Call me when iOS is growing anywhere close to the rate Android is.
1) You think a companies goal isn’t profit, or unit sales, but growth rate? If you really believe that then it would behoove every company in the world to scrap whatever they have and start over constantly because a new product is how you maintain a super high growth rate. IOW, after your first sale, if you want a 1000% growth rate you have to sell 10 more, but if you want to maintain that growth rate you have to sell 100 more, then 1000 more then 10,000 more. So by your focus on growth you are inadvertently stating that a stable long lasting product is pointless. Awesome¡
PS: Call me when you understand how business and economics work.
1) You think a companies goal isn?t profit, or unit sales, but growth rate? If you really believe that then it would behoove every company in the world to scrap whatever they have and start over constantly because a new product is how you maintain a super high growth rate. IOW, after your first sale, if you want a 1000% growth rate you have to sell 10 more, but if you want to maintain that growth rate you have to sell 100 more, then 1000 more then 10,000 more. So by your focus on growth you are inadvertently stating that a stable long lasting product is pointless. Awesome¡....
You know this isn't what I think. Why waste our time posting if we are not going to have a serious conversation?
My original point was that Apple will probably not dominate the smartphone market, like they do with the iPod for example. They will probably be the most profitable, but that is not domination. Apple is by far the most profitable computer hardware maker but they certainly don't dominate the PC market.
You know this isn't what I think. Why waste our time posting if we are not going to have a serious conversation?
My original point was that Apple will probably not dominate the smartphone market, like they do with the iPod for example. They will probably be the most profitable, but that is not domination. Apple is by far the most profitable computer hardware maker but they certainly don't dominate the PC market.
So by your measure Q-Tips dominate Blu-ray players. Awesome logic¡
By the way?
dom?i?nate |ˈdäməˌnāt|
verb [ trans. ]
? have a commanding influence on; exercise control over.
? be the most important or conspicuous person or thing in.
? (of something tall or high) have a commanding position over; overlook.
It sure sounds like Apple is dominate to me. Perhaps you need to realize that dominate does not necessarily mean more unit dispersal* of something else and that comparing different business models is why your arguments keep failing.
* Can?t really use sales as Android is not sold, but given away freely for anyone to include with their product sales, which just adds to the silliness of saying iPhones are outsold by Android.
So by your measure Q-Tips dominate Blu-ray players. Awesome logic¡
By the way?
dom?i?nate |ˈdäməˌnāt|
verb [ trans. ]
? have a commanding influence on; exercise control over.
? be the most important or conspicuous person or thing in.
? (of something tall or high) have a commanding position over; overlook.
It sure sounds like Apple is dominate to me. Perhaps you need to realize that dominate does not necessarily mean more unit dispersal* of something else and that comparing different business models is why your arguments keep failing.
* Can?t really use sales as Android is not sold, but given away freely for anyone to include with their product sales, which just adds to the silliness of saying iPhones are outsold by Android.
So are Q-Tips and Blu-ray players analogous to Android phones and iPhones? Is that your argument? And you side-step my point and give me a definition of dominate. Truly a magnificent post.
So are Q-Tips and Blu-ray players analogous to Android phones and iPhones? Is that your argument? And you side-step my point and give me a definition of dominate. Truly a magnificent post.
1) It?s an exaggerated phrase to point out how your silly your statement is. The difference is you think yours is valid as stated.
2) When people bring up your foolishly myopic argument I like to ask them: If Apple is so concerned about mobile or desktop marketshare (because, as you state, it?s the only measure worth considering units) then why don?t they 1) license their OS to any and all vendors (which would make it a more comparable product), and/or 2) make a lot more models that are much, much cheaper to make sure any and all can have access to their devices? Something like Dell and Nokia do.
3) Your statement makes it clear you do not know what dominate means, hence my supplying you with the definition. You?re welcome.
1) It?s an exaggerated phrase to point out how your silly your statement is. The difference is you think yours is valid as stated.
2) When people bring up your foolishly myopic argument I like to ask them: If Apple is so concerned about mobile or desktop marketshare (because, as you state, it?s the only measure worth considering units) then why don?t they 1) license their OS to any and all vendors (which would make it a more comparable product), and/or 2) make a lot more models that are much, much cheaper to make sure any and all can have access to their devices? Something like Dell and Nokia do.
3) Your statement makes it clear you do not know what dominate means, hence my supplying you with the definition. You?re welcome.
Here are the arguments I have made over the last few months that have "failed":
1. Apple needs to expand carriers in the US because AT&T sucks for a lot of people, to increase the number of units sold (still at a healthy profit), and head off the threat of Android.
2. If Apple can't produce iPhones fast enough to meet demand, they need to increase manufacturing capacity. Even if their margin is slightly lower than it would have been at the 11 million units, their total profit would increase.
3. If they don't do these things, Apple will fail to dominate. Note the future tense, which was in all of my previous posts, although you conveniently changed it to present tense.
If you can't agree with those above arguments, then enjoy the Kool-Aid. I have never argued that Apple should license iOS. I have never said that only units sold matters, not profit. You keep trying to make it seem like I have said those things, but I have not.
I think the constructive part of any conversation we might have in the future is over. I am going to put you on my ignore list. I would appreciate it if you did the same. I have nothing more to say to you.
Here are the arguments I have made over the last few months that have "failed":
1. Apple needs to expand carriers in the US because AT&T sucks for a lot of people, to increase the number of units sold (still at a healthy profit), and head off the threat of Android.
2. If Apple can't produce iPhones fast enough to meet demand, they need to increase manufacturing capacity. Even if their margin is slightly lower than it would have been at the 11 million units, their total profit would increase.
3. If they don't do these things, Apple will fail to dominate. Note the future tense, which was in all of my previous posts, although you conveniently changed it to present tense.
If you can't agree with those above arguments, then enjoy the Kool-Aid. I have never argued that Apple should license iOS. I have never said that only units sold matters, not profit. You keep trying to make it seem like I have said those things, but I have not.
I think the constructive part of any conversation we might have in the future is over. I am going to put you on my ignore list. I would appreciate it if you did the same. I have nothing more to say to you.
1) So if they sell more units at the same price and cost they make more money. You honestly posted this as some epiphany and not just common sense? Of course, you don?t mention any reasons why Apple can?t just start selling the iPhone on other US carriers. For example, the fact that the HW is incompatible to all MNOs except T-Mobile, and even then the HW is incompatible to their 3G network, or that there are likely contracts that keep this from happening.
2) In a perfect world where increasing production can be instant, where demand will continually increase so you?ll never have an oversupply that could become loses, where the cost to invest in a new factory is free and also created instantly, and where you can get all the components you want from your suppliers without ever being at their mercy? then sure, you have another obvious point. Unfortunately the world doesn?t work that way and there are well defined economic models that tell a company when it?s the best time to expand. For example, do you think it would make sense to pay for the a factory that will cost you $5,000,000 per day if you estimate the maximum total you?ll make in profit from the extra handset you?d sell is only 1/20th amount? You?re quick to say whether Apple will sell more or less, but you never offer any specifics, never look at the big picture and you completely discount any economic models regarding business. Real models, that real companies use in the real world to determine how to maximize their profit. Really!
3) Explain to use again how Apple will fail to dominate the handset market. By your measure Nokia must be the most dominate handset maker because they sell the most units. Oh, that?s right, you?re only considering the iPhone (hardware) and Android (freely distributed software). By your measure they won?t, in fact, by your measure they don?t even though you mention a future tense without showing how Apple will be pushed out of the market and their profits will be dwindling? in the future tense.
4) Note that every handset vendor that has chosen Android is doing so as a last resort effort to keep from going under. All were hemorrhaging money, many were in the red quarter-after-quarter until Apple showed Google how to make a mobile OS. Now many are turning things around but not on the same level as Apple so I can?t imagine why Apple would lose money in the future to the ?soup kitchen? OS for the destitute handset vendors.
Without taking anything away from iOS, I got 2.2 up and running on a 18 month old HTC Magic/Sapphire last week and the performance and improvement on 1.6 that it was running is literally mind blowing.
Apple has just one phone on one network against Android on many phones on all networks...saturation makes a bigger dent. Not to mention the rest of the phone producers out there, MS, RIM, Palm....etc
I feel the iPhone would be even bigger if it were also on Verizon, it's a huge drawback since many customers won't buy a phone no matter how good it is if it's on the wrong network.
One last thing... iPhones greatest asset is it's Exchange support out of the box.
Does iPhone make a ton of special "Apple" Folders on the Outlook server, like Apple Mail? I have Outlook for school email and it made another folder for Sent, Drafts, etc. Very annoying. Have been too lazy to see how to fix it. But it's bizarre that's the Apple Mail default behavior. At a minimum the default should be to just obey how the Outlook server has already been set up. So how does iPhone handle that? And what if I have 4 or 5 email accounts? Two on Outlook, one Gmail, another from another school, etc.?
Here are the arguments I have made over the last few months that have "failed":
1. Apple needs to expand carriers in the US because AT&T sucks for a lot of people, to increase the number of units sold (still at a healthy profit), and head off the threat of Android.
2. If Apple can't produce iPhones fast enough to meet demand, they need to increase manufacturing capacity. Even if their margin is slightly lower than it would have been at the 11 million units, their total profit would increase.
3. If they don't do these things, Apple will fail to dominate. Note the future tense, which was in all of my previous posts, although you conveniently changed it to present tense.
If you can't agree with those above arguments, then enjoy the Kool-Aid. I have never argued that Apple should license iOS. I have never said that only units sold matters, not profit. You keep trying to make it seem like I have said those things, but I have not.
I think the constructive part of any conversation we might have in the future is over. I am going to put you on my ignore list. I would appreciate it if you did the same. I have nothing more to say to you.
Agreed with all those, good points. I guess the news topic of this thread seems like the tipping point to me, and Android won. This was the year Apple should've expanded to at least Verizon at a minimum. 5 years from now...80% Droid, 10% iPhone, 5% Windows phone, 5% other (Palm/Symbian/Whatever) at least in US. I am likely going to go Droid now. I was waiting for all the iPhone 4 problems to be fixed, but it seems the one problem that will never be fixed is Apple's attitude. Their way or the highway, and frequently their way is a closed, uncustomizable, does not play well with the rest of the industry, and potentially not as powerful to advanced users, lying to customers about product defects (antenna, proximity sensor) mindset. And ArcGIS is coming to Droid, soon. And Droid has Flash. Flash is one of the most important pieces of the Internet, sort of like PDF. Love it or hate it, to not even have the possibility of running it is a huge handicap.
Solip I just think Droid has momentum. It's turning into Apple vs. The World (running Droid). Haha and of course M$ off in the background, I wonder how Win Phone will turn out. But how can Apple stay the majority smartphone maker, vs. the entire rest of the industry? It's Mac vs. PC again. I sincerely think Apple should have licensed MacOS back in the 90s. Perhaps Apple would have 20% marketshare now. Licensing iOS, I'm not sure. Maybe not, but then again, I don't know. As far as AAPL goes, perhaps they should. As far as quality of product goes, I don't know.
Agreed with all those, good points. I guess the news topic of this thread seems like the tipping point to me, and Android won. This was the year Apple should've expanded to at least Verizon at a minimum. 5 years from now...80% Droid, 10% iPhone, 5% Windows phone, 5% other (Palm/Symbian/Whatever) at least in US. I am likely going to go Droid now. I was waiting for all the iPhone 4 problems to be fixed, but it seems the one problem that will never be fixed is Apple's attitude. Their way or the highway, and frequently their way is a closed, uncustomizable, does not play well with the rest of the industry, and potentially not as powerful to advanced users, lying to customers about product defects (antenna, proximity sensor) mindset. And ArcGIS is coming to Droid, soon. And Droid has Flash. Flash is one of the most important pieces of the Internet, sort of like PDF. Love it or hate it, to not even have the possibility of running it is a huge handicap.
Solip I just think Droid has momentum. It's turning into Apple vs. The World (running Droid). Haha and of course M$ off in the background, I wonder how Win Phone will turn out. But how can Apple stay the majority smartphone maker, vs. the entire rest of the industry? It's Mac vs. PC again. I sincerely think Apple should have licensed MacOS back in the 90s. Perhaps Apple would have 20% marketshare now. Licensing iOS, I'm not sure. Maybe not, but then again, I don't know. As far as AAPL goes, perhaps they should. As far as quality of product goes, I don't know.
To be clear we are talking about two different scenarios here: US market vs. global market. In the US market as recently reported by NPD in August, Android operating system represented 33 percent of all smartphones sold in the U.S. consumer market. (NOTE: that is all variants of the Android OS, including sales of handsets with 1.6, 2.0, 2.1 and 2.2). Research In Motion with 28 percent moved down into 2nd place in volume, and Apple moved to third place with 22 percent of total volume sold in US.
Look carefully at those stats. It categorically is NOT Apple vs. the world (of Android) in the US market. Get it? It is *currently* All Android variants on a variety of hardware platforms against Blackberry OS running exclusively on RIM hardware, vs. Apple iOS running on Apple iPhone hardware, with Windows and other bringing up the rest of the market.
But wait there is another set of statistics you are ignoring, as published recently by comscore Mobilens: Total US smartphone subscribers. RIM: 39.3%, Apple: 23.8%, Google (Android - all) 17%, Windows Mobile (all) 11.8%, PalmOS 4.9%, all others 3.2%. Again, the top of the market in these numbers of actual subscribers has RIM on top, then followed by Apple, then followed by Android, Windows, PalmOS and all others. That should close the book on the US market. Look at real numbers to derive real conclusions.
Global market is a different scenario altogether.
According to StrategyAnalytics, the global smartphone market by number of subscribers breaks down thus: Symbian/Nokia 40.3%, Blackberry/RIM 18.8%, Apple 14.1%, all others 26.7%. Can you perceive the difference in scale here? Nokia commands the global stage, followed by also-rans RIM and Apple. Google doesn't even figure outside of the "others" category.
Summary: Apple nowhere is the majority smartphone maker and NEVER has been. It is NOT Mac vs. PC again. Not even close. Not even conceptually a distance, outside hypothetical possibility. Apple should have licensed the MacOS back in the 90's. They tried that, it damn near killed the company. Do at least a modicum of research please. But the last statement in your post is by far your most accurate "I don't know". Couldn't have put better myself.
BOT: Microsoft has lost a lot of marketshare to Android, and they will come roaring out to try and regain that marketshare - and Android is squarely in the sights of Redmond, with Apple just a little to the side as a potential other target.
Comments
Call me when iOS is growing anywhere close to the rate Android is.
1) You think a companies goal isn’t profit, or unit sales, but growth rate? If you really believe that then it would behoove every company in the world to scrap whatever they have and start over constantly because a new product is how you maintain a super high growth rate. IOW, after your first sale, if you want a 1000% growth rate you have to sell 10 more, but if you want to maintain that growth rate you have to sell 100 more, then 1000 more then 10,000 more. So by your focus on growth you are inadvertently stating that a stable long lasting product is pointless. Awesome¡
PS: Call me when you understand how business and economics work.
1) You think a companies goal isn?t profit, or unit sales, but growth rate? If you really believe that then it would behoove every company in the world to scrap whatever they have and start over constantly because a new product is how you maintain a super high growth rate. IOW, after your first sale, if you want a 1000% growth rate you have to sell 10 more, but if you want to maintain that growth rate you have to sell 100 more, then 1000 more then 10,000 more. So by your focus on growth you are inadvertently stating that a stable long lasting product is pointless. Awesome¡....
You know this isn't what I think. Why waste our time posting if we are not going to have a serious conversation?
My original point was that Apple will probably not dominate the smartphone market, like they do with the iPod for example. They will probably be the most profitable, but that is not domination. Apple is by far the most profitable computer hardware maker but they certainly don't dominate the PC market.
You know this isn't what I think. Why waste our time posting if we are not going to have a serious conversation?
My original point was that Apple will probably not dominate the smartphone market, like they do with the iPod for example. They will probably be the most profitable, but that is not domination. Apple is by far the most profitable computer hardware maker but they certainly don't dominate the PC market.
So by your measure Q-Tips dominate Blu-ray players. Awesome logic¡
By the way?It sure sounds like Apple is dominate to me. Perhaps you need to realize that dominate does not necessarily mean more unit dispersal* of something else and that comparing different business models is why your arguments keep failing.
* Can?t really use sales as Android is not sold, but given away freely for anyone to include with their product sales, which just adds to the silliness of saying iPhones are outsold by Android.
So by your measure Q-Tips dominate Blu-ray players. Awesome logic¡
By the way?It sure sounds like Apple is dominate to me. Perhaps you need to realize that dominate does not necessarily mean more unit dispersal* of something else and that comparing different business models is why your arguments keep failing.
* Can?t really use sales as Android is not sold, but given away freely for anyone to include with their product sales, which just adds to the silliness of saying iPhones are outsold by Android.
So are Q-Tips and Blu-ray players analogous to Android phones and iPhones? Is that your argument? And you side-step my point and give me a definition of dominate. Truly a magnificent post.
So are Q-Tips and Blu-ray players analogous to Android phones and iPhones? Is that your argument? And you side-step my point and give me a definition of dominate. Truly a magnificent post.
1) It?s an exaggerated phrase to point out how your silly your statement is. The difference is you think yours is valid as stated.
2) When people bring up your foolishly myopic argument I like to ask them: If Apple is so concerned about mobile or desktop marketshare (because, as you state, it?s the only measure worth considering units) then why don?t they 1) license their OS to any and all vendors (which would make it a more comparable product), and/or 2) make a lot more models that are much, much cheaper to make sure any and all can have access to their devices? Something like Dell and Nokia do.
3) Your statement makes it clear you do not know what dominate means, hence my supplying you with the definition. You?re welcome.
1) It?s an exaggerated phrase to point out how your silly your statement is. The difference is you think yours is valid as stated.
2) When people bring up your foolishly myopic argument I like to ask them: If Apple is so concerned about mobile or desktop marketshare (because, as you state, it?s the only measure worth considering units) then why don?t they 1) license their OS to any and all vendors (which would make it a more comparable product), and/or 2) make a lot more models that are much, much cheaper to make sure any and all can have access to their devices? Something like Dell and Nokia do.
3) Your statement makes it clear you do not know what dominate means, hence my supplying you with the definition. You?re welcome.
Here are the arguments I have made over the last few months that have "failed":
1. Apple needs to expand carriers in the US because AT&T sucks for a lot of people, to increase the number of units sold (still at a healthy profit), and head off the threat of Android.
2. If Apple can't produce iPhones fast enough to meet demand, they need to increase manufacturing capacity. Even if their margin is slightly lower than it would have been at the 11 million units, their total profit would increase.
3. If they don't do these things, Apple will fail to dominate. Note the future tense, which was in all of my previous posts, although you conveniently changed it to present tense.
If you can't agree with those above arguments, then enjoy the Kool-Aid. I have never argued that Apple should license iOS. I have never said that only units sold matters, not profit. You keep trying to make it seem like I have said those things, but I have not.
I think the constructive part of any conversation we might have in the future is over. I am going to put you on my ignore list. I would appreciate it if you did the same. I have nothing more to say to you.
Here are the arguments I have made over the last few months that have "failed":
1. Apple needs to expand carriers in the US because AT&T sucks for a lot of people, to increase the number of units sold (still at a healthy profit), and head off the threat of Android.
2. If Apple can't produce iPhones fast enough to meet demand, they need to increase manufacturing capacity. Even if their margin is slightly lower than it would have been at the 11 million units, their total profit would increase.
3. If they don't do these things, Apple will fail to dominate. Note the future tense, which was in all of my previous posts, although you conveniently changed it to present tense.
If you can't agree with those above arguments, then enjoy the Kool-Aid. I have never argued that Apple should license iOS. I have never said that only units sold matters, not profit. You keep trying to make it seem like I have said those things, but I have not.
I think the constructive part of any conversation we might have in the future is over. I am going to put you on my ignore list. I would appreciate it if you did the same. I have nothing more to say to you.
1) So if they sell more units at the same price and cost they make more money. You honestly posted this as some epiphany and not just common sense? Of course, you don?t mention any reasons why Apple can?t just start selling the iPhone on other US carriers. For example, the fact that the HW is incompatible to all MNOs except T-Mobile, and even then the HW is incompatible to their 3G network, or that there are likely contracts that keep this from happening.
2) In a perfect world where increasing production can be instant, where demand will continually increase so you?ll never have an oversupply that could become loses, where the cost to invest in a new factory is free and also created instantly, and where you can get all the components you want from your suppliers without ever being at their mercy? then sure, you have another obvious point. Unfortunately the world doesn?t work that way and there are well defined economic models that tell a company when it?s the best time to expand. For example, do you think it would make sense to pay for the a factory that will cost you $5,000,000 per day if you estimate the maximum total you?ll make in profit from the extra handset you?d sell is only 1/20th amount? You?re quick to say whether Apple will sell more or less, but you never offer any specifics, never look at the big picture and you completely discount any economic models regarding business. Real models, that real companies use in the real world to determine how to maximize their profit. Really!
3) Explain to use again how Apple will fail to dominate the handset market. By your measure Nokia must be the most dominate handset maker because they sell the most units. Oh, that?s right, you?re only considering the iPhone (hardware) and Android (freely distributed software). By your measure they won?t, in fact, by your measure they don?t even though you mention a future tense without showing how Apple will be pushed out of the market and their profits will be dwindling? in the future tense.
4) Note that every handset vendor that has chosen Android is doing so as a last resort effort to keep from going under. All were hemorrhaging money, many were in the red quarter-after-quarter until Apple showed Google how to make a mobile OS. Now many are turning things around but not on the same level as Apple so I can?t imagine why Apple would lose money in the future to the ?soup kitchen? OS for the destitute handset vendors.
Apple has just one phone on one network against Android on many phones on all networks...saturation makes a bigger dent. Not to mention the rest of the phone producers out there, MS, RIM, Palm....etc
I feel the iPhone would be even bigger if it were also on Verizon, it's a huge drawback since many customers won't buy a phone no matter how good it is if it's on the wrong network.
One last thing... iPhones greatest asset is it's Exchange support out of the box.
Does iPhone make a ton of special "Apple" Folders on the Outlook server, like Apple Mail? I have Outlook for school email and it made another folder for Sent, Drafts, etc. Very annoying. Have been too lazy to see how to fix it. But it's bizarre that's the Apple Mail default behavior. At a minimum the default should be to just obey how the Outlook server has already been set up. So how does iPhone handle that? And what if I have 4 or 5 email accounts? Two on Outlook, one Gmail, another from another school, etc.?
Here are the arguments I have made over the last few months that have "failed":
1. Apple needs to expand carriers in the US because AT&T sucks for a lot of people, to increase the number of units sold (still at a healthy profit), and head off the threat of Android.
2. If Apple can't produce iPhones fast enough to meet demand, they need to increase manufacturing capacity. Even if their margin is slightly lower than it would have been at the 11 million units, their total profit would increase.
3. If they don't do these things, Apple will fail to dominate. Note the future tense, which was in all of my previous posts, although you conveniently changed it to present tense.
If you can't agree with those above arguments, then enjoy the Kool-Aid. I have never argued that Apple should license iOS. I have never said that only units sold matters, not profit. You keep trying to make it seem like I have said those things, but I have not.
I think the constructive part of any conversation we might have in the future is over. I am going to put you on my ignore list. I would appreciate it if you did the same. I have nothing more to say to you.
Agreed with all those, good points. I guess the news topic of this thread seems like the tipping point to me, and Android won. This was the year Apple should've expanded to at least Verizon at a minimum. 5 years from now...80% Droid, 10% iPhone, 5% Windows phone, 5% other (Palm/Symbian/Whatever) at least in US. I am likely going to go Droid now. I was waiting for all the iPhone 4 problems to be fixed, but it seems the one problem that will never be fixed is Apple's attitude. Their way or the highway, and frequently their way is a closed, uncustomizable, does not play well with the rest of the industry, and potentially not as powerful to advanced users, lying to customers about product defects (antenna, proximity sensor) mindset. And ArcGIS is coming to Droid, soon. And Droid has Flash. Flash is one of the most important pieces of the Internet, sort of like PDF. Love it or hate it, to not even have the possibility of running it is a huge handicap.
Solip I just think Droid has momentum. It's turning into Apple vs. The World (running Droid). Haha and of course M$ off in the background, I wonder how Win Phone will turn out. But how can Apple stay the majority smartphone maker, vs. the entire rest of the industry? It's Mac vs. PC again. I sincerely think Apple should have licensed MacOS back in the 90s. Perhaps Apple would have 20% marketshare now. Licensing iOS, I'm not sure. Maybe not, but then again, I don't know. As far as AAPL goes, perhaps they should. As far as quality of product goes, I don't know.
Agreed with all those, good points. I guess the news topic of this thread seems like the tipping point to me, and Android won. This was the year Apple should've expanded to at least Verizon at a minimum. 5 years from now...80% Droid, 10% iPhone, 5% Windows phone, 5% other (Palm/Symbian/Whatever) at least in US. I am likely going to go Droid now. I was waiting for all the iPhone 4 problems to be fixed, but it seems the one problem that will never be fixed is Apple's attitude. Their way or the highway, and frequently their way is a closed, uncustomizable, does not play well with the rest of the industry, and potentially not as powerful to advanced users, lying to customers about product defects (antenna, proximity sensor) mindset. And ArcGIS is coming to Droid, soon. And Droid has Flash. Flash is one of the most important pieces of the Internet, sort of like PDF. Love it or hate it, to not even have the possibility of running it is a huge handicap.
Solip I just think Droid has momentum. It's turning into Apple vs. The World (running Droid). Haha and of course M$ off in the background, I wonder how Win Phone will turn out. But how can Apple stay the majority smartphone maker, vs. the entire rest of the industry? It's Mac vs. PC again. I sincerely think Apple should have licensed MacOS back in the 90s. Perhaps Apple would have 20% marketshare now. Licensing iOS, I'm not sure. Maybe not, but then again, I don't know. As far as AAPL goes, perhaps they should. As far as quality of product goes, I don't know.
To be clear we are talking about two different scenarios here: US market vs. global market. In the US market as recently reported by NPD in August, Android operating system represented 33 percent of all smartphones sold in the U.S. consumer market. (NOTE: that is all variants of the Android OS, including sales of handsets with 1.6, 2.0, 2.1 and 2.2). Research In Motion with 28 percent moved down into 2nd place in volume, and Apple moved to third place with 22 percent of total volume sold in US.
Look carefully at those stats. It categorically is NOT Apple vs. the world (of Android) in the US market. Get it? It is *currently* All Android variants on a variety of hardware platforms against Blackberry OS running exclusively on RIM hardware, vs. Apple iOS running on Apple iPhone hardware, with Windows and other bringing up the rest of the market.
But wait there is another set of statistics you are ignoring, as published recently by comscore Mobilens: Total US smartphone subscribers. RIM: 39.3%, Apple: 23.8%, Google (Android - all) 17%, Windows Mobile (all) 11.8%, PalmOS 4.9%, all others 3.2%. Again, the top of the market in these numbers of actual subscribers has RIM on top, then followed by Apple, then followed by Android, Windows, PalmOS and all others. That should close the book on the US market. Look at real numbers to derive real conclusions.
Global market is a different scenario altogether.
According to StrategyAnalytics, the global smartphone market by number of subscribers breaks down thus: Symbian/Nokia 40.3%, Blackberry/RIM 18.8%, Apple 14.1%, all others 26.7%. Can you perceive the difference in scale here? Nokia commands the global stage, followed by also-rans RIM and Apple. Google doesn't even figure outside of the "others" category.
Summary: Apple nowhere is the majority smartphone maker and NEVER has been. It is NOT Mac vs. PC again. Not even close. Not even conceptually a distance, outside hypothetical possibility. Apple should have licensed the MacOS back in the 90's. They tried that, it damn near killed the company. Do at least a modicum of research please. But the last statement in your post is by far your most accurate "I don't know". Couldn't have put better myself.
BOT: Microsoft has lost a lot of marketshare to Android, and they will come roaring out to try and regain that marketshare - and Android is squarely in the sights of Redmond, with Apple just a little to the side as a potential other target.