In the US, the iPhone has shrunk from 47% ad share in January to 38% share in the most recent report, while the second place Droid is at 16.1%. Overall, Android has grown from consuming 39% of the network's ads to 46%, making Android bigger as an ad base than the iPhone in this country.
.
What is going on here? Are they talking about iPhone OS? Or only the iPhone itself? They say that Android is bigger as an "ad base" but up above, they say that the iPhone "installed base" is twice as large as Android 's.
Android is more like one of those ice cream stores where they offer so many flavours it's just ridiculous, and half the time you end up walking out with a Kimchee, Cabbage, or Horse Radish flavoured cone and wonder what happened.
Apple is the excellent organic frozen Yoghurt place across the street.
Edit: anonymouse thought of this before me. I guess the analogy is pretty obvious.
Yessssssss... analogous for a certain mentally challenged few Apple sycophants. The remaining are clearly NOT mentally challenged, but instead are just mental! A preference for an inferior product on an inferior network? And if you're frequenting that ORGANIC YOGURT SHOP you have described then you are probably frequently running your tongue across some brussell sprout tasting option... not completely unlike licking an Iphone. Try the FROYO labeled FROYO next time and you might just need to change your pants.
The Iphone is like... well... let me think... well it's like going to an Ice Cream shop and only being offerred Vanilla (quite good Vanilla though). ANDROID, by comparison is like walking into a Baskin-Robbins! The sprinkles selection (a.k.a. the Apps) available at the Vanilla only shop is better (for now), however, the flavor does not come from those sprinkles but from the tasty goodness YOU CHOSE (from amidst many flavors) that they sit atop. Just Broke it Downz... for you Iclowns!
Well this iClown says this: When your "Mythica lBaskin-Robbins" has thousands and thousands of "flavors" ..... let's talk, otherwise your post is a big FAIL (but only one). THINK HARDER!
The Iphone is like... well... let me think... well it's like going to an Ice Cream shop and only being offerred Vanilla (quite good Vanilla though). ANDROID, by comparison is like walking into a Baskin-Robbins! The sprinkles selection (a.k.a. the Apps) available at the Vanilla only shop is better (for now), however, the flavor does not come from those sprinkles but from the tasty goodness YOU CHOSE (from amidst many flavors) that they sit atop. Just Broke it Downz... for you Iclowns!
You have made a good morphology but something went wrong. The apps of iPhone OS are actually the tasty goodness "many flavors: that you like. The sprinkles/toppings are what Android actually is.
But really, which Android hardware partner is winning? Is it HTC? LG? Motorola?
It's HTC. Check out their growth and stock price.
Quote:
Let's say you're in Tokyo and you're looking to buy an Android phone. (You'd be in the minority since iPhone currently has about 72% of the smartphone market market in Japan.) Do you think HTC, LG, and Motorola will all send their latest handsets there, with fully localized versions of Android 2.x, 2.y, and 2.z, and try to sell them in Yodobashi camera in Akihabara? And if they did, do you think they'd sell well against iPhone, Sharp, Sony, and the other indigenous smartphones? Good luck with all of that. Ganbatte kudasai!
Instead of guessing, it's pretty easy to find the answers for yourself. For example, Sony Ericsson sell the X10 in Japan. Also, NTT DoCoMo are switching their FOMA Linux phones (which along with their Symbian phones aren't included the smartphone figures you quote for some odd reason) to Android. That includes phones from indigenous manufacturers like Sharp.
Quote:
This problem (at least on the software side) is the result of Google starting as a web-based software company. Their software development teams still have that same rapid-release mentality.
You're forgetting that Android's initial development was by Android Inc., before Google bought up the company. It's still run independently from the rest of Google.
Android OS is still an immature product and the smartphone market as a whole moves very quickly. Rapid software cycles make a lot of sense right now. Android isn't the only one with this model. Other, more established players are doing it too.
Bertie Botts Every Flavor Jellybeans! "Ah Bertie Bott's Every Flavor Beans! I was unfortunate enough in my youth to come across a vomit-flavored one, and since then I'm afraid I've rather lost my liking for them-but I think I'll be safe with a nice toffee, don't you? Alas! Ear wax!"-Albus Dumbledore.
Bertie Botts Every Flavor Jellybeans! "Ah Bertie Bott's Every Flavor Beans! I was unfortunate enough in my youth to come across a vomit-flavored one, and since then I'm afraid I've rather lost my liking for them-but I think I'll be safe with a nice toffee, don't you? Alas! Ear wax!"-Albus Dumbledore.
Rapid software cycles make a lot of sense right now. Android isn't the only one with this model. Other, more established players are doing it too.
Just out of curiosity, are all those symbian variants meant for the same use or different ones? (Like S^2 going into the entry, simple phones, S^3 for the better, more functional but still non smart phones and S^4 for the actual smart phones, or all for the same type of phone?)
Just out of curiosity, are all those symbian variants meant for the same use or different ones? (Like S^2 going into the entry, simple phones, S^3 for the better, more functional but still non smart phones and S^4 for the actual smart phones, or all for the same type of phone?)
The same use. As far as I'm aware, there's no seperate version for cheaper devices. Symbian 2, 3 and 4 are all for smartphones.
Symbian used to be just the kernel and low-level components, with different UIs on top to suit different market segments. Now it's all rolled up into a single Symbian/S60 (Nokia's smartphone UI) product.
The same use. As far as I'm aware, there's no seperate version for cheaper devices. Symbian 2, 3 and 4 are all for smartphones.
Symbian used to be just the kernel and low-level components, with different UIs on top to suit different market segments. Now it's all rolled up into a single Symbian/S60 (Nokia's smartphone UI) product.
Then why do they have this kind of roadmap? I mean three major releases in one year sounds crazy. But if they can update the OS in the same way it is done for iPhone, I guess it isn't too bad.
From what I read, the hassle with android is that every manufacturer has his own UI, and that they need to update the thing themselves before putting new versions onto the phones, and that it often goes through the carrier, so there is no right access to the phone. They should have done this differently.
Edit: maybe it isn't that crazy, as apple has a couple of updates to it's OS during the year, maybe the naming is just different.
Instead of guessing, it's pretty easy to find the answers for yourself. For example, Sony Ericsson sell the X10 in Japan. Also, NTT DoCoMo are switching their FOMA Linux phones (which along with their Symbian phones aren't included the smartphone figures you quote for some odd reason) to Android. That includes phones from indigenous manufacturers like Sharp.
Aren't some of those NTT DoCoMo Symbian based phones locked down, so you can't install apps etc, thus why they aren't counted as smartphones?
I wonder, however, it a good number of the missing half of all iPhones sold just don't have any AdMob supported apps on them. A lot of people don't like ad apps, and may just delete any downloaded, which totally skews the results if ad apps are more widely used on other platforms.
So true. I don't know how many people are out there like me. I either buy apps or use the free ones. I hate ad supported ones. In the rare cases I use them I don't ever use the links.
I have my gmail account set for IMAP with my mail tool both on my computer and iPhone. I never ever see google ads on my mail.
So true. I don't know how many people are out there like me. I either buy apps or use the free ones. I hate ad supported ones. In the rare cases I use them I don't ever use the links.
You don't have to click on the Ads. The fact that the ads were retrieved from their server provides them with the information. I think the Admob number is a good indication of how many devices are actually in use. Since most ads on both phones currently are provided by Admob, it's a decent comparison. For sure, it's not completely accurate since someone may only have paid apps and have no apps with ad or may not run any apps with ads in that month. But it's still going to be closer to the actual figures than just having to figure out how many sold phones are actually in use. But to suggest that Admob's figures are deliberately falsified, is pure BS. Neither Apple nor Google is that type of a company.
In the future when most iPhone ads will be served by Apple's ad engine, the number won't mean much. But for now, the numbers should be, by and large, valid.
And it shows how much Android has grown.
I have never paid too much attention to Admob's market share results since the Android apps are largely ad driven while the iPhone apps have a much higher percentage of paid apps. So as a trend from month to month, it may mean something, but the numbers themselves may not be representative. However the uniqueness numbers are definitely worth considering.
We're supposed to believe the AdMob/Google numbers when the Google fans want to show how great Android is and how everyone's switching to Google.
But when they want to show that Apple has a monopoly and is unfairly restricting competition, they'll pull out different numbers that say that Apple sells 96% of all online apps.
You see? Choose the data you wish that supports whatever silly argument you want to make.
For any platform to attain one third the marketshare in the US as the iPhone OS in 18 months is a decent showing. Anyway, AI forgot to mention the most interesting horse race in these stats: China. It appears for whatever reason that Android is really taking off there and has almost caught up to the iPhone OS (across all platforms). It'd be an interesting case study to see why.
For any platform to attain one third the marketshare in the US as the iPhone OS in 18 months is a decent showing. .
Remember that those are Google figures and do not measure market share. Rather, they measure the share using a particular ad program - which isn't even on most iPhones.
Be very, very skeptical of information from Google claiming great results for Android.
Then why do they have this kind of roadmap? I mean three major releases in one year sounds crazy. But if they can update the OS in the same way it is done for iPhone, I guess it isn't too bad.
From what I read, the hassle with android is that every manufacturer has his own UI, and that they need to update the thing themselves before putting new versions onto the phones, and that it often goes through the carrier, so there is no right access to the phone. They should have done this differently.
Edit: maybe it isn't that crazy, as apple has a couple of updates to it's OS during the year, maybe the naming is just different.
Finally a reasonable point of view. The truth is somewhere in between. The reality is that fragmentation scarcely bothers most users. And screaming about it, really reflects poorly on Apple fans. It's like rabid Nokia/RIM/WinMo lovers going on and on about copy and paste or MMS or (more recently) multi-tasking. Nice to have. But how many users did they really impact? And how many did not buy an iPhone because it didn't have MMS or multi-tasking capabilities?
Something like 90% of the apps on there can run on 1.5. And Android Market does hide Apps that aren't compatible. So to the end-user, I fail to see how fragmentation is that big a deal unless there's that one app that you really want that falls in the 10% mark. Anybody who has actually used an Android device understands this. Try the device and you'll realize that fragmentation is just not that big a deal to most users. I don't think I've ever heard any Android users (other than a few media types) complain about fragmentation. It's really only on Apple sites that you read about it. And the few that care, well, they'll go Apple if they care that much.
The problem for Google is that Android had a lot of catching up to do. That required an aggressive update cycle. If they hadn't gone down that road, imagine how far behind Android would have been? And what would the pundits and Apple fans have said then? Just look at each OS update from Android. In many of them, Google gives out nearly as much as Apple's annual update. However, now that Android is finally catching up, I would expect OS updates to slow down to maybe thrice or twice a year eventually. And as that happens, fragmentation will reduce too.
Remember that those are Google figures and do not measure market share. Rather, they measure the share using a particular ad program - which isn't even on most iPhones.
Regardless, there's something more to the story than meets the eye, for sure. The closeness of Android and the iPhone OS in China is remarkable. Either than means that admob sites are doing particularly poorly in China or that the iPhone OS isn't doing that great. Either way it's a story. I'd like to know which one is true.
Android better start grabbing market share when they can. Windows Phone 7 is their true competitor.
I really doubt it. They are entirely different beasts. The restrictions that Microsoft is putting on hardware makers and the restrictions on customization is unprecedented, outside the Apple ecosystem. Heck, the iPhone will actually be more customizable than this in a few weeks.
And all those restrictions simply mean that hardware manufacturers will be pumping out only a handful of WinPho 7 phones a year (because there really will be only so many ways to build a WinPho 7 handset). Combine that with the fact that there's no backwards compatibility with WinMo and you really have a brand new platform that has to compete with Android and iPhone OS 4 and Blackberry and Symbian.
Good luck to them. They'll do well. They'll make money out of the venture. Microsoft always does. But I think the glory days of Windows on mobiles are long gone. And I think it's highly unlikely that they'll come anywhere close with WinPho 7 without anything short of Microsoft actually paying developers to port over the most popular apps on Android and the iPhone. Given that a lot of developers are bouncing around between Android and iPhone OS and scarcely bothering with Nokia or RIM these days, I find it highly implausible that they'll all of a sudden rush out en masse to embrace WinPho 7 (and if that happens, the iPhone OS will have problems too btw).
Comments
In the US, the iPhone has shrunk from 47% ad share in January to 38% share in the most recent report, while the second place Droid is at 16.1%. Overall, Android has grown from consuming 39% of the network's ads to 46%, making Android bigger as an ad base than the iPhone in this country.
.
What is going on here? Are they talking about iPhone OS? Or only the iPhone itself? They say that Android is bigger as an "ad base" but up above, they say that the iPhone "installed base" is twice as large as Android 's.
I'[m not getting something.
Android is more like one of those ice cream stores where they offer so many flavours it's just ridiculous, and half the time you end up walking out with a Kimchee, Cabbage, or Horse Radish flavoured cone and wonder what happened.
Apple is the excellent organic frozen Yoghurt place across the street.
Edit: anonymouse thought of this before me. I guess the analogy is pretty obvious.
Yessssssss... analogous for a certain mentally challenged few Apple sycophants. The remaining are clearly NOT mentally challenged, but instead are just mental! A preference for an inferior product on an inferior network? And if you're frequenting that ORGANIC YOGURT SHOP you have described then you are probably frequently running your tongue across some brussell sprout tasting option... not completely unlike licking an Iphone. Try the FROYO labeled FROYO next time and you might just need to change your pants.
Google's problem will soon be that nobody believes AdMob's numbers.
Why should AdMob's figures be believed now?
The Iphone is like... well... let me think... well it's like going to an Ice Cream shop and only being offerred Vanilla (quite good Vanilla though). ANDROID, by comparison is like walking into a Baskin-Robbins! The sprinkles selection (a.k.a. the Apps) available at the Vanilla only shop is better (for now), however, the flavor does not come from those sprinkles but from the tasty goodness YOU CHOSE (from amidst many flavors) that they sit atop. Just Broke it Downz... for you Iclowns!
Well this iClown says this: When your "Mythica lBaskin-Robbins" has thousands and thousands of "flavors" ..... let's talk, otherwise your post is a big FAIL (but only one). THINK HARDER!
The Iphone is like... well... let me think... well it's like going to an Ice Cream shop and only being offerred Vanilla (quite good Vanilla though). ANDROID, by comparison is like walking into a Baskin-Robbins! The sprinkles selection (a.k.a. the Apps) available at the Vanilla only shop is better (for now), however, the flavor does not come from those sprinkles but from the tasty goodness YOU CHOSE (from amidst many flavors) that they sit atop. Just Broke it Downz... for you Iclowns!
You have made a good morphology but something went wrong. The apps of iPhone OS are actually the tasty goodness "many flavors: that you like. The sprinkles/toppings are what Android actually is.
But really, which Android hardware partner is winning? Is it HTC? LG? Motorola?
It's HTC. Check out their growth and stock price.
Let's say you're in Tokyo and you're looking to buy an Android phone. (You'd be in the minority since iPhone currently has about 72% of the smartphone market market in Japan.) Do you think HTC, LG, and Motorola will all send their latest handsets there, with fully localized versions of Android 2.x, 2.y, and 2.z, and try to sell them in Yodobashi camera in Akihabara? And if they did, do you think they'd sell well against iPhone, Sharp, Sony, and the other indigenous smartphones? Good luck with all of that. Ganbatte kudasai!
Instead of guessing, it's pretty easy to find the answers for yourself. For example, Sony Ericsson sell the X10 in Japan. Also, NTT DoCoMo are switching their FOMA Linux phones (which along with their Symbian phones aren't included the smartphone figures you quote for some odd reason) to Android. That includes phones from indigenous manufacturers like Sharp.
This problem (at least on the software side) is the result of Google starting as a web-based software company. Their software development teams still have that same rapid-release mentality.
You're forgetting that Android's initial development was by Android Inc., before Google bought up the company. It's still run independently from the rest of Google.
Android OS is still an immature product and the smartphone market as a whole moves very quickly. Rapid software cycles make a lot of sense right now. Android isn't the only one with this model. Other, more established players are doing it too.
Bertie Botts Every Flavor Jellybeans! "Ah Bertie Bott's Every Flavor Beans! I was unfortunate enough in my youth to come across a vomit-flavored one, and since then I'm afraid I've rather lost my liking for them-but I think I'll be safe with a nice toffee, don't you? Alas! Ear wax!"-Albus Dumbledore.
I was gonna post that if you hadn't first!
Bertie Botts Every Flavor Jellybeans! "Ah Bertie Bott's Every Flavor Beans! I was unfortunate enough in my youth to come across a vomit-flavored one, and since then I'm afraid I've rather lost my liking for them-but I think I'll be safe with a nice toffee, don't you? Alas! Ear wax!"-Albus Dumbledore.
Excellent post !!!
Rapid software cycles make a lot of sense right now. Android isn't the only one with this model. Other, more established players are doing it too.
Just out of curiosity, are all those symbian variants meant for the same use or different ones? (Like S^2 going into the entry, simple phones, S^3 for the better, more functional but still non smart phones and S^4 for the actual smart phones, or all for the same type of phone?)
Just out of curiosity, are all those symbian variants meant for the same use or different ones? (Like S^2 going into the entry, simple phones, S^3 for the better, more functional but still non smart phones and S^4 for the actual smart phones, or all for the same type of phone?)
The same use. As far as I'm aware, there's no seperate version for cheaper devices. Symbian 2, 3 and 4 are all for smartphones.
Symbian used to be just the kernel and low-level components, with different UIs on top to suit different market segments. Now it's all rolled up into a single Symbian/S60 (Nokia's smartphone UI) product.
The same use. As far as I'm aware, there's no seperate version for cheaper devices. Symbian 2, 3 and 4 are all for smartphones.
Symbian used to be just the kernel and low-level components, with different UIs on top to suit different market segments. Now it's all rolled up into a single Symbian/S60 (Nokia's smartphone UI) product.
Then why do they have this kind of roadmap? I mean three major releases in one year sounds crazy. But if they can update the OS in the same way it is done for iPhone, I guess it isn't too bad.
From what I read, the hassle with android is that every manufacturer has his own UI, and that they need to update the thing themselves before putting new versions onto the phones, and that it often goes through the carrier, so there is no right access to the phone. They should have done this differently.
Edit: maybe it isn't that crazy, as apple has a couple of updates to it's OS during the year, maybe the naming is just different.
Instead of guessing, it's pretty easy to find the answers for yourself. For example, Sony Ericsson sell the X10 in Japan. Also, NTT DoCoMo are switching their FOMA Linux phones (which along with their Symbian phones aren't included the smartphone figures you quote for some odd reason) to Android. That includes phones from indigenous manufacturers like Sharp.
Aren't some of those NTT DoCoMo Symbian based phones locked down, so you can't install apps etc, thus why they aren't counted as smartphones?
I wonder, however, it a good number of the missing half of all iPhones sold just don't have any AdMob supported apps on them. A lot of people don't like ad apps, and may just delete any downloaded, which totally skews the results if ad apps are more widely used on other platforms.
So true. I don't know how many people are out there like me. I either buy apps or use the free ones. I hate ad supported ones. In the rare cases I use them I don't ever use the links.
I have my gmail account set for IMAP with my mail tool both on my computer and iPhone. I never ever see google ads on my mail.
So true. I don't know how many people are out there like me. I either buy apps or use the free ones. I hate ad supported ones. In the rare cases I use them I don't ever use the links.
You don't have to click on the Ads. The fact that the ads were retrieved from their server provides them with the information. I think the Admob number is a good indication of how many devices are actually in use. Since most ads on both phones currently are provided by Admob, it's a decent comparison. For sure, it's not completely accurate since someone may only have paid apps and have no apps with ad or may not run any apps with ads in that month. But it's still going to be closer to the actual figures than just having to figure out how many sold phones are actually in use. But to suggest that Admob's figures are deliberately falsified, is pure BS. Neither Apple nor Google is that type of a company.
In the future when most iPhone ads will be served by Apple's ad engine, the number won't mean much. But for now, the numbers should be, by and large, valid.
And it shows how much Android has grown.
I have never paid too much attention to Admob's market share results since the Android apps are largely ad driven while the iPhone apps have a much higher percentage of paid apps. So as a trend from month to month, it may mean something, but the numbers themselves may not be representative. However the uniqueness numbers are definitely worth considering.
Why should AdMob's figures be believed now?
You don't get it, do you?
We're supposed to believe the AdMob/Google numbers when the Google fans want to show how great Android is and how everyone's switching to Google.
But when they want to show that Apple has a monopoly and is unfairly restricting competition, they'll pull out different numbers that say that Apple sells 96% of all online apps.
You see? Choose the data you wish that supports whatever silly argument you want to make.
For any platform to attain one third the marketshare in the US as the iPhone OS in 18 months is a decent showing. .
Remember that those are Google figures and do not measure market share. Rather, they measure the share using a particular ad program - which isn't even on most iPhones.
Be very, very skeptical of information from Google claiming great results for Android.
Then why do they have this kind of roadmap? I mean three major releases in one year sounds crazy. But if they can update the OS in the same way it is done for iPhone, I guess it isn't too bad.
From what I read, the hassle with android is that every manufacturer has his own UI, and that they need to update the thing themselves before putting new versions onto the phones, and that it often goes through the carrier, so there is no right access to the phone. They should have done this differently.
Edit: maybe it isn't that crazy, as apple has a couple of updates to it's OS during the year, maybe the naming is just different.
Finally a reasonable point of view. The truth is somewhere in between. The reality is that fragmentation scarcely bothers most users. And screaming about it, really reflects poorly on Apple fans. It's like rabid Nokia/RIM/WinMo lovers going on and on about copy and paste or MMS or (more recently) multi-tasking. Nice to have. But how many users did they really impact? And how many did not buy an iPhone because it didn't have MMS or multi-tasking capabilities?
Something like 90% of the apps on there can run on 1.5. And Android Market does hide Apps that aren't compatible. So to the end-user, I fail to see how fragmentation is that big a deal unless there's that one app that you really want that falls in the 10% mark. Anybody who has actually used an Android device understands this. Try the device and you'll realize that fragmentation is just not that big a deal to most users. I don't think I've ever heard any Android users (other than a few media types) complain about fragmentation. It's really only on Apple sites that you read about it. And the few that care, well, they'll go Apple if they care that much.
The problem for Google is that Android had a lot of catching up to do. That required an aggressive update cycle. If they hadn't gone down that road, imagine how far behind Android would have been? And what would the pundits and Apple fans have said then? Just look at each OS update from Android. In many of them, Google gives out nearly as much as Apple's annual update. However, now that Android is finally catching up, I would expect OS updates to slow down to maybe thrice or twice a year eventually. And as that happens, fragmentation will reduce too.
Remember that those are Google figures and do not measure market share. Rather, they measure the share using a particular ad program - which isn't even on most iPhones.
Regardless, there's something more to the story than meets the eye, for sure. The closeness of Android and the iPhone OS in China is remarkable. Either than means that admob sites are doing particularly poorly in China or that the iPhone OS isn't doing that great. Either way it's a story. I'd like to know which one is true.
Android better start grabbing market share when they can. Windows Phone 7 is their true competitor.
I really doubt it. They are entirely different beasts. The restrictions that Microsoft is putting on hardware makers and the restrictions on customization is unprecedented, outside the Apple ecosystem. Heck, the iPhone will actually be more customizable than this in a few weeks.
And all those restrictions simply mean that hardware manufacturers will be pumping out only a handful of WinPho 7 phones a year (because there really will be only so many ways to build a WinPho 7 handset). Combine that with the fact that there's no backwards compatibility with WinMo and you really have a brand new platform that has to compete with Android and iPhone OS 4 and Blackberry and Symbian.
Good luck to them. They'll do well. They'll make money out of the venture. Microsoft always does. But I think the glory days of Windows on mobiles are long gone. And I think it's highly unlikely that they'll come anywhere close with WinPho 7 without anything short of Microsoft actually paying developers to port over the most popular apps on Android and the iPhone. Given that a lot of developers are bouncing around between Android and iPhone OS and scarcely bothering with Nokia or RIM these days, I find it highly implausible that they'll all of a sudden rush out en masse to embrace WinPho 7 (and if that happens, the iPhone OS will have problems too btw).