Apple devices account for 49% of all new activations during Christmas

Posted:
in General Discussion edited December 2015
Apple dominated the holiday gift giving season, according to a recent study that found iPhones and iPads in aggregate comprised 49.1 percent of new device activations in the week leading up to Christmas.




Published on Monday, statistics gathered by Yahoo-owned analytics firm Flurry show Apple again enjoyed a sizable lead in new device activations over the week of Dec. 19 through Dec. 25. The performance is down 2.2 percentage points from 2014, the debut year for the larger-screened iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus phablet.

Apple's dip in seasonal marketshare went to runner-up Samsung, which managed 19.8 percent of all device activations this year, up 2.1 percent from 2014. Samsung was buoyed by an overall trend toward phablet devices, as the extra-large smartphone form factor accounted for half of all devices running Google's Android operating system.

Nokia came in third with a 2 percent share of the market, while LG and Xiaomi rounded out the top five with 1.7 percent and 1.5 percent, respectively.

Breaking down the results by device reveals market trends also apply to Apple's offerings, with the larger 5.5-inch iPhone 6s Plus accounting for 12 percent of all Apple device activations over the week-long period. Flurry notes adoption of Apple's phablet comes at the expense of so-called "medium phones" like the 4.7-inch iPhone 6s and small tablets like the iPad mini, the latter of which accounted for 9 percent of all iOS device activations. Previous years saw phablet demand cannibalize tablet sales, not smaller smartphones.

Despite surging phablet sales, the 4.7-inch iPhone 6s and iPhone 6 accounted for 65 percent of iOS device activations, followed by full-size tablets -- including the iPad Pro -- with 14 percent. Apple's jumbo iPad accounted for less than 1 percent of device activations, Flurry said.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 19
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 9,462member
    “ The performance is down 2.2 percentage points from 2014...” And this is what Wall Street will latch onto. Apple is Doomed™
    cornchipmickey2ronnredgeminipa
  • Reply 2 of 19
    lkrupp said:

    “ The performance is down 2.2 percentage points from 2014...” And this is what Wall Street will latch onto. Apple is Doomed™
    Exactly. I can already see the headlines: "Apple has disappointing Christmas..."

    I'd like to know the actual numbers though... not just the percentage.

    It's entirely possible that Apple sold more units this year... yet they could still lose percentage.  We don't know because Flurry doesn't give us the sales numbers.  That's the problem with comparing anything with percentages... it's based on the size of the market at any given time.

    But I think Apple would be happier selling more units themselves rather than increasing their percentage among all companies.
    edited December 2015 cornchipredgeminipa
  • Reply 3 of 19
    lkrupp said:
    “ The performance is down 2.2 percentage points from 2014...” And this is what Wall Street will latch onto. Apple is Doomed™
    Sadly true.
    Just look at that chart; That's a chart of Apple's death. (to Wall st)  
    Unbelievable...
    cornchip
  • Reply 4 of 19
    fallenjtfallenjt Posts: 4,034member
    But but this was not over 50%. Therefore, Apple is doomed. 
  • Reply 5 of 19
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,867member
    Doomed! Apple fails to get 100%. 
  • Reply 6 of 19
    Why do they call them phablets? There is nothing fabulous about them. They are basically just a cross between a phone and a tablet.  
  • Reply 7 of 19
    sphericspheric Posts: 2,093member
    Why do they call them phablets? There is nothing fabulous about them. They are basically just a cross between a phone and a tablet.  
    Uh…that's why they're called PH(one-t)ABLETS. 

    They'd be "fablets" if there was anything "fabulous" about them.
    redgeminipa
  • Reply 8 of 19
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,767member

    Considering the average selling price of the competitor's products are in a freefall, this is a lot worse for the rest than for Apple.
    That means their profit is probably near ZERO! (the whole gang).

    Wouldn't be surprised if Apple is netting 95% of all profits accross PC, Watch, Phone, Tablets and media server,
  • Reply 9 of 19
    D-D-D-DOOOOOOOOMED!™
    edited December 2015
  • Reply 10 of 19
    Guys, honestly, just laugh silly, don't listen to morons. If you KNOW what WORKS and what is the BEST, then you KNOW. Move along, move along... Because it's just silly to get into the ole try and convince people this way or that way. Most people have chosen OR are just stuck with what they have. It's pretty much over now days. It's like living in a city. You know you would like to pick up and go to some other town, city or state, but it would just take so much effort to get there and to pack up and move, and that's where we are with technology for most people. Choices have been made and people have to live with them, they can't get out of the tech-eco-systems they are in. It's done...
    edited December 2015
  • Reply 11 of 19
    rezwits said:
    Guys, honestly, just laugh silly, don't listen to morons. If you KNOW what WORKS and what is the BEST, then you KNOW. Move along, move along... Because it's just silly to get into the ole try and convince people this way or that way. Most people have chosen OR are just stuck with what they have. It's pretty much over now days. It's like living in a city. You know you would like to pick up and go to some other town, city or state, but it would just take so much effort to get there and to pack up and move, and that's where we are with technology for most people. Choices have been made and people have to live with them, they can't get out of the tech-eco-systems they are in. It's done...
    This is funny. The last 16 months we were hearing about how everyone was switching from Android to Apple because Apple introduced larger screen phones and Android was doomed as a result. Now that we see that the iPhone 6 boom was temporary and that things are reverting to what they were previously, ecosystem lock-in (with the poor Android people stuck with their bad products) becomes the fallback. 

    Reality: most people who own premium Android phones (think Moto X, Samsung Galaxy LG G, HTC One, Nexus) owned iPhones previously. Also, as Google does not offer a productivity OS, scores of premium Android device owners have MacBooks and iPads.

    So what this survey is actually showing is the splintering of the mobile device market. People who prefer Apple are sticking with smaller devices like the iPhone 6 and 6s for phones and are using iPads for productivity purposes. This is why a lot of tech analysts are predicting that Apple will come out with a 4 inch iPhone 6c in March.

    By contrast, people who prefer Android are going for phablets like the Galaxy S6 Edge+, Galaxy Note 5, LG G4 and LG V10. My guess is that it is because those devices - thanks to the skins that the OEMs have placed on them - have the productivity features like split screens and stylus support that Google Android lacks. Meanwhile, they have no interest in the Samsung and LG tablets that offer those productivity features such as the Samsung Galaxy Note Pro and the LG G Pad 10 because they offer nothing that the phones do not except bigger screens. Honestly, they offer less and are inferior devices to the phones in almost every way, which is why they often cost 1/2 to 1/3 as much.

    The market is going to maintain this trend until either Google or Apple does something to change it. We have already seen that Apple offering something that Android fans have long had - larger screens - didn't really change anything. Google's following suit by finally adding productivity features to Android in Android 7.0 and then finishing the job by merging ChromeOS with Android in Android 8.0 will only cause some Android fans who own iPads and MacBooks to trade them for Android tablets and "ChromeAndroidbooks" but not any major changes. Maybe Google's push for virtualized apps will be the gamechanger? But then again, as Google is (at least initially) going to run it by making it a search/ads feature instead of something to benefit the consumer and the user experience ... maybe not. http://www.techrepublic.com/article/google-considering-an-option-to-stream-apps-as-ads/
  • Reply 12 of 19
    bulldogs said:

    The market is going to maintain this trend until either Google or Apple does something to change it. We have already seen that Apple offering something that Android fans have long had - larger screens - didn't really change anything. Google's following suit by finally adding productivity features to Android in Android 7.0 and then finishing the job by merging ChromeOS with Android in Android 8.0 will only cause some Android fans who own iPads and MacBooks to trade them for Android tablets and "ChromeAndroidbooks" but not any major changes. Maybe Google's push for virtualized apps will be the gamechanger? But then again, as Google is (at least initially) going to run it by making it a search/ads feature instead of something to benefit the consumer and the user experience ... maybe not. http://www.techrepublic.com/article/google-considering-an-option-to-stream-apps-as-ads/
    Ok, show me a Chrome/Android device than can run Phoroshop/Lightroom and hold 600+Gb of photos?
    You might ask why so many images? That is ONE year of shooting and I'm not a pro snapper. I went on a photo trip yesterday to a sporting event and shot close to 800 images at 60+Mb a pop. Do the math.

    I might be biased as have an aversion to using Google (and Microsoft) for anything. I don't want my usage slurped and turned into adverts for my 'pleasure'. Sorry. No, do not want. So my 15in MBP is perfect and no I don't do any photo editing on my iDevice.


  • Reply 13 of 19
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,171member
    bulldogs said:

    The market is going to maintain this trend until either Google or Apple does something to change it. We have already seen that Apple offering something that Android fans have long had - larger screens - didn't really change anything. Google's following suit by finally adding productivity features to Android in Android 7.0 and then finishing the job by merging ChromeOS with Android in Android 8.0 will only cause some Android fans who own iPads and MacBooks to trade them for Android tablets and "ChromeAndroidbooks" but not any major changes. Maybe Google's push for virtualized apps will be the gamechanger? But then again, as Google is (at least initially) going to run it by making it a search/ads feature instead of something to benefit the consumer and the user experience ... maybe not. http://www.techrepublic.com/article/google-considering-an-option-to-stream-apps-as-ads/
    Ok, show me a Chrome/Android device than can run Phoroshop/Lightroom and hold 600+Gb of photos?
    You might ask why so many images? That is ONE year of shooting and I'm not a pro snapper. I went on a photo trip yesterday to a sporting event and shot close to 800 images at 60+Mb a pop. Do the math.

    I might be biased as have an aversion to using Google (and Microsoft) for anything. I don't want my usage slurped and turned into adverts for my 'pleasure'. Sorry. No, do not want. So my 15in MBP is perfect and no I don't do any photo editing on my iDevice.


    Why keep it on device? I have roughly 560GB's of RAWs and JPEGs safely uploaded automatically to my 1TB Google drive. It's even free, a bonus that came with a lightly used Pixel from eBay. Now I can edit at work OR at home quite easily, or quickly preview for friends/family on my phone. BTW those pics look marvelous on the relatively cheap Pixel.

    While I was a bit leery of cloud services a couple years ago I've discovered how wonderfully convenient they can be for photos in particular. Screw worrying about a hard drive failing or a camera/laptop going missing along with perhaps irreplaceable pics. And with a TB of storage I can bulk save all those RAWs as soon as I shoot them until I've had the time to inspect and decide if they're worth keeping. Before this I tended to just keep JPEG's for the most part instead.
    edited December 2015
  • Reply 14 of 19
    steven n.steven n. Posts: 1,222member
    bulldogs said:

    Reality: most people who own premium Android phones (think Moto X, Samsung Galaxy LG G, HTC One, Nexus) owned iPhones previously. Also, as Google does not offer a productivity OS, scores of premium Android device owners have MacBooks and iPads.

    I don't find this true at all. Most my friends with premium Android handsets have never even touched an Apple product. 
  • Reply 15 of 19
    steven n.steven n. Posts: 1,222member

    gatorguy said:
    Ok, show me a Chrome/Android device than can run Phoroshop/Lightroom and hold 600+Gb of photos?
    You might ask why so many images? That is ONE year of shooting and I'm not a pro snapper. I went on a photo trip yesterday to a sporting event and shot close to 800 images at 60+Mb a pop. Do the math.

    I might be biased as have an aversion to using Google (and Microsoft) for anything. I don't want my usage slurped and turned into adverts for my 'pleasure'. Sorry. No, do not want. So my 15in MBP is perfect and no I don't do any photo editing on my iDevice.


    Why keep it on device? I have roughly 560GB's of RAWs and JPEGs safely uploaded automatically to my 1TB Google drive. It's even free, a bonus that came with a lightly used Pixel from eBay. Now I can edit at work OR at home quite easily, or quickly preview for friends/family on my phone. BTW those pics look marvelous on the relatively cheap Pixel.

    While I was a bit leery of cloud services a couple years ago I've discovered how wonderfully convenient they can be for photos in particular. Screw worrying about a hard drive failing or a camera/laptop going missing along with perhaps irreplaceable pics. And with a TB of storage I can bulk save all those RAWs as soon as I shoot them until I've had the time to inspect and decide if they're worth keeping. Before this I tended to just keep JPEG's for the most part instead.
    Because offline storage is slow. Period. It makes 1TB of Internet storage 100% worthless for image storage for me. 
  • Reply 16 of 19
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,171member
     @rotateleftbyte ;; 100% Worthless?
     
    Do you use your images in your work, making money with them? There's been more than once that a client out in the field asked to see some particular image. As the original would typically be back at my office it's still no problem.  Because they've all been backed up to the cloud it's relatively quick and easy to show them. How would you handle that type of client request? 
    edited December 2015
  • Reply 17 of 19
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,380member
    foggyhill said:

    Considering the average selling price of the competitor's products are in a freefall, this is a lot worse for the rest than for Apple.
    That means their profit is probably near ZERO! (the whole gang).

    Wouldn't be surprised if Apple is netting 95% of all profits accross PC, Watch, Phone, Tablets and media server,
    Exactly!  I bet you are pretty close to the real numbers there.   Of course Wall Street is simply manipulations AAPL as usual with analysts posting slanted information for their own purposes.  Frankly I am surprised that much the stuff that goes on is legal.
  • Reply 18 of 19
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,380member

    steven n. said:

    gatorguy said:
    Why keep it on device? I have roughly 560GB's of RAWs and JPEGs safely uploaded automatically to my 1TB Google drive. It's even free, a bonus that came with a lightly used Pixel from eBay. Now I can edit at work OR at home quite easily, or quickly preview for friends/family on my phone. BTW those pics look marvelous on the relatively cheap Pixel.

    While I was a bit leery of cloud services a couple years ago I've discovered how wonderfully convenient they can be for photos in particular. Screw worrying about a hard drive failing or a camera/laptop going missing along with perhaps irreplaceable pics. And with a TB of storage I can bulk save all those RAWs as soon as I shoot them until I've had the time to inspect and decide if they're worth keeping. Before this I tended to just keep JPEG's for the most part instead.
    Because offline storage is slow. Period. It makes 1TB of Internet storage 100% worthless for image storage for me. 
    Did you mean 'online' is slow?  Or was that the /s missing?  Assuming you did mean online is slow, I agree and I have 75 Mb/s upload.  I made a JPEG version of my massive collection of RAW Aperture Libraries and put those into Photos and paid for the extra space on iCloud.  I still keep the RAWs offline on removable bare HDs (I use docks) and hope the house doesn't burn down.  If it does at least I have all the JPEG versions safe.  I should add I simply can't justify the cost of the cloud storage for RAWs.  The slowness isn't that big of a deal, as you can just leave the uploads running over night.  The limit of 1000 per any given hour is the real pain for me.  It took weeks to upload all my JPEGs.  Maybe that's been changed since I did it, I haven't checked to be honest.
  • Reply 19 of 19

    steven n. said:

    Because offline storage is slow. Period. It makes 1TB of Internet storage 100% worthless for image storage for me. 
    Did you mean 'online' is slow?  Or was that the /s missing?  Assuming you did mean online is slow, I agree and I have 75 Mb/s upload.  I made a JPEG version of my massive collection of RAW Aperture Libraries and put those into Photos and paid for the extra space on iCloud.  I still keep the RAWs offline on removable bare HDs (I use docks) and hope the house doesn't burn down.  If it does at least I have all the JPEG versions safe.  I should add I simply can't justify the cost of the cloud storage for RAWs.  The slowness isn't that big of a deal, as you can just leave the uploads running over night.  The limit of 1000 per any given hour is the real pain for me.  It took weeks to upload all my JPEGs.  Maybe that's been changed since I did it, I haven't checked to be honest.
    For mass storage online, most services will accept you mailing them a hard drive, which they then make available online for you. It took me nearly 5 days of continually uploading to get all of my full resolution photos and videos stored onto Google Photos, so it's nice to know there are alternative ways of solving the bandwidth issue. If you're a professional, you really should store only the highest resolution versions of images IMO, since online storage is your last-ditch emergency backup in case of damage or loss everywhere else.
    edited December 2015
Sign In or Register to comment.