I hope that a multitude of companies are profitable so I can get a good selection of phones to choose from. Different phones for different people. I love new tech and buy the latest and greatest. My wife just wants a good phone to talk on.
At my desk on At&t iphone I get .12mb download on speedtest
my coworker on verizon 4g droid... 12mb. 100x faster than my iphone
Granted the wireless provider is a major factor, but those with iphones on sprint or verizon arent much better. My phone is basically unusable during the day
the iphone wave that ran through my building a few years ago and put 100+ iphones into the hands of my coworkers, is now bringing 4g droid phones
The retort to "where are the profits", or "as one manufacturer Apple is winning" are defeatist.
Apple may well catch Android next year - that 700K is not insurmountable, and seems to be a slowdown in the rate of growth.
Apple will not catch Android next year because that's not its game. Market Share can't buy anything but bragging rights. Apple is the #1 smart phone manufacturer (Samsung doesn't release actual numbers).
Apple sells you an ecosystem. Samsung, HTC, etc. sells you a phone. Google sells you.
Call me a little incredulous, but 700,000 units a day would mean they're selling over 12 million a month, and over 250 million a year. Those numbers seem a little high to me ...
The larger absurdity is comparing activation of a piece of hardware, the iPhone, with the activation of freebie software running on countless cheap doodads.
There are some very strange arguments in this thread.
In a market where there are at least 4 significant players (Android, iOS, BlackBerry and WinMob), having 30% of the market is enormous regardless of how much the leader has. Additionally, given that iPhone users seem to be far more likely to purchase their software, and given the target hardware is much more stable, developers will continue to support the platform and software quality will continue to be higher. I don't think iOS or Apple in general will be going anywhere.
Look at gaming - PCs Vs Consoles. How many copies of Call of Duty were sold on PC? How many on Xbox or PlayStation? The question is will the phone market mirror the PC market, or the console market in terms of 'open' Vs 'closed'. Sales of devices only profit the handset makers (HTC, Samsung, Apple etc) - but unless the software can make money too, the ecosystem doesn't survive.
Apple 'failed' in the 80's because it didn't get the software companies onside, for a whole host of reasons. That is not happening now, the situation is completely different.
Apple will not catch Android next year because that's not its game. Market Share can't buy anything but bragging rights. Apple is the #1 smart phone manufacturer (Samsung doesn't release actual numbers).
Apple sells you an ecosystem. Samsung, HTC, etc. sells you a phone. Google sells you.
You contradict yourself. If they are selling an eco-system they need overall market leadership, or a large share. . you also contradict Tim Cook, who points to the 95% yet to get (in all phones), and which he is interested in.
The larger absurdity is comparing activation of a piece of hardware, the iPhone, with the activation of freebie software running on countless cheap doodads.
Well, now it's has come to the point that Apple cannot announce activation numbers anymore. Android is overtaking much faster than anyone anticipated. .
And whether this is an issue depends on several other questions including
1. What's the rate of deactivation for each. Returns hurt the bottom line after all.
2. How much does Apple etc make on each phone they sell. That Apple is getting half the number of activations means less if they make 3 times as much on each device
At my desk on At&t iphone I get .12mb download on speedtest
my coworker on verizon 4g droid... 12mb. 100x faster than my iphone
Granted the wireless provider is a major factor, but those with iphones on sprint or verizon arent much better. My phone is basically unusable during the day
the iphone wave that ran through my building a few years ago and put 100+ iphones into the hands of my coworkers, is now bringing 4g droid phones
I'm sure iPhone activations are pretty high too, but most likely, in all reality, they're not going to be as high as Android, since they're not matching the sheer volume of devices the numerous Android mfgs are cranking out.
Of course Apple shouldn't crank out as many devices as the Droid people, cause that just leads to fragmentation and instant obsolescence. But, IMHO Apple has failed to produce enough variety of devices to satisfy the number of customers that they should.
There is only 1 model of iPhone (old versions don't count). By contrast, even Apple produces 5 different notebooks (3 MacBook Pro, 2 MacBook Air). Apple should produce 3 different iPhone models. That should be sufficient. It's called choice, and customers like that, because one size really does not fit all. If there was more choice in the Apple camp, they'd see more activations - possibly more than all the Droids combined - now that would be awesome. I think Apple should make a 3", 3.5", and a 4" iPhone5. There, done.
Just ask Apple with Macintosh vs Windows when Apple mad huge profits per product. What happened there? They lost. OSX and forced to switch to Intel chips to allow Windows to work on their hardware is what saved them. Yes Windows on a Mac. Pretty sad actually.
Actually some would argue that they switched to Intel because using speciality chips was too expensive.
And that the change in focus from "what would the super tech geeks and creative pros want" to "we're focusing on the consumers because they are the larger group" is what saved Apple. Not the fact that you can put Windows on a Mac. Because lets face it, if I want to run Windows I'm going to go with a $500 machine not the same specs at $1200. Mac OS and the easier to get services that Apple created with their retail stores are what appealed to the common man, most of whom still don't know that you can put Windows on your Mac hardware
We're all being pwned by the likes of Slappy. Why do we respond to the stupidly irrational, nonsensical strawman arguments of these types that continue to infest AI? It' like watching politicians on Meet The Press respond to questions from the moderator. They don't answer the questions, they ignore them, and spout the day's talking points instead.
Realize that the Slappy types have only the market share argument going for them. They have nothing else to talk about. Sales, profits, quality, reliability, customer satisfaction, apps, mindshare, even advertising are never touted because they "lose" big time on all those points. So shut them up by ignoring their market share trolls. To do otherwise is to be caught in their trolling nets. Slappy is sitting at his cheap PC right now laughing his ass off at the replies he got.
Between the crap flowing from Schmidt, and now Rubin, I dont know who is the better liar.
Which one of the two claimed to be sterile, so he could get out of paying child support for his out-of-wedlock daughter who was on welfare? Oh wait, that was Steve Jobs.
No, there's a dozen doubters perhaps looking for some way to brush the statement away.
Google considers an activation to be just what most of us would. You buy a smartphone and have a carrier activate it so it can be used as one. Google's activation numbers don't include resold devices (repeats) or software updates, with each device only counted once. The numbers also don't include any forked versions of Android since they don't have a license to Google services. Asian knock-offs, the Kindle Fire, the Nook Color or any other device not offering a license to Google services aren't counted in their activation numbers.
Which one of the two claimed to be sterile, so he could get out of paying child support for his out-of-wedlock daughter who was on welfare? Oh wait, that was Steve Jobs.
Having what to do with anything? We're not talking about that.
Short term memory. That was explained the LAST time the number was updated/announced.
"Google and a representative said that it does not include upgrades and only includes devices that run Google services. So forks of Android built by some Asian manufacturers who don’t license Google services would presumably not be counted."
Nokia alone sells 400 million phones a year. Do the math.
That's just another similar figure, it doesn't really help to intuit why so many phones are being sold... I don't know, I guess people must treat them like fashion accessories more than I thought.
Comments
4g
At my desk on At&t iphone I get .12mb download on speedtest
my coworker on verizon 4g droid... 12mb. 100x faster than my iphone
Granted the wireless provider is a major factor, but those with iphones on sprint or verizon arent much better. My phone is basically unusable during the day
the iphone wave that ran through my building a few years ago and put 100+ iphones into the hands of my coworkers, is now bringing 4g droid phones
The retort to "where are the profits", or "as one manufacturer Apple is winning" are defeatist.
Apple may well catch Android next year - that 700K is not insurmountable, and seems to be a slowdown in the rate of growth.
Apple will not catch Android next year because that's not its game. Market Share can't buy anything but bragging rights. Apple is the #1 smart phone manufacturer (Samsung doesn't release actual numbers).
Apple sells you an ecosystem. Samsung, HTC, etc. sells you a phone. Google sells you.
Call me a little incredulous, but 700,000 units a day would mean they're selling over 12 million a month, and over 250 million a year. Those numbers seem a little high to me ...
The larger absurdity is comparing activation of a piece of hardware, the iPhone, with the activation of freebie software running on countless cheap doodads.
In a market where there are at least 4 significant players (Android, iOS, BlackBerry and WinMob), having 30% of the market is enormous regardless of how much the leader has. Additionally, given that iPhone users seem to be far more likely to purchase their software, and given the target hardware is much more stable, developers will continue to support the platform and software quality will continue to be higher. I don't think iOS or Apple in general will be going anywhere.
Look at gaming - PCs Vs Consoles. How many copies of Call of Duty were sold on PC? How many on Xbox or PlayStation? The question is will the phone market mirror the PC market, or the console market in terms of 'open' Vs 'closed'. Sales of devices only profit the handset makers (HTC, Samsung, Apple etc) - but unless the software can make money too, the ecosystem doesn't survive.
Apple 'failed' in the 80's because it didn't get the software companies onside, for a whole host of reasons. That is not happening now, the situation is completely different.
Apple will not catch Android next year because that's not its game. Market Share can't buy anything but bragging rights. Apple is the #1 smart phone manufacturer (Samsung doesn't release actual numbers).
Apple sells you an ecosystem. Samsung, HTC, etc. sells you a phone. Google sells you.
You contradict yourself. If they are selling an eco-system they need overall market leadership, or a large share. . you also contradict Tim Cook, who points to the 95% yet to get (in all phones), and which he is interested in.
The larger absurdity is comparing activation of a piece of hardware, the iPhone, with the activation of freebie software running on countless cheap doodads.
Its ok to compare platforms.
Well, now it's has come to the point that Apple cannot announce activation numbers anymore. Android is overtaking much faster than anyone anticipated. .
And whether this is an issue depends on several other questions including
1. What's the rate of deactivation for each. Returns hurt the bottom line after all.
2. How much does Apple etc make on each phone they sell. That Apple is getting half the number of activations means less if they make 3 times as much on each device
One reason:
4g
At my desk on At&t iphone I get .12mb download on speedtest
my coworker on verizon 4g droid... 12mb. 100x faster than my iphone
Granted the wireless provider is a major factor, but those with iphones on sprint or verizon arent much better. My phone is basically unusable during the day
the iphone wave that ran through my building a few years ago and put 100+ iphones into the hands of my coworkers, is now bringing 4g droid phones
only relevant in the US.
If Apple was to let the top 5 Android phone companies (Samsung, Motorola, LG, HTC etc.) use iOS then Android would be dead by the summer of next year.
Those companies would literally break their necks to put iOS on their phones.
So activate all you want Android... Your winning because Apple is letting you... Dance Puppet....Dance!
Of course Apple shouldn't crank out as many devices as the Droid people, cause that just leads to fragmentation and instant obsolescence. But, IMHO Apple has failed to produce enough variety of devices to satisfy the number of customers that they should.
There is only 1 model of iPhone (old versions don't count). By contrast, even Apple produces 5 different notebooks (3 MacBook Pro, 2 MacBook Air). Apple should produce 3 different iPhone models. That should be sufficient. It's called choice, and customers like that, because one size really does not fit all. If there was more choice in the Apple camp, they'd see more activations - possibly more than all the Droids combined - now that would be awesome. I think Apple should make a 3", 3.5", and a 4" iPhone5. There, done.
Apple sells you an ecosystem. Samsung, HTC, etc. sells you a phone. Google sells you.
Well said.
Yet it seems that most people are OK with being sold.
They could not care less.
They'd rather be sold than buy into a 'closed' Apple ecosystem.
Strange world...
Just ask Apple with Macintosh vs Windows when Apple mad huge profits per product. What happened there? They lost. OSX and forced to switch to Intel chips to allow Windows to work on their hardware is what saved them. Yes Windows on a Mac. Pretty sad actually.
Actually some would argue that they switched to Intel because using speciality chips was too expensive.
And that the change in focus from "what would the super tech geeks and creative pros want" to "we're focusing on the consumers because they are the larger group" is what saved Apple. Not the fact that you can put Windows on a Mac. Because lets face it, if I want to run Windows I'm going to go with a $500 machine not the same specs at $1200. Mac OS and the easier to get services that Apple created with their retail stores are what appealed to the common man, most of whom still don't know that you can put Windows on your Mac hardware
Realize that the Slappy types have only the market share argument going for them. They have nothing else to talk about. Sales, profits, quality, reliability, customer satisfaction, apps, mindshare, even advertising are never touted because they "lose" big time on all those points. So shut them up by ignoring their market share trolls. To do otherwise is to be caught in their trolling nets. Slappy is sitting at his cheap PC right now laughing his ass off at the replies he got.
Between the crap flowing from Schmidt, and now Rubin, I dont know who is the better liar.
Which one of the two claimed to be sterile, so he could get out of paying child support for his out-of-wedlock daughter who was on welfare? Oh wait, that was Steve Jobs.
No, there's a dozen doubters perhaps looking for some way to brush the statement away.
Google considers an activation to be just what most of us would. You buy a smartphone and have a carrier activate it so it can be used as one. Google's activation numbers don't include resold devices (repeats) or software updates, with each device only counted once. The numbers also don't include any forked versions of Android since they don't have a license to Google services. Asian knock-offs, the Kindle Fire, the Nook Color or any other device not offering a license to Google services aren't counted in their activation numbers.
Are you still confused?
Where did Rubin specifically state most of that?
There was no mention at all of "Google services".
Which one of the two claimed to be sterile, so he could get out of paying child support for his out-of-wedlock daughter who was on welfare? Oh wait, that was Steve Jobs.
Having what to do with anything? We're not talking about that.
Where did Rubin specifically state most of that?
There was no mention at all of "Google services".
Short term memory. That was explained the LAST time the number was updated/announced.
"Google and a representative said that it does not include upgrades and only includes devices that run Google services. So forks of Android built by some Asian manufacturers who don’t license Google services would presumably not be counted."
Nokia alone sells 400 million phones a year. Do the math.
That's just another similar figure, it doesn't really help to intuit why so many phones are being sold... I don't know, I guess people must treat them like fashion accessories more than I thought.