, or even number 2. They're not after market share for market share sake, or for bragging rights.
But Apple does care about establishing viable products - Apple's goal at iPhone launch was 1% or 10M units in its first full year. So they dropped the price, and then changed their sales model (to subsidy) to make that happen.
Apple also does care about number of iPhone OS units sold for the sake of the iPhone OS PLATFORM. There is a unit/share threshold below which very few will develop Apps and content for the platform. The Mac almost died because the number of units sold (or market share) was too small - moving to OS X and establishing Quicktime as part of MPEG-4 saved Apple.
Apple's carefully crafted PR response today was clearly directed to developers who might be concerned. So that's why Apple points to 85M iPhone and iPod touch - both are part of the same platform.
You say it as though it's a small accomplishment. If that's true (and I don't think Android sales have caught up to the iPhone yet), that'll be quite a feat. It means that Android is catching up (and may have caught up) to the iPhone. It means that Android is proving to be a decent competitor. It's saying a lot if your conclusion is true. I wouldn't minimize that point.
And it's not a bad thing. Competition means better stuff for lower prices for us consumers. Android is good for Apple fans too.
I agree...that's a good thing, and give Android their due for realizing good numbers!
Not as good as the Apple app store. But that's more of a choice and app quality issue. It's coming along though. I see more and more iPhone apps getting ported to AM regularly. And if Android does gain marketshare, then of course, the popularity of the platform with developers will take off. For now, undoubtedly, the iPhone OS has the largest installed base.
If you are a good developer, there should be no reason why you can't make money off Android thought. Right now, I daresayt it's probably easier to get noticed in Android Market with a good app, than in the iPhone app store.
And while I don't know how difficult it is, given the number of apps that are appearing on both platforms, is it possible for you to develop for both, like many other developers?
Lastly, one thing to keep in mind with Android is that you don't have to necessarily distribute through Android Market. You can simply distribute your app through your own website or alternate Android app stores.
When will Google or any developer release some data about sales and revenue data resulting from selling apps for Android phones? Especially to counter data showing that free apps are even more dominant in Android Market (when compared to App Store).
They also have 0 environmental controls or regulations in China, Chinese employees handle hazardaous substances without the normally required (in the Western world) protective equipment, foreign companies negotiate wages directly with the government (who the employees can't vote for), and Apple has no liability for worker safety (this is "guaranteed" by the Chinese government).
How deep is your head in the sand? Have you never wondered why it's so cheap to have things made in China? No environmental regulations, nobody asking for a higher wage, much less insurance needed, and employees never take vacations or say no to overtime!
Would you have Apple discontinue doing business in China? That way all those handling hazardous materials would lose their jobs & die of starvation... if you were Chinese: Which would you choose, Which is better... worse... unethical?
That;s easy! They had a goal of penetration into a market new to them... They miscalculated (screwed up) and overpriced their offering (the iPhone) to meet that goal.
They did?
Then maybe you can explain why the iPhone's adoption rate was faster than any smartphone in history. And why it's still the #1 selling phone model 3 years after introduction.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetz
That's the choice Apple made. If they didn't have that AT&T exclusive, Android wouldn't have been able to get a toe into the US market. iPhones would have been everywhere. But they made their choice. And the consequences are playing out. I hope Steve has a good out clause in his AT&T contract.
Too bad you're looking at only one side of the equation. Without the AT&T exclusive, the iPhone might well not be where it is today. Apple's deal with AT&T meant that Apple gave some things up but got some things in return. Apple is very happy with the results (based on their quarterly earnings conference call). What do you know that Apple doesn't?
They aren't doctoring the numbers, but they are choosing the ones that make them look better... as every company does. If they were announcing the revenue and profit they get in the handset market ? which I think they have ? it would behoove them to use the entire handset market as the per unit price drops significantly for non-smartphones.
Truth be told, this topic would not have been an issue if Apple would have crushed the competition by opening up the U.S. market from the onset. The exclusive deal with ATT has only stifle growth. If I were Mr. Jobs, I would have flood the market with Iphone like yesterday. The only reason why Android phones are gaining any market shares as we speak is because the lack of iphone availability on other U.S. carriers. Why can the world have access to the iphone but yet three quarters of the U.S. market is disenfranchise from owning an iphone. I would like to own a iphone but I would like to stay on the Verizon network as well.
You need to go back to the way things were in 2006. Without AT&T around to agree to an exclusive, Apple would never have gotten the freedom to establish almost total control over its handset, including direct iTunes sales. The whole App Store concept would've been still-born.
Only in desperation in 2009 did Verizon finally loosen its strings and allow Android and its Market in.
Way better camera, smaller form factor, lower price will all prompt average people to upgrade...
Agree and what if it's battery life was significantly better? And what if AT&T allows 3GS owners to upgrade in less than a year? (I just checked my account and my upgrade date has been moved up to 7/23/2010, and I didn't buy my 3GS until Aug 2009.)
If this is AT&T's last iPhone exclusive, I can see them pulling out all the stops to entice as many subscribers as possible to sign up for a new 2-year iPhone contract.
Hahahaha Apple wont do this, Apple doesn't reply to that...
If Apple's market share or sales start declining, Apple will do ***** anything.
They haven't had to yet. But the signs are a bit worrying in some areas though you have to admit - Android in the number 1 spot. 150000 is a pretty reasonable sample size if you ask me. I'd be happy with it.
I used to be an Apple fan, but my enthusiasm has waned a bit over the years, chiefly due to not so much to the products Apple produces, they are still amazing, but more due to the attitude Apple takes to its customers.
Then maybe you can explain why the iPhone's adoption rate was faster than any smartphone in history. And why it's still the #1 selling phone model 3 years after introduction.
Would it have been that way without the AT&T subsidy?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Too bad you're looking at only one side of the equation. Without the AT&T exclusive, the iPhone might well not be where it is today. Apple's deal with AT&T meant that Apple gave some things up but got some things in return. Apple is very happy with the results (based on their quarterly earnings conference call). What do you know that Apple doesn't?
They got a ton out of AT&T. I don't deny that at all. But at this point, it's debatable whether AT&T is hurting or helping Apple. Time will tell whether Steve was incredibly smart or incredibly stupid for signing a 5 year deal. And that's of course assuming there is a deal and all that jazz. I could be totally wrong and be surprised to see a CDMA or AWS iPhone this summer.
When will Google or any developer release some data about sales and revenue data resulting from selling apps for Android phones? Especially to counter data showing that free apps are even more dominant in Android Market (when compared to App Store).
Why hasn't any such data been released yet?
Is that relevant though? Sure there's lots of free apps. But as a developer you can have Google take a cut and put it on Android Market or you can sell it right off your website and pay Google nothing. So sales on Android Market and even the number of apps is not directly comparable to Apple per se.
Only in desperation in 2009 did Verizon finally loosen its strings and allow Android and its Market in.
then you have role reversal with AT&T and Android in that regard. They seem to be forcing their Android handset makers to include bloatware mandatory Yahoo search.
Exactly the things Apple wanted to avoid when they decided not to go with Verizon.
Comments
How can you say that?
Have you ever owned or run a company?
I have, with two other principals!
We had three basic objectives:
1) return a fair profit to our owners and investors
2) provide the best possible products and services to our customers
3) have fun
(snip)
...and it really pisses me off when someone like you flippantly characterizes others through the looking glass of his own morals and ethics!
.
Well said!
But where Apple does sell on multiple carriers, they do well. Canada is a great example. We've got the iPhone on all 3 carriers. And iPhones abound. That said Android is gaining traction. And with all 3 carriers selling the iPhone, Android handsets are now marketed by the major carriers as differentiators, the way the lone iPhone carrier (Rogers) used to market the iPhone. One carrier (Telus) still has ads and store banners proclaiming the Motorola Milestone, and its far more prominent than the iPhone. So who knows how things will play out.
Living in the US with one carrier, I don't see those types of ads.
What you're pointing out is quite interesting.
I think the carriers make more money on Android phones than on iPhone (assuming the plans are the same) as the subsidy for iPhone is about $400, and I think it's less for the other phones (even if those phones are free). So I can see why Telus might be proclaiming the Milestone more than iPhone.
If you are going to come up with a "conclusion" at least make an effort to use numbers that are meaningful. You are tossing in thinks, extrapolations, and other fluff without any detail. And you additionally only select AT&T activations and some small percentage of that as smartphones. Is this meant to say this is the percentage that represents iPhone? Since you measure Android on a worldwide basis why would you use only AT&T as the iPhone basis?
Wow, you really have trouble with reading comprehension. So simplifying for such as you:
NPD estimated US sales of Android smartphones and Apple smartphones (i.e., iPhone) based on a survey. People question it. So let's see if we can corroborate the survey with whatever data we have.
There is NO public data on iPhone sales in US but AT&T reported iPhone activations serves as a useful proxy, since AT&T is the only carrier for iPhone in US.
There is NO public data on Android sales in US. Android phones in US consist primarily of Motorola, HTC, and Samsung phones.
There IS public data on worldwide sales of Motorola (2.3 to 2.8M) and HTC (2.6 to 2.8M) smartphones, but none on Samsung smartphones (but can deduce it is less than 2.3M since not in top 5). US sales for each are only a subset of worldwide sales. HTC smartphones include WinMo phones, so need to discount further.
So iPhone units sold in 1Q10 in US is about 2.7M. Android units sold in 1Q10 worldwide is about 5M. Most Motorola smartphone sales in 1Q10 was in US, so maybe 2M. So even if only 700K of the 2.6M HTC are Android and sold in US (and this is likely given Hero/Eris, Dream/G1, Magic/myTouch, Nexus One, etc and given AdMob US data), it puts Android in the same ballpark as iPhone. (Samsung has Galaxy, Moment, Behold in US but none seem to be a big hit.)
Got it?
Cry me a river Apple. BOGO complaints. One carrier complaints. Whose fault is that????????????? Crippled no-Flash phone??????????????
I will NOT get an iPhone as long as AT&T is the carrier. In fact, I and many others will NOT get an iPhone until it comes to Verizon and only Verizon.
Besides, with my DROID Incredible, I'm pretty sure I won't be asking for an iPhone in the future. And many more are in the same boat!
Attack that now all you want.
And, you are?
.
I don't get why people say this is a bad thing. As a consumer, I'd be happy if people cut me a deal (which is what BOGO is....it's not free). I find it odd that people on here think its a good thing that Apple doesn't cut prices or offers special deals to gain marketshare. Good for shareholders. Not so good for me as a consumer (of Apple products). And where were all these people when the iPhone was first launched for $600 and the price dropped. Were they all upset that Apple 'discounted' the iPhone?
Good on Verizon and their partner OEMs for competing. People act like that's a bad thing for us consumers. If Apple and AT&T were smart, they would counter by offering the last gen iPhone for free on contract and convert every high school kid onto the iPhone platform for life....and who knows, we might see that yet! It's like smoking. The phone companies have to get 'em young!
As long as Apple keeps innovating in a way that leads to products with a great user experience, I want Apple to exist. I want to have the opportunity to choose the Apple paradigm because all the other electronics/computer companies have bought into a different paradigm that leads to mostly crappy copycat products. In order for Apple to exist, they need to maintain a fair profit to keep innovating.
Also as a consumer, I'm willing to pay a fair premium for the better user experience, but I don't want to be gouged. So I do want good competitors to exist to keep Apple (and their partners like AT&T) in check. I would like nothing more than to see AT&T (and VZW) forced to lower prices.
So for me, there is a tension, and it's not black and white.
Interesting catch...
Eh, you have a point there. I was thinking in broad terms or moral ethics. They didn't sacrifice a million kids or stole from the poor or used oil derived from currently endangers species in the delivery trucks to initiate the BOGO deal. That we know of...
Err...Ahhh, I think that oil comes from the dinosaurs... and they were extinct before... even one as old as me
.
If Apple does not care about market share and volumen, then why did they drop the price of the original iPhone by hundreds of dollars?
That's easy! They had a goal of penetration into a market new to them... They miscalculated (screwed up) and overpriced their offering (the iPhone) to meet that goal.
They recognized that, and were agile enough to adjust their price so they could meet their goal...
... to do otherwise, would be, just, stupid!
.
If Apple does not care about market share and volumen, then why did they drop the price of the original iPhone by hundreds of dollars?
Apple doesn't care about being number 1 in market share, or even number 2. They're not after market share for market share sake, or for bragging rights.
But Apple does care about establishing viable products - Apple's goal at iPhone launch was 1% or 10M units in its first full year. So they dropped the price, and then changed their sales model (to subsidy) to make that happen.
Apple also does care about number of iPhone OS units sold for the sake of the iPhone OS PLATFORM. There is a unit/share threshold below which very few will develop Apps and content for the platform. The Mac almost died because the number of units sold (or market share) was too small - moving to OS X and establishing Quicktime as part of MPEG-4 saved Apple.
Apple's carefully crafted PR response today was clearly directed to developers who might be concerned. So that's why Apple points to 85M iPhone and iPod touch - both are part of the same platform.
You say it as though it's a small accomplishment. If that's true (and I don't think Android sales have caught up to the iPhone yet), that'll be quite a feat. It means that Android is catching up (and may have caught up) to the iPhone. It means that Android is proving to be a decent competitor. It's saying a lot if your conclusion is true. I wouldn't minimize that point.
And it's not a bad thing. Competition means better stuff for lower prices for us consumers. Android is good for Apple fans too.
I agree...that's a good thing, and give Android their due for realizing good numbers!
.
She says "no comment".
she shoulda' done that in this case, too!
Not as good as the Apple app store. But that's more of a choice and app quality issue. It's coming along though. I see more and more iPhone apps getting ported to AM regularly. And if Android does gain marketshare, then of course, the popularity of the platform with developers will take off. For now, undoubtedly, the iPhone OS has the largest installed base.
If you are a good developer, there should be no reason why you can't make money off Android thought. Right now, I daresayt it's probably easier to get noticed in Android Market with a good app, than in the iPhone app store.
And while I don't know how difficult it is, given the number of apps that are appearing on both platforms, is it possible for you to develop for both, like many other developers?
Lastly, one thing to keep in mind with Android is that you don't have to necessarily distribute through Android Market. You can simply distribute your app through your own website or alternate Android app stores.
When will Google or any developer release some data about sales and revenue data resulting from selling apps for Android phones? Especially to counter data showing that free apps are even more dominant in Android Market (when compared to App Store).
Why hasn't any such data been released yet?
They also have 0 environmental controls or regulations in China, Chinese employees handle hazardaous substances without the normally required (in the Western world) protective equipment, foreign companies negotiate wages directly with the government (who the employees can't vote for), and Apple has no liability for worker safety (this is "guaranteed" by the Chinese government).
How deep is your head in the sand? Have you never wondered why it's so cheap to have things made in China? No environmental regulations, nobody asking for a higher wage, much less insurance needed, and employees never take vacations or say no to overtime!
Would you have Apple discontinue doing business in China? That way all those handling hazardous materials would lose their jobs & die of starvation... if you were Chinese: Which would you choose, Which is better... worse... unethical?
.
That;s easy! They had a goal of penetration into a market new to them... They miscalculated (screwed up) and overpriced their offering (the iPhone) to meet that goal.
They did?
Then maybe you can explain why the iPhone's adoption rate was faster than any smartphone in history. And why it's still the #1 selling phone model 3 years after introduction.
That's the choice Apple made. If they didn't have that AT&T exclusive, Android wouldn't have been able to get a toe into the US market. iPhones would have been everywhere. But they made their choice. And the consequences are playing out. I hope Steve has a good out clause in his AT&T contract.
Too bad you're looking at only one side of the equation. Without the AT&T exclusive, the iPhone might well not be where it is today. Apple's deal with AT&T meant that Apple gave some things up but got some things in return. Apple is very happy with the results (based on their quarterly earnings conference call). What do you know that Apple doesn't?
They aren't doctoring the numbers, but they are choosing the ones that make them look better... as every company does. If they were announcing the revenue and profit they get in the handset market ? which I think they have ? it would behoove them to use the entire handset market as the per unit price drops significantly for non-smartphones.
Ta Dah!
.
Truth be told, this topic would not have been an issue if Apple would have crushed the competition by opening up the U.S. market from the onset. The exclusive deal with ATT has only stifle growth. If I were Mr. Jobs, I would have flood the market with Iphone like yesterday. The only reason why Android phones are gaining any market shares as we speak is because the lack of iphone availability on other U.S. carriers. Why can the world have access to the iphone but yet three quarters of the U.S. market is disenfranchise from owning an iphone. I would like to own a iphone but I would like to stay on the Verizon network as well.
You need to go back to the way things were in 2006. Without AT&T around to agree to an exclusive, Apple would never have gotten the freedom to establish almost total control over its handset, including direct iTunes sales. The whole App Store concept would've been still-born.
Only in desperation in 2009 did Verizon finally loosen its strings and allow Android and its Market in.
Way better camera, smaller form factor, lower price will all prompt average people to upgrade...
Agree and what if it's battery life was significantly better? And what if AT&T allows 3GS owners to upgrade in less than a year? (I just checked my account and my upgrade date has been moved up to 7/23/2010, and I didn't buy my 3GS until Aug 2009.)
If this is AT&T's last iPhone exclusive, I can see them pulling out all the stops to entice as many subscribers as possible to sign up for a new 2-year iPhone contract.
If Apple's market share or sales start declining, Apple will do ***** anything.
They haven't had to yet. But the signs are a bit worrying in some areas though you have to admit - Android in the number 1 spot. 150000 is a pretty reasonable sample size if you ask me. I'd be happy with it.
I used to be an Apple fan, but my enthusiasm has waned a bit over the years, chiefly due to not so much to the products Apple produces, they are still amazing, but more due to the attitude Apple takes to its customers.
They did?
Then maybe you can explain why the iPhone's adoption rate was faster than any smartphone in history. And why it's still the #1 selling phone model 3 years after introduction.
Would it have been that way without the AT&T subsidy?
Too bad you're looking at only one side of the equation. Without the AT&T exclusive, the iPhone might well not be where it is today. Apple's deal with AT&T meant that Apple gave some things up but got some things in return. Apple is very happy with the results (based on their quarterly earnings conference call). What do you know that Apple doesn't?
They got a ton out of AT&T. I don't deny that at all. But at this point, it's debatable whether AT&T is hurting or helping Apple. Time will tell whether Steve was incredibly smart or incredibly stupid for signing a 5 year deal. And that's of course assuming there is a deal and all that jazz. I could be totally wrong and be surprised to see a CDMA or AWS iPhone this summer.
When will Google or any developer release some data about sales and revenue data resulting from selling apps for Android phones? Especially to counter data showing that free apps are even more dominant in Android Market (when compared to App Store).
Why hasn't any such data been released yet?
Is that relevant though? Sure there's lots of free apps. But as a developer you can have Google take a cut and put it on Android Market or you can sell it right off your website and pay Google nothing. So sales on Android Market and even the number of apps is not directly comparable to Apple per se.
Only in desperation in 2009 did Verizon finally loosen its strings and allow Android and its Market in.
then you have role reversal with AT&T and Android in that regard. They seem to be forcing their Android handset makers to include bloatware mandatory Yahoo search.
Exactly the things Apple wanted to avoid when they decided not to go with Verizon.