I see a lot of Android phones myself, but that's because I happen to know a lot of lower income people and they are on prepaid plans. All of them say that if the iPhone ever becomes available on a prepaid plan, they'll be on it in a minute.
But yes, out of the people I know that can afford traditional mobile plans, it seems like almost all either have an iPhone or are planning to get one as soon as they are eligible for a subsidized upgrade.
I've long maintained that the day Apple makes a deal with major prepaid providers is the beginning of the end for Android.
"All of them say..." LOL.
No matter what these "lower income people" say, there's a very slim chance they'd be buying a $750 iPhone on a prepaid plan if they don't have a free one now. If they like the iPhone, they should make use of the generous carrier subsidy while it lasts.
Here in the UK you can get prepaid iPhones easily, but almost all the iPhone users I know are on contract because the upfront cost is too much on prepaid. If you're not a heavy user, prepaid is often cheaper over 18 or 24 months, but that depends on you being willing to spend £500 on the handset.
I was under the impression that feature phones are already excluded from the statistics. If I have to guess, I'd say that lower-end smartphones probably account for half of Android's share and perhaps less than 10% of iOS's...
I imagine that anything running Android on a phone is considered a smartphone at this point, but I don't think it should.
I imagine that anything running Android on a phone is considered a smartphone at this point, but I don't think it should.
I understand your point since I have friends that use cheaper Android phones as feature phones -- they've never activated them and don't even have gmail accounts! Personally, I don't care much about the distinction, since I am not as interested in absolute numbers but in the trends, which would be unaffected by definitions as long as the methodology is intact.
Also, if dumb users buy smart phones we shouldn't blame it on the phones
I imagine that anything running Android on a phone is considered a smartphone at this point, but I don't think it should.
I don't know how you would make a distinction. If you go by the definition laid out here, then I don't think any Android phone can reasonably be considered a feature phone. Maybe there is another definition, but it looks like you'd probably have to seriously blur the lines to make that case.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
Are there any currently produced dumb phones running Google-licensed Android? I don't think there are but I'm not certain.
I think my take on it would be that if it is a phone that runs a derivative of Android, then it's probably a smart phone. Maybe if it's seriously crippled that it cannot do things like run add-on apps, then maybe it's a feature phone, but I don't see any reason for anyone to do that.
Are there any currently produced dumb phones running Google-licensed Android? I don't think there are but I'm not certain.
There are "smartphones" and there are "smartphones". The telecoms act as though anything with Android, WP7, and iOS must be forced to have data for no reason. You know.
Correct me if I'm bad at math, but I don't think that T-Mobile has enough customers to offset Apple's majority (not plurality) at AT&T, Verizon, and Sprint. Especially not enough to kick Apple to 31%.
I wonder if we will see Microsoft regaining market share in the next six months, and if it does, at whose expense... I will be surprised if the marketing effort put into Lumia doesn't pay off at least partially. However, with the release of HTC One X and Samsung Galaxy III, Nokia has a very tough battle ahead of it...
Well despite Microsoft's drop in share in the above table (3 months).... their March share is the same as February. 3.9%
How the heck does google have 50%+. I rarely see android. Mostly iphones. 4S at that
I keep thinking it must be that I don't run in the same type of circles as Android users.
I've sat at many a table with different groups of people, young and old, and when the phones come out I see mostly iPhones, Blackberrys (yes) or old flip phones (in that order) and few, if any, Android phones.
No matter what these "lower income people" say, there's a very slim chance they'd be buying a $750 iPhone on a prepaid plan if they don't have a free one now. If they like the iPhone, they should make use of the generous carrier subsidy while it lasts.
I don't imagine they'd be buying the latest model, but given that you can now get "last year's model" free with contract on traditional mobile plans, I think it is very likely that if a prepaid option becomes available, it will also offer "last year's model" at a much lower price of $200 - $300. And yes, many of these lower income people have Android smartphones, not feature phones, from services like Boost Mobile where they had to pay $200 or more for the phone up front.
Lower income doesn't always mean "never has any money", often it means that they simply have poor credit or don't have a reliably predictable monthly income. So when they come into some cash, they splurge. May not be the smartest way to run your finances, but it doesn't change the reality of people doing it.
Frankly, if Boost Mobile came up with an iPhone option, I'd give it serious thought myself. They offer unlimited plans that work out to $55 a month for their Android phones, half what I pay AT&T on a "traditional" plan.
I have friends that have new, but super cheap per-paid, Android branded handsets that cannot play the majority of games on Google Play. The phones struggle with displaying a web page. They remind me of something much slower than the original iPhone.
They come close to being just a feature phone since most of the app experience is not available to them.
I don't imagine they'd be buying the latest model, but given that you can now get "last year's model" free with contract on traditional mobile plans, I think it is very likely that if a prepaid option becomes available, it will also offer "last year's model" at a much lower price of $200 - $300. And yes, many of these lower income people have Android smartphones, not feature phones, from services like Boost Mobile where they had to pay $200 or more for the phone up front.
Lower income doesn't always mean "never has any money", often it means that they simply have poor credit or don't have a reliably predictable monthly income. So when they come into some cash, they splurge. May not be the smartest way to run your finances, but it doesn't change the reality of people doing it.
Frankly, if Boost Mobile came up with an iPhone option, I'd give it serious thought myself. They offer unlimited plans that work out to $55 a month for their Android phones, half what I pay AT&T on a "traditional" plan.
Well, the 3GS still goes for $400, so I don't imagine one will ever be able to get even an unused old model iPhone for less than that. And yes, I agree that there are decent pre-paid options, which I wish people would use more in order to break the current horrible carrier model.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven N.
I have friends that have new, but super cheap per-paid, Android branded handsets that cannot play the majority of games on Google Play. The phones struggle with displaying a web page. They remind me of something much slower than the original iPhone.
They come close to being just a feature phone since most of the app experience is not available to them.
There are many cheap phones out there, but they are a waste of money. Tell your friends to get HTC One S -- an amazing phone not much different, yet cheaper than the One X flagship.
Didn't Nokia use Symbian on dumb phones, feature phones and smartphones? How were those models differentiated?
If you go by the definition laid out here, then I don't think any Android phone can reasonably be considered a feature phone. Maybe there is another definition, but it looks like you'd probably have to seriously blur the lines to make that case.
The definition should be changing as the distinction changes. If you look at the original smartphones they would be laughed at today if you tried to claim they are modern smartphones. The Samsung Dart is an example of what I'd classify as a feature phone. As Android grows more and more comparatively un-smart devices will be getting Android, but does simply having Android installed mean they are in the same category and have the same utility as Galaxy S II and HTC One? i don't think so.
Why do you think the Dart is a feature phone? What specific aspects make it not a smart phone? I think it's better to just do away with the class than to try to arrive at a more contrived definition.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tildeboy
I see a lot of Android phones myself, but that's because I happen to know a lot of lower income people and they are on prepaid plans. All of them say that if the iPhone ever becomes available on a prepaid plan, they'll be on it in a minute.
But yes, out of the people I know that can afford traditional mobile plans, it seems like almost all either have an iPhone or are planning to get one as soon as they are eligible for a subsidized upgrade.
I've long maintained that the day Apple makes a deal with major prepaid providers is the beginning of the end for Android.
"All of them say..." LOL.
No matter what these "lower income people" say, there's a very slim chance they'd be buying a $750 iPhone on a prepaid plan if they don't have a free one now. If they like the iPhone, they should make use of the generous carrier subsidy while it lasts.
Here in the UK you can get prepaid iPhones easily, but almost all the iPhone users I know are on contract because the upfront cost is too much on prepaid. If you're not a heavy user, prepaid is often cheaper over 18 or 24 months, but that depends on you being willing to spend £500 on the handset.
I imagine that anything running Android on a phone is considered a smartphone at this point, but I don't think it should.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
I imagine that anything running Android on a phone is considered a smartphone at this point, but I don't think it should.
Are there any currently produced dumb phones running Google-licensed Android? I don't think there are but I'm not certain.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
I imagine that anything running Android on a phone is considered a smartphone at this point, but I don't think it should.
I understand your point since I have friends that use cheaper Android phones as feature phones -- they've never activated them and don't even have gmail accounts! Personally, I don't care much about the distinction, since I am not as interested in absolute numbers but in the trends, which would be unaffected by definitions as long as the methodology is intact.
Also, if dumb users buy smart phones we shouldn't blame it on the phones
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
I imagine that anything running Android on a phone is considered a smartphone at this point, but I don't think it should.
I don't know how you would make a distinction. If you go by the definition laid out here, then I don't think any Android phone can reasonably be considered a feature phone. Maybe there is another definition, but it looks like you'd probably have to seriously blur the lines to make that case.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
Are there any currently produced dumb phones running Google-licensed Android? I don't think there are but I'm not certain.
I think my take on it would be that if it is a phone that runs a derivative of Android, then it's probably a smart phone. Maybe if it's seriously crippled that it cannot do things like run add-on apps, then maybe it's a feature phone, but I don't see any reason for anyone to do that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
Are there any currently produced dumb phones running Google-licensed Android? I don't think there are but I'm not certain.
There are "smartphones" and there are "smartphones". The telecoms act as though anything with Android, WP7, and iOS must be forced to have data for no reason. You know.
This was a survey.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz
"Once the iPhone is on more than just AT&T it is the beginning of the end for Android." (Everyone - Circa 2009/2010)
Moving goalposts much?
But everyone didn't say that.
Exaggerate much?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDoppio
I wonder if we will see Microsoft regaining market share in the next six months, and if it does, at whose expense... I will be surprised if the marketing effort put into Lumia doesn't pay off at least partially. However, with the release of HTC One X and Samsung Galaxy III, Nokia has a very tough battle ahead of it...
Well despite Microsoft's drop in share in the above table (3 months).... their March share is the same as February. 3.9%
http://www.comscore.com/Press_Events/Press_Releases/2012/4/comScore_Reports_February_2012_U.S._Mobile_Subscriber_Market_Share
Total smartphone users have grown... so Microsoft actually grew their installed base. Might be a blip... might be the green shoots.
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit
Quote:
Originally Posted by Just_Me
How the heck does google have 50%+. I rarely see android. Mostly iphones. 4S at that
I keep thinking it must be that I don't run in the same type of circles as Android users.
I've sat at many a table with different groups of people, young and old, and when the phones come out I see mostly iPhones, Blackberrys (yes) or old flip phones (in that order) and few, if any, Android phones.
All I ever see are iPhones.
deleted
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz
"Once the iPhone is on more than just AT&T it is the beginning of the end for Android." (Everyone - Circa 2009/2010)
Moving goalposts much?
about every day... you only need to wait 24hrs to read another idiotic justification
"once (place stupidity here) Android is done"
you should not think much of it - iOS users for the most part represent the Dumbing down of Apple. Critical thinking is not their strong point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz
I nev er see anything except iPhones.
Maybe it's true for students especially High Schools'. Do a survey, ask high school students what smart phones they want to own.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDoppio
"All of them say..." LOL.
No matter what these "lower income people" say, there's a very slim chance they'd be buying a $750 iPhone on a prepaid plan if they don't have a free one now. If they like the iPhone, they should make use of the generous carrier subsidy while it lasts.
I don't imagine they'd be buying the latest model, but given that you can now get "last year's model" free with contract on traditional mobile plans, I think it is very likely that if a prepaid option becomes available, it will also offer "last year's model" at a much lower price of $200 - $300. And yes, many of these lower income people have Android smartphones, not feature phones, from services like Boost Mobile where they had to pay $200 or more for the phone up front.
Lower income doesn't always mean "never has any money", often it means that they simply have poor credit or don't have a reliably predictable monthly income. So when they come into some cash, they splurge. May not be the smartest way to run your finances, but it doesn't change the reality of people doing it.
Frankly, if Boost Mobile came up with an iPhone option, I'd give it serious thought myself. They offer unlimited plans that work out to $55 a month for their Android phones, half what I pay AT&T on a "traditional" plan.
They come close to being just a feature phone since most of the app experience is not available to them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tildeboy
I don't imagine they'd be buying the latest model, but given that you can now get "last year's model" free with contract on traditional mobile plans, I think it is very likely that if a prepaid option becomes available, it will also offer "last year's model" at a much lower price of $200 - $300. And yes, many of these lower income people have Android smartphones, not feature phones, from services like Boost Mobile where they had to pay $200 or more for the phone up front.
Lower income doesn't always mean "never has any money", often it means that they simply have poor credit or don't have a reliably predictable monthly income. So when they come into some cash, they splurge. May not be the smartest way to run your finances, but it doesn't change the reality of people doing it.
Frankly, if Boost Mobile came up with an iPhone option, I'd give it serious thought myself. They offer unlimited plans that work out to $55 a month for their Android phones, half what I pay AT&T on a "traditional" plan.
Well, the 3GS still goes for $400, so I don't imagine one will ever be able to get even an unused old model iPhone for less than that. And yes, I agree that there are decent pre-paid options, which I wish people would use more in order to break the current horrible carrier model.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven N.
I have friends that have new, but super cheap per-paid, Android branded handsets that cannot play the majority of games on Google Play. The phones struggle with displaying a web page. They remind me of something much slower than the original iPhone.
They come close to being just a feature phone since most of the app experience is not available to them.
There are many cheap phones out there, but they are a waste of money. Tell your friends to get HTC One S -- an amazing phone not much different, yet cheaper than the One X flagship.
The definition should be changing as the distinction changes. If you look at the original smartphones they would be laughed at today if you tried to claim they are modern smartphones. The Samsung Dart is an example of what I'd classify as a feature phone. As Android grows more and more comparatively un-smart devices will be getting Android, but does simply having Android installed mean they are in the same category and have the same utility as Galaxy S II and HTC One? i don't think so.
Why do you think the Dart is a feature phone? What specific aspects make it not a smart phone? I think it's better to just do away with the class than to try to arrive at a more contrived definition.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
I think it's better to just do away with the class than to try to arrive at a more contrived definition.
If the telecoms force me to have a data plan to use it, it's a smartphone. Otherwise it's a regular phone.
That's what I use.