Not really. They just need to be good enough to offer a viable alternative. Android phones fumbled around for awhile at first, but now are giving Apple some competition. They didn't "leapfrog" the iPhone. They offered good options as an alternative.
Believe it or not, not everyone drinks the Apple Kool-Aid. Some people want choices which Apple refuse to offer. And I know a growing number of people who are anti-Apple because of that lack of choice and the "my way or the highway" attitude. Sure, Apple has the best option right now, but that doesn't mean it fits everyone's needs.
Don't take this the wrong way but I doubt Steve Jobs is losing sleep worrying about a relatively small percentage of consumers who will seek out a viable alternative to the iPad out of spite.
The average consumer knows that software is easily acquired for great prices and, really, what else matters. What you think of as a closed system that is bad for consumers the average consumer perceives to be an organized, well-thought-out software delivery system that results in stable operation, few compatibility issues, in short, the sort of user experience that was only dreamed of under the so-called open system that was controlled so poorly by Microsoft.
Speaking of Microsoft, while there was some pushback to the virtual Microsoft monopoly, that monopoly thrived for the longest time just the same. The difference is that the Microsoft monopoly forced a horrible user experience onto consumers who just wanted a computer that worked while Apple's closed approach is making for a better, more stable user experience.
Those choices you refer to come at a cost. Instead of a system that is carefully integrated as is the iPad environment, opening the floodgates as many advocate would only lead to the sort of garbage that PC users allowed themselves to be subjected to for decades. Jobs correctly perceived that the so-called open approach was the root cause of all the nasty issues that marred the user experience on the PC side. While there are a hardy few who revel in all the expertise needed to successfully navigate such rough waters, the rest of us just want electronic lifestyle devices that just work. We also want the cost of ownership to be reasonably low, which with Apple products it can be because well-designed software that covers the basics pretty much is there right out of the box.
The App Store, meanwhile, offers access to incredibly inexpensive software. Does it really matter to the average consumer that it's Apple's software delivery system or nothing. I mean, really, who cares, when it's the developers who set the price for their products, not Apple. The quality of the software largely determines how much developers can charge and as such there are market-driven forces that impact on price. It's not the same thing as having a monopoly charge whatever it feels like for a must-have product. You have your choice as a consumer of many software products, often competing in the same space, and that competition means there is motivation for developers to offer up good products for good prices. With that pressure on prices, consumers are not the losers and in fact there is plenty of upside for consumers in that software compatibility is carefully orchestrated by Apple, avoiding the nightmare we were subjected to under a Microsoft-dominated PC system.
When an iPhone or Touch or iPad owner can pay good prices for decent software that makes his or her device rather useful, how is that a problem?
It's not as if I want other tablet-makers to fail, basically giving up the fight. For us consumers, there is only good that can come from another company offering a quality device at a great price. It means that Apple has to continue to raise the bar to avoid being overtaken. So if a few consumers buy something other than an iPad, that's not a bad thing. On the other hand, thank God that Apple finally stepped up and showed other manufacturers a better way to serve the low-end computer market than those horrendous netbooks we were being sold not so long ago.
You talk of drinking the Apple Kool-Aid but if I were you I'd be taking a long hard look at what has long been in the glass you've been drinking out of. Unless having to deal with all the headaches caused by the mess that Apple's competitors have stuck us with over the years is your idea of fun times, you've been had.
But the "My way or the highway" attitude is misattributed if applied to Apple.
Apple tends to focus its efforts on a few superior products that will satisfy a majority of the markets in which they choose to participate -- then support the hell out of them.
Competitors. largely, try to have something for everyone and regurgitate forth a plethora of poorly thought-out and developed offerings to see if/what will sell -- often abandoning new products a few months after (even before) they get to market.
Apple chooses where and how they compete -- they never claim to have a solution for all users.
Are you also counting AppleTV2 and the original iPhone?
This is about 7 months old, but still a very good article on the subject. Note that in September Google stated that 200K Android devices were being activated per day, while Apple was quoting 230K. As of a week or so ago Google is now showing 400K activations per day.
...compare this to the iPhone/Android phones market, but what everyone fails to mention is this.
A cell phone is, for all intents and purposes, a necessity, these days. Data Plans? No, but data plans are not so prohibitively expensive.
Google and their OEMs were smart in targeting Verizon in the US as the main carrier. Take the biggest carrier, that also happens to not have the iPhone, and introduce a viable alternative. This is the key to the early success of the Android platform.
It was an alternative platform, in an existing market, that, like iOS, was able to push the market forward.
Turn your attention to tablets. Apple introduced the iPad not as a replacement to anything. As a "tweener" product. It's not a smartphone, but it's not a laptop. It doesn't do everything, but what it does do? It does better than the alternatives.
However, what the tablet market is not? It is not a need. As I mentioned, people basically need a cell phone these days, and they need a computer. They do not need the in between product. It is an accessory. A luxury. Most people, when looking at a luxury item, don't settle. They go for the best/what they want, or the "popular" or status symbol item.
In other words, as of today, they will go with the iPad.
Until everyone "needs" a tablet, the iPad, in my opinion, will dominate. It is wrong to compare it to the smartphone market. It is more closely associated with the MP3 player market, where, just like coke and kleenex before it, iPod has become the "genericized" name referring to a product category.
Whoops, I just parroted your comments below, didn't read this first....I agree 100%
"RIM is burying themselves with disastrous PR for this one device alone."
but we have heard over and over how to forget the past this is the future of RIM, and how this alone will rescue BB and RIM, well enterprise sees the writing on the wall, RIM can't provide the support of the products, which os to use and continue supporting, too fragmented to really care. enterprise is moving AWAY from RIM to android and iOS
RIM's big players, enterprise are moving on
there was a good article about the the future of RIM and it wasn't pretty when i find it i will post
I actually hope they figure it out and do well. More competition is better for the market. It will push innovation at a faster pace. Yes, even as good as Apple's products are, I believe they could do even better if they had some competition nipping at their heels.
I read this sort of sentiment a lot but I have to say, Apple doesn't seem to need competition to put out the best possible products they can. They are simply self motivated to do so well they are beyond any possible competition. The so called competition in OS, phones and tablets are simply copycats which don't qualify as competition in the real sense of the word.
All sewn up? No. But I do expect the Android market share to increase. But I only point out the Android handset market share to illustrate that pointing and laughing at a product is often a short term thing. People did laugh at Android. Andoid handsets now sell like hotcakes. I'll not get into the debate about whether they out sell iOS devices. The point being that anybody laughing at Android handsets today better take another look. I strongly suspect the same thing may happen to the Android tablet market. No, Android doesn't have the market sewn up in tablets either. But it's a young market.
Note that I own an iPad and an iPhone. I like the products. I just don't laugh at the competition.
I'm not laughing either, but I think that there are some fundamentals that may bite Android. I don't think that Android is selling like hotcakes. Free phones with two year contracts and buy one, get one free is not selling. It's giving it away. They are being given away like hotcakes for sure.
There is no debate about whether iOS or Android has more units. Apple and Google released quarterlies and Apple has more units out there than Android. That's it. That's fact. No debate.
And you are, IMO, drawing conclusions for the tablet market based on what you see with phones. I feel very comfortable stating two facts:
1. You will not see any BOGO Android tablet offers.
2. You will not see any fully subsidized(certainly not wifi-only), ie, free Android tablets.
Why? Because people are buying Wifi only versions *far* more than 3G versions and without the data plan, no one can afford to give the tablets away.
The two reasons, Android over took marketshare in the US, IMO, is from the carriers subsidizing the prices and no iPhone competition. iPhone has always outsold Android on AT&T and now its happening on Verizon.
Tablets pull the carriers out of the equation. Apple has the price point advantage, the software advantage, the ecosystem advantage, the brand advantage, the point of sales advantage. By almost every metric with which I am familiar Apple has the margin advantage. The tablet market is iPad vs. Everyone else and everyone, *everyone* is coming up short. The problem is that the other companies all combined lack the finances, scale and engineering talents that Apple commands.
Open is not a selling feature to most.
Multitasking is not a selling feature to most.
Flash is not a selling feature to most. iOS's success has proven this again and again. The only thing slowing down Apple is its ability to build the product.
Enjoy your laugh now. Then again, perhaps your laugh will continue for a while, I don't know. I do know that today's Android phone market is larger than the iOS market. It's tough to laugh at Android handsets. At least today. Once upon a time, Android phones were weak. Rushed to market. The only appeal was that they weren't Apple products. And yet they still sold. Today, Android phones are represent a pretty decent platform. A true alternative to iOS. I suspect that Android on tablets will come around as well. You may be laughing at something that will come back to bite you.
You boys with your "My thing is bigger than yours" attitude refuse to measure by the only metric which Apple cares about: revenue.
Despite market share talk, Apple's revenue numbers are increasingly better and better. As a shareholder that's all i care about. So if it means that much to you to have x number of carriers give away Android phones or sell them for bottom dollar and still be destroyed by iOS devices in terms of revenue, by all means please keep looking at the distraction. Apple will continue to make money hand over fist with a products that people buy and love.
You're looking at individual manufacturers, I'm looking at the entire Android market. Cumulatively, I believe more Android handsets were sold than iPhones. But you have an excellent point about revenue. Apple is making a huge profit.
If you say phones, sure, but you said Android is bigger than iOS. That simply isn't true.
You boys with your "My thing is bigger than yours" attitude refuse to measure by the only metric which Apple cares about: revenue.
Despite market share talk, Apple's revenue numbers are increasingly better and better. As a shareholder that's all i care about. So if it means that much to you to have x number of carriers give away Android phones or sell them for bottom dollar and still be destroyed by iOS devices in terms of revenue, by all means please keep looking at the distraction. Apple will continue to make money hand over fist with a products that people buy and love.
That's exactly what you should be looking at rather than market share. That's the only figure that really matters at the end of the day.
I do know that today's Android phone market is larger than the iOS market. It's tough to laugh at Android handsets. At least today. Once upon a time, Android phones were weak. Rushed to market. The only appeal was that they weren't Apple products. And yet they still sold. Today, Android phones are represent a pretty decent platform. A true alternative to iOS. I suspect that Android on tablets will come around as well. You may be laughing at something that will come back to bite you.
Of course it’s larger, anything less would be a complete failure considering all vendors and all carriers with multiple handset brands are competing with one brand from one vendor.
I’ll let Horace Dediu sum it up:
So what makes the iPhone dead in the water?
The claim was made relative to the (a) share of (b) mobile platforms (c) installed base (d) in the US. In other words, if one adds all Android phones in use vs. the iPhones in use in the US (while ignoring iOS devices other than iPhone) while the market is growing at nearly triple digit rates, then the iPhone is not gaining (much) share.
That’s the most obtuse way of suggesting a slowing product. If something is dead in the water, it isn’t going anywhere or making any progress.
On a unit basis and one the basis of vendor comparison, iPhone is doing very well. On the basis of value capture and profitability it’s doing even better. More about that later.
Note the iPhone takes over 50% of the world’s handset profits and is still growing not only in unit sales but as a percentage of the unit sales of smartphones sold.
Motorola, a prominent and well known vendor using Android, had a loss of $81 million. But at least it’s better than the $212 million loss for that same quarter a year ago.
You're looking at individual manufacturers, I'm looking at the entire Android market. Cumulatively, I believe more Android handsets were sold than iPhones. But you have an excellent point about revenue. Apple is making a huge profit.
Its either iPhone against other PHONES, individually, or Andoid against all iOS devices.
You can't have it both ways. 'Cumulatively', iOS devices outsold Android devices.
But even that's a nonsensical comparison, because companies die or thrive as individuals, not as part of a collective of shareware licensees.
Apple doesn't compete against 'Android'. It competes against LG, Moto, Samsung, etc.
And lets not even get into the fact that as far as profits (the only thing that really matters), Apple kicks a$$ even if you combine the competition.
Originally Posted by Curmudgeon, and for that matter everyone else going off on the iOS vs Android tangent
Enjoy your laugh now. Then again, perhaps your laugh will continue for a while, I don't know. I do know that today's Android phone market is larger than the iOS market. It's tough to laugh at Android handsets. At least today. Once upon a time, Android phones were weak. Rushed to market. The only appeal was that they weren't Apple products. And yet they still sold. Today, Android phones are represent a pretty decent platform. A true alternative to iOS. I suspect that Android on tablets will come around as well. You may be laughing at something that will come back to bite you.
I was laughing at the shiny slab of failure that is the PlayBook recall, actually.
Were I laughing at Android, that response would have been accurate though. I think Android has the best shot at making a tablet that can truly replace the low-end laptop - a quad-core in the Transformer chassis would be a hit. If they can make the software less of a, well, mess.
As I mentioned, people basically need a cell phone these days, and they need a computer. They do not need the in between product. It is an accessory. A luxury.
Agree very much with your analysis. It's very insightful. Thanks!
...compare this to the iPhone/Android phones market, but what everyone fails to mention is this.
A cell phone is, for all intents and purposes, a necessity, these days. Data Plans? No, but data plans are not so prohibitively expensive.
Google and their OEMs were smart in targeting Verizon in the US as the main carrier. Take the biggest carrier, that also happens to not have the iPhone, and introduce a viable alternative. This is the key to the early success of the Android platform.
It was an alternative platform, in an existing market, that, like iOS, was able to push the market forward.
Turn your attention to tablets. Apple introduced the iPad not as a replacement to anything. As a "tweener" product. It's not a smartphone, but it's not a laptop. It doesn't do everything, but what it does do? It does better than the alternatives.
However, what the tablet market is not? It is not a need. As I mentioned, people basically need a cell phone these days, and they need a computer. They do not need the in between product. It is an accessory. A luxury. Most people, when looking at a luxury item, don't settle. They go for the best/what they want, or the "popular" or status symbol item.
In other words, as of today, they will go with the iPad.
Until everyone "needs" a tablet, the iPad, in my opinion, will dominate. It is wrong to compare it to the smartphone market. It is more closely associated with the MP3 player market, where, just like coke and kleenex before it, iPod has become the "genericized" name referring to a product category.
What most consumers do seek out, and many perceive as a need, is a portable device to perform some basic tasks like media consumption, e-mailing, surfing, etc. The laptop provided that for years but with shortcomings including poor battery life and a bulky, awkward form factor. The iPad has stepped in to allow consumers to perform tasks that were the domain of laptops but with a more convenient form factor and far superior battery life.
You could argue that we don't need such a device yet one could reasonably argue that the vast majority of consumers don't really need a cell phone, yet now I think many of us treat it like a necessity.
If today most are opting for the iPad, it's not because they think it's a luxury item and hence might as well buy the best. It's because for the price, the iPad is by far the most polished, functional tablet on the market. It does certain things better than any other device available and if what you are looking for is a device to perform those specific tasks, opting for the iPad, at the moment, is a no-brainer. If I had someone looking for a convenient, portable Internet/Media Consumption/Gaming platform, I really can't think of anything available today that does it better. Certainly, if the person in question was not all that tech savvy, the iPad would be top of the list.
Besides, what manufacturer is offering a tablet that, considering the specs, provides a lower-cost, i.e. cheaper, alternative to the iPad? For the iPad to be perceived to be a luxury choice, it would have to have been more expensive. You couldn't buy a $200 iPad knockoff even if you wanted to. Perhaps eventually such garbage will flood the market but we're not there today.
I'm a sort of "edge case" iPad user in that I use mine almost exclusively as a productivity device. It's basically my main portable computer like a netbook or a laptop. I know most don't use the iPad that way, but the point is more and more people will over time if it's ever to replace traditional laptops (and I totally think they can). If Apple doesn't get the finger out and attack the productivity issue soon it might be too late.
Apple really needs to move iOS in the direction of productivity and personally I'm hoping that's what iOS 5 is all about because if it isn't, they might not have another year of lollygagging around by the other manufacturers to do that. I use Pages on the iPad every day all day and it's seriously lacking. It's not feature complete, and when it first came out it was essentially a beta product. So far they've release a single, weak update that added in a few thing that were missing from the beta (but not all), and some bug fixes. That's it.
Hell, DoodleJump on my iPhone must have been updated and patched literally 20 times in the same amount of time it got Apple to put out the single bug-fix to Pages. Pages is obviously a more complicated and involved app, but Pages is supposed to be the leading productivity app on the platform. If this is the best they can do then the iPad really is just a toy.
I think it's kind of embarrassing how little Apple has done on this front, but I'm still assuming that they are working on a big update that will surprise us all soon. I can't imagine what the hell they are thinking if they are not.
Edit: Oops -- working on a Mac instead of an iPad, in bed -- and I truncated the post I was responding to (above) and My first points (below):
I agree with what you say!
I believe that MS should offer Word and Excel apps for the iPad ASAP, or they will miss a great opportunity -- the paopportunity to be apart of the tablet environment as it evolves. If, later, MS enters the market with a Win tab solution. they will have existing, proven tablet versions of these apps. If not, they will have apps running on the dominant tablet platform.
End Edit.
That said, Apple does need to flesh out its iPad iWork apps.
However, I do not believe that these apps need to be able to handle every little feature in their respective MS apps -- rather handle the most commonly-used features.
I suspect that Apple is in the process of cross-breeding or combining the OS X and iOS versions of these apps -- while adding support for more MS features & compatibility. It would be stupid if they aren't doing this, IMO.
I believe that this may already be a "done deal" and the code has already been written.
I think that there are several things key to Apple's plans for the immediate and near future.
Greatest of these are:
1) iOS 5
2) Lion
3) the NC Datacenter
I think that iOS and Lion are going to have common features where possible.
I thing that most (if not all) Apple Software products will run on either iOS or Lion
I think that companion apps and or services will be offered from the cloud as some sort of rejuvenated MobileMe -- regardless of what it is called.
I suspect that we will see a lot of this rolled out at WWDC on June 6 -- D-Day, on the Beaches of Mosconi.
Apple's foremost Pro app suite, Final Cut is scheduled for a total replacement upgrade as FCPX in July.
I fully expect FCPX to integrate with Lion, iOS where possible, and Apple's cloud offering.
Somewhere in the 3-6 month time period after WWDC, I expect Apple to release their cross-OS/Cloud-integrated iLife and iWork apps.
This time, however, Apple won't try to do it all at once -- rather they will roll out a piece at a time.
Research in Motion has recalled about 1,000 defective units of its new PlayBook tablet, though most had not yet been sold to users.
"It's a point of sales problem. It's an expertise problem. It's a marketing problem to consumers. It's a price point problem," he reportedly said, adding: "And it's a software richness of content problem."
But having the ability to play Flash is not a problem!
RIM got one thing right when they said, "Playtime is over."
Comments
Not really. They just need to be good enough to offer a viable alternative. Android phones fumbled around for awhile at first, but now are giving Apple some competition. They didn't "leapfrog" the iPhone. They offered good options as an alternative.
Believe it or not, not everyone drinks the Apple Kool-Aid. Some people want choices which Apple refuse to offer. And I know a growing number of people who are anti-Apple because of that lack of choice and the "my way or the highway" attitude. Sure, Apple has the best option right now, but that doesn't mean it fits everyone's needs.
Don't take this the wrong way but I doubt Steve Jobs is losing sleep worrying about a relatively small percentage of consumers who will seek out a viable alternative to the iPad out of spite.
The average consumer knows that software is easily acquired for great prices and, really, what else matters. What you think of as a closed system that is bad for consumers the average consumer perceives to be an organized, well-thought-out software delivery system that results in stable operation, few compatibility issues, in short, the sort of user experience that was only dreamed of under the so-called open system that was controlled so poorly by Microsoft.
Speaking of Microsoft, while there was some pushback to the virtual Microsoft monopoly, that monopoly thrived for the longest time just the same. The difference is that the Microsoft monopoly forced a horrible user experience onto consumers who just wanted a computer that worked while Apple's closed approach is making for a better, more stable user experience.
Those choices you refer to come at a cost. Instead of a system that is carefully integrated as is the iPad environment, opening the floodgates as many advocate would only lead to the sort of garbage that PC users allowed themselves to be subjected to for decades. Jobs correctly perceived that the so-called open approach was the root cause of all the nasty issues that marred the user experience on the PC side. While there are a hardy few who revel in all the expertise needed to successfully navigate such rough waters, the rest of us just want electronic lifestyle devices that just work. We also want the cost of ownership to be reasonably low, which with Apple products it can be because well-designed software that covers the basics pretty much is there right out of the box.
The App Store, meanwhile, offers access to incredibly inexpensive software. Does it really matter to the average consumer that it's Apple's software delivery system or nothing. I mean, really, who cares, when it's the developers who set the price for their products, not Apple. The quality of the software largely determines how much developers can charge and as such there are market-driven forces that impact on price. It's not the same thing as having a monopoly charge whatever it feels like for a must-have product. You have your choice as a consumer of many software products, often competing in the same space, and that competition means there is motivation for developers to offer up good products for good prices. With that pressure on prices, consumers are not the losers and in fact there is plenty of upside for consumers in that software compatibility is carefully orchestrated by Apple, avoiding the nightmare we were subjected to under a Microsoft-dominated PC system.
When an iPhone or Touch or iPad owner can pay good prices for decent software that makes his or her device rather useful, how is that a problem?
It's not as if I want other tablet-makers to fail, basically giving up the fight. For us consumers, there is only good that can come from another company offering a quality device at a great price. It means that Apple has to continue to raise the bar to avoid being overtaken. So if a few consumers buy something other than an iPad, that's not a bad thing. On the other hand, thank God that Apple finally stepped up and showed other manufacturers a better way to serve the low-end computer market than those horrendous netbooks we were being sold not so long ago.
You talk of drinking the Apple Kool-Aid but if I were you I'd be taking a long hard look at what has long been in the glass you've been drinking out of. Unless having to deal with all the headaches caused by the mess that Apple's competitors have stuck us with over the years is your idea of fun times, you've been had.
I don't mean to pick on you in particular!
But the "My way or the highway" attitude is misattributed if applied to Apple.
Apple tends to focus its efforts on a few superior products that will satisfy a majority of the markets in which they choose to participate -- then support the hell out of them.
Competitors. largely, try to have something for everyone and regurgitate forth a plethora of poorly thought-out and developed offerings to see if/what will sell -- often abandoning new products a few months after (even before) they get to market.
Apple chooses where and how they compete -- they never claim to have a solution for all users.
I applaud Apple for their approach!
This is a completely true take IMO.
Facts?
Are you also counting AppleTV2 and the original iPhone?
This is about 7 months old, but still a very good article on the subject. Note that in September Google stated that 200K Android devices were being activated per day, while Apple was quoting 230K. As of a week or so ago Google is now showing 400K activations per day.
http://blogs.computerworld.com/16887...evices_a_month
...compare this to the iPhone/Android phones market, but what everyone fails to mention is this.
A cell phone is, for all intents and purposes, a necessity, these days. Data Plans? No, but data plans are not so prohibitively expensive.
Google and their OEMs were smart in targeting Verizon in the US as the main carrier. Take the biggest carrier, that also happens to not have the iPhone, and introduce a viable alternative. This is the key to the early success of the Android platform.
It was an alternative platform, in an existing market, that, like iOS, was able to push the market forward.
Turn your attention to tablets. Apple introduced the iPad not as a replacement to anything. As a "tweener" product. It's not a smartphone, but it's not a laptop. It doesn't do everything, but what it does do? It does better than the alternatives.
However, what the tablet market is not? It is not a need. As I mentioned, people basically need a cell phone these days, and they need a computer. They do not need the in between product. It is an accessory. A luxury. Most people, when looking at a luxury item, don't settle. They go for the best/what they want, or the "popular" or status symbol item.
In other words, as of today, they will go with the iPad.
Until everyone "needs" a tablet, the iPad, in my opinion, will dominate. It is wrong to compare it to the smartphone market. It is more closely associated with the MP3 player market, where, just like coke and kleenex before it, iPod has become the "genericized" name referring to a product category.
Whoops, I just parroted your comments below, didn't read this first....I agree 100%
nothing like cutting to the meat
"RIM is burying themselves with disastrous PR for this one device alone."
but we have heard over and over how to forget the past this is the future of RIM, and how this alone will rescue BB and RIM, well enterprise sees the writing on the wall, RIM can't provide the support of the products, which os to use and continue supporting, too fragmented to really care. enterprise is moving AWAY from RIM to android and iOS
RIM's big players, enterprise are moving on
there was a good article about the the future of RIM and it wasn't pretty when i find it i will post
RIM is in deep deep trouble
found the article:
http://www.macworld.com/article/1598...lackberry.html
Funny - as displayed on my iPad - the end of the article link you posted was truncated to "lackberry" ...
I actually hope they figure it out and do well. More competition is better for the market. It will push innovation at a faster pace. Yes, even as good as Apple's products are, I believe they could do even better if they had some competition nipping at their heels.
I read this sort of sentiment a lot but I have to say, Apple doesn't seem to need competition to put out the best possible products they can. They are simply self motivated to do so well they are beyond any possible competition. The so called competition in OS, phones and tablets are simply copycats which don't qualify as competition in the real sense of the word.
So they've recalled all of them then.
My thoughts exactly
All sewn up? No. But I do expect the Android market share to increase. But I only point out the Android handset market share to illustrate that pointing and laughing at a product is often a short term thing. People did laugh at Android. Andoid handsets now sell like hotcakes. I'll not get into the debate about whether they out sell iOS devices. The point being that anybody laughing at Android handsets today better take another look. I strongly suspect the same thing may happen to the Android tablet market. No, Android doesn't have the market sewn up in tablets either. But it's a young market.
Note that I own an iPad and an iPhone. I like the products. I just don't laugh at the competition.
I'm not laughing either, but I think that there are some fundamentals that may bite Android. I don't think that Android is selling like hotcakes. Free phones with two year contracts and buy one, get one free is not selling. It's giving it away. They are being given away like hotcakes for sure.
There is no debate about whether iOS or Android has more units. Apple and Google released quarterlies and Apple has more units out there than Android. That's it. That's fact. No debate.
And you are, IMO, drawing conclusions for the tablet market based on what you see with phones. I feel very comfortable stating two facts:
1. You will not see any BOGO Android tablet offers.
2. You will not see any fully subsidized(certainly not wifi-only), ie, free Android tablets.
Why? Because people are buying Wifi only versions *far* more than 3G versions and without the data plan, no one can afford to give the tablets away.
The two reasons, Android over took marketshare in the US, IMO, is from the carriers subsidizing the prices and no iPhone competition. iPhone has always outsold Android on AT&T and now its happening on Verizon.
Tablets pull the carriers out of the equation. Apple has the price point advantage, the software advantage, the ecosystem advantage, the brand advantage, the point of sales advantage. By almost every metric with which I am familiar Apple has the margin advantage. The tablet market is iPad vs. Everyone else and everyone, *everyone* is coming up short. The problem is that the other companies all combined lack the finances, scale and engineering talents that Apple commands.
Open is not a selling feature to most.
Multitasking is not a selling feature to most.
Flash is not a selling feature to most. iOS's success has proven this again and again. The only thing slowing down Apple is its ability to build the product.
Enjoy your laugh now. Then again, perhaps your laugh will continue for a while, I don't know. I do know that today's Android phone market is larger than the iOS market. It's tough to laugh at Android handsets. At least today. Once upon a time, Android phones were weak. Rushed to market. The only appeal was that they weren't Apple products. And yet they still sold. Today, Android phones are represent a pretty decent platform. A true alternative to iOS. I suspect that Android on tablets will come around as well. You may be laughing at something that will come back to bite you.
You boys with your "My thing is bigger than yours" attitude refuse to measure by the only metric which Apple cares about: revenue.
Despite market share talk, Apple's revenue numbers are increasingly better and better. As a shareholder that's all i care about. So if it means that much to you to have x number of carriers give away Android phones or sell them for bottom dollar and still be destroyed by iOS devices in terms of revenue, by all means please keep looking at the distraction. Apple will continue to make money hand over fist with a products that people buy and love.
You're looking at individual manufacturers, I'm looking at the entire Android market. Cumulatively, I believe more Android handsets were sold than iPhones. But you have an excellent point about revenue. Apple is making a huge profit.
If you say phones, sure, but you said Android is bigger than iOS. That simply isn't true.
You boys with your "My thing is bigger than yours" attitude refuse to measure by the only metric which Apple cares about: revenue.
Despite market share talk, Apple's revenue numbers are increasingly better and better. As a shareholder that's all i care about. So if it means that much to you to have x number of carriers give away Android phones or sell them for bottom dollar and still be destroyed by iOS devices in terms of revenue, by all means please keep looking at the distraction. Apple will continue to make money hand over fist with a products that people buy and love.
That's exactly what you should be looking at rather than market share. That's the only figure that really matters at the end of the day.
I do know that today's Android phone market is larger than the iOS market. It's tough to laugh at Android handsets. At least today. Once upon a time, Android phones were weak. Rushed to market. The only appeal was that they weren't Apple products. And yet they still sold. Today, Android phones are represent a pretty decent platform. A true alternative to iOS. I suspect that Android on tablets will come around as well. You may be laughing at something that will come back to bite you.
Of course it’s larger, anything less would be a complete failure considering all vendors and all carriers with multiple handset brands are competing with one brand from one vendor.
I’ll let Horace Dediu sum it up: Note the iPhone takes over 50% of the world’s handset profits and is still growing not only in unit sales but as a percentage of the unit sales of smartphones sold.Motorola, a prominent and well known vendor using Android, had a loss of $81 million. But at least it’s better than the $212 million loss for that same quarter a year ago.
You're looking at individual manufacturers, I'm looking at the entire Android market. Cumulatively, I believe more Android handsets were sold than iPhones. But you have an excellent point about revenue. Apple is making a huge profit.
Its either iPhone against other PHONES, individually, or Andoid against all iOS devices.
You can't have it both ways. 'Cumulatively', iOS devices outsold Android devices.
But even that's a nonsensical comparison, because companies die or thrive as individuals, not as part of a collective of shareware licensees.
Apple doesn't compete against 'Android'. It competes against LG, Moto, Samsung, etc.
And lets not even get into the fact that as far as profits (the only thing that really matters), Apple kicks a$$ even if you combine the competition.
Enjoy your laugh now. Then again, perhaps your laugh will continue for a while, I don't know. I do know that today's Android phone market is larger than the iOS market. It's tough to laugh at Android handsets. At least today. Once upon a time, Android phones were weak. Rushed to market. The only appeal was that they weren't Apple products. And yet they still sold. Today, Android phones are represent a pretty decent platform. A true alternative to iOS. I suspect that Android on tablets will come around as well. You may be laughing at something that will come back to bite you.
I was laughing at the shiny slab of failure that is the PlayBook recall, actually.
Were I laughing at Android, that response would have been accurate though. I think Android has the best shot at making a tablet that can truly replace the low-end laptop - a quad-core in the Transformer chassis would be a hit. If they can make the software less of a, well, mess.
As I mentioned, people basically need a cell phone these days, and they need a computer. They do not need the in between product. It is an accessory. A luxury.
Agree very much with your analysis. It's very insightful. Thanks!
...compare this to the iPhone/Android phones market, but what everyone fails to mention is this.
A cell phone is, for all intents and purposes, a necessity, these days. Data Plans? No, but data plans are not so prohibitively expensive.
Google and their OEMs were smart in targeting Verizon in the US as the main carrier. Take the biggest carrier, that also happens to not have the iPhone, and introduce a viable alternative. This is the key to the early success of the Android platform.
It was an alternative platform, in an existing market, that, like iOS, was able to push the market forward.
Turn your attention to tablets. Apple introduced the iPad not as a replacement to anything. As a "tweener" product. It's not a smartphone, but it's not a laptop. It doesn't do everything, but what it does do? It does better than the alternatives.
However, what the tablet market is not? It is not a need. As I mentioned, people basically need a cell phone these days, and they need a computer. They do not need the in between product. It is an accessory. A luxury. Most people, when looking at a luxury item, don't settle. They go for the best/what they want, or the "popular" or status symbol item.
In other words, as of today, they will go with the iPad.
Until everyone "needs" a tablet, the iPad, in my opinion, will dominate. It is wrong to compare it to the smartphone market. It is more closely associated with the MP3 player market, where, just like coke and kleenex before it, iPod has become the "genericized" name referring to a product category.
What most consumers do seek out, and many perceive as a need, is a portable device to perform some basic tasks like media consumption, e-mailing, surfing, etc. The laptop provided that for years but with shortcomings including poor battery life and a bulky, awkward form factor. The iPad has stepped in to allow consumers to perform tasks that were the domain of laptops but with a more convenient form factor and far superior battery life.
You could argue that we don't need such a device yet one could reasonably argue that the vast majority of consumers don't really need a cell phone, yet now I think many of us treat it like a necessity.
If today most are opting for the iPad, it's not because they think it's a luxury item and hence might as well buy the best. It's because for the price, the iPad is by far the most polished, functional tablet on the market. It does certain things better than any other device available and if what you are looking for is a device to perform those specific tasks, opting for the iPad, at the moment, is a no-brainer. If I had someone looking for a convenient, portable Internet/Media Consumption/Gaming platform, I really can't think of anything available today that does it better. Certainly, if the person in question was not all that tech savvy, the iPad would be top of the list.
Besides, what manufacturer is offering a tablet that, considering the specs, provides a lower-cost, i.e. cheaper, alternative to the iPad? For the iPad to be perceived to be a luxury choice, it would have to have been more expensive. You couldn't buy a $200 iPad knockoff even if you wanted to. Perhaps eventually such garbage will flood the market but we're not there today.
I completely agree with this.
I'm a sort of "edge case" iPad user in that I use mine almost exclusively as a productivity device. It's basically my main portable computer like a netbook or a laptop. I know most don't use the iPad that way, but the point is more and more people will over time if it's ever to replace traditional laptops (and I totally think they can). If Apple doesn't get the finger out and attack the productivity issue soon it might be too late.
Apple really needs to move iOS in the direction of productivity and personally I'm hoping that's what iOS 5 is all about because if it isn't, they might not have another year of lollygagging around by the other manufacturers to do that. I use Pages on the iPad every day all day and it's seriously lacking. It's not feature complete, and when it first came out it was essentially a beta product. So far they've release a single, weak update that added in a few thing that were missing from the beta (but not all), and some bug fixes. That's it.
Hell, DoodleJump on my iPhone must have been updated and patched literally 20 times in the same amount of time it got Apple to put out the single bug-fix to Pages. Pages is obviously a more complicated and involved app, but Pages is supposed to be the leading productivity app on the platform. If this is the best they can do then the iPad really is just a toy.
I think it's kind of embarrassing how little Apple has done on this front, but I'm still assuming that they are working on a big update that will surprise us all soon. I can't imagine what the hell they are thinking if they are not.
Edit: Oops -- working on a Mac instead of an iPad, in bed -- and I truncated the post I was responding to (above) and My first points (below):
I agree with what you say!
I believe that MS should offer Word and Excel apps for the iPad ASAP, or they will miss a great opportunity -- the paopportunity to be apart of the tablet environment as it evolves. If, later, MS enters the market with a Win tab solution. they will have existing, proven tablet versions of these apps. If not, they will have apps running on the dominant tablet platform.
End Edit.
That said, Apple does need to flesh out its iPad iWork apps.
However, I do not believe that these apps need to be able to handle every little feature in their respective MS apps -- rather handle the most commonly-used features.
I suspect that Apple is in the process of cross-breeding or combining the OS X and iOS versions of these apps -- while adding support for more MS features & compatibility. It would be stupid if they aren't doing this, IMO.
I believe that this may already be a "done deal" and the code has already been written.
I think that there are several things key to Apple's plans for the immediate and near future.
Greatest of these are:
1) iOS 5
2) Lion
3) the NC Datacenter
I think that iOS and Lion are going to have common features where possible.
I thing that most (if not all) Apple Software products will run on either iOS or Lion
I think that companion apps and or services will be offered from the cloud as some sort of rejuvenated MobileMe -- regardless of what it is called.
I suspect that we will see a lot of this rolled out at WWDC on June 6 -- D-Day, on the Beaches of Mosconi.
Apple's foremost Pro app suite, Final Cut is scheduled for a total replacement upgrade as FCPX in July.
I fully expect FCPX to integrate with Lion, iOS where possible, and Apple's cloud offering.
Somewhere in the 3-6 month time period after WWDC, I expect Apple to release their cross-OS/Cloud-integrated iLife and iWork apps.
This time, however, Apple won't try to do it all at once -- rather they will roll out a piece at a time.
Research in Motion has recalled about 1,000 defective units of its new PlayBook tablet, though most had not yet been sold to users.
"It's a point of sales problem. It's an expertise problem. It's a marketing problem to consumers. It's a price point problem," he reportedly said, adding: "And it's a software richness of content problem."
But having the ability to play Flash is not a problem!
RIM got one thing right when they said, "Playtime is over."
RIM, PlayBook's playtime is over!
/
/
/
Enjoy your laugh now. Then again, perhaps your laugh will continue for a while, I don't know.
I didn't know RIM execs could post here.
Facts?
Are you also counting AppleTV2 and the original iPhone?
comScore noted it last month: Apple iOS Platform Outreaches Android by 59 Percent in U.S. When Accounting for Mobile Phones, Tablets and Other Connected Media Devices