Fewer and fewer people want to be chained to a clunky laptop that is itself chained to the box that gives it access to the world...
But, the laptop hangs on -- and will -- because Apple and Google have yet to offer a viable alternative to the things that it does well (without also dealing with its chain-gang mentality).
... Steve! Wherever you are! Come Back! We need you!
and steve would say, if people want to buy old trucks, let them. He's building cars (and nice new trucks).
Apparently, Android now makes more profit in their App Store than Apple.
Android's app stores are expected to surpass the App Store in revenue sometime this year. However, they certainly are not expected to surpass the App Store in profit.
Apple has a problem: price. Apple could reduce 50% the price of all products and boost sales tremendously worldwide.
Additionally, in the case of Mac they use many times soldered components (RAM, SSD and GPU), so that you cannot upgrade the machine later on (programmed obsolescence and big anti-ecological impact on planet Earth!) or with proprietary connectors, so that you are forced to purchase from Apple.
And Apple charges 2 to 3 times more for the very same product as compared to sites like Amazon when you buy just one item (whereas Apple purchases millions, so they could give even better price than Amazon.
Do not get me wrong. I love Apple products and in particular the Mac. But the situation is clearly unfair.
What utter tripe. Market share is practically meaningless. Apple has 90+% of mobile phone profits, 40+% computer profit, a majority of watch profit, majority of tablet profit. I guess too much profit is bad news.
Macs generally last longer than PCs and most PC users replace the PC rather than the components when they upgrade.
When you're giving away devices and an OS for negative profit whilst stealing personal information and giving it to the government, you're sure to dominate marketshare. Sadly, you're not going to dominate profits not have any cash to do anything else.
And who does this exactly? Google makes billions per year on Android and so does Samsung. Google most certainly dominates their category - web search, services and advertising - in profits to the point where numerous entities have sued them for being a monopoly. Samsung meanwhile is #2 in mobile profits. Google came up with a successful strategy to defeat Microsoft in mobile and search, and did so against some pretty tall odds. Samsung also emerged from the pack against a bunch of companies that were better known and had much bigger market share and credibility as high tech companies and mobile companies (think HTC, Motorola, Nokia, Sony) to get where they are and stay there. This endless grumbling over the fact that Apple is not the only company on the planet succeeding and making money makes no sense and quite frankly does not project a good image for Apple fandom.
Instead of bedgrudging Samsung and Google for having their piece of the pie, you should be more concerned about this: "while macOS/OS X took just 5.17" and "while Mac numbers have fallen slightly." As Google and Samsung do not compete with Mac OS X - Chrome OS and Samsung being a very minor maker of Windows laptops far behind Lenovo, Dell, HP and even Toshiba notwithstanding - Apple has other problems to worry about. Apple failed to translate and leverage the massive success of their mobile devices, iPod and iPhone as well as the somewhat lesser success of the iPad, into an increased marketshare for other devices or to increase their footholds in other businesses. All the talk 5 or even 3 years ago about how Apple was going to kill off Microsoft and Windows for consumers and even in the enterprise turned out to be precisely that, and Apple is even pulling back, focusing less emphasis on enterprise efforts and selling fewer devices blatantly aimed at tempting Windows users to switch. Add to to that the fact that the Windows PC free fall seems to have stabilized ... things are never going back to the Wintel heyday of the 00s on one hand, but on the other hand it is clear that when people and enterprises need a main or work computing device they are going to get a laptop - as opposed to a smartphone or tablet - and 9 times out of 10 that laptop is going to run Windows as opposed to Mac OS X , just as things were before the iPad boom.
Apple won the mobile wars, but Google and Samsung did a good job for themselves in carving out a very lucrative second place. What needs to be mentioned now is A) Apple failed to parlay their victory in mobile into increased market share anywhere else and it is now time to let the mobile wars go and transition to the next battle with new products. Wearables failed to take off, so has VR, so what is next? (Although it is curious that no one has really tried to add smart functionality to an existing product that already sells well ... smart headphones with VR/AR goggles attached anyone? Beats could release those at any time.)
i, as an Apple fan despise the competition because they gained their "success" by completely ripping off Apple's hard work and spreading propaganda against the EXACT company that made them who they are. Now we have idiots(statistically proven idiots)* who believe Samsung and other iKnockoff manufacturers are actually original products.
Beats headphones with glasses attached? Apple, hire this guy ASAP!!!!!!
*Droid users are less intelligent, less educated, less healthy and less successful than people who use real iPhones/iPads:
Apparently, Android now makes more profit in their App Store than Apple.
Android's app stores are expected to surpass the App Store in revenue sometime this year. However, they certainly are not expected to surpass the App Store in profit.
When you're giving away devices and an OS for negative profit whilst stealing personal information and giving it to the government, you're sure to dominate marketshare. Sadly, you're not going to dominate profits not have any cash to do anything else.
And who does this exactly? Google makes billions per year on Android and so does Samsung. Google most certainly dominates their category - web search, services and advertising - in profits to the point where numerous entities have sued them for being a monopoly. Samsung meanwhile is #2 in mobile profits. Google came up with a successful strategy to defeat Microsoft in mobile and search, and did so against some pretty tall odds. Samsung also emerged from the pack against a bunch of companies that were better known and had much bigger market share and credibility as high tech companies and mobile companies (think HTC, Motorola, Nokia, Sony) to get where they are and stay there. This endless grumbling over the fact that Apple is not the only company on the planet succeeding and making money makes no sense and quite frankly does not project a good image for Apple fandom.
Instead of bedgrudging Samsung and Google for having their piece of the pie, you should be more concerned about this: "while macOS/OS X took just 5.17" and "while Mac numbers have fallen slightly." As Google and Samsung do not compete with Mac OS X - Chrome OS and Samsung being a very minor maker of Windows laptops far behind Lenovo, Dell, HP and even Toshiba notwithstanding - Apple has other problems to worry about. Apple failed to translate and leverage the massive success of their mobile devices, iPod and iPhone as well as the somewhat lesser success of the iPad, into an increased marketshare for other devices or to increase their footholds in other businesses. All the talk 5 or even 3 years ago about how Apple was going to kill off Microsoft and Windows for consumers and even in the enterprise turned out to be precisely that, and Apple is even pulling back, focusing less emphasis on enterprise efforts and selling fewer devices blatantly aimed at tempting Windows users to switch. Add to to that the fact that the Windows PC free fall seems to have stabilized ... things are never going back to the Wintel heyday of the 00s on one hand, but on the other hand it is clear that when people and enterprises need a main or work computing device they are going to get a laptop - as opposed to a smartphone or tablet - and 9 times out of 10 that laptop is going to run Windows as opposed to Mac OS X , just as things were before the iPad boom.
Apple won the mobile wars, but Google and Samsung did a good job for themselves in carving out a very lucrative second place. What needs to be mentioned now is A) Apple failed to parlay their victory in mobile into increased market share anywhere else and it is now time to let the mobile wars go and transition to the next battle with new products. Wearables failed to take off, so has VR, so what is next? (Although it is curious that no one has really tried to add smart functionality to an existing product that already sells well ... smart headphones with VR/AR goggles attached anyone? Beats could release those at any time.)
Yes, Google definitely profits from advertising, but with regards to Android products being used more, they are also generally cheaper and sell with little or no profit. Personally, I wouldn't consider having an Android phone for the fact of Google collecting/selling my information.
Samsung is the second in mobile profits, yet they don't nearly contribute to mobile profits as much Apple does. They are not very notable in this regard.
All of this is in regards to Android products being used more than Apple. I'm not saying anyone does or doesn't directly compete with Apple. I'm saying that Apple isn't less of competitor despite their lesser market usage, as they significantly profit in their categories.
Also, Apple hasn't been pulling away from enterprise. And Wearables haven't failed to take off. Though I could agree they aren't taking off super fast, but there definitely is a market for them and it's definitely growing.
Apple has a problem: price. Apple could reduce 50% the price of all products and boost sales tremendously worldwide.
Additionally, in the case of Mac they use many times soldered components (RAM, SSD and GPU), so that you cannot upgrade the machine later on (programmed obsolescence and big anti-ecological impact on planet Earth!) or with proprietary connectors, so that you are forced to purchase from Apple.
And Apple charges 2 to 3 times more for the very same product as compared to sites like Amazon when you buy just one item (whereas Apple purchases millions, so they could give even better price than Amazon.
Do not get me wrong. I love Apple products and in particular the Mac. But the situation is clearly unfair.
Take a finance class and learn about time value or money and doing NPV analysis and you will find an investment in Apple product even at a higher initial cost has much higher value over time than competing products. The issue is the fact most people can not even attempt to make this cost benefit analysis and most companies who make consumer products know this and rather selling you the same cheap product 10 times in the same time period apple only sold you one.
That's not totally accurate. Planes only make money while in the air. For every extra kilo its adds around a million dollars to the cost over the lifetime of the product. There are far too many factors involved, even in personal computing, to get beyond sweeping generalisations.
TCO is a nice but overly simplistic idea when put to the test.
It's not invalid but to be taken with a pinch of salt. The 'much higher value over time' will depend on far too many unique, user dependent factors to be reliable.
In my particular case I have decided to buy cheaper and upgrade more frequently on phones. The main reason is that I cannot afford to buy an iPhone every 12 to 15 months, so I get cheaper but excellent quality Android phones (which actually come down in price over time). For Macs, it's not the same. I get what I need, for the price I consider fair, and squeeze all I can out of them, even while paying the price of being cut off from security updates etc.
Apparently, Android now makes more profit in their App Store than Apple.
Android's app stores are expected to surpass the App Store in revenue sometime this year. However, they certainly are not expected to surpass the App Store in profit.
You lost me a bit with that one. How are you reaching your numbers to be so sure of your calculations?
Do you know how much profit the Chinese Android App Stores make for example?
When you're giving away devices and an OS for negative profit whilst stealing personal information and giving it to the government, you're sure to dominate marketshare. Sadly, you're not going to dominate profits not have any cash to do anything else.
And who does this exactly? Google makes billions per year on Android and so does Samsung. Google most certainly dominates their category - web search, services and advertising - in profits to the point where numerous entities have sued them for being a monopoly. Samsung meanwhile is #2 in mobile profits. Google came up with a successful strategy to defeat Microsoft in mobile and search, and did so against some pretty tall odds. Samsung also emerged from the pack against a bunch of companies that were better known and had much bigger market share and credibility as high tech companies and mobile companies (think HTC, Motorola, Nokia, Sony) to get where they are and stay there. This endless grumbling over the fact that Apple is not the only company on the planet succeeding and making money makes no sense and quite frankly does not project a good image for Apple fandom.
Instead of bedgrudging Samsung and Google for having their piece of the pie, you should be more concerned about this: "while macOS/OS X took just 5.17" and "while Mac numbers have fallen slightly." As Google and Samsung do not compete with Mac OS X - Chrome OS and Samsung being a very minor maker of Windows laptops far behind Lenovo, Dell, HP and even Toshiba notwithstanding - Apple has other problems to worry about. Apple failed to translate and leverage the massive success of their mobile devices, iPod and iPhone as well as the somewhat lesser success of the iPad, into an increased marketshare for other devices or to increase their footholds in other businesses. All the talk 5 or even 3 years ago about how Apple was going to kill off Microsoft and Windows for consumers and even in the enterprise turned out to be precisely that, and Apple is even pulling back, focusing less emphasis on enterprise efforts and selling fewer devices blatantly aimed at tempting Windows users to switch. Add to to that the fact that the Windows PC free fall seems to have stabilized ... things are never going back to the Wintel heyday of the 00s on one hand, but on the other hand it is clear that when people and enterprises need a main or work computing device they are going to get a laptop - as opposed to a smartphone or tablet - and 9 times out of 10 that laptop is going to run Windows as opposed to Mac OS X , just as things were before the iPad boom.
Apple won the mobile wars, but Google and Samsung did a good job for themselves in carving out a very lucrative second place. What needs to be mentioned now is A) Apple failed to parlay their victory in mobile into increased market share anywhere else and it is now time to let the mobile wars go and transition to the next battle with new products. Wearables failed to take off, so has VR, so what is next? (Although it is curious that no one has really tried to add smart functionality to an existing product that already sells well ... smart headphones with VR/AR goggles attached anyone? Beats could release those at any time.)
i, as an Apple fan despise the competition because they gained their "success" by completely ripping off Apple's hard work and spreading propaganda against the EXACT company that made them who they are. Now we have idiots(statistically proven idiots)* who believe Samsung and other iKnockoff manufacturers are actually original products.
Beats headphones with glasses attached? Apple, hire this guy ASAP!!!!!!
*Droid users are less intelligent, less educated, less healthy and less successful than people who use real iPhones/iPads:
I hate seeing anyone use that argument as tho owning an expensive item is a crown. It comes off sounding pompous whether intended to or not.
One does not lead to the other. It simply a position in life. Bugatti owners are generally more intelligent, educated, healthy and successful than the average iPhone owner in all probability. Why? Because they are even more likely to be part of the upper-class who can afford to pay for higher-priced gear.
We don't get to choose our parents or where we are born. That becomes an innate advantage or disadvantage starting out in life, and some can't ever completely shake their origins.
When you're giving away devices and an OS for negative profit whilst stealing personal information and giving it to the government, you're sure to dominate marketshare. Sadly, you're not going to dominate profits not have any cash to do anything else.
But... but... but Android is "winning" and Apple's iOS is doomed. Everyone knows that much as I've been hearing that argument for years. Highest market share is the most important metric as far as Wall Street is concerned and Apple is swimming in shark-infested waters with cement overshoes in terms of market share percentage. You figure if Google has a sweet P/E of 30 and Apple has a sour P/E of 17, Apple is seen to be worth a little more than half the value of Google. That can't be good. Wall Street is sending Apple investors a clear message. Low market share percentage equals low value. Goodbye, losers.
There are more bicycles on the world's roads than Roll Royces, does this actually matter to Roll Royce?
I think it should matter to RR because they're getting their butt seriously kicked in market share percentage. I'm waiting for RR to lower their least expensive model to compete with a Diamondback Century 2 Ultegra. I'm going to hold my breath starting now until it happens. One, two, three... uhhhhh... ...
When you're giving away devices and an OS for negative profit whilst stealing personal information and giving it to the government, you're sure to dominate marketshare. Sadly, you're not going to dominate profits not have any cash to do anything else.
And who does this exactly? Google makes billions per year on Android and so does Samsung. Google most certainly dominates their category - web search, services and advertising - in profits to the point where numerous entities have sued them for being a monopoly. Samsung meanwhile is #2 in mobile profits. Google came up with a successful strategy to defeat Microsoft in mobile and search, and did so against some pretty tall odds. Samsung also emerged from the pack against a bunch of companies that were better known and had much bigger market share and credibility as high tech companies and mobile companies (think HTC, Motorola, Nokia, Sony) to get where they are and stay there. This endless grumbling over the fact that Apple is not the only company on the planet succeeding and making money makes no sense and quite frankly does not project a good image for Apple fandom.
Instead of bedgrudging Samsung and Google for having their piece of the pie, you should be more concerned about this: "while macOS/OS X took just 5.17" and "while Mac numbers have fallen slightly." As Google and Samsung do not compete with Mac OS X - Chrome OS and Samsung being a very minor maker of Windows laptops far behind Lenovo, Dell, HP and even Toshiba notwithstanding - Apple has other problems to worry about. Apple failed to translate and leverage the massive success of their mobile devices, iPod and iPhone as well as the somewhat lesser success of the iPad, into an increased marketshare for other devices or to increase their footholds in other businesses. All the talk 5 or even 3 years ago about how Apple was going to kill off Microsoft and Windows for consumers and even in the enterprise turned out to be precisely that, and Apple is even pulling back, focusing less emphasis on enterprise efforts and selling fewer devices blatantly aimed at tempting Windows users to switch. Add to to that the fact that the Windows PC free fall seems to have stabilized ... things are never going back to the Wintel heyday of the 00s on one hand, but on the other hand it is clear that when people and enterprises need a main or work computing device they are going to get a laptop - as opposed to a smartphone or tablet - and 9 times out of 10 that laptop is going to run Windows as opposed to Mac OS X , just as things were before the iPad boom.
Apple won the mobile wars, but Google and Samsung did a good job for themselves in carving out a very lucrative second place. What needs to be mentioned now is A) Apple failed to parlay their victory in mobile into increased market share anywhere else and it is now time to let the mobile wars go and transition to the next battle with new products. Wearables failed to take off, so has VR, so what is next? (Although it is curious that no one has really tried to add smart functionality to an existing product that already sells well ... smart headphones with VR/AR goggles attached anyone? Beats could release those at any time.)
Personally, I wouldn't consider having an Android phone for the fact of Google ...selling my information.
Oft said, but not true and unfortunate it's used so often for purposes of FUD. Not claiming that was your intention of course.
The credit bureaus really do sell your information. Yes for profit. Your bank might sell your information. The stores you buy from may be selling your personal information. Some states sell your information. The websites you visit and the forums you engage with may be selling your information. Some companies like Acxiom and Epsilon exist ONLY to sell your personal information. All actually selling and transferring your personal information including real names and addresses, family dynamics, income and other financial information, to various and sundry 3rd parties for profit. Heck nearly anyone could buy a dossier on you from any number of online providers if they wanted to. Look for yourself, they're all over the web. But they aren't fed by Google.
Google instead uses whatever it knows, and granted it knows a lot about online activities (probably not as much off-line), to place ads on behalf of companies like your local craft store all the way up the chain to big ol' Apple and Ford and Proctor&Gamble. It doesn't sell personal information.
Apple has a problem: price. Apple could reduce 50% the price of all products and boost sales tremendously worldwide.
Additionally, in the case of Mac they use many times soldered components (RAM, SSD and GPU), so that you cannot upgrade the machine later on (programmed obsolescence and big anti-ecological impact on planet Earth!) or with proprietary connectors, so that you are forced to purchase from Apple.
And Apple charges 2 to 3 times more for the very same product as compared to sites like Amazon when you buy just one item (whereas Apple purchases millions, so they could give even better price than Amazon.
Do not get me wrong. I love Apple products and in particular the Mac. But the situation is clearly unfair.
If Apple reduced the price of all products by 50%, it would be losing money hand over fist.
Apple's aggregate operating margin over the last three years is below 30%. Even its company-wide gross margin over that time is below 40%. We don't know exactly what the gross margin for iPhones as a category is, but we know enough to know that it's below 50%. There may be some SKUs (e.g. the 256 GB iPhone 7 Pluses) with a gross margin above 50%, but most of Apple's products have lower gross margins.
So... no, it couldn't reduce the price of all products 50%. I mean, it could, but if it did it wouldn't take long for Apple to blow through its cash pile - especially considering the boost in sales you suggest.
You lost me a bit with that one. How are you reaching your numbers to be so sure of your calculations?
Do you know how much profit the Chinese Android App Stores make for example?
I was simply stating what has been expected and has not been expected in terms of revenues and profits. The same ones reporting Android store revenues are set to take over App Store revenues haven't said they expect the App Store profits to be taken over.
However, based on how the app industry is understood, the understanding of app developers, and myself being an app developer, the App Store is known to profit more. Which is why most developers are more concerned about their apps success on the App Store compared to Android stores, as it means more money for themselves.
Again, I was only stating expectations and there were no expections, from anyone in the industry, that Android stores were going to surpass the App Store in profit any time soon.
Personally, I wouldn't consider having an Android phone for the fact of Google ...selling my information.
Oft said, but not true and unfortunate it's used so often for purposes of FUD. Not claiming that was your intention of course.
The credit bureaus really do sell your information. Your bank might sell your information. The stores you buy from may be selling your personal information. Some states sell your information. The websites you visit and the forums you engage with may be selling your information. Some companies like Acxiom and Epsilon exist ONLY to sell your personal information.
Google instead uses whatever it knows, and granted it knows a lot about online activities (probably not as much off-line), to place ads on behalf of companies like your local craft store all the way up the chain to big ol' Apple and Ford and Proctor&Gamble. It doesn't sell personal information.
I was focusing more on how Google collects user information and less on it being sold. Though how I see it, whether or not my information is being sold to others, Google may collect whatever information from any user, and, with most services, use it however they want, and try to make money off that information, whetver public or private. That makes me sick. Even though they disclose that they do this, not a lot of users pay attention to really understand what it means.
Personally, I wouldn't consider having an Android phone for the fact of Google ...selling my information.
Oft said, but not true and unfortunate it's used so often for purposes of FUD. Not claiming that was your intention of course.
The credit bureaus really do sell your information. Your bank might sell your information. The stores you buy from may be selling your personal information. Some states sell your information. The websites you visit and the forums you engage with may be selling your information. Some companies like Acxiom and Epsilon exist ONLY to sell your personal information.
Google instead uses whatever it knows, and granted it knows a lot about online activities (probably not as much off-line), to place ads on behalf of companies like your local craft store all the way up the chain to big ol' Apple and Ford and Proctor&Gamble. It doesn't sell personal information.
I was focusing more on how Google collects user information and less on it being sold. Though how I see it, whether or not my information is being sold to others, Google may collect whatever information from any user, and, with most services, use it however they want, and try to make money off that information, whetver public or private. That makes me sick. Even though they disclose that they do this, not a lot of users pay attention to really understand what it means.
And what DOES it mean?
Do the ads concern you or just the fact they "know" something? If the first, well some folks just would rather not see commercials or ads so I understand, tho making you sick sounds a bit extreme. If the latter why would you even bother with internet activities as there's thousands of companies and organizations (probably millions) besides Google who are tracking what you say, what you visit and what you buy.
So you stay off the internet and out of Google's eyes and you're safe right? Nope, not if the concern is having your activities followed. Off-line it's your credit-card provider, pharmacy, insurance company, bank, box-store retailer, grocery store, magazine, club, homeowners association or landlord, city, county and state, etc who's keeping track of you. All Google wants to do in show you an ad. What are these others actually doing with your information? If Google makes you sick what's your reaction to these others? Honest questions.
One thing I'm missing from this article is how much the totat amount of devices have grown. While it does look bad for Microsoft they could have sold just as many Computers now as 2012, while sale of Android-devices have skyrocketed. I guess Androids big gain since 2012 is the lower price of CPU's with enables more sold inexpensive phones. While I think it is fascinating a phone OS basically is the biggest OS in the world, who knows what there will be in the future? Ovens or refrigerators might get a OS and will win the market share race with just pure volumes sold.
Fewer and fewer people want to be chained to a clunky laptop that is itself chained to the box that gives it access to the world...
But, the laptop hangs on -- and will -- because Apple and Google have yet to offer a viable alternative to the things that it does well (without also dealing with its chain-gang mentality).
... Steve! Wherever you are! Come Back! We need you!
Laptops are trucks, tablets are cars. Jobs already gave us options.
Yeh, he gave us trucks and cars. Beautiful, functional, friendly and easy trucks and cars.... ... that was what? 20 years ago for the trucks and 10 years ago for the cars? ......... Time for an encore!
I'm not getting most of these comments: As I read the article, it was really about Android overtaking Windows in web use -- which is something quite different from Android vs IOS...
That is really about smart phones overtaking Desktops & Laptops -- at least for web based usage.
Comments
Macs generally last longer than PCs and most PC users replace the PC rather than the components when they upgrade.
Now we have idiots(statistically proven idiots)* who believe Samsung and other iKnockoff manufacturers are actually original products.
Beats headphones with glasses attached?
Apple, hire this guy ASAP!!!!!!
*Droid users are less intelligent, less educated, less healthy and less successful than people who use real iPhones/iPads:
wqad.com/2015/01/22/study-says-iphone-users-are-wealthier-and-more-educated-than-android-users/
tinypic.com/r/2ym7s7c/9
androidauthority.com/are-iphone-users-richer-better-educated-than-android-users-105032/
thanks for correcting that.
Samsung is the second in mobile profits, yet they don't nearly contribute to mobile profits as much Apple does. They are not very notable in this regard.
All of this is in regards to Android products being used more than Apple. I'm not saying anyone does or doesn't directly compete with Apple. I'm saying that Apple isn't less of competitor despite their lesser market usage, as they significantly profit in their categories.
Also, Apple hasn't been pulling away from enterprise. And Wearables haven't failed to take off. Though I could agree they aren't taking off super fast, but there definitely is a market for them and it's definitely growing.
TCO is a nice but overly simplistic idea when put to the test.
It's not invalid but to be taken with a pinch of salt. The 'much higher value over time' will depend on far too many unique, user dependent factors to be reliable.
In my particular case I have decided to buy cheaper and upgrade more frequently on phones. The main reason is that I cannot afford to buy an iPhone every 12 to 15 months, so I get cheaper but excellent quality Android phones (which actually come down in price over time). For Macs, it's not the same. I get what I need, for the price I consider fair, and squeeze all I can out of them, even while paying the price of being cut off from security updates etc.
Do you know how much profit the Chinese Android App Stores make for example?
I hate seeing anyone use that argument as tho owning an expensive item is a crown. It comes off sounding pompous whether intended to or not.
One does not lead to the other. It simply a position in life. Bugatti owners are generally more intelligent, educated, healthy and successful than the average iPhone owner in all probability. Why? Because they are even more likely to be part of the upper-class who can afford to pay for higher-priced gear.
We don't get to choose our parents or where we are born. That becomes an innate advantage or disadvantage starting out in life, and some can't ever completely shake their origins.
Oft said, but not true and unfortunate it's used so often for purposes of FUD. Not claiming that was your intention of course.
The credit bureaus really do sell your information. Yes for profit. Your bank might sell your information. The stores you buy from may be selling your personal information. Some states sell your information. The websites you visit and the forums you engage with may be selling your information. Some companies like Acxiom and Epsilon exist ONLY to sell your personal information. All actually selling and transferring your personal information including real names and addresses, family dynamics, income and other financial information, to various and sundry 3rd parties for profit. Heck nearly anyone could buy a dossier on you from any number of online providers if they wanted to. Look for yourself, they're all over the web. But they aren't fed by Google.
Google instead uses whatever it knows, and granted it knows a lot about online activities (probably not as much off-line), to place ads on behalf of companies like your local craft store all the way up the chain to big ol' Apple and Ford and Proctor&Gamble. It doesn't sell personal information.
Apple's aggregate operating margin over the last three years is below 30%. Even its company-wide gross margin over that time is below 40%. We don't know exactly what the gross margin for iPhones as a category is, but we know enough to know that it's below 50%. There may be some SKUs (e.g. the 256 GB iPhone 7 Pluses) with a gross margin above 50%, but most of Apple's products have lower gross margins.
So... no, it couldn't reduce the price of all products 50%. I mean, it could, but if it did it wouldn't take long for Apple to blow through its cash pile - especially considering the boost in sales you suggest.
However, based on how the app industry is understood, the understanding of app developers, and myself being an app developer, the App Store is known to profit more. Which is why most developers are more concerned about their apps success on the App Store compared to Android stores, as it means more money for themselves.
Again, I was only stating expectations and there were no expections, from anyone in the industry, that Android stores were going to surpass the App Store in profit any time soon.
Do the ads concern you or just the fact they "know" something? If the first, well some folks just would rather not see commercials or ads so I understand, tho making you sick sounds a bit extreme. If the latter why would you even bother with internet activities as there's thousands of companies and organizations (probably millions) besides Google who are tracking what you say, what you visit and what you buy.
So you stay off the internet and out of Google's eyes and you're safe right? Nope, not if the concern is having your activities followed. Off-line it's your credit-card provider, pharmacy, insurance company, bank, box-store retailer, grocery store, magazine, club, homeowners association or landlord, city, county and state, etc who's keeping track of you. All Google wants to do in show you an ad. What are these others actually doing with your information? If Google makes you sick what's your reaction to these others? Honest questions.
... that was what? 20 years ago for the trucks and 10 years ago for the cars?
......... Time for an encore!
As I read the article, it was really about Android overtaking Windows in web use -- which is something quite different from Android vs IOS...
That is really about smart phones overtaking Desktops & Laptops -- at least for web based usage.