iPhone, Android dominate U.S. smartphone market with combined 82% share
Sales of Android and iOS handsets in the U.S. eclipsed other smartphone platforms in the first three quarters of 2011, holding a combined 82% of the market, while rival Research In Motion suffered a continued decline during the same period.
According to data released on Tuesday by market research firm The NPD Group, the growth seen by Google's Android and Apple's iOS platforms in 2011 came at the cost of one-time smartphone heavyweight RIM.
Android-based smartphones owned over half the market with a 53 percent share by the end of October, followed by Apple's iPhone with 29 percent. RIM's BlackBerry managed to hold onto an 11% share.
?The competitive landscape for smartphones, which has been reshaped by Apple and Google, has ultimately forced every major handset provider through a major transition,? said Ross Rubin, executive director, Connected Intelligence for The NPD Group. ?For many of them, 2012 will be a critical year in assessing how effective their responses have been.?
iOS and Android's lead in the segment is significant as nearly half of all mobile users in the U.S. now own a smartphone, with the number expected to continue to grow in 2012.
The Apple/Google duopoly has caused major shifts within the mobile industry as RIM desperately tries to regain a foothold in the marketplace it helped create and Microsoft continues to push the Window Phone 7 platform toward relevance.
RIM's BlackBerry
BlackBerry devices comprised half of all smartphone sales in Q2 2006, but have since seen a steep decline, ending the third quarter of 2011 with just 8 percent market share.
?Few companies have felt the impact of the shift to touch user interfaces and larger screen sizes as negatively as RIM, but the company is beginning anew with a strong technical foundation and many paths to the platform,? NPD executive director of Connected Intelligence Ross Rubin said.
RIM's smartphone woes have been further exacerbated this year by multiple service issues in the EMEIA region (Europe, Middle East, India and Africa) and poor sales of its PlayBook tablet. Faced with rapidly evaporating cash reserves, the beleaguered company has been forced to cut its workforce.
Nokia and Windows Phone 7
Rubin viewed Nokia's agreement with Microsoft to use Windows Phone 7 on its smartphone devices as one of the biggest news stories of the year. After dropping the Symbian OS in February, Nokia focused on launching its new Windows Phone-based Lumia handsets by the end of the year.
Nokia's new Lumia 800 (left) and Lumia 710 are its first Windows Phones.
?Nokia and Microsoft must build from almost nothing to carve out success between the consistency of the iPhone and the flexibility of Android,? Rubin said.
A recent report cast doubt on the Microsoft-Nokia partnership, saying that the Lumia line of phones failed to innovate and would see only high-end user adoption.
Rubin compared the now defunct Windows Mobile's peak smartphone market share of 50 percent in Q2 2007 with that of Windows Phone 7, which has not surpassed 2 percent since launching late last year. Microsoft recently revealed that it making some leadership changes in order to take better advantage of Windows Phone 7's potential.
While Nokia remains the top handset vendor in the world, it has suffered a major blow in smartphone sales during the transition from Symbian to Windows Phone, seeing a decline from a 33 percent share in 2010 to 14 percent in 2011.
Android continues to dominate
Google's Android platform has seen remarkable growth in 2011, enjoying a 53 percent share of the market between January and October.
Rubin pointed out that Google's acquisition of Motorola Mobility in September not only helped save the phone maker's ailing business, but also granted the internet search giant access to useful telecom patents.
Motorola's presence in the smartphone arena sunk as low as 1 percent in the third quarter of 2009, but rose to 16 percent in the fourth quarter of 2010 after the company adopted Google's mobile OS. Currently, the Droid RAZR manufacturer holds a 12 percent share of the market.
?Android has helped Motorola climb back into the smartphone market; now, though, Google will seek to use Motorola?s patent pool to help protect other Android licensees,? Rubin said.
Android and iOS appear to be leading the way in smartphone design and usability, leaving competing OEMs to either join up with Google or try to fight the two megaliths for marketshare, as RIM and Microsoft are attempting.
During the three months ending in September, Apple held its title as America's top smartphone maker with a 28.3 percent share followed by HTC and RIM with 20.3 percent and 17.8 percent, respectively, according to Nielsen. Android phones as a whole dominated the market, however, garnering a 42.8 percent share.
But, Apple does enjoy the lion's share of the industry's profits. Canaccord Genuity estimates that the company took in more than half of the handset industry's operating profits last quarter with just 4 percent global market share. That's a stark contrast from 2007 when Nokia took in 67 percent of operating profits from the industry and Apple had just 4 percent.
According to data released on Tuesday by market research firm The NPD Group, the growth seen by Google's Android and Apple's iOS platforms in 2011 came at the cost of one-time smartphone heavyweight RIM.
Android-based smartphones owned over half the market with a 53 percent share by the end of October, followed by Apple's iPhone with 29 percent. RIM's BlackBerry managed to hold onto an 11% share.
?The competitive landscape for smartphones, which has been reshaped by Apple and Google, has ultimately forced every major handset provider through a major transition,? said Ross Rubin, executive director, Connected Intelligence for The NPD Group. ?For many of them, 2012 will be a critical year in assessing how effective their responses have been.?
iOS and Android's lead in the segment is significant as nearly half of all mobile users in the U.S. now own a smartphone, with the number expected to continue to grow in 2012.
The Apple/Google duopoly has caused major shifts within the mobile industry as RIM desperately tries to regain a foothold in the marketplace it helped create and Microsoft continues to push the Window Phone 7 platform toward relevance.
RIM's BlackBerry
BlackBerry devices comprised half of all smartphone sales in Q2 2006, but have since seen a steep decline, ending the third quarter of 2011 with just 8 percent market share.
?Few companies have felt the impact of the shift to touch user interfaces and larger screen sizes as negatively as RIM, but the company is beginning anew with a strong technical foundation and many paths to the platform,? NPD executive director of Connected Intelligence Ross Rubin said.
RIM's smartphone woes have been further exacerbated this year by multiple service issues in the EMEIA region (Europe, Middle East, India and Africa) and poor sales of its PlayBook tablet. Faced with rapidly evaporating cash reserves, the beleaguered company has been forced to cut its workforce.
Nokia and Windows Phone 7
Rubin viewed Nokia's agreement with Microsoft to use Windows Phone 7 on its smartphone devices as one of the biggest news stories of the year. After dropping the Symbian OS in February, Nokia focused on launching its new Windows Phone-based Lumia handsets by the end of the year.
Nokia's new Lumia 800 (left) and Lumia 710 are its first Windows Phones.
?Nokia and Microsoft must build from almost nothing to carve out success between the consistency of the iPhone and the flexibility of Android,? Rubin said.
A recent report cast doubt on the Microsoft-Nokia partnership, saying that the Lumia line of phones failed to innovate and would see only high-end user adoption.
Rubin compared the now defunct Windows Mobile's peak smartphone market share of 50 percent in Q2 2007 with that of Windows Phone 7, which has not surpassed 2 percent since launching late last year. Microsoft recently revealed that it making some leadership changes in order to take better advantage of Windows Phone 7's potential.
While Nokia remains the top handset vendor in the world, it has suffered a major blow in smartphone sales during the transition from Symbian to Windows Phone, seeing a decline from a 33 percent share in 2010 to 14 percent in 2011.
Android continues to dominate
Google's Android platform has seen remarkable growth in 2011, enjoying a 53 percent share of the market between January and October.
Rubin pointed out that Google's acquisition of Motorola Mobility in September not only helped save the phone maker's ailing business, but also granted the internet search giant access to useful telecom patents.
Motorola's presence in the smartphone arena sunk as low as 1 percent in the third quarter of 2009, but rose to 16 percent in the fourth quarter of 2010 after the company adopted Google's mobile OS. Currently, the Droid RAZR manufacturer holds a 12 percent share of the market.
?Android has helped Motorola climb back into the smartphone market; now, though, Google will seek to use Motorola?s patent pool to help protect other Android licensees,? Rubin said.
Android and iOS appear to be leading the way in smartphone design and usability, leaving competing OEMs to either join up with Google or try to fight the two megaliths for marketshare, as RIM and Microsoft are attempting.
During the three months ending in September, Apple held its title as America's top smartphone maker with a 28.3 percent share followed by HTC and RIM with 20.3 percent and 17.8 percent, respectively, according to Nielsen. Android phones as a whole dominated the market, however, garnering a 42.8 percent share.
But, Apple does enjoy the lion's share of the industry's profits. Canaccord Genuity estimates that the company took in more than half of the handset industry's operating profits last quarter with just 4 percent global market share. That's a stark contrast from 2007 when Nokia took in 67 percent of operating profits from the industry and Apple had just 4 percent.
Comments
"According to The NPD Group, a leading market research company, Android?s operating system (OS) share of smartphone sales grew to command more than half of the U.S. smartphone market (53 percent) from January through October 2011, as Apple?s iOS share grew to reach 29 percent of the market, and RIM?s OS share declined to 11 percent."
Android doesn't have a share a smartphone sales. Google doesn't sell Android.
This is akin to stating that Rolls-Royce has 30% market share in commercial airliners although Rolls-Royce only manufactures jet engines.
There are different motivations for discussing each distribution.
This article isn't worth discussion. The report is fundamentally flawed.
"According to The NPD Group, a leading market research company, Android?s operating system (OS) share of smartphone sales grew to command more than half of the U.S. smartphone market (53 percent) from January through October 2011, as Apple?s iOS share grew to reach 29 percent of the market, and RIM?s OS share declined to 11 percent."
Android doesn't have a share a smartphone sales. Google doesn't sell Android.
This is akin to stating that Rolls-Royce has 30% market share in commercial airliners although Rolls-Royce only manufactures jet engines.
This is a puzzling assertion. It is completely legitimate to quote the OS share numbers, just as it is legitimate to point out that Windows has ~85% OS marketshare in desktop computers.
It's not at all clear what you are objecting to from the report.
As misleading is saying that Mac is in the 10th or whatever position of sold Desktop computers, because in such a case the Mac (only sold by Apple) should be compared to Windows (including all the companies that sell them). Those are the real numbers in the real context.
I think the article adequately distinguishes between HW and OS. It could also be reasonably argued that a consideration of HW marketshare and OS marketshare is justifiable in different circumstances. If you were looking at 3rd party Apps you'd consider the OS, for instance, and not be concerned with the HW manufacturer as much.
There are different motivations for discussing each distribution.
A consideration of the OS, as it applies to iOS, involves more than smartphones when it comes to 3rd party Apps, which makes these figures somewhat useless.
A consideration of the OS, as it applies to iOS, involves more than smartphones when it comes to 3rd party Apps, which makes these figures somewhat useless.
The addition of iPod touches, and iPads to this figure would be interesting but Android would still be in the lead.
Together, Mike Tyson and I can knock out every one of you here.
the problem here is that you see android as mike tyson, as your previous posts show. In fact your previous posts show a lot about you and i feel sorry for your parents. however, android is no mike tyson. android is the same as a bunch of rats that were able to proliferate. apple is the cat... and, as you can guess, there's more rats than cats. so what? i don't want a rat, but my cat needs rats in order to feed and evolve. so be it..
(i have a xperia x10mini pro)
...In fact your previous posts show a lot about you and i feel sorry for your parents...
Why the ad hominem? You know nothing about me or my parents. Attacking people for no reason -- way to be a sorry loser!
I didn't read your previous posts. In fact, I don't care about them at all.
The addition of iPod touches, and iPads to this figure would be interesting but Android would still be in the lead.
i don't know if android would still be in the lead, but just like ferrari will never outsell fiat toyota and ford together (or even 1 vs 1), android being in the lead makes sense.
but what's the point? android products are cheaper, so there's nothing apple can do besides playing with it's strengths. they (apple) sell more and more and it won't stop soon. they sell almost everything they can produce, android doesn't (and shouldn't) matter. different markets. android will become just low-end (like it already is).
Yes, and Mac and Windows dominate the Desktop Operating System market with 98% share. That is utterly misleading!!! In such a case Windows dominates, and in the other Android dominates. The Mac and the iOS come second.
As misleading is saying that Mac is in the 10th or whatever position of sold Desktop computers, because in such a case the Mac (only sold by Apple) should be compared to Windows (including all the companies that sell them). Those are the real numbers in the real context.
And you're just as guilty as people making the opposite mistake.
The fact is that the comparison you use depends on what you're trying to understand. If you're looking at the potential for releasing a new application for desktop computers, you are more interested in the OS share. Or, even better, at the share of apps purchased by each platform. Or, better yet, the percentage of apps of the same type as YOUR app purchased for each platform. OTOH, if you're interested in making a desktop computer accessory designed to go with the computer brand (a little Apple or Dell or HP or Toshiba keyboard, for example), then you'd be more interested in the share by manufacturer. Or, better yet, the percentage of accessories purchased by customers of each manufacturer. If you're interested in investing, you might be more interested in share by manufacturer. Or, even better, profitability by manufacturer.
It's insane to think that only one type of comparison has any value.
In the iOS space, the percentage of smart phones by OS has some value. You might be interested in releasing an app that only makes sense on smart phones. Even there, the percentage of application sales by OS might make more sense (and you also have to consider what fraction of the entire segment your app will work on - which is particularly important with Android's fragmentation).
If you were interested in introducing a phone accessory (case, etc), you'd be interested in sales by handset model.
If you were interested in introducing an app that works on both smart phones and tablets, you'd want to know the total sales by OS (or, even better, the application sales by OS).
And so on.
android will become just low-end (like it already is).
As an Android user I have to agree with that last statement. Android ain't no iOS, it's lowest-common-denominator. Like Windows PCs it covers the cheap end of the market nicely while Apple take the cream.
The addition of iPod touches, and iPads to this figure would be interesting but Android would still be in the lead.
Given the number of iPads and iPods sold, I'd have to bring the android lead into question considering the level of disinterest in all Android devices outside the smartphone market.
These numbers suggest that Android would likely fall in the category of an OS a developer would likely support either first or most certainly second if that developer wanted access to the most potential customers.
Given the structure of Android's business plan, the needs of the hardware manufacturers and users are secondary to the dissemination of the platform to as wide an audience as can be advertised to. A phone from one manufacturer can be slotted in with another with limited differentiation available to the OEM save specifications and most current version of the OS.
The fact is Android is good enough and has many advantages in certain areas like access to bleeding edge hardware as OEMs compete for handset share with other Android OEMs. Android is also a first-class recipient of most of Google's online services. Because of the penetration purchased by offering free services like GMail, Google is able to leverage a large userbase from the Windows and Mac desktop audiences.
Google is also iterating their OS faster in response to the market. It has many novel and useful features and satisfies the desires of many to individualize their experience with their phone.
Apple, on the other hand, has focused on simplifying complex services to a point where they are sufficiently usable to attract a wide audience from those new to smartphones and those who to do things WITH their phones rather than TO their phones.
Apple has also chosen to limit their OS to their own devices to ensure better integration between the hardware and the software. This has lead to Apple's services being for the most part more mature and usable and able to to do more with relatively lower-specced (and less expensive for Apple) hardware.
For most of its existence the iPhone has been on a limited number of carriers and appeared on a single phone form factor. This allows Apple more profit per handset and lower manufacturing costs but it limits adoption by those for whom the lack of alternate form-factors and hardware (such as a flip, slider, keyboard or removable battery, removable storage) are deal-breakers.
Set against all other manufacturers wishing to stay in business, the adoption of the low-cost Android OS in place of other licensed for a fee options is hardly surprising. Asian vendors in particular have always been hampered by the poor user experience they provide for some of their most innovative services.
Given that Apple's self-imposed constraints have permitted Android to achieve critical mass, one has to wonder what will happen when Apple takes it foot off the brake.
Given that Apple's self-imposed constraints have permitted Android to achieve critical mass, one has to wonder what will happen when Apple takes it foot off the brake.
Or, ya know, Apple has three handsets and Android has 10 vendors each with 3+ handsets - to keep it nice and short.
Its nothing to do with limitations at all, its just Apple are the only people who make iPhone and the world and his dog make handsets and choose Android for them. Nothing more, nothing less.
The marketshare (or percentage of new handsets with a particular OS that are sold) is relevant because it can foreshadow developer support with their focusing third party apps for you OS platform. Installed base (the total number of active units on which the same OS is installed) is also important.
These numbers suggest that Android would likely fall in the category of an OS a developer would likely support either first or most certainly second if that developer wanted access to the most potential customers.
Given the structure of Android's business plan, the needs of the hardware manufacturers and users are secondary to the dissemination of the platform to as wide an audience as can be advertised to. A phone from one manufacturer can be slotted in with another with limited differentiation available to the OEM save specifications and most current version of the OS.
The fact is Android is good enough and has many advantages in certain areas like access to bleeding edge hardware as OEMs compete for handset share with other Android OEMs. Android is also a first-class recipient of most of Google's online services. Because of the penetration purchased by offering free services like GMail, Google is able to leverage a large userbase from the Windows and Mac desktop audiences.
Google is also iterating their OS faster in response to the market. It has many novel and useful features and satisfies the desires of many to individualize their experience with their phone.
Apple, on the other hand, has focused on simplifying complex services to a point where they are sufficiently usable to attract a wide audience from those new to smartphones and those who to do things WITH their phones rather than TO their phones.
Apple has also chosen to limit their OS to their own devices to ensure better integration between the hardware and the software. This has lead to Apple's services being for the most part more mature and usable and able to to do more with relatively lower-specced (and less expensive for Apple) hardware.
For most of its existence the iPhone has been on a limited number of carriers and appeared on a single phone form factor. This allows Apple more profit per handset and lower manufacturing costs but it limits adoption by those for whom the lack of alternate form-factors and hardware (such as a flip, slider, keyboard or removable battery, removable storage) are deal-breakers.
Set against all other manufacturers wishing to stay in business, the adoption of the low-cost Android OS in place of other licensed for a fee options is hardly surprising. Asian vendors in particular have always been hampered by the poor user experience they provide for some of their most innovative services.
Given that Apple's self-imposed constraints have permitted Android to achieve critical mass, one has to wonder what will happen when Apple takes it foot off the brake.
the iPhone has (by far) the best graphics.
it is the most reliable.
it is the fastest smartphone (most likely the OS plays a big role in this field).
so what's the "lower-specced"?
what do you mean by "when Apple takes it foot off the brake"?
And you're just as guilty as people making the opposite mistake.
The fact is that the comparison you use depends on what you're trying to understand. If you're looking at the potential for releasing a new application for desktop computers, you are more interested in the OS share. Or, even better, at the share of apps purchased by each platform. Or, better yet, the percentage of apps of the same type as YOUR app purchased for each platform. OTOH, if you're interested in making a desktop computer accessory designed to go with the computer brand (a little Apple or Dell or HP or Toshiba keyboard, for example), then you'd be more interested in the share by manufacturer. Or, better yet, the percentage of accessories purchased by customers of each manufacturer. If you're interested in investing, you might be more interested in share by manufacturer. Or, even better, profitability by manufacturer.
It's insane to think that only one type of comparison has any value.
In the iOS space, the percentage of smart phones by OS has some value. You might be interested in releasing an app that only makes sense on smart phones. Even there, the percentage of application sales by OS might make more sense (and you also have to consider what fraction of the entire segment your app will work on - which is particularly important with Android's fragmentation).
If you were interested in introducing a phone accessory (case, etc), you'd be interested in sales by handset model.
If you were interested in introducing an app that works on both smart phones and tablets, you'd want to know the total sales by OS (or, even better, the application sales by OS).
And so on.
There is the situation of high fragmentation in the Android OS community. So when developers create their apps they rarely work across all the different competitive models. Also, look at the return on time invested, and iOS blows Android off the map. There are strong indications all the productive apps are being developed for iOS. Also look at the adoption of iOS in Enterprise. Android is a very distant void. FWIW
the iPhone has (by far) the best graphics.
it is the most reliable.
it is the fastest smartphone (most likely the OS plays a big role in this field).
so what's the "lower-specced"?
what do you mean by "when Apple takes it foot off the brake"?
What I am suggesting is that Apple is doing more with less. On devices with similar specifications, iOS 5 is performing better (especially with respect to graphics and responsiveness of the UI to touch).
By taking their foot off the brake I mean that Apple could decide to speciate the iPhone form factor with different sizes and additional hardware features that are said to be things that keep people from buying. For example, you have a large population (of which I am not a member) that learned to type accurately with their thumbs. If you wanted to target that population you might include a hardware keyboard for each character set you wished to support or you could make the individual hardware keys into displays that can change a single displayed character based on a user selection. This would be a logistics challenge of dubious payback but it might lead to wider adoption of iOS.
They could also create a separate model for each carrier's peculiar allocation of radio bandwidth and networking technology.
They could introduce a larger phone with a larger display and monster battery to power a 4G LTE radio for the markets in which it has been already rolled out.
They could make a dual-screened flip-phone that is compact enough to fit in the smallest pockets.
They could make a phone that is only an earwig and is operated by voice alone and displays on the palm of your hand or a wall when you look at it.
They could make a phone with a display built into a contact lens and the speakers built into your ears.
Instead they are taking the prudent course of building in such a way as to meet the needs of 80% of the people with a 95% solution on a third of the carriers.
- Sent from my iPhone 4S via Siri dictation
I don't think it's fair to say Android dominates any handset or smartphone market. They dominate the handset or smartphone OS market. This distinction isn't minor as one distinctly refers to an OS and the other to HW.
I find it amazing the number of handsets that are not smartphones. Apple only accounts for 4% of the handset market which means that there is still a tremendous opportunity for growth in smartphones.
I'd love to be able to look 5 years into the future to see how things are shaking out.