I know numbers. I'm not saying that Android is outselling iPhone, nor that it had better start than iPhone.
All I'm saying is they look like having nice momentum, and new models are emerging almost constantly, each bettering (or trying to) previous release.
Android is increasing momentum but they haven't yet caught up to the momentum that the iPhone has had since July. Will they pass the iPhone momentum before June (when iPhone momentum is pushed to the next level)? Maybe, maybe not.
Quote:
My point is that for me, Android went from uninspiring devices with unknown software, to desirable devices with (still) unknown software. And I know that their penetration is improving dramatically relative to platform's start.
And I haven't even seen anything but couple of HTC and Motorola models. With Samsung, LG, Sony, Dell... in the queue, I think that Android influence on the market will be significant. I also think Apple is perfectly aware of that.
If that's your only point, I agree. There has been significant improvement in the Android camp, but in many basic ways, it still lags iPhone. (It also exceeds iPhone in some particular apps.)
And yes, Android influence is significant. In my estimation, Android is the number one threat to the iPhone. If Google can subsidize its good-enough Android phones with search/ad revenue, then the offer of a free Android phone with a discounted cheaper data plan on any cellular network will surely hinder even a best or better iPhone's future. As Apple makes little to no profit off of iTunes or App Store or MobileMe, it can't subsidize in that way.
The mobile market chain consists of user device, OS, apps, services (including ads), and comm pipes. Apple is trying to commoditize everything in the chain except the user device (and its subsidized proprietary OS). Google is trying to commoditize everything in the chain except its proprietary ad service. Nokia is following Apple's plan except the Symbian OS is open (Will MeeGo be open?). Microsoft's strategy is unclear in the mobile market - they could attempt to profit from the OS, Office apps, Bing search/ads, and device (Pink handset). The cell carriers were trying to commoditize everything except the comm pipes, but due to their sluggishness in innovating, that battle seems lost already for 3G and I don't think they'll regain any leverage with 4G.
Android is increasing momentum but they haven't yet caught up to the momentum that the iPhone has had since July. Will they pass the iPhone momentum before June (when iPhone momentum is pushed to the next level)? Maybe, maybe not.
If that's your only point, I agree. There has been significant improvement in the Android camp, but in many basic ways, it still lags iPhone. (It also exceeds iPhone in some particular apps.)
And yes, Android influence is significant. In my estimation, Android is the number one threat to the iPhone. If Google can subsidize its good-enough Android phones with search/ad revenue, then the offer of a free Android phone with a discounted cheaper data plan on any cellular network will surely hinder even a best or better iPhone's future. As Apple makes little to no profit off of iTunes or App Store or MobileMe, it can't subsidize in that way.
The mobile market chain consists of user device, OS, apps, services (including ads), and comm pipes. Apple is trying to commoditize everything in the chain except the user device (and its subsidized proprietary OS). Google is trying to commoditize everything in the chain except its proprietary ad service. Nokia is following Apple's plan except the Symbian OS is open (Will MeeGo be open?). Microsoft's strategy is unclear in the mobile market - they could attempt to profit from the OS, Office apps, Bing search/ads, and device (Pink handset). The cell carriers were trying to commoditize everything except the comm pipes, but due to their sluggishness in innovating, that battle seems lost already for 3G and I don't think they'll regain any leverage with 4G.
Yup, that is pretty much what I'm saying.
I had a chance to play a bit with Android phone for the firs time this weekend. Nexus One.
Definitely not polished as iPhone. Status bar (with battery, signal status etc) is plain ugly, white with thick icons. Everything scrolling is not as smooth as on 3Gs, and there are more inconsistencies over the GUI. I had no problem typing on it (only for a few minutes, though) but that might be because of my slim fingers - owner does feel his typing on iPhone was more accurate... but screen is nice, visibly brighter and more detailed. Phone itself looks and feels better than on pictures, close to iPhone solid feel. Email, messages, browser... feel as god as on iPhone, with added bonus of higher res screen. No Stanza yet, there are some alternatives, no idea how good they are. Here in NZ turn-by-turn GPS is not enabled (yet), a big let-down.
I wouldn't bother replacing my 3Gs to Nexus, but if I was buying my phone now instead of last year, I'd seriously consider it - something Androids from last year failed to achieve. And since this tread started I have noticed a few new Androids, one water-resistant with push-talk, one uber featured... and there is also new Motorola being advertised even here on AI, not looking bad at all. They are all Androids, yet different enough to attract different buyers... something iPhone with it's unitarian looks across generations can't achieve easily, even with internal improvements.
In fact, talking about my first, albeit short Android experience... on that party I have noticed 4 iPhones (probably more, unnoticed) and one Nexus. Interestingly, Nexus was attracting much more attention... but when I thought of it, it wasnt't that much of a surprise. So many people already have iPhone and in becoming common, it has lost some of its coolness for some people. While it is not my game, I believe there is number of people who want not only to have great device, but also one different... where lies the problem of iPhone; they are all the same from the outside, and I believe next one will not differ much.
Of course people will get tired of Nexus as well, but there will be number of other Androids with some variations in size, shape, colour and features.
All in all, I agree completely - Android seem to have right ingredients to be the most serious competitor to iPhone. Will it dethrone iPhone in future, well, time will tell. But successful it will be.
Let's look at that one thing. More than one aspect to it. Apple now has more than 170,000 active apps in the store. Android has more than 30,000. You really aren't going to say that a greater percentage of Android apps are useful are you? Because when people say that sort of thing, their credibility drops quickly. Apple simply has far more "useful" apps than does Android, and always will unless some drastic happens.
In addition, you can read about comparisons between Android and iPhone apps. Every time you do, you will see that iPhone apps are considered superior, app to app. That's true even if the apps are from the same developer.
Of course I'm not saying Android apps are better than iPhone apps. Not having Android, I don't even know what is available for Android.
What I'm saying is that for average buyer more is always better. Like in "12MP P&S camera must be twice better than 6MP P&S camera... right?" And that is (one of the) reason(s) why Apple is putting that much emphasis on apps library. Androids are, for same reasons, putting same emphasis on higher-res screens and cameras, even if both are not giving perceived advantage in real usage.
Question I can't answer is how many people will prefer bigger software library to bigger specs. I do know couple of iPhone users not caring at all about apps (using phone for calling, txting, emails, calendar and iPod, all included) but I'd expect some if not all of them would not care much about higher res screens and cameras. However,t hat is very small number of people, and differentiation like this on global scale can give nice advantage to one camp or another.
No, you're saying it has unbeatable momentum and that's clearly false if it's less than that of the iPhone during the same period.
But iPhone was pretty much first of its kind, and didn't have to compete against well established and best-selling iPhone.
Considering how market has matured since iPhone release (and to big part thanks to iPhone), Android has much harder work in front of them. It is not only about absolute numbers, I'm trying to consider circumstances as well. Relative to current market and its own slow start, Android is doing remarkably well.
Again - I'm not cheering for Android. I don't have it, nor am I planning to get one tomorrow. My 3Gs is 6 months old. I've got it contract-free and while I can replace it at any moment, I'm not planning to do it for the next year and half, likely longer. It does what I need it to do, and it does it gracefully. I'd keep it for Stanza only even if I didn't like any other feature, compared to Android (and I do like other features).
All I'm saying is, within consumer smartphone market, I perceive Android as first serious competitor to iPhone. Something Symbian, WebOS, WinMo, PalmOS... failed to achieve. It should not be underestimated.
What's interesting is that when turn by turn was enabled in Europe by users of this "open" platform, Google stepped in with an OTA update which disabled it again.
Something that the drooling, Android loving, tech pundits remain VERY quiet about, despite an apparent enthusiasm for breaking Godwin's Law on anything involving Apple.
We'll see. 2H2010 isn't that far away. Neither is 2011 when Android is supposed to disintegrate by your timetable.
I'd like to see something as a viable competitor to Apple. What I wonder though, is whether the open model will really work for that in the long run. It's possible that the iPod example will work here as well. It's certainly worked for the app and hardware model.
It just seems to me that even if overall, Android is in a greater number of hands, it doesn't mean that it's going to be more significant OS. If the fragmentation continues, as it's very likely to, then that diminishes its impact.
So even if the percentage is greater, we have to wonder what that will mean. After all, right now, Apple has about an 18% worldwide phone OS marketshare in the smartphone space. Even if Android kills others and ends up with 25% over the next 18 month to two years, what does that mean, if there are several competing versions from different manufacturers, where third party software doesn't always work between their phones?
And you have to keep in mind the fact that even if most current phones can be updated to 2.1, newer phones will continue to come out with differing versions, some with earlier versions than 2.1, even after Google has moved to 2.5 and beyond.
That was explained well in one of these articles. Since Google can't control when manufacturers begin development of new phone models, as they are competing with other even if they do use Android, and as that will determine which version of the OS they come out with, there will be a continuing slew of phones out there with partly incompatible OS's, in addition to the continuing to evolve GUI's from the differing manufacturers, AND differences imposed by the carriers, which we're seeing as well.
When people see these phones, they will all be so different, that most people won't know that they're Android phones at all. Let's face it, most people don't know about these things. As a greater portion of the population gets smartphones, and moves from feature phones, the smarts of the people getting them drops insofar as their knowledge of what's inside goes. We've seen that in the typical computer customer over the years.
So if the GUI's are much different, the included apps are much different, and the ability to get third party apps is much different, can we really speak of an Android market? I don't think so.
It's not a "disintegration" of Android, to use your word, but rather a moving apart of the various, I guess the word might be "distro's" of the OS. And I was talking about this becoming really serious in a couple of years, by 2012 possibly, though we'll see more of it by next year.
The reason why I used the word "other" when I described how some of those "distro's" may be categorized, is because if they're too different, and they aren't selling that well themselves, then that's where they will be put in the charts. We often see that now with some more obscure phone OS's, such as Linux phones. We often see the top five players, and then the rest is "other".
You're strongly denying that possibility, but I see it as a very definite risk.
What I don't understand is this fixation on the doomsday senario that all Android phones must be able to upgrade to 2.x or Android will fail.
Will there be really old models that can't get the 2.x update? Sure. It's been shown that you can get 2.1 onto a G1, but it runs really slow. People with G1s will be told "if you want Android 2.1, you have to get a new phone, the hardware's just too old" by T-Mobile and I believe a majority of them will understand.
At the time those phones came out, Android was nowhere near as full-featured as it is now. The hardware didn't need to be as high-end to run the OS well. And it was more of an oddity, kind of like the Bada OS.
All the phones around the time of the DROID's release to now all have relatively high-end (and similar) specs and should have no issues running Android 2.x. Some extra features may get left out here and there (i.e. live wallpapers), but the core OS functions that matter will be the same. What I'm saying is that going forward, keeping up with the OS updates (hardware-wise) should be no problem.
Hardware gets outdated. That's the progress of technology. There will always be a point where we have to stop supporting the really old stuff just to be able to move forward. There will be small pockets of people that keep Android phones that won't get the 2.x update for whatever reason. For most others, they'll have moved on to a phone that does support it already.
The iPhone has a similar issue. There are pockets of people out there still holding onto the original iPhones. Sure they can install the latest OS on it, but it'll be missing features too, because the hardware's outdated. And there will be apps they can't install because it was written to access functions/hardware that isn't there.
I never said that Android would fail. Not once!
I'm saying that it will fragment, just as many in the industry have now been saying as well. Fragmentation doesn't mean that Android will go away. It means that manufacturers will be trying to take it and change it so that they get some advantage over their competitors. Do you really think that they CARE about Android? They don't. Not at all. They see this as a free OS that they can do whatever they want with.
That means putting their own vision into it. Whether their vision is good or bad is something else.
A few people will do whatever they want to, as you did, to get other software otherwise unavailable. The vast majority won't be able to do that, or won't be interested in doing that. Techie types always seem to be so naive about the general population's interest or ability to mess around with things. They aren't interested. they just want it to work. If it doesn't, they get rid of it. They don't go prying around in the software or hardware.
Even with techie types, most won't do that. So those who do have little understanding of most other people. We're talking about the sales of tens of millions of phones, shortly, hundreds of millions.
My response to Vinea explains what I'm saying here, so I don't have to repeat all of it.
Of course I'm not saying Android apps are better than iPhone apps. Not having Android, I don't even know what is available for Android.
What I'm saying is that for average buyer more is always better. Like in "12MP P&S camera must be twice better than 6MP P&S camera... right?" And that is (one of the) reason(s) why Apple is putting that much emphasis on apps library. Androids are, for same reasons, putting same emphasis on higher-res screens and cameras, even if both are not giving perceived advantage in real usage.
Question I can't answer is how many people will prefer bigger software library to bigger specs. I do know couple of iPhone users not caring at all about apps (using phone for calling, txting, emails, calendar and iPod, all included) but I'd expect some if not all of them would not care much about higher res screens and cameras. However,t hat is very small number of people, and differentiation like this on global scale can give nice advantage to one camp or another.
I wouldn't compare pixel counts to software counts. One is a technical limitation, and one is up to the individual developer to get right. Though I understand your referring to the "more is better" concept there.
I do know that if I want a certain kind of software, it's far more likely to be in the App Store, than in the Android Marketplace. There's also a much better chance of finding a better version, as there will be more of them, and more competition.
It's ALL about the software, which is something that Apple seems to understand best. The device must be a conduit for the software. The iPhone is that. Not so much with other systems, as the hardware varies too much in the same generation of phone.
It's like the old days of the PC, where there were what was called "IBM Compatibles". Those were (for those here too young to remember) computers that used the unpatented (by error) IBM bus, but used different firmware and BIOS. What we had was a slightly different OS for each manufacturers machine. That also meant that software had to be customized for each machine with a different firmware, BIOS, and OS. And each machine was using MS-DOS!
Only when Phoenix clean roomed the IBM BIOS did we get actual IBM "clones" capable of running the same version of MS-DOS, and thus didn't need customized versions of the OS or software. Now, it's been so long, we don't think of the term IBM clone.
But it's possible that Android is going that way, and so software libraries will be messed up for it, whereas that for the iPhone will be much more unified, and thus larger.
It just seems to me that even if overall, Android is in a greater number of hands, it doesn't mean that it's going to be more significant OS. If the fragmentation continues, as it's very likely to, then that diminishes its impact.
I dunno why you call it likely if the amount of fragmentaion is expected to decrease this year sometime.
Quote:
Even if Android kills others and ends up with 25% over the next 18 month to two years, what does that mean, if there are several competing versions from different manufacturers, where third party software doesn't always work between their phones?
You're assuming that the majority of 3rd party software will not work even across versions. I disagree with this assumption.
Quote:
When people see these phones, they will all be so different, that most people won't know that they're Android phones at all. Let's face it, most people don't know about these things. As a greater portion of the population gets smartphones, and moves from feature phones, the smarts of the people getting them drops insofar as their knowledge of what's inside goes. We've seen that in the typical computer customer over the years.
That doesn't matter to the existance and importance of the platform. What matters is the total marketspace that app developers can target which influences the number of high quality apps for that platform.
All this chart and article shows is that the market is growing rapidly. It doesn't say anything about how well or poorly Android is expected to do between now an Q3 2011.
Quote:
So if the GUI's are much different, the included apps are much different, and the ability to get third party apps is much different, can we really speak of an Android market? I don't think so.
You basic premise is that there will be major incompatibilities between Android phones and this is incorrect.
First, there are only so many different Android versions between now an Q3 2011. The critical period you and Businessweek believes decides the success of smartphone platforms.
Second, the differences between point releases (2.1 vs 2.2 or 1.5 vs 1.6) will not be THAT significant for the average developer.
The UI differences are not going to be always important to all app developers. Most apps don't care how they get launched. The app in one of the articles you quote wishes to do things to the home screen. Yes, that is impacted but not all apps do this.
Quote:
It's not a "disintegration" of Android, to use your word, but rather a moving apart of the various, I guess the word might be "distro's" of the OS. And I was talking about this becoming really serious in a couple of years, by 2012 possibly, though we'll see more of it by next year.
You wrote this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
We won't be talking about Android phones vs iPhones after a year or so
Quote:
The reason why I used the word "other" when I described how some of those "distro's" may be categorized, is because if they're too different, and they aren't selling that well themselves, then that's where they will be put in the charts.
This would be the disintegration of the Android market. You know, vs integraion of the market. Android market today...other market tomorrow...
Answer: Not bloody likely by Q3 2011.
Quote:
We often see that now with some more obscure phone OS's, such as Linux phones. We often see the top five players, and then the rest is "other".
So your prediction is that the Android market will be so fragmented that it won't be listed in the top 5 phone OSs and will be obscure like Linux or PalmOS.
Quote:
You're strongly denying that possibility, but I see it as a very definite risk.
By Q3 2011? Only if Google loses the trademark and they have to call Android something else will we not be talking about the Android Market in a year and a half.
There is simply NOT enough time for sufficient fragmentation to occur. At most you'll see 3.x in 2011 with maybe 3 more 2.x releases in between. If all current 1.x phones are at the 2.x point as the major manufacturers claim then we're talking no MORE fragmentation than iPhone 3.x vs iPhone 4.x.
I dunno why you call it likely if the amount of fragmentaion is expected to decrease this year sometime.
It's not expected to decrease. That's what you're saying. Google is trying to prevent it with individual app updates, but that does nothing for the OS itself, or what the companies are doing to it.
Quote:
You're assuming that the majority of 3rd party software will not work even across versions. I disagree with this assumption.
It's not an assumption. It's already happening. Whether it will be the majority or not, I don't know, but it could be a substantial number. If it's a few popular apps, that will be a bad publicity problem. If you read the link that showed that, you saw that. And you already agreed it was happening when you said it was a good idea for Google to not let people see apps they couldn't use on their phones. At least, I think it was you who said that. This is a real, occurring problem, it's not an assumption.
Quote:
That doesn't matter to the existance and importance of the platform. What matters is the total marketspace that app developers can target which influences the number of high quality apps for that platform.
Of course it matters! If developers have to have several different versions of their apps, they will only develop them for the phones that are selling best. Why develop for five different Android phone types if only three are selling well? In addition, if you read the reviews, you'll see that Android apps aren't considered to be of as high a quality as iPhone apps.
All this chart and article shows is that the market is growing rapidly. It doesn't say anything about how well or poorly Android is expected to do between now an Q3 2011.
It usefully shows a strong trend. It illustrates what I was saying about feature phones vs smartphones.
Quote:
You basic premise is that there will be major incompatibilities between Android phones and this is incorrect.
That's your assumption. I might as well say that you are incorrect, and industry people agree with my position much more than with yours.
Quote:
First, there are only so many different Android versions between now an Q3 2011. The critical period you and Businessweek believes decides the success of smartphone platforms.
Second, the differences between point releases (2.1 vs 2.2 or 1.5 vs 1.6) will not be THAT significant for the average developer.
They don't need dozens of different versions floating around at the same time to have problems. and you're forgetting how manufacturers and phone companies are customizing them as well, adding to the confusion.
Also, you don't have to compare 1.5 to 1.6, or 2.1 to 2.2. Compare 1.6 to 2.0. That's where a major problem lies. With new phones coming out with the obsolete 1.6 (and even the worse 1.5) there will will remain major software deficiencies. It's well documented that 1.6 and earlier can't run much software made for 2.0 and higher. Again, check out that link.
Quote:
The UI differences are not going to be always important to all app developers. Most apps don't care how they get launched. The app in one of the articles you quote wishes to do things to the home screen. Yes, that is impacted but not all apps do this.
No the GUI won't be important to ALL developers, as you say. It will be important for enough to limit adoption of a significant amount of software.
Quote:
You wrote this:
This would be the disintegration of the Android market. You know, vs integraion of the market. Android market today...other market tomorrow...
Answer: Not bloody likely by Q3 2011.
I know exactly what I wrote. It doesn't mean a disintegration of the market. Not right away certainly. In several years, maybe. but I would hope that Google changes their minds about letting everything go it's own way before it gets to that point.
Quote:
So your prediction is that the Android market will be so fragmented that it won't be listed in the top 5 phone OSs and will be obscure like Linux or PalmOS.
I didn't say that either. What I said was that some phones made by some companies will not sell well because their OS has fragmented too far from the mainstream, and so they won't sell well. Therefor THEY will be listed as "other". I didn't say that Android in its entirety would be listed that way. But, if that does happen, it would mean that all the other Android phones that were more compatible would be considered to have less marketshare than otherwise.
Quote:
By Q3 2011? Only if Google loses the trademark and they have to call Android something else will we not be talking about the Android Market in a year and a half.
There is simply NOT enough time for sufficient fragmentation to occur. At most you'll see 3.x in 2011 with maybe 3 more 2.x releases in between. If all current 1.x phones are at the 2.x point as the major manufacturers claim then we're talking no MORE fragmentation than iPhone 3.x vs iPhone 4.x.
I keep saying that 18 months would be the shortest time, but that in two or three years we could see that.
It's up to Google. If they understand that their lassie-faire attitude toward this will lead to manufacturers to just think of their competitors and how to get an advantage over them, rather than becoming commodity players as has happened in the PC industry, then they will understand that they have to do something drastic.
If they don't, then these manufacturers who are adopting Android because it's free, AND because they can muck it up any way they want to, WILL muck it up the way they want to. The one thing I hope we can agree on here, is that the manufacturers and the phone companies are NOT the most adept at understanding the best thing here. They're mostly interested in tying their customers up. They're already beginning to open their own stores, and don't you know that if they can, they will wall off whatever they can. Is that smart? No, of course not! But when have they ever been smart?
Fragmentation of the iPhone has been very minimal. As soon as a new point update is available, it's available for all phones, unlike the Android market, where Google has had the carriers spend months to "test" them. When a new upgrade is available, it's also available for all iPhones at the same time. Android has major problems with that as well. Why do you think that the best Google could do is this pitiful app update program? They can't even force their partners to speed up, or even guarantee they will do the updates at all.
At some point, the first iPhone won't receive an upgrade, but by then it will be years old, ancient in the smartphone world. But many Android phones will have that problem after a year to 18 months. Some sooner.
Comments
I know numbers. I'm not saying that Android is outselling iPhone, nor that it had better start than iPhone.
All I'm saying is they look like having nice momentum, and new models are emerging almost constantly, each bettering (or trying to) previous release.
Android is increasing momentum but they haven't yet caught up to the momentum that the iPhone has had since July. Will they pass the iPhone momentum before June (when iPhone momentum is pushed to the next level)? Maybe, maybe not.
My point is that for me, Android went from uninspiring devices with unknown software, to desirable devices with (still) unknown software. And I know that their penetration is improving dramatically relative to platform's start.
And I haven't even seen anything but couple of HTC and Motorola models. With Samsung, LG, Sony, Dell... in the queue, I think that Android influence on the market will be significant. I also think Apple is perfectly aware of that.
If that's your only point, I agree. There has been significant improvement in the Android camp, but in many basic ways, it still lags iPhone. (It also exceeds iPhone in some particular apps.)
And yes, Android influence is significant. In my estimation, Android is the number one threat to the iPhone. If Google can subsidize its good-enough Android phones with search/ad revenue, then the offer of a free Android phone with a discounted cheaper data plan on any cellular network will surely hinder even a best or better iPhone's future. As Apple makes little to no profit off of iTunes or App Store or MobileMe, it can't subsidize in that way.
The mobile market chain consists of user device, OS, apps, services (including ads), and comm pipes. Apple is trying to commoditize everything in the chain except the user device (and its subsidized proprietary OS). Google is trying to commoditize everything in the chain except its proprietary ad service. Nokia is following Apple's plan except the Symbian OS is open (Will MeeGo be open?). Microsoft's strategy is unclear in the mobile market - they could attempt to profit from the OS, Office apps, Bing search/ads, and device (Pink handset). The cell carriers were trying to commoditize everything except the comm pipes, but due to their sluggishness in innovating, that battle seems lost already for 3G and I don't think they'll regain any leverage with 4G.
Android is increasing momentum but they haven't yet caught up to the momentum that the iPhone has had since July. Will they pass the iPhone momentum before June (when iPhone momentum is pushed to the next level)? Maybe, maybe not.
If that's your only point, I agree. There has been significant improvement in the Android camp, but in many basic ways, it still lags iPhone. (It also exceeds iPhone in some particular apps.)
And yes, Android influence is significant. In my estimation, Android is the number one threat to the iPhone. If Google can subsidize its good-enough Android phones with search/ad revenue, then the offer of a free Android phone with a discounted cheaper data plan on any cellular network will surely hinder even a best or better iPhone's future. As Apple makes little to no profit off of iTunes or App Store or MobileMe, it can't subsidize in that way.
The mobile market chain consists of user device, OS, apps, services (including ads), and comm pipes. Apple is trying to commoditize everything in the chain except the user device (and its subsidized proprietary OS). Google is trying to commoditize everything in the chain except its proprietary ad service. Nokia is following Apple's plan except the Symbian OS is open (Will MeeGo be open?). Microsoft's strategy is unclear in the mobile market - they could attempt to profit from the OS, Office apps, Bing search/ads, and device (Pink handset). The cell carriers were trying to commoditize everything except the comm pipes, but due to their sluggishness in innovating, that battle seems lost already for 3G and I don't think they'll regain any leverage with 4G.
Yup, that is pretty much what I'm saying.
I had a chance to play a bit with Android phone for the firs time this weekend. Nexus One.
Definitely not polished as iPhone. Status bar (with battery, signal status etc) is plain ugly, white with thick icons. Everything scrolling is not as smooth as on 3Gs, and there are more inconsistencies over the GUI. I had no problem typing on it (only for a few minutes, though) but that might be because of my slim fingers - owner does feel his typing on iPhone was more accurate... but screen is nice, visibly brighter and more detailed. Phone itself looks and feels better than on pictures, close to iPhone solid feel. Email, messages, browser... feel as god as on iPhone, with added bonus of higher res screen. No Stanza yet, there are some alternatives, no idea how good they are. Here in NZ turn-by-turn GPS is not enabled (yet), a big let-down.
I wouldn't bother replacing my 3Gs to Nexus, but if I was buying my phone now instead of last year, I'd seriously consider it - something Androids from last year failed to achieve. And since this tread started I have noticed a few new Androids, one water-resistant with push-talk, one uber featured... and there is also new Motorola being advertised even here on AI, not looking bad at all. They are all Androids, yet different enough to attract different buyers... something iPhone with it's unitarian looks across generations can't achieve easily, even with internal improvements.
In fact, talking about my first, albeit short Android experience... on that party I have noticed 4 iPhones (probably more, unnoticed) and one Nexus. Interestingly, Nexus was attracting much more attention... but when I thought of it, it wasnt't that much of a surprise. So many people already have iPhone and in becoming common, it has lost some of its coolness for some people. While it is not my game, I believe there is number of people who want not only to have great device, but also one different... where lies the problem of iPhone; they are all the same from the outside, and I believe next one will not differ much.
Of course people will get tired of Nexus as well, but there will be number of other Androids with some variations in size, shape, colour and features.
All in all, I agree completely - Android seem to have right ingredients to be the most serious competitor to iPhone. Will it dethrone iPhone in future, well, time will tell. But successful it will be.
Let's look at that one thing. More than one aspect to it. Apple now has more than 170,000 active apps in the store. Android has more than 30,000. You really aren't going to say that a greater percentage of Android apps are useful are you? Because when people say that sort of thing, their credibility drops quickly. Apple simply has far more "useful" apps than does Android, and always will unless some drastic happens.
In addition, you can read about comparisons between Android and iPhone apps. Every time you do, you will see that iPhone apps are considered superior, app to app. That's true even if the apps are from the same developer.
Of course I'm not saying Android apps are better than iPhone apps. Not having Android, I don't even know what is available for Android.
What I'm saying is that for average buyer more is always better. Like in "12MP P&S camera must be twice better than 6MP P&S camera... right?" And that is (one of the) reason(s) why Apple is putting that much emphasis on apps library. Androids are, for same reasons, putting same emphasis on higher-res screens and cameras, even if both are not giving perceived advantage in real usage.
Question I can't answer is how many people will prefer bigger software library to bigger specs. I do know couple of iPhone users not caring at all about apps (using phone for calling, txting, emails, calendar and iPod, all included) but I'd expect some if not all of them would not care much about higher res screens and cameras. However,t hat is very small number of people, and differentiation like this on global scale can give nice advantage to one camp or another.
No, you're saying it has unbeatable momentum and that's clearly false if it's less than that of the iPhone during the same period.
But iPhone was pretty much first of its kind, and didn't have to compete against well established and best-selling iPhone.
Considering how market has matured since iPhone release (and to big part thanks to iPhone), Android has much harder work in front of them. It is not only about absolute numbers, I'm trying to consider circumstances as well. Relative to current market and its own slow start, Android is doing remarkably well.
Again - I'm not cheering for Android. I don't have it, nor am I planning to get one tomorrow. My 3Gs is 6 months old. I've got it contract-free and while I can replace it at any moment, I'm not planning to do it for the next year and half, likely longer. It does what I need it to do, and it does it gracefully. I'd keep it for Stanza only even if I didn't like any other feature, compared to Android (and I do like other features).
All I'm saying is, within consumer smartphone market, I perceive Android as first serious competitor to iPhone. Something Symbian, WebOS, WinMo, PalmOS... failed to achieve. It should not be underestimated.
Something that the drooling, Android loving, tech pundits remain VERY quiet about, despite an apparent enthusiasm for breaking Godwin's Law on anything involving Apple.
http://truthseekernz.blogspot.com/20...n-mod-425.html
Here in NZ turn-by-turn GPS is not enabled (yet), a big let-down.
We'll see. 2H2010 isn't that far away. Neither is 2011 when Android is supposed to disintegrate by your timetable.
I'd like to see something as a viable competitor to Apple. What I wonder though, is whether the open model will really work for that in the long run. It's possible that the iPod example will work here as well. It's certainly worked for the app and hardware model.
It just seems to me that even if overall, Android is in a greater number of hands, it doesn't mean that it's going to be more significant OS. If the fragmentation continues, as it's very likely to, then that diminishes its impact.
So even if the percentage is greater, we have to wonder what that will mean. After all, right now, Apple has about an 18% worldwide phone OS marketshare in the smartphone space. Even if Android kills others and ends up with 25% over the next 18 month to two years, what does that mean, if there are several competing versions from different manufacturers, where third party software doesn't always work between their phones?
And you have to keep in mind the fact that even if most current phones can be updated to 2.1, newer phones will continue to come out with differing versions, some with earlier versions than 2.1, even after Google has moved to 2.5 and beyond.
That was explained well in one of these articles. Since Google can't control when manufacturers begin development of new phone models, as they are competing with other even if they do use Android, and as that will determine which version of the OS they come out with, there will be a continuing slew of phones out there with partly incompatible OS's, in addition to the continuing to evolve GUI's from the differing manufacturers, AND differences imposed by the carriers, which we're seeing as well.
When people see these phones, they will all be so different, that most people won't know that they're Android phones at all. Let's face it, most people don't know about these things. As a greater portion of the population gets smartphones, and moves from feature phones, the smarts of the people getting them drops insofar as their knowledge of what's inside goes. We've seen that in the typical computer customer over the years.
http://link.businessinsider.com/view/c4z.5fx/28ac9456
So if the GUI's are much different, the included apps are much different, and the ability to get third party apps is much different, can we really speak of an Android market? I don't think so.
It's not a "disintegration" of Android, to use your word, but rather a moving apart of the various, I guess the word might be "distro's" of the OS. And I was talking about this becoming really serious in a couple of years, by 2012 possibly, though we'll see more of it by next year.
The reason why I used the word "other" when I described how some of those "distro's" may be categorized, is because if they're too different, and they aren't selling that well themselves, then that's where they will be put in the charts. We often see that now with some more obscure phone OS's, such as Linux phones. We often see the top five players, and then the rest is "other".
You're strongly denying that possibility, but I see it as a very definite risk.
What I don't understand is this fixation on the doomsday senario that all Android phones must be able to upgrade to 2.x or Android will fail.
Will there be really old models that can't get the 2.x update? Sure. It's been shown that you can get 2.1 onto a G1, but it runs really slow. People with G1s will be told "if you want Android 2.1, you have to get a new phone, the hardware's just too old" by T-Mobile and I believe a majority of them will understand.
At the time those phones came out, Android was nowhere near as full-featured as it is now. The hardware didn't need to be as high-end to run the OS well. And it was more of an oddity, kind of like the Bada OS.
All the phones around the time of the DROID's release to now all have relatively high-end (and similar) specs and should have no issues running Android 2.x. Some extra features may get left out here and there (i.e. live wallpapers), but the core OS functions that matter will be the same. What I'm saying is that going forward, keeping up with the OS updates (hardware-wise) should be no problem.
Hardware gets outdated. That's the progress of technology. There will always be a point where we have to stop supporting the really old stuff just to be able to move forward. There will be small pockets of people that keep Android phones that won't get the 2.x update for whatever reason. For most others, they'll have moved on to a phone that does support it already.
The iPhone has a similar issue. There are pockets of people out there still holding onto the original iPhones. Sure they can install the latest OS on it, but it'll be missing features too, because the hardware's outdated. And there will be apps they can't install because it was written to access functions/hardware that isn't there.
I never said that Android would fail. Not once!
I'm saying that it will fragment, just as many in the industry have now been saying as well. Fragmentation doesn't mean that Android will go away. It means that manufacturers will be trying to take it and change it so that they get some advantage over their competitors. Do you really think that they CARE about Android? They don't. Not at all. They see this as a free OS that they can do whatever they want with.
That means putting their own vision into it. Whether their vision is good or bad is something else.
A few people will do whatever they want to, as you did, to get other software otherwise unavailable. The vast majority won't be able to do that, or won't be interested in doing that. Techie types always seem to be so naive about the general population's interest or ability to mess around with things. They aren't interested. they just want it to work. If it doesn't, they get rid of it. They don't go prying around in the software or hardware.
Even with techie types, most won't do that. So those who do have little understanding of most other people. We're talking about the sales of tens of millions of phones, shortly, hundreds of millions.
My response to Vinea explains what I'm saying here, so I don't have to repeat all of it.
Of course I'm not saying Android apps are better than iPhone apps. Not having Android, I don't even know what is available for Android.
What I'm saying is that for average buyer more is always better. Like in "12MP P&S camera must be twice better than 6MP P&S camera... right?" And that is (one of the) reason(s) why Apple is putting that much emphasis on apps library. Androids are, for same reasons, putting same emphasis on higher-res screens and cameras, even if both are not giving perceived advantage in real usage.
Question I can't answer is how many people will prefer bigger software library to bigger specs. I do know couple of iPhone users not caring at all about apps (using phone for calling, txting, emails, calendar and iPod, all included) but I'd expect some if not all of them would not care much about higher res screens and cameras. However,t hat is very small number of people, and differentiation like this on global scale can give nice advantage to one camp or another.
I wouldn't compare pixel counts to software counts. One is a technical limitation, and one is up to the individual developer to get right. Though I understand your referring to the "more is better" concept there.
I do know that if I want a certain kind of software, it's far more likely to be in the App Store, than in the Android Marketplace. There's also a much better chance of finding a better version, as there will be more of them, and more competition.
It's ALL about the software, which is something that Apple seems to understand best. The device must be a conduit for the software. The iPhone is that. Not so much with other systems, as the hardware varies too much in the same generation of phone.
It's like the old days of the PC, where there were what was called "IBM Compatibles". Those were (for those here too young to remember) computers that used the unpatented (by error) IBM bus, but used different firmware and BIOS. What we had was a slightly different OS for each manufacturers machine. That also meant that software had to be customized for each machine with a different firmware, BIOS, and OS. And each machine was using MS-DOS!
Only when Phoenix clean roomed the IBM BIOS did we get actual IBM "clones" capable of running the same version of MS-DOS, and thus didn't need customized versions of the OS or software. Now, it's been so long, we don't think of the term IBM clone.
But it's possible that Android is going that way, and so software libraries will be messed up for it, whereas that for the iPhone will be much more unified, and thus larger.
It just seems to me that even if overall, Android is in a greater number of hands, it doesn't mean that it's going to be more significant OS. If the fragmentation continues, as it's very likely to, then that diminishes its impact.
I dunno why you call it likely if the amount of fragmentaion is expected to decrease this year sometime.
Even if Android kills others and ends up with 25% over the next 18 month to two years, what does that mean, if there are several competing versions from different manufacturers, where third party software doesn't always work between their phones?
You're assuming that the majority of 3rd party software will not work even across versions. I disagree with this assumption.
When people see these phones, they will all be so different, that most people won't know that they're Android phones at all. Let's face it, most people don't know about these things. As a greater portion of the population gets smartphones, and moves from feature phones, the smarts of the people getting them drops insofar as their knowledge of what's inside goes. We've seen that in the typical computer customer over the years.
That doesn't matter to the existance and importance of the platform. What matters is the total marketspace that app developers can target which influences the number of high quality apps for that platform.
http://link.businessinsider.com/view/c4z.5fx/28ac9456
All this chart and article shows is that the market is growing rapidly. It doesn't say anything about how well or poorly Android is expected to do between now an Q3 2011.
So if the GUI's are much different, the included apps are much different, and the ability to get third party apps is much different, can we really speak of an Android market? I don't think so.
You basic premise is that there will be major incompatibilities between Android phones and this is incorrect.
First, there are only so many different Android versions between now an Q3 2011. The critical period you and Businessweek believes decides the success of smartphone platforms.
Second, the differences between point releases (2.1 vs 2.2 or 1.5 vs 1.6) will not be THAT significant for the average developer.
The UI differences are not going to be always important to all app developers. Most apps don't care how they get launched. The app in one of the articles you quote wishes to do things to the home screen. Yes, that is impacted but not all apps do this.
It's not a "disintegration" of Android, to use your word, but rather a moving apart of the various, I guess the word might be "distro's" of the OS. And I was talking about this becoming really serious in a couple of years, by 2012 possibly, though we'll see more of it by next year.
You wrote this:
We won't be talking about Android phones vs iPhones after a year or so
The reason why I used the word "other" when I described how some of those "distro's" may be categorized, is because if they're too different, and they aren't selling that well themselves, then that's where they will be put in the charts.
This would be the disintegration of the Android market. You know, vs integraion of the market. Android market today...other market tomorrow...
Answer: Not bloody likely by Q3 2011.
We often see that now with some more obscure phone OS's, such as Linux phones. We often see the top five players, and then the rest is "other".
So your prediction is that the Android market will be so fragmented that it won't be listed in the top 5 phone OSs and will be obscure like Linux or PalmOS.
You're strongly denying that possibility, but I see it as a very definite risk.
By Q3 2011? Only if Google loses the trademark and they have to call Android something else will we not be talking about the Android Market in a year and a half.
There is simply NOT enough time for sufficient fragmentation to occur. At most you'll see 3.x in 2011 with maybe 3 more 2.x releases in between. If all current 1.x phones are at the 2.x point as the major manufacturers claim then we're talking no MORE fragmentation than iPhone 3.x vs iPhone 4.x.
I dunno why you call it likely if the amount of fragmentaion is expected to decrease this year sometime.
It's not expected to decrease. That's what you're saying. Google is trying to prevent it with individual app updates, but that does nothing for the OS itself, or what the companies are doing to it.
You're assuming that the majority of 3rd party software will not work even across versions. I disagree with this assumption.
It's not an assumption. It's already happening. Whether it will be the majority or not, I don't know, but it could be a substantial number. If it's a few popular apps, that will be a bad publicity problem. If you read the link that showed that, you saw that. And you already agreed it was happening when you said it was a good idea for Google to not let people see apps they couldn't use on their phones. At least, I think it was you who said that. This is a real, occurring problem, it's not an assumption.
That doesn't matter to the existance and importance of the platform. What matters is the total marketspace that app developers can target which influences the number of high quality apps for that platform.
Of course it matters! If developers have to have several different versions of their apps, they will only develop them for the phones that are selling best. Why develop for five different Android phone types if only three are selling well? In addition, if you read the reviews, you'll see that Android apps aren't considered to be of as high a quality as iPhone apps.
http://link.businessinsider.com/view/c4z.5fx/28ac9456
All this chart and article shows is that the market is growing rapidly. It doesn't say anything about how well or poorly Android is expected to do between now an Q3 2011.
It usefully shows a strong trend. It illustrates what I was saying about feature phones vs smartphones.
You basic premise is that there will be major incompatibilities between Android phones and this is incorrect.
That's your assumption. I might as well say that you are incorrect, and industry people agree with my position much more than with yours.
First, there are only so many different Android versions between now an Q3 2011. The critical period you and Businessweek believes decides the success of smartphone platforms.
Second, the differences between point releases (2.1 vs 2.2 or 1.5 vs 1.6) will not be THAT significant for the average developer.
They don't need dozens of different versions floating around at the same time to have problems. and you're forgetting how manufacturers and phone companies are customizing them as well, adding to the confusion.
Also, you don't have to compare 1.5 to 1.6, or 2.1 to 2.2. Compare 1.6 to 2.0. That's where a major problem lies. With new phones coming out with the obsolete 1.6 (and even the worse 1.5) there will will remain major software deficiencies. It's well documented that 1.6 and earlier can't run much software made for 2.0 and higher. Again, check out that link.
The UI differences are not going to be always important to all app developers. Most apps don't care how they get launched. The app in one of the articles you quote wishes to do things to the home screen. Yes, that is impacted but not all apps do this.
No the GUI won't be important to ALL developers, as you say. It will be important for enough to limit adoption of a significant amount of software.
You wrote this:
This would be the disintegration of the Android market. You know, vs integraion of the market. Android market today...other market tomorrow...
Answer: Not bloody likely by Q3 2011.
I know exactly what I wrote. It doesn't mean a disintegration of the market. Not right away certainly. In several years, maybe. but I would hope that Google changes their minds about letting everything go it's own way before it gets to that point.
So your prediction is that the Android market will be so fragmented that it won't be listed in the top 5 phone OSs and will be obscure like Linux or PalmOS.
I didn't say that either. What I said was that some phones made by some companies will not sell well because their OS has fragmented too far from the mainstream, and so they won't sell well. Therefor THEY will be listed as "other". I didn't say that Android in its entirety would be listed that way. But, if that does happen, it would mean that all the other Android phones that were more compatible would be considered to have less marketshare than otherwise.
By Q3 2011? Only if Google loses the trademark and they have to call Android something else will we not be talking about the Android Market in a year and a half.
There is simply NOT enough time for sufficient fragmentation to occur. At most you'll see 3.x in 2011 with maybe 3 more 2.x releases in between. If all current 1.x phones are at the 2.x point as the major manufacturers claim then we're talking no MORE fragmentation than iPhone 3.x vs iPhone 4.x.
I keep saying that 18 months would be the shortest time, but that in two or three years we could see that.
It's up to Google. If they understand that their lassie-faire attitude toward this will lead to manufacturers to just think of their competitors and how to get an advantage over them, rather than becoming commodity players as has happened in the PC industry, then they will understand that they have to do something drastic.
If they don't, then these manufacturers who are adopting Android because it's free, AND because they can muck it up any way they want to, WILL muck it up the way they want to. The one thing I hope we can agree on here, is that the manufacturers and the phone companies are NOT the most adept at understanding the best thing here. They're mostly interested in tying their customers up. They're already beginning to open their own stores, and don't you know that if they can, they will wall off whatever they can. Is that smart? No, of course not! But when have they ever been smart?
Fragmentation of the iPhone has been very minimal. As soon as a new point update is available, it's available for all phones, unlike the Android market, where Google has had the carriers spend months to "test" them. When a new upgrade is available, it's also available for all iPhones at the same time. Android has major problems with that as well. Why do you think that the best Google could do is this pitiful app update program? They can't even force their partners to speed up, or even guarantee they will do the updates at all.
At some point, the first iPhone won't receive an upgrade, but by then it will be years old, ancient in the smartphone world. But many Android phones will have that problem after a year to 18 months. Some sooner.