I agree. Apple's strategy is based on monopoly and early lead, the same strategy used 25 years ago for the Mac. Windows 95 crushed Apple once and Android is poised to do the same in the smartphone market. Alas.
At best, Apple's strategy can only lead to an early success followed by a downfall to a 5% world market share. Some people never learn. Greed and supersized egos. Alas.
\\\
eh? isn't OS X use growing? Ipod seems to be doing ok also.
I agree. Apple's strategy is based on monopoly and early lead, the same strategy used 25 years ago for the Mac. Windows 95 crushed Apple once and Android is poised to do the same in the smartphone market. Alas.
At best, Apple's strategy can only lead to an early success followed by a downfall to a 5% world market share. Some people never learn. Greed and supersized egos. Alas.
\\\
Actually, at best Apple's strategy can lead to the iPod, which has a pretty decent share of the market...
Android is a flash in the pan, just like its parent OS, Linux. If you haven't noticed, Linux is an irrelevant flop for end-users.
It is doomed to Balkanization. There will be Motorola Android, HTC Android, Dell Android, etc. And they will all lock-in their customers.
Android is not a tablet OS, and Google shows its internal confusion by promoting Chrome OS for that role.
The Android market will become clogged by masses of horrible, buggy and insecure apps. Apple's App Store is truly the freest market in practical terms. With their supervision of the basic functionality and security of apps, the users have the widest choice of quality apps possible.
Google's latest scandal regarding privacy shows the company knows too much about its customers and what they give away for "free" actually comes at a high price. Once phone makers and carriers get sued for security breaches at Google, the support for Android will instantly dry up.
I think the notion that Google is competing with Apple in this space is a bit misguided.
Apple's business model is to sell devices to users.
Google's model is to sell users to advertisers.
Seemingly free products will probably do fine. But I am not convinced whether it makes good commercial sense for Google.
I suspect that Google makes more money from iPhone than the do from Android.
C.
That is assuming how much the information is worth. If you can blackmail someone with just one piece of information it might be worth millions for the right owner of this information. For Google that makes its profit about selling information about a user to the highest bidder. They would thrive best by spying and collecting all possible information about you and selling it so that anyone that wants to know about you could pay to get the information. That would be most profitable for google. It now has the devices to do this (where I come from this is called a troijan horse). Google becomes a bigger risk in profiling people than the FBI/CIA etc. Maybe that is why they need a moto like "Dont be evil"? Some employee might even have a hobby of selling sensitive information to anyone willing to pay big bucks. BTW with android they can even spy on all your traffic from the device and any other device in the lan/wlan. They have your wlan wpa2 key for example. Remember when google "unknowingly" recorded a "little" bit of wlan traffic that wasnt encrypted?
1. This is US market share where Apple still has a single carrier. It would be useful analysis to have worldwide numbers, broken down into countries with single, dual and multiple carriers. For example, in the UK, the iPhone is now available on all of the top tier carriers and an increasing number of Virtual Network Operators (Virgin Mobile, Tesco, etc). Being in the UK, I have noticed many more people now have the iPhone since going multi-carrier.
2. The figures are for up to July 2010, so won't include the iPhone 4 sales.
3. Does Symbian (Nokia, etc) not sell smartphones in the US?
What kind of comparison is this?? They compare Phones from Apple, against Software from google?? What is the point?
If they want to compare how many people use Googles OS versus Apples iOS they have to count with ALL iOS devices, not just iphones. We are missing data from iPods Touchs and iPads.
They same goes to RIM and Microsoft. RIM phone builder, Microsoft software builder.
In terms of showing developers for which OS they should build first, in the case of Apple this information means nothing or better yet, it is not complete.
If they wanted to compare phone makers, than they should compare iPhone versus HTC phones, for example.
I hate when people just throw statistics like is the biggest truth in the world.
Market Share is only one factor in success. Mind Share is another. Here in Australia, where the iPhone has always been available on the 4 main carriers - Telstra, Optus, 3 and Vodafone - the iPhone 4 continues to be sold out and new buyers are being asked to wait 3 to 5 weeks for their units. All the carrier stores carry Android phones as well, and, anecdotally, staff tell me that they are selling quite well, but that is a lot different from 'a 5 week wait'.
Mind Share becomes important because I suspect only 50% of people who walk into a store wanting a Smartphone are even aware of 'AntennaGate'. You can guarantee 100% will have heard of the 'iPhone'. This is SO important, because most new customers start from the position of wanting an iPhone, and possibly switch to an Android when the store says, "it's a 5 week wait for an iPhone4 or you can have a Samsung Galaxy S right now." Staff will be reluctant to let you leave the store empty handed - and we are a bunch of instant-gratification shoppers these days.
As a "mini-iPhone" strategy, the iPod Touch seems to be working out pretty well.
Google is more open - with your privacy.
Sold to the highest bigger so they can try and flog you stuff.
Perhaps raw sales figures are keenly sought out by Android admiring tech press, because they seek validation. Yes, the average man in the street has worked out Apple make superior products overall, but hey, if the Android sales figures are up, Android must be cool - right?
A previous comment nailed it. As App Developers, we develop for 4 platforms - iOS, Android, Windows Phone and webOS, but when it comes to pricing a warranty for a client for an Android App, we have to consider - Dell Android? HTC Android? Samsung Android? 2.1? 2.2? Screen resolution? etc. etc.
We recommend 8 Apps to our clients so that they can interface with our development process on their iPads. 8 business class Apps we are confident we can recommend to our clients for revenue critical activities. Only half of these Apps are available on Android. Doesn't really matter who has the most apps. But the "biggest app store" figure is important for.....Mind Share. Just ask your Marketing Manager. It is, however, genuinely hard to get a scientific measure of the quality of the platforms and app stores, but I think it is fairly clear to see which users are attracted to which features of the various platforms.
So Apple's strategy of Mind Share, not just Market Share, is sensible and plays to their strengths. The iPod Touch and iPad operate as precision marketing on behalf of iPhone/iOS. And the fact that iOS is PURPOSE DESIGNED to be used across MULTI-TOUCH DEVICES and not just Smartphones, really is the deal maker. Witness the number of Apps that now get iPhones and iPads to inter-operate. (And soon AppleTV?).....
As a company that designs and build custom iOS-specific Chips, Batteries, Screens, Hardware and Software, Apple does create supply problems for itself. But not being able to build products fast enough to satisfy demand is a problem I'd like to have.
Post-Christmas, with iOS, Android and Win Phone offerings available, hopefully the consumer will win, with competitive pricing and hopefully developers like us will win as we can take advantage of competition driven innovation.
So let's see the figures for July - September (post iPhone4 launch). Let's compare single carrier iPhone markets (USA) with multi-carrier iPhone markets (UK and Australia) and let's see the figures post holiday period when stocks of all iOS devices are ready for the buying season.
I agree. Apple's strategy is based on monopoly and early lead, the same strategy used 25 years ago for the Mac. Windows 95 crushed Apple once and Android is poised to do the same in the smartphone market. Alas.
At best, Apple's strategy can only lead to an early success followed by a downfall to a 5% world market share. Some people never learn. Greed and supersized egos. Alas.
Your argument might carry some weight if there were actually parallels between the computer industry 25 years ago and the smartphone industry today. (Or, if Apple's strategy were as you describe.) But, other than the fact that people are focused on two companies, there are no analogous circumstances, particularly none between Android and Windows, so, while it sounds like a plausible argument if you don't actually think about it, there's no substance to it.
That doesn't mean that Android necessarily won't end up with higher market share, just that it won't be for the reasons you give.
Android is winning because it's a better overall platform... it's that simple.
I disagree. Even if the OS were better, it wouldn't matter cuz the hardware is junk.
I had to borrow a friends android phone while camping. My iPhone had no signal, and his had a weak one. I tried to make a call, and the phone reboot itself. This happened 2 more times before I moved around thinking it was a signal issue. It finally worked.
If the phone can't make the call due to a weak signal, why would it reboot???
On a separate occasion, we were out looking for a place to eat. I asked him to look up a place on google and after trying a few times, he had to reboot it. He said its finicky and he has to reboot it sometimes because it gets slow".
Why would anyone put up with this garbage? They just don't know any better.
Sure andorid is much better than the crap phones used to have... but iOS is in much higher class.
Android is rising because Apple is letting Android rise. Those numbers/or percentage will soon change once Apple goes multi-carriers (USA) in the future.
Comments
THEN ask whether iPhone user loyalty will be greater or lesser than an Android phone user?
Google should enjoy the party while it lasts, while the only real sufferers are Microsoft, RIM and Nokia.
I agree. Apple's strategy is based on monopoly and early lead, the same strategy used 25 years ago for the Mac. Windows 95 crushed Apple once and Android is poised to do the same in the smartphone market. Alas.
At best, Apple's strategy can only lead to an early success followed by a downfall to a 5% world market share. Some people never learn. Greed and supersized egos. Alas.
eh? isn't OS X use growing? Ipod seems to be doing ok also.
Google should enjoy the party while it lasts, while the only real sufferers are Microsoft, RIM and Nokia.
I think the notion that Google is competing with Apple in this space is a bit misguided.
Apple's business model is to sell devices to users.
Google's model is to sell users to advertisers.
Seemingly free products will probably do fine. But I am not convinced whether it makes good commercial sense for Google.
I suspect that Google makes more money from iPhone than the do from Android.
C.
Apple needs to diversify its iphone segments.
An Iphone Nano/Mini with a lover price point could do it.
The SonyEricsson mini experia 10 is an exempel that people wants smaller smart phones.
almost bought one of those until i tried to use it. nice though.
Apple needs to diversify its iphone segments.
Why should the most profitable handset manufacturer in the world, follow the model of the least profitable?
C.
In the US you can buy the 3GS for $99. that is about as mid range as you get, so I would assume Apple gets plenty of the mid-range market.
No you can't, you can rent to buy one, with a $99 deposit.
I agree. Apple's strategy is based on monopoly and early lead, the same strategy used 25 years ago for the Mac. Windows 95 crushed Apple once and Android is poised to do the same in the smartphone market. Alas.
At best, Apple's strategy can only lead to an early success followed by a downfall to a 5% world market share. Some people never learn. Greed and supersized egos. Alas.
Actually, at best Apple's strategy can lead to the iPod, which has a pretty decent share of the market...
Android is a flash in the pan, just like its parent OS, Linux. If you haven't noticed, Linux is an irrelevant flop for end-users.
It is doomed to Balkanization. There will be Motorola Android, HTC Android, Dell Android, etc. And they will all lock-in their customers.
Android is not a tablet OS, and Google shows its internal confusion by promoting Chrome OS for that role.
The Android market will become clogged by masses of horrible, buggy and insecure apps. Apple's App Store is truly the freest market in practical terms. With their supervision of the basic functionality and security of apps, the users have the widest choice of quality apps possible.
Google's latest scandal regarding privacy shows the company knows too much about its customers and what they give away for "free" actually comes at a high price. Once phone makers and carriers get sued for security breaches at Google, the support for Android will instantly dry up.
Google is Doomed!®
Google is Doomed!®
Alas not. Google makes no little money directly from Android. So it's fate is not tied to the success of the Android platform.
I suspect that globally, Google makes more advertising revenue from iPhone traffic than it does from Android traffic.
If Apple capture all of the iOS advertising revenue through iAds - that might hurt Google more.
C.
I think the notion that Google is competing with Apple in this space is a bit misguided.
Apple's business model is to sell devices to users.
Google's model is to sell users to advertisers.
Seemingly free products will probably do fine. But I am not convinced whether it makes good commercial sense for Google.
I suspect that Google makes more money from iPhone than the do from Android.
C.
That is assuming how much the information is worth. If you can blackmail someone with just one piece of information it might be worth millions for the right owner of this information. For Google that makes its profit about selling information about a user to the highest bidder. They would thrive best by spying and collecting all possible information about you and selling it so that anyone that wants to know about you could pay to get the information. That would be most profitable for google. It now has the devices to do this (where I come from this is called a troijan horse). Google becomes a bigger risk in profiling people than the FBI/CIA etc. Maybe that is why they need a moto like "Dont be evil"? Some employee might even have a hobby of selling sensitive information to anyone willing to pay big bucks. BTW with android they can even spy on all your traffic from the device and any other device in the lan/wlan. They have your wlan wpa2 key for example. Remember when google "unknowingly" recorded a "little" bit of wlan traffic that wasnt encrypted?
1. This is US market share where Apple still has a single carrier. It would be useful analysis to have worldwide numbers, broken down into countries with single, dual and multiple carriers. For example, in the UK, the iPhone is now available on all of the top tier carriers and an increasing number of Virtual Network Operators (Virgin Mobile, Tesco, etc). Being in the UK, I have noticed many more people now have the iPhone since going multi-carrier.
2. The figures are for up to July 2010, so won't include the iPhone 4 sales.
3. Does Symbian (Nokia, etc) not sell smartphones in the US?
If they want to compare how many people use Googles OS versus Apples iOS they have to count with ALL iOS devices, not just iphones. We are missing data from iPods Touchs and iPads.
They same goes to RIM and Microsoft. RIM phone builder, Microsoft software builder.
In terms of showing developers for which OS they should build first, in the case of Apple this information means nothing or better yet, it is not complete.
If they wanted to compare phone makers, than they should compare iPhone versus HTC phones, for example.
I hate when people just throw statistics like is the biggest truth in the world.
Mind Share becomes important because I suspect only 50% of people who walk into a store wanting a Smartphone are even aware of 'AntennaGate'. You can guarantee 100% will have heard of the 'iPhone'. This is SO important, because most new customers start from the position of wanting an iPhone, and possibly switch to an Android when the store says, "it's a 5 week wait for an iPhone4 or you can have a Samsung Galaxy S right now." Staff will be reluctant to let you leave the store empty handed - and we are a bunch of instant-gratification shoppers these days.
As a "mini-iPhone" strategy, the iPod Touch seems to be working out pretty well.
Google is more open - with your privacy.
Sold to the highest bigger so they can try and flog you stuff.
Perhaps raw sales figures are keenly sought out by Android admiring tech press, because they seek validation. Yes, the average man in the street has worked out Apple make superior products overall, but hey, if the Android sales figures are up, Android must be cool - right?
A previous comment nailed it. As App Developers, we develop for 4 platforms - iOS, Android, Windows Phone and webOS, but when it comes to pricing a warranty for a client for an Android App, we have to consider - Dell Android? HTC Android? Samsung Android? 2.1? 2.2? Screen resolution? etc. etc.
We recommend 8 Apps to our clients so that they can interface with our development process on their iPads. 8 business class Apps we are confident we can recommend to our clients for revenue critical activities. Only half of these Apps are available on Android. Doesn't really matter who has the most apps. But the "biggest app store" figure is important for.....Mind Share. Just ask your Marketing Manager. It is, however, genuinely hard to get a scientific measure of the quality of the platforms and app stores, but I think it is fairly clear to see which users are attracted to which features of the various platforms.
So Apple's strategy of Mind Share, not just Market Share, is sensible and plays to their strengths. The iPod Touch and iPad operate as precision marketing on behalf of iPhone/iOS. And the fact that iOS is PURPOSE DESIGNED to be used across MULTI-TOUCH DEVICES and not just Smartphones, really is the deal maker. Witness the number of Apps that now get iPhones and iPads to inter-operate. (And soon AppleTV?).....
As a company that designs and build custom iOS-specific Chips, Batteries, Screens, Hardware and Software, Apple does create supply problems for itself. But not being able to build products fast enough to satisfy demand is a problem I'd like to have.
Post-Christmas, with iOS, Android and Win Phone offerings available, hopefully the consumer will win, with competitive pricing and hopefully developers like us will win as we can take advantage of competition driven innovation.
So let's see the figures for July - September (post iPhone4 launch). Let's compare single carrier iPhone markets (USA) with multi-carrier iPhone markets (UK and Australia) and let's see the figures post holiday period when stocks of all iOS devices are ready for the buying season.
Android is winning because it's a better overall platform... it's that simple.
Clearly you haven't tried them both!
three types of android users:
Apple haters: They will never buy anything with a bitten apple logo.
Verizon subscribers: They want an iPhone but can't/won't switch to AT&T.
Cheapskates: They get sucked in to the BOGO deals & cheap hardware.
I agree. Apple's strategy is based on monopoly and early lead, the same strategy used 25 years ago for the Mac. Windows 95 crushed Apple once and Android is poised to do the same in the smartphone market. Alas.
At best, Apple's strategy can only lead to an early success followed by a downfall to a 5% world market share. Some people never learn. Greed and supersized egos. Alas.
Your argument might carry some weight if there were actually parallels between the computer industry 25 years ago and the smartphone industry today. (Or, if Apple's strategy were as you describe.) But, other than the fact that people are focused on two companies, there are no analogous circumstances, particularly none between Android and Windows, so, while it sounds like a plausible argument if you don't actually think about it, there's no substance to it.
That doesn't mean that Android necessarily won't end up with higher market share, just that it won't be for the reasons you give.
You've got to wonder how the iPhone would sell if Antennagate didn't happen.
Since they are selling every iPhone they can make, it's obviously having no effect at all.
Android is winning because it's a better overall platform... it's that simple.
I disagree. Even if the OS were better, it wouldn't matter cuz the hardware is junk.
I had to borrow a friends android phone while camping. My iPhone had no signal, and his had a weak one. I tried to make a call, and the phone reboot itself. This happened 2 more times before I moved around thinking it was a signal issue. It finally worked.
If the phone can't make the call due to a weak signal, why would it reboot???
On a separate occasion, we were out looking for a place to eat. I asked him to look up a place on google and after trying a few times, he had to reboot it. He said its finicky and he has to reboot it sometimes because it gets slow".
Why would anyone put up with this garbage? They just don't know any better.
Sure andorid is much better than the crap phones used to have... but iOS is in much higher class.
Android is rising because Apple is letting Android rise. Those numbers/or percentage will soon change once Apple goes multi-carriers (USA) in the future.
May be it's already too late