What an awesome read! Completely exposing these "analysts" for the shills that they are. After a thorough thrashing with hard facts, DED drops the bomb at the end. Loved that. And the icing on the cake is gg's whining.. "bu.. bu.. but.. Apple has used IDC numbers too!"
When taken globally, this market share erotion makes sense when you stop to think that outside of the United States, Western Europe Japan and maybe some other countries apple's prices are way to high to have massive sale numbers.
For instance, I paid 500 dollars upfront for my iPhone 4S(16 gb)6 months after it was released with a 2 year contract of about 50 dollars a month
Last week I was shopping and went into one of the official apple retailers in my town (Montevideo, Uruguay). The price of a 16gb iPad 4 wifi only is 1020 dollars. A 32gb iPod touch goes for $450. The way I see it the only apple product people outside the aforementioned regions would be able to massively buy would be the Apple TV which is about 200. But because there is no Apple TV advertising, and because the services that make an Apple TV a great product are not widely used in most of the countries were all this other android-running cheap products are seen growth, there is no way for apple to see any major development.
And we have the issue of people not being "educated" enough, and I don't mean this I a derogatory way. People just don't think it's worth it to spend 10 times more money on an iPad when you can buy "white box" android tablets that as far as they can tell do the same thing an iPad does.
The same thing goes for android smartphone market share and the use of the devices seen on statistics. I read the comments of people living in the USA about how you guys hardly ever see any android phones or android tablets compared to iPhones and iPads. Outside of the US it's the exact opposite, my office has about 60 people, we all have "above average" salaries that allow us to at least get smartphones, and out of the 60 we are it's only 3 of us who have iPhones. The rest is a mix of $200 android 2.3 phones(Samsung mostly) or lumias 600 something.
This is just a glimps of what it looks like to be outside of the US in this tablet/smartphone world of today.
I'd just like to say that personally I rather have apple keep things the way they are rather than getting in the mud where Samsung and the rest of the android gang and Nokia are wrestling here in the third world. The way I see it apple should just try to bring the full experience people on the US get when getting into the ecosystem. That should be what drives Apple in this markets.
When taken globally, this market share erotion makes sense when you stop to think that outside of the United States, Western Europe Japan and maybe some other countries apple's prices are way to high to have massive sale numbers.
For instance, I paid 500 dollars upfront for my iPhone 4S(16 gb)6 months after it was released with a 2 year contract of about 50 dollars a month
Last week I was shopping and went into one of the official apple retailers in my town (Montevideo, Uruguay). The price of a 16gb iPad 4 wifi only is 1020 dollars.
A 32gb iPod touch goes for $450.
The way I see it the only apple product people outside the aforementioned regions would be able to massively buy would be the Apple TV which is about 200. But because there is no Apple TV advertising, and because the services that make an Apple TV a great product are not widely used in most of the countries were all this other android-running cheap products are seen growth, there is no way for apple to see any major development.
And we have the issue of people not being "educated" enough, and I don't mind this I a derogatory way. People just don't think it's worth it to spend 10 times more money on an iPad when you can buy "white box" android tablets that as far as they can tell do the same thing an iPad does.
The same thing goes for android smartphone market share and the use of the devises seen on statistics. I read the comments of people living in the USA about how you guys hardly ever see any android phones or android tablets compared to iPhones and iPads. Outside of the US it's the exact opposite, my office has about 60 people, we all have "above average" salaries that allow us to at least get smartphones, and out of the 60 we are it's only 3 of us who have iPhones. The rest is a mix of $200 android 2.3 phones(Samsung mostly) or lumias 600 something.
This is just a glimps of what it looks like to be outside of the US in this tablet/smartphone world of today.
I'd just like to say that personally I rather have apple keep things the way they are rather than getting in the mud where Samsung and the rest of the android gang and Nokia are wrestling here in the third world. The way I see it apple should just try to bring the full experience people on the US get when getting into the ecosystem. That should be what drives Apple in this markets.
Sorry for my broken English.
A very interesting point there. Here in Australia it's similar to the US, but I tend to see a lot of Samsung smartphones, generally because there's a huge Asian population here in Brisbane - but iPhones easily outnumber them. And tablets? Everyone uses iPads, I rarely see anyone use anything else (it's just cooler to be seen using an iPad).
I would love to see some research on the average "life expectancy" of android tablets from all manufacturers compared to the iPad.
I hear it all the time: "how dumb can you be to waste so much money on an overpriced tablet?" When the question I ask back is "how dumb can you be to actually go and buy a product from a company that just wants to keep on selling crap to get your money every quarter?"
The more important question is how to define market share for mobile devices. I don't think most would define it as the number of units shipped, since that doesn't mean the devices have been sold or are even being used.
A more accurate way is by web traffic, but that still probably doesn't include devices that are used for business purposes since they may not be using the Internet all that much and are using apps for most functions.
Web traffic (or worse, ad impressions) has always been an unreliable sales indicator. For example, when the iPad first came out, its web stats made it look like it was selling many times as much as iPhones were, which was of course ridiculous.
It also ignores all the devices used by people who rarely surf the web. I know a lot of women who use social apps, but never the web. My own kids used tablets for years just to play games. And then there are the e-readers.
Also, as you said, business uses are not counted. American Airlines bought 8,000 iPads for their pilots that will never show up in web stats. They also bought 17,000 five inch Notes for their crew and 6,000 ten inch Notes for their first class passengers. Only the latter tablets can possibly show up on the web.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tribalogical
Just one request: Please don't get caught up in the trap of using the word "sold" synonymously with "shipped". Apple, unlike other companies, does differentiate and as long as they do, we should do the same in support of that practice.
Most reports are talking about sales/shipments to retailers, where the terms mean the same thing.
Only a few reports try to figure out end user sales, but unless there's a huge dip in retailer sales, the numbers will end up being similar, as retailers do not continue to buy stock that doesn't sell.
Canalys has just published their latest tablet market share report and has generally come up with the same findings: Android tablets now are outselling Apple's iPad line.
"[B]Over 34 million tablets shipped in Q2 2013, a 43% year-on-year increase. Tablets now account for 31% of worldwide PC shipments. But Apple’s performance faltered. Its tablet shipments declined 14% on Q2 2012 and its market share dropped to 43%. [/B]The chasing pack of Samsung, Amazon, Lenovo and Acer each grew annually by over 200%, driven by increasing demand for small-screen tablets. Canalys estimates that 68% of tablets shipped in Q2 had a screen size smaller than 9". ‘Consumers have been evaluating tablets and the results are now in,’ said Tim Coulling, Canalys Senior Analyst. ‘With touch-screens contributing to a high proportion of the build cost of a tablet, small-screen products can be priced very aggressively.’
Apple’s decline in shipments and share has been partly attributed to its aging portfolio. But Canalys believes that new product launches will have less impact on its shipments in future. ‘When Apple does decide to refresh its iPad range it will not experience the buzz of previous launches,’ said Canalys Analyst James Wang. ‘Tablets are now mainstream products and hardware innovation is increasingly difficult. With branded Android tablets available for less than $150, the PC market has never been so good for consumers, who are voting with their wallets.’ The move to smaller tablets has sparked a price war that has real consequences for the entire supply chain. These products generate little absolute margin for channel partners, vendors or component manufacturers. Content, applications and accessories (especially cases and keyboards) are now even more important to boost margins – areas where Apple remains a leader.
In addition to disappearing margins, inventory management is emerging as a major challenge. If a vendor overcommits at the product planning stage, unsold inventory can play havoc with a company’s balance sheet, even with other hit products in a portfolio. The market for full-sized tablets has stalled and even Apple has found it harder to sell its larger iPads in recent quarters".
Small tablets are driving the sales according to Canalys with lagging demand for the original 10"+ screen size.
Canalys has just published their latest tablet market share report and has generally come up with the same findings: Android tablets now are outselling Apple's iPad line.
"Over 34 million tablets shipped in Q2 2013, a 43% year-on-year increase. Tablets now account for 31% of worldwide PC shipments. But Apple’s performance faltered. Its tablet shipments declined 14% on Q2 2012 and its market share dropped to 43%. The chasing pack of Samsung, Amazon, Lenovo and Acer each grew annually by over 200%, driven by increasing demand for small-screen tablets. Canalys estimates that 68% of tablets shipped in Q2 had a screen size smaller than 9". ‘Consumers have been evaluating tablets and the results are now in,’ said Tim Coulling, Canalys Senior Analyst. ‘With touch-screens contributing to a high proportion of the build cost of a tablet, small-screen products can be priced very aggressively.’
Apple’s decline in shipments and share has been partly attributed to its aging portfolio. But Canalys believes that new product launches will have less impact on its shipments in future. ‘When Apple does decide to refresh its iPad range it will not experience the buzz of previous launches,’ said Canalys Analyst James Wang. ‘Tablets are now mainstream products and hardware innovation is increasingly difficult. With branded Android tablets available for less than $150, the PC market has never been so good for consumers, who are voting with their wallets.’ The move to smaller tablets has sparked a price war that has real consequences for the entire supply chain. These products generate little absolute margin for channel partners, vendors or component manufacturers. Content, applications and accessories (especially cases and keyboards) are now even more important to boost margins – areas where Apple remains a leader.
In addition to disappearing margins, inventory management is emerging as a major challenge. If a vendor overcommits at the product planning stage, unsold inventory can play havoc with a company’s balance sheet, even with other hit products in a portfolio. The market for full-sized tablets has stalled and even Apple has found it harder to sell its larger iPads in recent quarters".
Small tablets are driving the sales according to Canalys with lagging demand for the original 10"+ screen size.
First point is Apple doesn't need to compete here. Not because market share isn't important but because that race to the bottom will end on bankruptcy. Like the home computer OSes of the 80's. Canalys makes that point and then forgets it. Apple can go cheaper this year by keeping the non-mini retina in production. At say $50-$100 off today's prices. That's all they need, it's a great device.
First point is Apple doesn't need to compete here. Not because market share isn't important but because that race to the bottom will end on bankruptcy. Like the home computer OSes of the 80's. Canalys makes that point and then forgets it. Apple can go cheaper this year by keeping the non-mini retina in production. At say $50-$100 off today's prices. That's all they need, it's a great device.
No neec to follow the low margin herd.
Canalys has just published their latest tablet market share report and has generally come up with the same findings: Android tablets now are outselling Apple's iPad line.
"Over 34 million tablets shipped in Q2 2013, a 43% year-on-year increase. Tablets now account for 31% of worldwide PC shipments. But Apple’s performance faltered. Its tablet shipments declined 14% on Q2 2012 and its market share dropped to 43%. The chasing pack of Samsung, Amazon, Lenovo and Acer each grew annually by over 200%, driven by increasing demand for small-screen tablets. Canalys estimates that 68% of tablets shipped in Q2 had a screen size smaller than 9". ‘Consumers have been evaluating tablets and the results are now in,’ said Tim Coulling, Canalys Senior Analyst. ‘With touch-screens contributing to a high proportion of the build cost of a tablet, small-screen products can be priced very aggressively.’
Apple’s decline in shipments and share has been partly attributed to its aging portfolio. But Canalys believes that new product launches will have less impact on its shipments in future. ‘When Apple does decide to refresh its iPad range it will not experience the buzz of previous launches,’ said Canalys Analyst James Wang. ‘Tablets are now mainstream products and hardware innovation is increasingly difficult. With branded Android tablets available for less than $150, the PC market has never been so good for consumers, who are voting with their wallets.’ The move to smaller tablets has sparked a price war that has real consequences for the entire supply chain. These products generate little absolute margin for channel partners, vendors or component manufacturers. Content, applications and accessories (especially cases and keyboards) are now even more important to boost margins – areas where Apple remains a leader.
In addition to disappearing margins, inventory management is emerging as a major challenge. If a vendor overcommits at the product planning stage, unsold inventory can play havoc with a company’s balance sheet, even with other hit products in a portfolio. The market for full-sized tablets has stalled and even Apple has found it harder to sell its larger iPads in recent quarters".
Small tablets are driving the sales according to Canalys with lagging demand for the original 10"+ screen size.
So all these vendors should be announcing real numbers then. The "report" also failed to mention that last year, the 3 was released and nothing was released this year. Perhaps that's why this qtr was "faltered".
Yet another coolaid overdose article. IDC numbers may not be 100% accurate, but they are close. Fact is the ipad is losing chunks of market shares worldwide over cheap android tablets. Same thing goes for iphones. Is not very apparent in developed counties.
On the ipad side, Apple is doing better than the on the phone side in terms of holding its market shares. There is nothing Apple can do at the $99 smartphone segments and $99 tablet segments. That being said, lets hope Apple will be able establish market shares in mid-range segments. Those developped countries mid-range segments will allow Apple to be position at the high end in emerging markets.
Any numbers that support your likes are good numbers and any that support Apple are bad numbers. I get it. PS if read one of the comments they showed a company that sells android tv sticks. It appears that these can show up looking like android tablets. And yet even with that Android use on line is very limited.
PS if read one of the comments they showed a company that sells android tv sticks. It appears that these can show up looking like android tablets. And yet even with that Android use on line is very limited.
The young person on Twitter who was quoted at the end of the article, wrote: "Posit: devices like this look like an Android tablet to Google". Meaning it's a guess. He even backed up a little later on and added, "It seems to be at least possible." So let's explore it.
If a HTPC stick does come with Google Play, then it'll usually register as a "large" screen device, which means roughly about 4" to 7" (*). So okay, it might show up on Android Dashboard as a phablet or mini tablet registration. (Assuming Google isn't smart enough to look at any other data, such as ... does it have a touchscreen? If it's missing that, then some posit that it would register as a Google TV instead.)
As for online usage, most will be used for games, Skype, and especially streaming videos from Hulu, YouTube, Netflix, etc... since that's their main purpose. That kind of usage doesn't show up in web stats.
I don't know where the idea came from that you have to see web ads or hit some popular sites to be counted as using a device 'online'. There are lots of uses... and lots of users... which don't surf the web, but instead use dedicated apps to access the 'net.
Cheers!
(*) Why not larger? Because at the distance most people view their TVs, it's the UI equivalent of that size display.
As for online usage, most will be used for games, Skype, and especially streaming videos from Hulu, YouTube, Netflix, etc... since that's their main purpose. That kind of usage doesn't show up in web stats.
I don't know where the idea came from that you have to see web ads or hit some popular sites to be counted as using a device 'online'. There are lots of uses... and lots of users... which don't surf the web, but instead use dedicated apps to access the 'net.
Exactly... all those reports are looking specifically at "Web Usage" or Web Traffic"
If they said "online" or "internet access" it would be a different report.
The truth is... there's not much else a 3rd party analyst can see besides web traffic.
How would they see exactly which internet services you are accessing with your tablet? If you're using your Kindle Fire to watch Netflix... only Amazon and Netflix know that. (oh and your ISP)
But getting back to web browsing... why do these reports come out, time and time again, that say the iPad absolutely dominates every other tablet in web browsing?
Hell... with the sheer number of Android tablets out in the world... even if someone accidentally launched the browser it should kick up their percentage a lil bit.
Every time one of these reports come out... it's something like "iPad has 80% of web traffic"
Why is that?
You're right... non-iPad tablets can be used for all sorts of things outside of web browsing... games, Netflix, Hulu, etc. And those things can't be measured.
But... the iPad has games, Netflix and Hulu too... in addition to having all that web browsing usage.
Couldn't it be possible that the iPad is the most used tablet in the world?
Yeah. The web usage stats are even more impressive given there are more functional apps for the iPad than, certainly, cheaper android devices. Although possibly the Kindle is a more dedicated e-reader. My feeling is
1) The iPad is used more. 2) The iPad has legs. I bet the iPad 1 is still being used, and not in a drawer.
The installed base of still used tablets is possibly 70% iPads.
Remember those headlines about Samsung "dethroning" Apple in profits? Forget them.
Source: Asymco.com
FORTUNE -- If anyone can draw a picture that puts to lie Strategy Analytic's claim -- widely reported in the tech press -- that Samsung has become the world's most profitable smartphone vendor, Horace Dediu can.
The chart above was adapted from That Competition Thing, a post on his Asymco.com blog that compared the top and bottom lines of Apple (AAPL), Amazon (AMZN), Google (GOOG), Microsoft (MSFT) and Samsung.
Dediu's bottom line on Apple v. Samsung: "Apple remains most profitable phone maker by a wide margin."
Below: Dediu's revenue charts for the two companies by segment and product line.
These "white box" phones are little more than the "store brand" salt, sugar, and pepper you can buy at your local grocery store. And they generally only cover the basics: you know, salt, sugar, and pepper. But if your want sea salt, sugar-in-the-raw, or cayenne pepper, you are TSOL. And the idea that outside analysts would be promoting "in-store brands"? Sad.
Sorry to be late, but I just got turned on to the Dilger commentary. I'll try to keep up better in the future.
Comments
I wonder how many Google or Samsung pays for this bullshit...
For instance, I paid 500 dollars upfront for my iPhone 4S(16 gb)6 months after it was released with a 2 year contract of about 50 dollars a month
Last week I was shopping and went into one of the official apple retailers in my town (Montevideo, Uruguay). The price of a 16gb iPad 4 wifi only is 1020 dollars.
A 32gb iPod touch goes for $450.
The way I see it the only apple product people outside the aforementioned regions would be able to massively buy would be the Apple TV which is about 200. But because there is no Apple TV advertising, and because the services that make an Apple TV a great product are not widely used in most of the countries were all this other android-running cheap products are seen growth, there is no way for apple to see any major development.
And we have the issue of people not being "educated" enough, and I don't mean this I a derogatory way. People just don't think it's worth it to spend 10 times more money on an iPad when you can buy "white box" android tablets that as far as they can tell do the same thing an iPad does.
The same thing goes for android smartphone market share and the use of the devices seen on statistics. I read the comments of people living in the USA about how you guys hardly ever see any android phones or android tablets compared to iPhones and iPads. Outside of the US it's the exact opposite, my office has about 60 people, we all have "above average" salaries that allow us to at least get smartphones, and out of the 60 we are it's only 3 of us who have iPhones. The rest is a mix of $200 android 2.3 phones(Samsung mostly) or lumias 600 something.
This is just a glimps of what it looks like to be outside of the US in this tablet/smartphone world of today.
I'd just like to say that personally I rather have apple keep things the way they are rather than getting in the mud where Samsung and the rest of the android gang and Nokia are wrestling here in the third world. The way I see it apple should just try to bring the full experience people on the US get when getting into the ecosystem. That should be what drives Apple in this markets.
Sorry for my broken English.
A very interesting point there. Here in Australia it's similar to the US, but I tend to see a lot of Samsung smartphones, generally because there's a huge Asian population here in Brisbane - but iPhones easily outnumber them. And tablets? Everyone uses iPads, I rarely see anyone use anything else (it's just cooler to be seen using an iPad).
I hear it all the time: "how dumb can you be to waste so much money on an overpriced tablet?" When the question I ask back is "how dumb can you be to actually go and buy a product from a company that just wants to keep on selling crap to get your money every quarter?"
It also greatly reduces the risk of theft.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zogg
The more important question is how to define market share for mobile devices. I don't think most would define it as the number of units shipped, since that doesn't mean the devices have been sold or are even being used.
A more accurate way is by web traffic, but that still probably doesn't include devices that are used for business purposes since they may not be using the Internet all that much and are using apps for most functions.
Web traffic (or worse, ad impressions) has always been an unreliable sales indicator. For example, when the iPad first came out, its web stats made it look like it was selling many times as much as iPhones were, which was of course ridiculous.
It also ignores all the devices used by people who rarely surf the web. I know a lot of women who use social apps, but never the web. My own kids used tablets for years just to play games. And then there are the e-readers.
Also, as you said, business uses are not counted. American Airlines bought 8,000 iPads for their pilots that will never show up in web stats. They also bought 17,000 five inch Notes for their crew and 6,000 ten inch Notes for their first class passengers. Only the latter tablets can possibly show up on the web.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tribalogical
Just one request: Please don't get caught up in the trap of using the word "sold" synonymously with "shipped". Apple, unlike other companies, does differentiate and as long as they do, we should do the same in support of that practice.
Most reports are talking about sales/shipments to retailers, where the terms mean the same thing.
Only a few reports try to figure out end user sales, but unless there's a huge dip in retailer sales, the numbers will end up being similar, as retailers do not continue to buy stock that doesn't sell.
"[B]Over 34 million tablets shipped in Q2 2013, a 43% year-on-year increase. Tablets now account for 31% of worldwide PC shipments. But Apple’s performance faltered. Its tablet shipments declined 14% on Q2 2012 and its market share dropped to 43%. [/B]The chasing pack of Samsung, Amazon, Lenovo and Acer each grew annually by over 200%, driven by increasing demand for small-screen tablets. Canalys estimates that 68% of tablets shipped in Q2 had a screen size smaller than 9". ‘Consumers have been evaluating tablets and the results are now in,’ said Tim Coulling, Canalys Senior Analyst. ‘With touch-screens contributing to a high proportion of the build cost of a tablet, small-screen products can be priced very aggressively.’
Apple’s decline in shipments and share has been partly attributed to its aging portfolio. But Canalys believes that new product launches will have less impact on its shipments in future. ‘When Apple does decide to refresh its iPad range it will not experience the buzz of previous launches,’ said Canalys Analyst James Wang. ‘Tablets are now mainstream products and hardware innovation is increasingly difficult. With branded Android tablets available for less than $150, the PC market has never been so good for consumers, who are voting with their wallets.’ The move to smaller tablets has sparked a price war that has real consequences for the entire supply chain. These products generate little absolute margin for channel partners, vendors or component manufacturers. Content, applications and accessories (especially cases and keyboards) are now even more important to boost margins – areas where Apple remains a leader.
In addition to disappearing margins, inventory management is emerging as a major challenge. If a vendor overcommits at the product planning stage, unsold inventory can play havoc with a company’s balance sheet, even with other hit products in a portfolio. The market for full-sized tablets has stalled and even Apple has found it harder to sell its larger iPads in recent quarters".
Small tablets are driving the sales according to Canalys with lagging demand for the original 10"+ screen size.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
Canalys has just published their latest tablet market share report and has generally come up with the same findings: Android tablets now are outselling Apple's iPad line.
"Over 34 million tablets shipped in Q2 2013, a 43% year-on-year increase. Tablets now account for 31% of worldwide PC shipments. But Apple’s performance faltered. Its tablet shipments declined 14% on Q2 2012 and its market share dropped to 43%. The chasing pack of Samsung, Amazon, Lenovo and Acer each grew annually by over 200%, driven by increasing demand for small-screen tablets. Canalys estimates that 68% of tablets shipped in Q2 had a screen size smaller than 9". ‘Consumers have been evaluating tablets and the results are now in,’ said Tim Coulling, Canalys Senior Analyst. ‘With touch-screens contributing to a high proportion of the build cost of a tablet, small-screen products can be priced very aggressively.’
Apple’s decline in shipments and share has been partly attributed to its aging portfolio. But Canalys believes that new product launches will have less impact on its shipments in future. ‘When Apple does decide to refresh its iPad range it will not experience the buzz of previous launches,’ said Canalys Analyst James Wang. ‘Tablets are now mainstream products and hardware innovation is increasingly difficult. With branded Android tablets available for less than $150, the PC market has never been so good for consumers, who are voting with their wallets.’ The move to smaller tablets has sparked a price war that has real consequences for the entire supply chain. These products generate little absolute margin for channel partners, vendors or component manufacturers. Content, applications and accessories (especially cases and keyboards) are now even more important to boost margins – areas where Apple remains a leader.
In addition to disappearing margins, inventory management is emerging as a major challenge. If a vendor overcommits at the product planning stage, unsold inventory can play havoc with a company’s balance sheet, even with other hit products in a portfolio. The market for full-sized tablets has stalled and even Apple has found it harder to sell its larger iPads in recent quarters".
Small tablets are driving the sales according to Canalys with lagging demand for the original 10"+ screen size.
First point is Apple doesn't need to compete here. Not because market share isn't important but because that race to the bottom will end on bankruptcy. Like the home computer OSes of the 80's. Canalys makes that point and then forgets it. Apple can go cheaper this year by keeping the non-mini retina in production. At say $50-$100 off today's prices. That's all they need, it's a great device.
No neec to follow the low margin herd.
I don't disagree.
So all these vendors should be announcing real numbers then. The "report" also failed to mention that last year, the 3 was released and nothing was released this year. Perhaps that's why this qtr was "faltered".
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbapou
Yet another coolaid overdose article. IDC numbers may not be 100% accurate, but they are close. Fact is the ipad is losing chunks of market shares worldwide over cheap android tablets. Same thing goes for iphones. Is not very apparent in developed counties.
On the ipad side, Apple is doing better than the on the phone side in terms of holding its market shares. There is nothing Apple can do at the $99 smartphone segments and $99 tablet segments. That being said, lets hope Apple will be able establish market shares in mid-range segments. Those developped countries mid-range segments will allow Apple to be position at the high end in emerging markets.
Any numbers that support your likes are good numbers and any that support Apple are bad numbers. I get it. PS if read one of the comments they showed a company that sells android tv sticks. It appears that these can show up looking like android tablets. And yet even with that Android use on line is very limited.
I think Apple is doing just fine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eldernorm
PS if read one of the comments they showed a company that sells android tv sticks. It appears that these can show up looking like android tablets. And yet even with that Android use on line is very limited.
The young person on Twitter who was quoted at the end of the article, wrote: "Posit: devices like this look like an Android tablet to Google". Meaning it's a guess. He even backed up a little later on and added, "It seems to be at least possible." So let's explore it.
If a HTPC stick does come with Google Play, then it'll usually register as a "large" screen device, which means roughly about 4" to 7" (*). So okay, it might show up on Android Dashboard as a phablet or mini tablet registration. (Assuming Google isn't smart enough to look at any other data, such as ... does it have a touchscreen? If it's missing that, then some posit that it would register as a Google TV instead.)
As for online usage, most will be used for games, Skype, and especially streaming videos from Hulu, YouTube, Netflix, etc... since that's their main purpose. That kind of usage doesn't show up in web stats.
I don't know where the idea came from that you have to see web ads or hit some popular sites to be counted as using a device 'online'. There are lots of uses... and lots of users... which don't surf the web, but instead use dedicated apps to access the 'net.
Cheers!
(*) Why not larger? Because at the distance most people view their TVs, it's the UI equivalent of that size display.
Exactly... all those reports are looking specifically at "Web Usage" or Web Traffic"
If they said "online" or "internet access" it would be a different report.
The truth is... there's not much else a 3rd party analyst can see besides web traffic.
How would they see exactly which internet services you are accessing with your tablet? If you're using your Kindle Fire to watch Netflix... only Amazon and Netflix know that. (oh and your ISP)
But getting back to web browsing... why do these reports come out, time and time again, that say the iPad absolutely dominates every other tablet in web browsing?
Hell... with the sheer number of Android tablets out in the world... even if someone accidentally launched the browser it should kick up their percentage a lil bit.
Every time one of these reports come out... it's something like "iPad has 80% of web traffic"
Why is that?
You're right... non-iPad tablets can be used for all sorts of things outside of web browsing... games, Netflix, Hulu, etc. And those things can't be measured.
But... the iPad has games, Netflix and Hulu too... in addition to having all that web browsing usage.
Couldn't it be possible that the iPad is the most used tablet in the world?
1) The iPad is used more.
2) The iPad has legs. I bet the iPad 1 is still being used, and not in a drawer.
The installed base of still used tablets is possibly 70% iPads.
So, how much Samsung paid "Strategy Analytics???
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2013/08/04/apple-samsung-bottom-line/
Remember those headlines about Samsung "dethroning" Apple in profits? Forget them.
Source: Asymco.com
FORTUNE -- If anyone can draw a picture that puts to lie Strategy Analytic's claim -- widely reported in the tech press -- that Samsung has become the world's most profitable smartphone vendor, Horace Dediu can.
The chart above was adapted from That Competition Thing, a post on his Asymco.com blog that compared the top and bottom lines of Apple (AAPL), Amazon (AMZN), Google (GOOG), Microsoft (MSFT) and Samsung.
Dediu's bottom line on Apple v. Samsung: "Apple remains most profitable phone maker by a wide margin."
Below: Dediu's revenue charts for the two companies by segment and product line.
Source: Asymco.com
Sorry to be late, but I just got turned on to the Dilger commentary. I'll try to keep up better in the future.