Mobile web connected devices are soon going to become the primary way people connected to the internet.
Then what explains Apple's stance that the mobile web is not the way people now seek information, but instead, that they overwhelmingly use apps?
I think that, given both Apple's problems with its mobile browsers, and Apple's domination of the mobile app market, the statement is suspect as mere self-serving bullshit.
But you seem to disagree with it. What's your opinion on apps quickly replacing web browsing on mobile devices?
Maybe AT&T is holding the iPhone back, but the effect may not be as big as some think. I read an article recently that Samsung sold 1 million Galaxy S phones in 45 days on AT&T and T-mobile.
I assume that T-mobile did not sell all 1 million phones, so people who bought the Galaxy S on AT&T had the choice between the iPhone and Android, and they chose the Android.
It?s easy to say that Apple would sell more if they made it available to more customers, which (in case) includes carriers, countries and phone models across different price points. The problem I see with that kind of obvious prediction is the physical limitation on sourcing components and manufacturing.
Looking at these issues with the iPhone 4 and iPad ? both of which still not yet selling in all countries ? the first and most problematic issue for Apple?s sales is supply. So even if Verizon was on board they still wouldn?t be selling any more (and possibly slightly less, but that is a different issue that isn?t in the scope of this discussion).
There is a new Foxconn plant coming on board early(?) next year that is apparently designed to manufacture a quarter-million iPhones per day. That seems to be what be needed to make this happen.
It?s easy to say that Apple would sell more if they made it available to more customers, which (in case) includes carriers, countries and phone models across different price points. The problem I see with that kind of obvious prediction is the physical limitation on sourcing components and manufacturing.
Looking at these issues with the iPhone 4 and iPad ? both of which still not yet selling in all countries ? the first and most problematic issue for Apple?s sales is supply. So even if Verizon was on board they still wouldn?t be selling any more (and possibly slightly less, but that is a different issue that isn?t in the scope of this discussion).
There is a new Foxconn plant coming on board early(?) next year that is apparently designed to manufacture a quarter-million iPhones per day. That seems to be what be needed to make this happen.
You have a point. However, in this (and other threads) a common argument is that Android's existence (not just increased market share) is largely a function of the iPhone only being on AT&T.
While the AT&T only situation does constrain sales, and while supply would still constrain iPhone sales if it went multi-carrier, I do not see a wholesale collapse of Android sales happening. Even if Apple had an unlimited supply of iPhones on multiple carriers, I think Android would still sell quite well - I doubt it would see double digit increases in market share, but sales would not collapse, and it would maintain a reasonable market share.
We can sit around and discuss the situation and all, but what some here need to accept is that a segment of the population actually likes Android phones, and knowingly picks said phones over an iPhone, even when the iPhone is available.
Again you are back to the argument of either providing unlimited data to everyone or the whole thing will fail.
No, my argument is that "unlimited data" is a red herring because, as used in the argument you are making it means "infinite data", which of course if absurd. What I am arguing is that a) if carriers can't provide sufficient data to everyone, mobile is going to hit a brick wall, and b) that the carriers certainly can provide sufficient data to everyone but are pretending they can't to drive up charges to customers and minimize their quarterly investments by discouraging data usage, which will effectively curb the growth of mobile for as long as they continue to do so.
You have a point. However, in this (and other threads) a common argument is that Android's existence (not just increased market share) is largely a function of the iPhone only being on AT&T.
While the AT&T only situation does constrain sales, and while supply would still constrain iPhone sales if it went multi-carrier, I do not see a wholesale collapse of Android sales happening. Even if Apple had an unlimited supply of iPhones on multiple carriers, I think Android would still sell quite well - I doubt it would see double digit increases in market share, but sales would not collapse, and it would maintain a reasonable market share.
We can sit around and discuss the situation and all, but what some here need to accept is that a segment of the population actually likes Android phones, and knowingly picks said phones over an iPhone, even when the iPhone is available.
I agree that it would have reduced Android?s marketshare as some would wait for the iPhone to be in stock now that it?s on their carrier, but I don?t see it increasing Apple?s profit as a result. That is the heart of all these discussions about companies: How would this affect them?
I assume some would just get frustrated and get another device which could create a different and potentially more harmful issue for Apple if it?s deemed that Apple has ?production problems? that triples the time it takes to get an iPhone 4 (if we assume that AT&T accounts for 1/3 of the US cellular market).
As a shareholder I hope that Verizon is coming, even though I?m happy with my fast AT&T service. The long term growth of the company will benefit by it, even after a huge bump int eh stock price from an official word from Apple.
... Second issue, to the extent that IOS became a defacto standard, Apple could restrict Google's ability to generate revenue from that platform. In that sense, Android becomes "defensive". Apple's decision to block Google Voice, for instance, provides some evidence of that concern. Therefore a good strategy.
Not that good, as carriers begin to block Google services, like search and navigation, from Android phones.
AGH, why did I click the un-ignore button?!?! LOL Newtron is now saying iPhone customers aren?t sophisticated. Gotta love those sophisticated Droid commercials targeted at those pimple-faced virgins who regulate their free time between masturbation and online roll-playing games. Also love those sophisticated apps for Android compared to the the iPhone. Only the unrefined would ever use an iPhone which makes me wonder why the expensive cars have docks for iPhones yet I?ve seen none for Android.
Because expensive cars can't give buy 1 get 100 free.
I assume that T-mobile did not sell all 1 million phones, so people who bought the Galaxy S on AT&T had the choice between the iPhone and Android, and they chose the Android.
People choosing Android on AT&T fall into 1 of 3 categories
* Hard core Android fans
* People who got BOGO or other deals for whom the initial cost was a significant consideration
* Uninformed consumers steered to Android phones by AT&T salespeople because it was a more profitable sale for AT&T.
Ever notice that AT&T doesn't really spend money advertising iPhones? That's partly because Apple does, and partly to steer the naive to options better for AT&T.
That is all within Apple's control (except for the 5-year exclusiviity deal). Once they go multi-carrier in the US, those figures will change overnight.
Even being stuck with AT&T at the moment, this is still Apple's doing. If they hadn't been so restricive with developers, if they hadn't handled the iPhone 4 antenna issue so poorly, and if they would throw a little bit more attention and marketing at the business segment of the market, their numbers would far higher than Android.
That is all within Apple's control (except for the 5-year exclusiviity deal). Once they go multi-carrier in the US, those figures will change overnight.
Even being stuck with AT&T at the moment, this is still Apple's doing. If they hadn't been so restricive with developers, if they hadn't handled the iPhone 4 antenna issue so poorly, and if they would throw a little bit more attention and marketing at the business segment of the market, their numbers would far higher than Android.
I don't think the "issues" you mention have anything to do with this. It's due to a) iPhone being only on AT&T, and b) carrier desire for reclaiming control of what the phones do, which Android allows them to do.
I'm always amazed at how insulting some iPhone fanatics are! I've not once called anyone's post "stupid" or anything of the kind on here. Kinda reeks of insecurity about one's platform.
LOL. Dude, you're way too serious here.
Just for the record, I've never heard an adult call someone "Dude".
You don?t understand what is meant by this context or are purposely trying to be obtuse. You can?t put Mac OS X on the first Mac either. You have to draw the line somewhere.
iOS is updated for ALL of Apple?s iPhones at the same time each year, and they supply updates for devices for three full years. The same can?t be said of Android, which is still shipping *new* items with version 1.6, has many devices still stuck on much older versions with no hope of being upgraded since it?s up to the vendor and/or carrier, no consistency among UIs, and even the ability for crapware apps and a lock out of search engines which is even worse than the $400 notebooks that are supplemented by such tactics.
While technically the introduction of a new device each year with better HW and more features does create a fragment it?s a simple linear model where the older device can?t get all the updates of the newer device and after 3 years of rich updates don?t get any new updates, compared to a fractured model that looks like it was created by Mandelbrot.
Q: When will iOS 5.0 become a beta?
Q: When will iOS 5.0 launch?
Q: What devices will be able to get the iOS 5.0 update?
Q: Will all iPhones sold after iOS 5.0 drops get iOS 5.0?
Q: When will Honeycomb become a beta?
Q: When will Honeycomb launch?
Q: What devices will be able to get the Honeycomb update at that time?
Q: Will all Android-based phones sold after Honeycomb drops get iOS 5.0?
That is all within Apple's control (except for the 5-year exclusiviity deal). Once they go multi-carrier in the US, those figures will change overnight.
Even being stuck with AT&T at the moment, this is still Apple's doing. If they hadn't been so restricive with developers, if they hadn't handled the iPhone 4 antenna issue so poorly, and if they would throw a little bit more attention and marketing at the business segment of the market, their numbers would far higher than Android.
I disagree. Android is an OEM operating system while iOS is used exclusively with iDevices. Android has no good competition in the OEM landscape and it is the only answer for some of these companies, lacking their own personal solution, to compete in the changing smartphone scene. The major competition for Android in this sense will come from another OEM OS (e.g. from Microsoft). Multi-carrier iPhones will have a strong impact on Android, but as Android appears in more and more phones of varying quality and price I expect Android will still move ahead. The only way Apple can crush them is to license iOS as an OEM operating system itself, which would be a move of colossal stupidity for them and for the iOS platform.
Apple could have handled the antenna fiasco better, but they did not handle it terribly. And you're criticizing their handling of the business segment? They've been handling that quite well, actually. iOS is actually ramping up against BlackBerry in that segment, which is no small feat. Those criticisms remind me of the term 'Armchair CEO'. Apple is one of the most successful companies in the world right now, and it's because they know what they're doing. We can choose to like that, or not, but it's a silly thing to dispute.
People choosing Android on AT&T fall into 1 of 3 categories
* Hard core Android fans
* People who got BOGO or other deals for whom the initial cost was a significant consideration
* Uninformed consumers steered to Android phones by AT&T salespeople because it was a more profitable sale for AT&T.
Ever notice that AT&T doesn't really spend money advertising iPhones? That's partly because Apple does, and partly to steer the naive to options better for AT&T.
These are the same (and IMHO, tired) arguments that get mentioned whenever this whole issue pops up.
Point 1. How is this different than a hard core Apple fan buying a new iPhone every year.
Point 2 assumes people are cheap, and at a certain level makes no sense (at least in the US), because you can buy the 3GS for $99
Point 3 assumes people are stupid, or at least gullible.
Part of the point of my post was, that there is a 4th alternative that many people here are either unwilling or unable to consider
Point 4. People compare an iPhone and an Android phone, and for them, the Android is a better choice, and that is what they buy, not because they are irrational (hardcore fan), cheap or stupid, but because they make a reasoned, informed choice.
Then don't make that decision for me as well...lets just stick to the subject and leave the personalities and people out of it....too many times these dicussions turn to a personal nature and I hate that.....
Except that your statement was incorrect. There are things that both the iPhone and Android have that are unique or sufficiently unique to make coding it on the other platform annoying. It is easier to develop more elegant working apps on iOS than Android IMHO.
So if you believe that "there is nothing on a IOS device that cannot be done as well or better on an Android device" I would question your tech savvy categorization. Sure it is possible if you ignore budget and schedule constraints but less true in terms of actual execution.
Comments
Mobile web connected devices are soon going to become the primary way people connected to the internet.
Then what explains Apple's stance that the mobile web is not the way people now seek information, but instead, that they overwhelmingly use apps?
I think that, given both Apple's problems with its mobile browsers, and Apple's domination of the mobile app market, the statement is suspect as mere self-serving bullshit.
But you seem to disagree with it. What's your opinion on apps quickly replacing web browsing on mobile devices?
Maybe AT&T is holding the iPhone back, but the effect may not be as big as some think. I read an article recently that Samsung sold 1 million Galaxy S phones in 45 days on AT&T and T-mobile.
I assume that T-mobile did not sell all 1 million phones, so people who bought the Galaxy S on AT&T had the choice between the iPhone and Android, and they chose the Android.
It?s easy to say that Apple would sell more if they made it available to more customers, which (in case) includes carriers, countries and phone models across different price points. The problem I see with that kind of obvious prediction is the physical limitation on sourcing components and manufacturing.
Looking at these issues with the iPhone 4 and iPad ? both of which still not yet selling in all countries ? the first and most problematic issue for Apple?s sales is supply. So even if Verizon was on board they still wouldn?t be selling any more (and possibly slightly less, but that is a different issue that isn?t in the scope of this discussion).
There is a new Foxconn plant coming on board early(?) next year that is apparently designed to manufacture a quarter-million iPhones per day. That seems to be what be needed to make this happen.
It?s easy to say that Apple would sell more if they made it available to more customers, which (in case) includes carriers, countries and phone models across different price points. The problem I see with that kind of obvious prediction is the physical limitation on sourcing components and manufacturing.
Looking at these issues with the iPhone 4 and iPad ? both of which still not yet selling in all countries ? the first and most problematic issue for Apple?s sales is supply. So even if Verizon was on board they still wouldn?t be selling any more (and possibly slightly less, but that is a different issue that isn?t in the scope of this discussion).
There is a new Foxconn plant coming on board early(?) next year that is apparently designed to manufacture a quarter-million iPhones per day. That seems to be what be needed to make this happen.
You have a point. However, in this (and other threads) a common argument is that Android's existence (not just increased market share) is largely a function of the iPhone only being on AT&T.
While the AT&T only situation does constrain sales, and while supply would still constrain iPhone sales if it went multi-carrier, I do not see a wholesale collapse of Android sales happening. Even if Apple had an unlimited supply of iPhones on multiple carriers, I think Android would still sell quite well - I doubt it would see double digit increases in market share, but sales would not collapse, and it would maintain a reasonable market share.
We can sit around and discuss the situation and all, but what some here need to accept is that a segment of the population actually likes Android phones, and knowingly picks said phones over an iPhone, even when the iPhone is available.
Again you are back to the argument of either providing unlimited data to everyone or the whole thing will fail.
No, my argument is that "unlimited data" is a red herring because, as used in the argument you are making it means "infinite data", which of course if absurd. What I am arguing is that a) if carriers can't provide sufficient data to everyone, mobile is going to hit a brick wall, and b) that the carriers certainly can provide sufficient data to everyone but are pretending they can't to drive up charges to customers and minimize their quarterly investments by discouraging data usage, which will effectively curb the growth of mobile for as long as they continue to do so.
Of course if i diagree with you then I am anti Apple and a troll.......very convenient for you.......
Is that rule #37 you just used there?
You have a point. However, in this (and other threads) a common argument is that Android's existence (not just increased market share) is largely a function of the iPhone only being on AT&T.
While the AT&T only situation does constrain sales, and while supply would still constrain iPhone sales if it went multi-carrier, I do not see a wholesale collapse of Android sales happening. Even if Apple had an unlimited supply of iPhones on multiple carriers, I think Android would still sell quite well - I doubt it would see double digit increases in market share, but sales would not collapse, and it would maintain a reasonable market share.
We can sit around and discuss the situation and all, but what some here need to accept is that a segment of the population actually likes Android phones, and knowingly picks said phones over an iPhone, even when the iPhone is available.
I agree that it would have reduced Android?s marketshare as some would wait for the iPhone to be in stock now that it?s on their carrier, but I don?t see it increasing Apple?s profit as a result. That is the heart of all these discussions about companies: How would this affect them?
I assume some would just get frustrated and get another device which could create a different and potentially more harmful issue for Apple if it?s deemed that Apple has ?production problems? that triples the time it takes to get an iPhone 4 (if we assume that AT&T accounts for 1/3 of the US cellular market).
As a shareholder I hope that Verizon is coming, even though I?m happy with my fast AT&T service. The long term growth of the company will benefit by it, even after a huge bump int eh stock price from an official word from Apple.
... Second issue, to the extent that IOS became a defacto standard, Apple could restrict Google's ability to generate revenue from that platform. In that sense, Android becomes "defensive". Apple's decision to block Google Voice, for instance, provides some evidence of that concern. Therefore a good strategy.
Not that good, as carriers begin to block Google services, like search and navigation, from Android phones.
AGH, why did I click the un-ignore button?!?! LOL Newtron is now saying iPhone customers aren?t sophisticated. Gotta love those sophisticated Droid commercials targeted at those pimple-faced virgins who regulate their free time between masturbation and online roll-playing games. Also love those sophisticated apps for Android compared to the the iPhone. Only the unrefined would ever use an iPhone which makes me wonder why the expensive cars have docks for iPhones yet I?ve seen none for Android.
Because expensive cars can't give buy 1 get 100 free.
I assume that T-mobile did not sell all 1 million phones, so people who bought the Galaxy S on AT&T had the choice between the iPhone and Android, and they chose the Android.
People choosing Android on AT&T fall into 1 of 3 categories
* Hard core Android fans
* People who got BOGO or other deals for whom the initial cost was a significant consideration
* Uninformed consumers steered to Android phones by AT&T salespeople because it was a more profitable sale for AT&T.
Ever notice that AT&T doesn't really spend money advertising iPhones? That's partly because Apple does, and partly to steer the naive to options better for AT&T.
[hovering with my trusty Palm Treo 650...]
My old 700P was a great device.
Even being stuck with AT&T at the moment, this is still Apple's doing. If they hadn't been so restricive with developers, if they hadn't handled the iPhone 4 antenna issue so poorly, and if they would throw a little bit more attention and marketing at the business segment of the market, their numbers would far higher than Android.
That is all within Apple's control (except for the 5-year exclusiviity deal). Once they go multi-carrier in the US, those figures will change overnight.
Even being stuck with AT&T at the moment, this is still Apple's doing. If they hadn't been so restricive with developers, if they hadn't handled the iPhone 4 antenna issue so poorly, and if they would throw a little bit more attention and marketing at the business segment of the market, their numbers would far higher than Android.
I don't think the "issues" you mention have anything to do with this. It's due to a) iPhone being only on AT&T, and b) carrier desire for reclaiming control of what the phones do, which Android allows them to do.
I'm always amazed at how insulting some iPhone fanatics are! I've not once called anyone's post "stupid" or anything of the kind on here. Kinda reeks of insecurity about one's platform.
LOL. Dude, you're way too serious here.
Just for the record, I've never heard an adult call someone "Dude".
.
Just for the record, I've never heard an adult call someone "Dude".
.
You don?t understand what is meant by this context or are purposely trying to be obtuse. You can?t put Mac OS X on the first Mac either. You have to draw the line somewhere.
iOS is updated for ALL of Apple?s iPhones at the same time each year, and they supply updates for devices for three full years. The same can?t be said of Android, which is still shipping *new* items with version 1.6, has many devices still stuck on much older versions with no hope of being upgraded since it?s up to the vendor and/or carrier, no consistency among UIs, and even the ability for crapware apps and a lock out of search engines which is even worse than the $400 notebooks that are supplemented by such tactics.
While technically the introduction of a new device each year with better HW and more features does create a fragment it?s a simple linear model where the older device can?t get all the updates of the newer device and after 3 years of rich updates don?t get any new updates, compared to a fractured model that looks like it was created by Mandelbrot.
+++ QFT
Excellent, well stated... as usual.
Wish I'd been following this thread earlier...
.... but you just cleared away the cruft!
.
That is all within Apple's control (except for the 5-year exclusiviity deal). Once they go multi-carrier in the US, those figures will change overnight.
Even being stuck with AT&T at the moment, this is still Apple's doing. If they hadn't been so restricive with developers, if they hadn't handled the iPhone 4 antenna issue so poorly, and if they would throw a little bit more attention and marketing at the business segment of the market, their numbers would far higher than Android.
I disagree. Android is an OEM operating system while iOS is used exclusively with iDevices. Android has no good competition in the OEM landscape and it is the only answer for some of these companies, lacking their own personal solution, to compete in the changing smartphone scene. The major competition for Android in this sense will come from another OEM OS (e.g. from Microsoft). Multi-carrier iPhones will have a strong impact on Android, but as Android appears in more and more phones of varying quality and price I expect Android will still move ahead. The only way Apple can crush them is to license iOS as an OEM operating system itself, which would be a move of colossal stupidity for them and for the iOS platform.
Apple could have handled the antenna fiasco better, but they did not handle it terribly. And you're criticizing their handling of the business segment? They've been handling that quite well, actually. iOS is actually ramping up against BlackBerry in that segment, which is no small feat. Those criticisms remind me of the term 'Armchair CEO'. Apple is one of the most successful companies in the world right now, and it's because they know what they're doing. We can choose to like that, or not, but it's a silly thing to dispute.
People choosing Android on AT&T fall into 1 of 3 categories
* Hard core Android fans
* People who got BOGO or other deals for whom the initial cost was a significant consideration
* Uninformed consumers steered to Android phones by AT&T salespeople because it was a more profitable sale for AT&T.
Ever notice that AT&T doesn't really spend money advertising iPhones? That's partly because Apple does, and partly to steer the naive to options better for AT&T.
These are the same (and IMHO, tired) arguments that get mentioned whenever this whole issue pops up.
Point 1. How is this different than a hard core Apple fan buying a new iPhone every year.
Point 2 assumes people are cheap, and at a certain level makes no sense (at least in the US), because you can buy the 3GS for $99
Point 3 assumes people are stupid, or at least gullible.
Part of the point of my post was, that there is a 4th alternative that many people here are either unwilling or unable to consider
Point 4. People compare an iPhone and an Android phone, and for them, the Android is a better choice, and that is what they buy, not because they are irrational (hardcore fan), cheap or stupid, but because they make a reasoned, informed choice.
That is the heart of all these discussions about companies: How would this affect them?
.
I agree 100%, and personally, if the iPhone went multi-carrier, I am not sure it would have a huge effect on either Apple or Android.
Then don't make that decision for me as well...lets just stick to the subject and leave the personalities and people out of it....too many times these dicussions turn to a personal nature and I hate that.....
Except that your statement was incorrect. There are things that both the iPhone and Android have that are unique or sufficiently unique to make coding it on the other platform annoying. It is easier to develop more elegant working apps on iOS than Android IMHO.
So if you believe that "there is nothing on a IOS device that cannot be done as well or better on an Android device" I would question your tech savvy categorization. Sure it is possible if you ignore budget and schedule constraints but less true in terms of actual execution.
And no, I'm not a huge fan of Sense.