Maybe the levels aren't equal. But Apple has a disproportionate share of the profits in the feature smartphone market. As long as that remains the case...Apple are on to a winner.
Android is fast becoming a race to the bottom on price, just as with the Windows-based PC market. Hardly any profit to be had in PCs, and Apple has the vast majority of that too.
You say that like it's a bad thing. Imagine where computing would be today if the Apple model of exclusively selling hardware and software bundled together had won out.
Say what you will, but you can thank Wintel for making commodotizing computers and putting them within reach of virtually anybody. With any luck, Android might be able to do the same for smartphones.
I disagree. You need to care about profitability. Without it manufacturers and developers won't grow and progress devices and platforms. If Apple is highly profitable they will keep putting money into their products. So you SHOULD care about profitability.
PC profits are razor thin. Hasn't stopped innovation and new form factors (netbooks) from coming out.
By your rationale, Microsoft should have kept on steamrolling everybody else since they've been banking billions for years.
I'd like to see some more conclusive proof that profitability = innovation.
As far as I'm concerned, the competition between Android and Apple is already providing benefits to end users. I hope that it only gets more intense.
+1
I figure that Android has probably forced Apple to up its hardware development cycle by at least a year. And can you imagine what the iPhone 5 and iPad 2 are going to look like given the competition that's coming from the Android world.
I figure that Android has probably forced Apple to up its hardware development cycle by at least a year. And can you imagine what the iPhone 5 and iPad 2 are going to look like given the competition that's coming from the Android world.
By a year? In what way?
Note that CES had plenty of smartphones and tablets with dual-core Cortex-A9 processors, which is something Apple isn?t current using and certainly was using last year.
I see modern smartphone OSes, not just Android, pushing development a little faster on the iPhone but so much with HW as with SW. HW designs take a while to work out and aren?t going to be altered at the last minute simply because a new Android-based phone has included something.
Plus, HW is an area where Apple ahead without having to be ahead. Meaning Apple can use a ≈800MHz Cortex-A8 and have a device that feels faster than an Android-based device performing a similar task while running 25% faster. If you have more efficient code you don?t have to force it to use the fastest HW just to make a usable device. Android is coming along nicely, but it still trails Apple in this regard.
The majority of posters here have been stating that Android should best iOS in OS marketshare. It?s a free OS that can be used by all and iOS is only used on Apple?s products. That alone should tell you that Android The fact that it took Android long to creep ahead of a iOS is the real story here.
Android's been around for just over two years and only really got going just over a year ago (with the Droid). How long has iOS been around? I'd say catching up to iPhone market share in a year is a decent accomplishment. Are your blinders that strong that you don't consider the accomplishments of Android worthwhile at all?
Just because it's a free OS doesn't mean that it's going to best Apple overnight. Somebody's still gotta build hardware for that piece of software.
Note that CES had plenty of smartphones and tablets with dual-core Cortex-A9 processors, which is something Apple isn?t current using and certainly was using last year.
They weren't using a touch optimized OS. They were all running Windows. We're only really seeing true competition to the iPad now....and by now I mean in 4-6 months when Android 3.0, WebOS and some tablet version of WinPho 7 hit the market. Even the Galaxy Tab as well as it sold, I wouldn't really count as a real iPad competitor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
I see modern smartphone OSes, not just Android, pushing development a little faster on the iPhone but so much with HW as with SW. HW designs take a while to work out and aren?t going to be altered at the last minute simply because a new Android-based phone has included something.
I see your point. However, I really don't think that the iPhone 4 would have been as strong as it was if the Droid line hadn't launched. Sure HW takes a year to plan out. But it's not like Apple didn't know the specs of the Droid before Motorola launched it. I doubt they'd have really gone after expensive components like the Retina display or the 3 axis gyroscope without Android breathing down their necks and knowing what lay ahead in the next year. That's the real challenge for Apple. They have to have a product that's relevant for a whole year. And while most Android OEMs pretty much refresh their major platforms once a year (ie Galaxy S or Xperia for example) - while launching different form factors of the same platform - the fact that there are several OEMs means that the HW is being pushed forward every month. That's real competition for Apple.
Just look at stuff like NFC. How long would we have waited for that if Apple and Google weren't competing to rush that technology to the market? Competition is good. And it's not just limited to software.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
Plus, HW is an area where Apple ahead without having to be ahead. Meaning Apple can use a ≈800MHz Cortex-A8 and have a device that feels faster than an Android-based device performing a similar task while running 25% faster. If you have more efficient code you don?t have to force it to use the fastest HW just to make a usable device. Android is coming along nicely, but it still trails Apple in this regard.
Meh. Play with a Galaxy S phone running 2.2 and then come and tell me that an iPhone 4 feels 25% faster. I have no doubt that iOS is a better polished and more efficient OS. But I don't think the difference is the gulf people on here make it out to be.
The challenge for Android is the cheap Androids. It's the Huawei Android devices for example that leave a bad impression. If Android was restricted to high end devices only, the impression and user experience of the platform would be quite different.
In any event, I'd say the biggest benefit to come from this contest will be price. Remember what the iPhone sold for when it launched? Today you can get an iPhone 4 for free on contract in a lot of places outside the US (that's why all these cries against Android BOGOs in the US is just ridiculous whining) and you can get a iPhone 3GS for $50 in the USA. If there weren't Android BOGO offers in the US, that wouldn't have happened. I look forward to the day when virtually every high end smartphone (including the iPhone) can be bought for less than $500 off-contract and will be available for free on contract.
I figure that Android has probably forced Apple to up its hardware development cycle by at least a year. And can you imagine what the iPhone 5 and iPad 2 are going to look like given the competition that's coming from the Android world.
Which Android release and/or which Android Phones "forced Apple to up its hardware development cycle" and create the iPad -- an all new category, that single-handedly outsold many Android phones (mentioned because there was no tablet competition) in the 9 months of its availability?
Meh. Play with a Galaxy S phone running 2.2 and then come and tell me that an iPhone 4 feels 25% faster. I have no doubt that iOS is a better polished and more efficient OS. But I don't think the difference is the gulf people on here make it out to be.
I’m glad you brought up the Samsung Galaxy S as it illustrates my point. Since you seem to think that raw specs are more important than optimized HW and SW I’ll use the Galaxy S to illustrate why that is illogical when using disparate OSes.
Exhibit A: They both have 802.11n so they should be equally as fast because the 802.11n spec is the same regardless. But that isn’t the case. In fact, 802.11g on the iPhone is faster than 802.11n on Android phones.
Exhibit B: It’s 25% faster yet with page loadings it doesn’t look to be 25% faster. This is something the user can feel. This is where you’d agrue that you mentioned Android 2.2 which does have an even better JS engine and page loading, but that’s optimized code, the point I’m making here.
Exhibit C: Resulting battery life. This is where power management comes into play. This is important to users even though most don’t even realize it. It’s one of those odd features that most don’t think about until their device is without power. Having faster HW just to keep up with slower HW and optimized code is not good for power efficiency. Think of it this way, you can put a 1000HP engine into a car, but it’ll still get beaten by a Vespa if you make the car out of bricks, the wheels from wood, and transmission out of straw. It’s the whole package that makes it work, not just a single aspect.
You might notice that there are phones that exceed that iPhone on ‘3G’ talk while they are well under on the other battery stats. This has to do with CDMA/EV-DO v. GSM/UMTS. You’ll notice CDMA-based ‘2G’ and ‘3G’ talk time are equivalent, but not so with GSM-based ‘2G’ and ‘3G’ talk time. ven when ‘3G’ is activated on a CDMA-based device it still uses ‘2G’ for the call. CDMA has a pretty good voice algorithm, and much better than GSM, so this is a benefit for it. The downside being that you can’t currently get simultaneous voice and data.
PS: Also note that Galaxy S only has to push 384,000 pixels while the iPhone 4 has to push 614,400 despite the weaker hardware, yet it doesn’t seem to do poorly with rendering graphics.
The majority of posters here have been stating that Android should best iOS in OS marketshare. It?s a free OS that can be used by all and iOS is only used on Apple?s products. That alone should tell you that Android The fact that it took Android long to creep ahead of a iOS is the real story here.
You are a very reasonable guy on this forum and you know that Android has been bashed since the beginning and that here has been said that it won't overnumber iOS.
By the way, if Android/iOS is the number one doesn't mean nothing
Others have mentioned that Android has an advantage because:
-- while most Android OEMs release 1 major smartphone per year (including several carrier variants)
-- that, because there are so many Android OEMs, there is a new, better Android model every few months
Thus, the consumer always has a choice of the latest/newest Android phone vs an iPhone that is, on average, 6 months old.
What bothers me is that the normal consumer's buy/refresh cycle is not every 3 months, 6 months or even a year -- more like 2 years -- to get the maximum subsidy and avoid ETFs.
There are a few buyers, like DaHarder, who can afford multiple, concurrent, carrier subscriptions to multiple iPhones, Android Phones, etc.
Is this realistic?
Over decades, the major automobile refresh cycle evolved to a new car every 2-3 years. Hence the financing plans and more-or-less October release window for most new models -- to match the buying patterns of consumers.
Assuming the DaHarders are an exception (God willing) -- do you think the smart phone industry will evolve to a "one major model per year" and a reduced "new model introduction" window once per year.
I realize there will be exceptions -- I am talking the majority here.
That said, the release of the iPad 3G without a carrier subsidy/contract is a monumental occurrence, IMO.
The OEM (Apple) is totally in charge of the device: price; features; upgrades; ecosystem; release schedule.
The carriers devolve to what they should be "carriers" -- not subsidizers, contractors; enforcers.
Unfortunately, the vast majority of Tablet OEMs seem to be "hiding behind the subsidy skirts" of the carriers.
I hope Apple continues offering the iPad as it currently does -- taking advantage of its new-found freedom.
I think it can do this as follows:
1) offer a carrier-agnostic iPad at a MSRP through its Apple Stores and other resellers
2) insist that approved carriers offer this same model at comparable MSRP
3) allow carriers to bundle the iPad with carrier plans at whatever discount they can afford (while paying Apple full wholesale)
Once this takes hold, it is a much smaller step, than today, to take the same approach with cell phones.
You are a very reasonable guy on this forum and you know that Android has been bashed since the beginning and that here has been said that it won't overnumber iOS.
By the way, if Android/iOS is the number one doesn't mean nothing
Sure, I?m sure nearly every posters has said a negative thing about Android, but I think that most still felt that it would reign. It?s a modern mobile OS designed for modern touch-based devices that is free and backed by dozens of HW companies. I don?t see how they can?t be the most common smartphone OS.
Prediction: The Verizon iPhone will slow down Android-based devices a little, but they will continue to grow faster than Apple?s iOS platform in OS unit numbers.
What bothers me is that the normal consumer's buy/refresh cycle is not every 3 months, 6 months or even a year -- more like 2 years -- to get the maximum subsidy and avoid ETFs.
.
I think that you're thinking on USA market, don't you?
I?m glad you brought up the Samsung Galaxy S as it illustrates my point. Since you seem to think that raw specs are more important than optimized HW and SW I?ll use the Galaxy S to illustrate why that is illogical when using disparate OSes.
...
You might notice that there are phones that exceed that iPhone on ?3G? talk while they are well under on the other battery stats. This has to do with CDMA/EV-DO v. GSM/UMTS. You?ll notice CDMA-based ?2G? and ?3G? talk time are equivalent, but not so with GSM-based ?2G? and ?3G? talk time. ven when ?3G? is activated on a CDMA-based device it still uses ?2G? for the call. CDMA has a pretty good voice algorithm, and much better than GSM, so this is a benefit for it. The downside being that you can?t currently get simultaneous voice and data.
Great charts and commentary!
Also, I remember reading somewhere, that OS garbage collection on Android phones caused a noticeable delay in UI responsiveness. I suspect that the easiest way to compensate is to throw more hardware at the problem (reducing battery) -- called the "Detroit Solution" -- "there is no substitute for cubic inches"... except for mobile, that is!
Conversly, iOS does not provide garbage collection and requires the developer to manage the critical RAM resource -- not difficult for a qualified developer.
The result of the Apple iOS approach is that when you add more powerful hardware you get better results (performance, battery) -- rather than "it now performs adequately".
But, even (maybe more so) with unsubsidized phones, how often does the average consumer replace his phone?
Here in Spain, the people I know replace their phone every 6 months more less, they buy and sell it.
My actual phone, yes, an Android Galaxy S was bougth through eBay for $200 unlock from a person which uses his reward points.
By they way, I bought my iPhone 3G for 200€ (subsudizedI) and I sold it for 250€ a year later and I bought the Nexus One for 400€ unsubsudized and I sold it for 500€ 9 months later
Here in Spain, the people I know replace their phone every 6 months more less, they buy and sell it.
My actual phone, yes, an Android Galaxy S was bougth through eBay for $200 unlock from a person which uses his reward points.
By they way, I bought my iPhone 3G for 200€ (subsudizedI) and I sold it for 250€ a year later and I bought the Nexus One for 400€ unsubsudized and I sold it for 500€ 9 months later
Wow! That's very interesting!
You seem to be making money!
Why do smart phones appreciate in price?
Are there artificial shortages or import restrictions?
Doesn't a legacy of app purchases tend to tie the consumer to a specific brand of phone?
One of the 1st gen 1 iPhone apps I bought was Sketches. It was written by two Spaniards in Madrid. At the time iPhones were unavailable there and were purchased on trips to the US. I suspect that is no longer necessary.
P.S. I've never been to Barcelona -- but it was the highlight of my daughter's High school trip to Europe... Our family spent time in Madrid and Costa del Sol on another trip. Loved it -- Especially a trip To Ronda.
But, even (maybe more so) with unsubsidized phones, how often does the average consumer replace his phone?
Had my phone for five going on six years. LG VX5300. Best phone ever. I ignore texting and all the fake features in the terrible OS and just have it for if people call me. If I can get a CDMA iPhone without a data plan, I'll get a new iPhone. If not, I'll have Verizon activate my iPhone 2G using an LTE modem SIM. Should be interesting.
I've read this site daily for years, and finally I had to register to respond to this thread. My family has owned at least one of every Apple product made in the last decade except for the iPhone (we refuse to use AT&T) and the iPad, and as an Apple enthusiast and stockholder, I hope that the iPhone product line is immensely successful for a long time.
That said, most users of this website have an incredibly skewed view of Android. You all make remarks about the terrible hardware and software of Android phones, and I have to wonder if any of you have ever actually picked one up and used it. The high end Android phones (the ones truly competing with the iPhone) lack nothing with regards to hardware and software quality. My phone, the Droid X, is a truly fantastic piece of technology that deserves nothing but praise from gadget lovers (I have to assume anyone who reads this site falls into that category). The same goes for for the Droid, the Droid 2, the Droid Incredible, the Galaxy S, the Nexus One, the Nexus S, etc. Those devices are wonderful phones that bring a very satisfying user experience across the board. I won't speak for Android devices that are dissimilar from those I just listed since I have never used any.
Now back to some points more relevant to this thread. I'm tired of hearing the argument about the number of Android devices vs. the number of iOS devices. First off, it doesn't matter as long as both operating systems are selling above some critical level. But if to you it does matter, then realize that Android sales are comparable to iPhone sales because they represent all phones running the Android operating system, just as iPhone sales represent all phones running iOS. To say that Android sales numbers are only relevant phone by phone is silly and displays poor logic. Nobody can know that Android wouldn't sell in equal numbers if it were only released on one phone (or iterations thereof), so drop the argument. There's no sound point you can make in contradiction. As far as BOGOs enhancing sales, go to Verizon's website right now, and count the number of Android devices on BOGO; there are two (probably slow sellers at this point). Sales like that are generally used to reduce inventories of older products, so it's unlikely that the phenomenal sales rates of Android devices is due in large part to them.
Finally, solipsism, your graphs are outdated, although they are very nice. Most of the Android devices on them still showed 2.1 as their operating system rather than 2.2, which all of them currently run.
Finally, solipsism, your graphs are outdated, although they are very nice. Most of the Android devices on them still showed 2.1 as their operating system rather than 2.2, which all of them currently run.
Welcome to the forum.
I made mention of the Android OS changes, but iOS has also been updated. Those graphs are from October from the Samsung Galaxy S review on AnandTech. I was informed that faster HW means faster user experience and that optimizing code doesn’t make a lick of different if you don’t have faster HW. Hence, I showed otherwise. The fact that 2.2 is better optimized just proves my point. I’m sure the latest and next iOS updates will also be better optimized, too.
To reiterate, when using different OSes you can’t simply look at HW specs and say which one will perform better as noted by the graphs above.
Comments
Maybe the levels aren't equal. But Apple has a disproportionate share of the profits in the feature smartphone market. As long as that remains the case...Apple are on to a winner.
Android is fast becoming a race to the bottom on price, just as with the Windows-based PC market. Hardly any profit to be had in PCs, and Apple has the vast majority of that too.
You say that like it's a bad thing. Imagine where computing would be today if the Apple model of exclusively selling hardware and software bundled together had won out.
Say what you will, but you can thank Wintel for making commodotizing computers and putting them within reach of virtually anybody. With any luck, Android might be able to do the same for smartphones.
I disagree. You need to care about profitability. Without it manufacturers and developers won't grow and progress devices and platforms. If Apple is highly profitable they will keep putting money into their products. So you SHOULD care about profitability.
PC profits are razor thin. Hasn't stopped innovation and new form factors (netbooks) from coming out.
By your rationale, Microsoft should have kept on steamrolling everybody else since they've been banking billions for years.
I'd like to see some more conclusive proof that profitability = innovation.
As far as I'm concerned, the competition between Android and Apple is already providing benefits to end users. I hope that it only gets more intense.
+1
I figure that Android has probably forced Apple to up its hardware development cycle by at least a year. And can you imagine what the iPhone 5 and iPad 2 are going to look like given the competition that's coming from the Android world.
+1
I figure that Android has probably forced Apple to up its hardware development cycle by at least a year. And can you imagine what the iPhone 5 and iPad 2 are going to look like given the competition that's coming from the Android world.
By a year? In what way?
Note that CES had plenty of smartphones and tablets with dual-core Cortex-A9 processors, which is something Apple isn?t current using and certainly was using last year.
I see modern smartphone OSes, not just Android, pushing development a little faster on the iPhone but so much with HW as with SW. HW designs take a while to work out and aren?t going to be altered at the last minute simply because a new Android-based phone has included something.
Plus, HW is an area where Apple ahead without having to be ahead. Meaning Apple can use a ≈800MHz Cortex-A8 and have a device that feels faster than an Android-based device performing a similar task while running 25% faster. If you have more efficient code you don?t have to force it to use the fastest HW just to make a usable device. Android is coming along nicely, but it still trails Apple in this regard.
The majority of posters here have been stating that Android should best iOS in OS marketshare. It?s a free OS that can be used by all and iOS is only used on Apple?s products. That alone should tell you that Android The fact that it took Android long to creep ahead of a iOS is the real story here.
Android's been around for just over two years and only really got going just over a year ago (with the Droid). How long has iOS been around? I'd say catching up to iPhone market share in a year is a decent accomplishment. Are your blinders that strong that you don't consider the accomplishments of Android worthwhile at all?
Just because it's a free OS doesn't mean that it's going to best Apple overnight. Somebody's still gotta build hardware for that piece of software.
By a year? In what way?
Note that CES had plenty of smartphones and tablets with dual-core Cortex-A9 processors, which is something Apple isn?t current using and certainly was using last year.
They weren't using a touch optimized OS. They were all running Windows. We're only really seeing true competition to the iPad now....and by now I mean in 4-6 months when Android 3.0, WebOS and some tablet version of WinPho 7 hit the market. Even the Galaxy Tab as well as it sold, I wouldn't really count as a real iPad competitor.
I see modern smartphone OSes, not just Android, pushing development a little faster on the iPhone but so much with HW as with SW. HW designs take a while to work out and aren?t going to be altered at the last minute simply because a new Android-based phone has included something.
I see your point. However, I really don't think that the iPhone 4 would have been as strong as it was if the Droid line hadn't launched. Sure HW takes a year to plan out. But it's not like Apple didn't know the specs of the Droid before Motorola launched it. I doubt they'd have really gone after expensive components like the Retina display or the 3 axis gyroscope without Android breathing down their necks and knowing what lay ahead in the next year. That's the real challenge for Apple. They have to have a product that's relevant for a whole year. And while most Android OEMs pretty much refresh their major platforms once a year (ie Galaxy S or Xperia for example) - while launching different form factors of the same platform - the fact that there are several OEMs means that the HW is being pushed forward every month. That's real competition for Apple.
Just look at stuff like NFC. How long would we have waited for that if Apple and Google weren't competing to rush that technology to the market? Competition is good. And it's not just limited to software.
Plus, HW is an area where Apple ahead without having to be ahead. Meaning Apple can use a ≈800MHz Cortex-A8 and have a device that feels faster than an Android-based device performing a similar task while running 25% faster. If you have more efficient code you don?t have to force it to use the fastest HW just to make a usable device. Android is coming along nicely, but it still trails Apple in this regard.
Meh. Play with a Galaxy S phone running 2.2 and then come and tell me that an iPhone 4 feels 25% faster. I have no doubt that iOS is a better polished and more efficient OS. But I don't think the difference is the gulf people on here make it out to be.
The challenge for Android is the cheap Androids. It's the Huawei Android devices for example that leave a bad impression. If Android was restricted to high end devices only, the impression and user experience of the platform would be quite different.
In any event, I'd say the biggest benefit to come from this contest will be price. Remember what the iPhone sold for when it launched? Today you can get an iPhone 4 for free on contract in a lot of places outside the US (that's why all these cries against Android BOGOs in the US is just ridiculous whining) and you can get a iPhone 3GS for $50 in the USA. If there weren't Android BOGO offers in the US, that wouldn't have happened. I look forward to the day when virtually every high end smartphone (including the iPhone) can be bought for less than $500 off-contract and will be available for free on contract.
+1
I figure that Android has probably forced Apple to up its hardware development cycle by at least a year. And can you imagine what the iPhone 5 and iPad 2 are going to look like given the competition that's coming from the Android world.
Which Android release and/or which Android Phones "forced Apple to up its hardware development cycle" and create the iPad -- an all new category, that single-handedly outsold many Android phones (mentioned because there was no tablet competition) in the 9 months of its availability?
Somebody's still gotta build hardware for that piece of software.
"piece of software"... an interesting turn of phrasing
Meh. Play with a Galaxy S phone running 2.2 and then come and tell me that an iPhone 4 feels 25% faster. I have no doubt that iOS is a better polished and more efficient OS. But I don't think the difference is the gulf people on here make it out to be.
I’m glad you brought up the Samsung Galaxy S as it illustrates my point. Since you seem to think that raw specs are more important than optimized HW and SW I’ll use the Galaxy S to illustrate why that is illogical when using disparate OSes.
Exhibit A: They both have 802.11n so they should be equally as fast because the 802.11n spec is the same regardless. But that isn’t the case. In fact, 802.11g on the iPhone is faster than 802.11n on Android phones.Exhibit B: It’s 25% faster yet with page loadings it doesn’t look to be 25% faster. This is something the user can feel. This is where you’d agrue that you mentioned Android 2.2 which does have an even better JS engine and page loading, but that’s optimized code, the point I’m making here. Exhibit C: Resulting battery life. This is where power management comes into play. This is important to users even though most don’t even realize it. It’s one of those odd features that most don’t think about until their device is without power. Having faster HW just to keep up with slower HW and optimized code is not good for power efficiency. Think of it this way, you can put a 1000HP engine into a car, but it’ll still get beaten by a Vespa if you make the car out of bricks, the wheels from wood, and transmission out of straw. It’s the whole package that makes it work, not just a single aspect.You might notice that there are phones that exceed that iPhone on ‘3G’ talk while they are well under on the other battery stats. This has to do with CDMA/EV-DO v. GSM/UMTS. You’ll notice CDMA-based ‘2G’ and ‘3G’ talk time are equivalent, but not so with GSM-based ‘2G’ and ‘3G’ talk time. ven when ‘3G’ is activated on a CDMA-based device it still uses ‘2G’ for the call. CDMA has a pretty good voice algorithm, and much better than GSM, so this is a benefit for it. The downside being that you can’t currently get simultaneous voice and data.
PS: Also note that Galaxy S only has to push 384,000 pixels while the iPhone 4 has to push 614,400 despite the weaker hardware, yet it doesn’t seem to do poorly with rendering graphics.
The majority of posters here have been stating that Android should best iOS in OS marketshare. It?s a free OS that can be used by all and iOS is only used on Apple?s products. That alone should tell you that Android The fact that it took Android long to creep ahead of a iOS is the real story here.
You are a very reasonable guy on this forum and you know that Android has been bashed since the beginning and that here has been said that it won't overnumber iOS.
By the way, if Android/iOS is the number one doesn't mean nothing
-- while most Android OEMs release 1 major smartphone per year (including several carrier variants)
-- that, because there are so many Android OEMs, there is a new, better Android model every few months
Thus, the consumer always has a choice of the latest/newest Android phone vs an iPhone that is, on average, 6 months old.
What bothers me is that the normal consumer's buy/refresh cycle is not every 3 months, 6 months or even a year -- more like 2 years -- to get the maximum subsidy and avoid ETFs.
There are a few buyers, like DaHarder, who can afford multiple, concurrent, carrier subscriptions to multiple iPhones, Android Phones, etc.
Is this realistic?
Over decades, the major automobile refresh cycle evolved to a new car every 2-3 years. Hence the financing plans and more-or-less October release window for most new models -- to match the buying patterns of consumers.
Assuming the DaHarders are an exception (God willing) -- do you think the smart phone industry will evolve to a "one major model per year" and a reduced "new model introduction" window once per year.
I realize there will be exceptions -- I am talking the majority here.
That said, the release of the iPad 3G without a carrier subsidy/contract is a monumental occurrence, IMO.
The OEM (Apple) is totally in charge of the device: price; features; upgrades; ecosystem; release schedule.
The carriers devolve to what they should be "carriers" -- not subsidizers, contractors; enforcers.
Unfortunately, the vast majority of Tablet OEMs seem to be "hiding behind the subsidy skirts" of the carriers.
I hope Apple continues offering the iPad as it currently does -- taking advantage of its new-found freedom.
I think it can do this as follows:
1) offer a carrier-agnostic iPad at a MSRP through its Apple Stores and other resellers
2) insist that approved carriers offer this same model at comparable MSRP
3) allow carriers to bundle the iPad with carrier plans at whatever discount they can afford (while paying Apple full wholesale)
Once this takes hold, it is a much smaller step, than today, to take the same approach with cell phones.
This has to happen -- the sooner the quicker!
.
You are a very reasonable guy on this forum and you know that Android has been bashed since the beginning and that here has been said that it won't overnumber iOS.
By the way, if Android/iOS is the number one doesn't mean nothing
Sure, I?m sure nearly every posters has said a negative thing about Android, but I think that most still felt that it would reign. It?s a modern mobile OS designed for modern touch-based devices that is free and backed by dozens of HW companies. I don?t see how they can?t be the most common smartphone OS.
Prediction: The Verizon iPhone will slow down Android-based devices a little, but they will continue to grow faster than Apple?s iOS platform in OS unit numbers.
What bothers me is that the normal consumer's buy/refresh cycle is not every 3 months, 6 months or even a year -- more like 2 years -- to get the maximum subsidy and avoid ETFs.
.
I think that you're thinking on USA market, don't you?
I?m glad you brought up the Samsung Galaxy S as it illustrates my point. Since you seem to think that raw specs are more important than optimized HW and SW I?ll use the Galaxy S to illustrate why that is illogical when using disparate OSes.
...
You might notice that there are phones that exceed that iPhone on ?3G? talk while they are well under on the other battery stats. This has to do with CDMA/EV-DO v. GSM/UMTS. You?ll notice CDMA-based ?2G? and ?3G? talk time are equivalent, but not so with GSM-based ?2G? and ?3G? talk time. ven when ?3G? is activated on a CDMA-based device it still uses ?2G? for the call. CDMA has a pretty good voice algorithm, and much better than GSM, so this is a benefit for it. The downside being that you can?t currently get simultaneous voice and data.
Great charts and commentary!
Also, I remember reading somewhere, that OS garbage collection on Android phones caused a noticeable delay in UI responsiveness. I suspect that the easiest way to compensate is to throw more hardware at the problem (reducing battery) -- called the "Detroit Solution" -- "there is no substitute for cubic inches"... except for mobile, that is!
Conversly, iOS does not provide garbage collection and requires the developer to manage the critical RAM resource -- not difficult for a qualified developer.
The result of the Apple iOS approach is that when you add more powerful hardware you get better results (performance, battery) -- rather than "it now performs adequately".
.
I think that you're thinking on USA market, don't you?
Yeah -- that's the only market I know.
But, even (maybe more so) with unsubsidized phones, how often does the average consumer replace his phone?
Yeah -- that's the only market I know.
But, even (maybe more so) with unsubsidized phones, how often does the average consumer replace his phone?
Here in Spain, the people I know replace their phone every 6 months more less, they buy and sell it.
My actual phone, yes, an Android Galaxy S was bougth through eBay for $200 unlock from a person which uses his reward points.
By they way, I bought my iPhone 3G for 200€ (subsudizedI) and I sold it for 250€ a year later and I bought the Nexus One for 400€ unsubsudized and I sold it for 500€ 9 months later
Here in Spain, the people I know replace their phone every 6 months more less, they buy and sell it.
My actual phone, yes, an Android Galaxy S was bougth through eBay for $200 unlock from a person which uses his reward points.
By they way, I bought my iPhone 3G for 200€ (subsudizedI) and I sold it for 250€ a year later and I bought the Nexus One for 400€ unsubsudized and I sold it for 500€ 9 months later
Wow! That's very interesting!
You seem to be making money!
Why do smart phones appreciate in price?
Are there artificial shortages or import restrictions?
Doesn't a legacy of app purchases tend to tie the consumer to a specific brand of phone?
One of the 1st gen 1 iPhone apps I bought was Sketches. It was written by two Spaniards in Madrid. At the time iPhones were unavailable there and were purchased on trips to the US. I suspect that is no longer necessary.
P.S. I've never been to Barcelona -- but it was the highlight of my daughter's High school trip to Europe... Our family spent time in Madrid and Costa del Sol on another trip. Loved it -- Especially a trip To Ronda.
.
Yeah -- that's the only market I know.
But, even (maybe more so) with unsubsidized phones, how often does the average consumer replace his phone?
Had my phone for five going on six years. LG VX5300. Best phone ever. I ignore texting and all the fake features in the terrible OS and just have it for if people call me. If I can get a CDMA iPhone without a data plan, I'll get a new iPhone. If not, I'll have Verizon activate my iPhone 2G using an LTE modem SIM. Should be interesting.
That said, most users of this website have an incredibly skewed view of Android. You all make remarks about the terrible hardware and software of Android phones, and I have to wonder if any of you have ever actually picked one up and used it. The high end Android phones (the ones truly competing with the iPhone) lack nothing with regards to hardware and software quality. My phone, the Droid X, is a truly fantastic piece of technology that deserves nothing but praise from gadget lovers (I have to assume anyone who reads this site falls into that category). The same goes for for the Droid, the Droid 2, the Droid Incredible, the Galaxy S, the Nexus One, the Nexus S, etc. Those devices are wonderful phones that bring a very satisfying user experience across the board. I won't speak for Android devices that are dissimilar from those I just listed since I have never used any.
Now back to some points more relevant to this thread. I'm tired of hearing the argument about the number of Android devices vs. the number of iOS devices. First off, it doesn't matter as long as both operating systems are selling above some critical level. But if to you it does matter, then realize that Android sales are comparable to iPhone sales because they represent all phones running the Android operating system, just as iPhone sales represent all phones running iOS. To say that Android sales numbers are only relevant phone by phone is silly and displays poor logic. Nobody can know that Android wouldn't sell in equal numbers if it were only released on one phone (or iterations thereof), so drop the argument. There's no sound point you can make in contradiction. As far as BOGOs enhancing sales, go to Verizon's website right now, and count the number of Android devices on BOGO; there are two (probably slow sellers at this point). Sales like that are generally used to reduce inventories of older products, so it's unlikely that the phenomenal sales rates of Android devices is due in large part to them.
Finally, solipsism, your graphs are outdated, although they are very nice. Most of the Android devices on them still showed 2.1 as their operating system rather than 2.2, which all of them currently run.
Finally, solipsism, your graphs are outdated, although they are very nice. Most of the Android devices on them still showed 2.1 as their operating system rather than 2.2, which all of them currently run.
Welcome to the forum.
I made mention of the Android OS changes, but iOS has also been updated. Those graphs are from October from the Samsung Galaxy S review on AnandTech. I was informed that faster HW means faster user experience and that optimizing code doesn’t make a lick of different if you don’t have faster HW. Hence, I showed otherwise. The fact that 2.2 is better optimized just proves my point. I’m sure the latest and next iOS updates will also be better optimized, too.
To reiterate, when using different OSes you can’t simply look at HW specs and say which one will perform better as noted by the graphs above.