AirPods & Apple Watch market share insight opens debate on consumer choice
Following the US Department of Justice's comprehensive antitrust lawsuit against Apple, new insights have emerged that shed light on Apple's influence within the market.
New report reveals numbers on Apple's market dominance
The DOJ filed the lawsuit on Thursday, March 21, accusing Apple of violating antitrust law and saying the company is a monopoly abusing its market dominance.
One aspect of the DOJ's case highlights how Apple allegedly limits the capabilities of smartwatches from competitors, particularly those running on Android when used with its own devices.
Market shares of Bluetooth earphones among iOS and Android users for the year ending December 2023
However, a report from Consumer Intelligence Research Partners (CIRP) on March 27 provides insight into Apple's accessory market share. It reveals a strong preference among iPhone users for Apple-branded accessories like AirPods and the Apple Watch.
More than 80% of those who purchase an Apple iPhone and also own a smartwatch or fitness tracker choose the Apple Watch. With Bluetooth headsets, AirPods command a significant majority among iPhone users who purchase Bluetooth headsets, with nearly two-thirds opting for AirPods.
In contrast, Samsung, a major player in the Android market, attracts less than 20% of Android users looking for Bluetooth headsets.
Apple responds to DOJ antitrust lawsuit
Apple's "walled garden" approach, promoting a seamless integration of its products and software, has long been a hallmark of its brand. The company defends its strategy as enhancing the user experience, but the DOJ contends it has partly enabled Apple's dominance by violating antitrust laws.
Market distribution of smartwatches among iOS and Android purchasers throughout the year ending in December 2023
These actions, according to Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Kanter, are part of a "Whac-A-Mole" strategy of contractual rules and restrictions allowing Apple to "extract higher prices from consumers, impose higher fees on developers and creators, and throttle competitive alternatives."
Apple has contested all allegations, asserting that they either stem from outdated data or are mischaracterizations of its operational practices.
One of the questions that the DOJ is exploring is whether consumers stick with Apple products because of loyalty to its devices or because Apple is limiting their choices and locking them inside the ecosystem.
"Do branded accessories attract buyers based on product alignment and design, or the fear that mixing brands increases the risk of interoperability problems?" CIRP asks. "Has the smartphone manufacturer made it difficult for competing devices to break into their system, with purposeful compatibility advantages that create an uneven playing field?"
The DOJ has accused Apple of creating an ecosystem that limits user choices, suggesting that Apple's practices restrict the options available to its customers. But its products still work with Android devices.
People who own an Apple Watch or AirPods can use them with their Android smartphones. Meanwhile, Google and Samsung have stopped supporting wearOS 4 on iPhones, reducing the choices for iPhone users interested in alternative smartwatch options.
Ultimately, there's a difference between commanding a significant share of a market, and attracting users based on device compatibility with software and services. So far, suggests that the continued preference for Apple products among its users stems from brand loyalty.
Read on AppleInsider
Comments
I'm shocked any iPhone user, uses anything other than Air Pods 😳 They are clearly the best in the market, should Apple make them worse to satisfy the DoJ and other manufacturers?
Samsung watch has already 40% of the market on Android and it was launched 4 years later than Apple Watch, isn't giving Samsung watches away & Samsung Pods for free (bundled with their phones) anti competitive to other blue tooth headset manufacturers, because they don't make phones?
Anyway other watches work with iPhone, Samsung & Google have purposely made their watches incompatible with iPhone !
Technically too, AirPods have lagged behind competitors on many levels, but once again, people look for different technical aspects.
It is not all about audio quality, for example.
I think it's logical for users to prefer a brand they know, so an AirPods/iDevice pairing makes sense.
Likewise a Samsung or Huawei branded pairing.
It's also true that manufacturers can offer less on competing platforms to make their own offerings appear more attractive.
The problems arise though when manufacturers try to limit accessibility unnaturally to their platforms. That might be a different story. I don't know if that's the case.
We'll have to wait and see how they flesh things out.
Marketshare dominance (in this case it's limited to the US market) isn't relevant unless that dominance was fruit of abusing a dominant position.
As in the App Store situation, the key here are the competing players, as they know full well the problems they face when deploying to iDevices.
All of these lawsuits are trying to tear down the very things that we Apple users WANT, and are a significant reason why we pay "the Apple tax" as people like to say.
I don't want to be ablate side load apps. I don't want to multiple app stores, and I don't want things like "walmart pay" to junk up my phone and ruin my iPhone experience. We pay a PREMIUM the the privilege of NOT having to deal with these things. I buy iPhones for all of my kids because i DONT want them to have Android phones and have to deal with the privacy and security issues there. If one of my kids wants a Samsung phone that's fine, but they are on their own to buy one.
How can you possibly know that 95% don't want certain features?
I'm of the opinion that 95% don't know the restrictions on competition that Apple imposes. Apple makes zero effort to explain them. I'm also of the opinion that if they were aware of those limits they would change their minds on Apple.
You're free to not even consider a phone that isn't an iPhone. Everyone is.
But there's no way that Apple should be allowed to stop competition from existing and trying to lock them in.
I think you'll find that most investigations will come to the same conclusion.
Are there ways to maybe continue as they are? MAYBE, But that would hinge on them explicitly spelling out the restrictions to potential purchasers and making them sign off on them. Would they do that?
Would they tell users that?
I think that's a definite no.
Let users have options and let them choose from them.
Note if BeOS, SGI, Sun Computer, or Commodore Amiga had survived and been viable alternatives past 2000 and beyond I would have considered using any of them. All of them were some of the last vertical computer companies from the 1980's-1990's that were crushed by Microsoft and Intel the DOJ/Congress was for all practical purposes missing in action and they still are from a tech knowledge standpoint.
And now the ass backward DOJ wants to eliminate the last Amercian vertical computer company and replace it with a weak Dell and HP clone.
The comparison needed is how many Samsung smartphone users also use Samsung accessories.
Also the devices communicate via Bluetooth so there's no limiting factor with support. A Fitbit works with an iPhone just as an Apple Watch does, Bose/JBL etc audio works with iPhones just as AirPods do.
"The company defends its strategy as enhancing the user experience, but the DOJ contends it has partly enabled Apple's dominance by violating antitrust laws."
They are saying that something that Apple holds itself accountable for, a level of hardware, software, and system level integration that the world has seldom if ever experienced before, something that defines what it is to be Apple, is now a violation of antitrust laws? When did constructing something that is so profoundly better than what any other competitor can offer constitute a violation of anything?
Are all companies supposed throw out some stinkers that frustrate and alienate customers more often? You know, like Windows ME and Windows Vista. Go crap all over your customers and you'll get an official Gold Star from the DOJ and US government. Doing otherwise, i.e., basically trying not to dump on your customers and subject them to calling a "tech support" agent that does not speak your language, only after traversing 28 layers of automated phone chaff, and waiting on hold with grotesque music blaring at the cutoff volume that phone circuitry can support for 2 hours and 30 minutes. Not adequately inflicting needless pain and suffering on your customers puts you in the dog house.
There are no participation trophies given out in highly competitive markets. Success and customer loyalty must be earned.
I'm wondering, what planet does the DOJ live on? Is the "J" for Jupiter? Is the 'D" for dummies?
On a more personal note, last week I was walking a friend of mine through all of the features that Apple provides with Continuity between Apple devices. His jaw was on the floor. I guess that Windows 11 and the PC world have a totally different set of expectations when it comes to product and system integration. When it comes to integration, Apple is doing Jetsons level stuff, and much more. The PC world is still trying to achieve Flintstones level status.
This is what happens when you put technically illiterate people in charge of anything that can inflict harm on others. They should be boarding their mothership back to their home planet. They are a danger to themselves and to all others here on Earth.
Consumers have a choice here…if you want mix and match you go Android/Windows. If you want uniform quality, interoperability and a more trouble-free experience, you go iOS and MacOS. Going backwards from peripheral preferences is an example of muddled thinking.