Google's problem will soon be that nobody believes AdMob's numbers.
They'll simply be viewed as self-serving.
Wow, cynical. And Google's scarcely completed the acquisition. I am having a hard time seeing the problem in numbers that say the iPhone OS bests Android 2 to 1 in the US and 10 to 1 elsewhere. OMG. Biased against the iPhone!
Their methodology could have flaws of course. Can we be sure that their sampling accurately reflects the market? But, I am at a loss to see why any but the most warped mind would see dastardly intent and bias behind the very normal reporting of very normal quarterly or semi-annual or annual statistics.
Android ... Windows Phone 7 is their true competitor.
Apple will always be Apple.
The outcome may be a no brainer, actually. And, this may be the revenge of Netscape, more than a decade later. The only difference would be Google, unexpectedly becoming Netscape's surrogate avenger.
Netscape revolutionized internet browsing when it introduced its easy to use Netscape Navigator in 1994. Microsoft using its domination in the PC countered with Internet Explorer in 1995 for free. Guess who won?
Now Google Android vs Windows Mobile. Different arena -- battle of OS for mobile devices. Unlike the iPhone OS or RIM OS (which are not licensed to others), both of the aforementioned mobile OS come from companies that are predominantly not phone manufacturers.
The Android OS is open source, forked from the original Linux OS under initial tutelage by Google's Android Inc; and now more broadly by the "Open Handset Alliance [OHA] a consortium of 65 hardware, software, and telecom companies devoted to advancing open standards for mobile devices" -- Wikipedia. Make no mistake about it though, Adnroid's primary contributor is still Google.
In contrast, the "Windows Mobile OS" is proprietary and has to be licensed from Microsoft. However, the "latest metamorphosis" Windows Phone 7, Microsoft's attempt to rejuvenate its sagging Mobile Phone OS, is not compatible with earlier Windows Mobile OS iterations (up to Windows Mobile 7), that were now all scrapped.
The direct customers of Android OS and Windows Mobile OS (Windows Phone 7) are phone manufacturers, not the actual consumers of the phones. The Android OS is free. Microsoft was not so willing to share what it will charge for "Windows Phone 7", however, it charged around $8-15 per phone for the prior Windows Mobile iterations.
The total revenue would be pocket change for Microsoft, but when one considers millions of phones, that is a lot of unrealized profits for phone manufacturers that may already have rock bottom profit margin. Just like the Netscape vs Internet Explorer battle played out in the 1990's, the final outcome would not come as a surprise:
JOKE OF THE WEEK: Microsoft Plans To Charge For Its Mobile Operating System
If Microsoft heeds the advice, it may be as well-received as the Zune. In this regard, Microsoft did announce its own branded phones, the Microsoft Kin (two versions), on 12 April 2010, (available online and stores May 2010) as Verizon exclusive in the US, and through Vodafone in Europe in Autumn.
Overall, the smartphone business grew year-over-year as of the first quarter of 2010, with two exceptions:
\t\t
Nokia *Symbiant2.4M,\t35.0%
RIMt10.6M,\t40.1%
iPhonet8.4M,\t117.3%
Androidt5.2M,\t807.0%
Windows Mobilet3.7M,\t -0.9%
Linux\t: 1.99M, \t-21.5%
CGC
N.B.
I assume the data for the iPhone OS, refers to the smartphone only, not including the iPod Touch. The recent introduction of the iPad will further increase the growing ecosystem of iPhone OS mobile devices. There were concept models planned as competing products from the other OS, two already went back to the drawing board (HP Slate) or scrapped (MS Courier).
I like to go by what I see, and that is a helluva lot of iphones out there! I ride the train everday, and if someone has a smartphone..9 times out of 10 its an iPhone. I don't think i've ever even noticed anyone with an android phone.
The only android phone I've played around with is the Droid. I was not impressed. I've heard the HTC ones are good, and Nexus one, but I've yet to see one irl.
I was thinking about that line too, it doesn't make much sense. "If only half are still used". That's a pretty big assumption, that 50% of the iPhones and Touches sold are still being used. I think more than that are still in service. I know my 3G, my brother's, and my brother-in-law, the guy at the deli, and a few others that are still rocking them. Only my brother-in-law had the original iPhone, but that was sold off, and I believe still in service. To assume half of all iDevices are not in service is a bit of a leap, then, from where I'm standing.
Exactly. I would be willing to wager somewhere between 80-90% of all iPhones sold are still in use. Here's why:
1. For example, my wife and I still have and use our 1st generation iPhones. We rarely, if ever, use apps that spew ads. I hate ads in apps. I will buy apps that don't have ads because I am so tired of the constant in-your-face, everywhere you go, advertising that has polluted the planet.
2. We plan to buy the forthcoming 4th generation iPhones to replace our old ones. But will that remove our old phones from the installed base? NO. We will be discontinuing cell service on the old phones, but handing them over to the kids to be used as if they were iPod touches.
I know lots of people who do this. They, like us, are expanding the installed base. The iDevices are the longest life mobile devices on the planet. Other companies' junk phones come and go every year, but in Apple's camp, that problem has been fixed. I imagine our 1st gen iPhones will have a total lifetime of about 6 years, and despite the quality and longevity of these items (or more likely because of it) Apple continues to sell more and more iDevices.
We're supposed to believe the AdMob/Google numbers when the Google fans want to show how great Android is and how everyone's switching to Google.
But when they want to show that Apple has a monopoly and is unfairly restricting competition, they'll pull out different numbers that say that Apple sells 96% of all online apps.
Are one or the other sets of stats inaccurate? Which one? Both?
Yea, I'm guessing once froyo ships on phones it'll really start to gain traction. It's not even out yet and I want a Sense UI update using it. Only one more week until my EVO gets here. I'm pumped My iphone has stupidly been breaking my calendar appointment times and weirdly sending them back in time 2 hours and in some cases to the wrong day entirely. Not really sure what the hell is going on with apple and calendar apps, but they've never had one that worked as advertised in my experience. Also really looking forward to having multitasking apps and writing some software for the platform. Got some fun game ideas and stuff.
Then why do they have this kind of roadmap? I mean three major releases in one year sounds crazy.
Most software developers follow the "little and often" mantra. Of course, marketing and management usually try their hardest to ruin software devs' best intentions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning
Aren't some of those NTT DoCoMo Symbian based phones locked down, so you can't install apps etc, thus why they aren't counted as smartphones?
I don't know, I kept my western phone when I lived in Japan. It's a bit of a moot point though since other platforms without native 3rd party apps (iPhone OS v1, arguably BB OS) have counted as smartphones in the past.
We're supposed to believe the AdMob/Google numbers when the Google fans want to show how great Android is and how everyone's switching to Google.
But when they want to show that Apple has a monopoly and is unfairly restricting competition, they'll pull out different numbers that say that Apple sells 96% of all online apps.
You see? Choose the data you wish that supports whatever silly argument you want to make.
Damn it, I just rebuilt that Irony-O-Meter from the last time you broke it!
I don't see the point in your post (other than to poke fun at something that isn't Apple). It's true that people are jumping onto the Google/Android bandwagon in decent numbers. It's also true that Apple does control the majority share of the apps out there.
With your third paragraph, you're implying that Google/Android is as big of a presence as Apple. But yet you scoff at the numbers that show Google is gaining ground. Which is it? You can't have it both ways.
I like to go by what I see, and that is a helluva lot of iphones out there! I ride the train everday, and if someone has a smartphone..9 times out of 10 its an iPhone. I don't think i've ever even noticed anyone with an android phone.
The only android phone I've played around with is the Droid. I was not impressed. I've heard the HTC ones are good, and Nexus one, but I've yet to see one irl.
Same exact experience for me. I also think that a lot of Droid buyers are persons without any real experience with Apple products, specifically the iPhone and it also feel like it's their first smart phone purchase. I have also observed that a lot of them have 'upgraded' from the BlackBerry. In other words, I think there is a perception that the Blackberry is not "smart enough?" This is not all that surprising since a lot of people left the BB for the iPhone.
Love or hate Android, Apple does need the competition
I never understand this sentament.
Why does Apple "need" the competition?
If anything else, the rest of industry needs the inspiration from Apple as the smartphone market was anemic, boring and extremly disfunctional before Apple entered it. The tablet market was basically non-existant after 10 years of missteps by Microsoft and zilch from the mighty Open Source community.
Apple is the clear leader here, not the other way around. Everyone else needs to compete with Apple or be left in their dust.
And why is that? Is it assumed that MS will just automatically rule the corporate space?
If that's your assumption, you couldn't be more wrong. I have seen more interest and demand for the iPhone vs. the Blackberry than even I had assumed would happen. When OS 4 arrives with it's remote management, provisioning and application deployment the gloves will be OFF. MS will still be a bit player, and RIM is in serious trouble.
Two years from now it will be startling how fast the mobile space in the entrprise changes.
If anything else, the rest of industry needs the inspiration from Apple as the smartphone market was anemic, boring and extremly disfunctional before Apple entered it. The tablet market was basically non-existant after 10 years of missteps by Microsoft and zilch from the mighty Open Source community.
Apple is the clear leader here, not the other way around. Everyone else needs to compete with Apple or be left in their dust.
First off, because if there wasn't any competition for Apple, it would become a monopoly and will get tied up in legislative tape even more so than it is now.
Second, as much as people want to believe, it's not always Apple that comes up with something new and innovative. If it was Apple only, there would be no need to come up with something great in a timely manner. Lets say the only smartphone you could by is from Apple. If it doesn't have a feature, what are you going to do? There's no competition to go to. In that case, Apple has just as much of a chance of sitting on its butt as RIM has done because it knows that the consumer has no choice other than to pick their product. And RIM is only now changing the way their OS looks to be more non-business friendly. Would you be willing to wait if Apple became like that?
The competition can, will, and does give Apple something to better itself on. Google does come by and kick the bar a bit higher. Then Apple will follow suit. It's good for Apple, it's good for Google. Most importantly, it's good for us.
Android OS is still an immature product and the smartphone market as a whole moves very quickly. Rapid software cycles make a lot of sense right now. Android isn't the only one with this model. Other, more established players are doing it too.
I dunno, a mature OS with reasoned, well spaced and timed updates seems far more appealing.
Then again at this point in my life I would prefer my phone to be a well honed tool instead of a science project - to each his own.
AT&T has reported activating 9m iPhones in the last 9 months. Most analysts believe AT&T has 15 to 16m iPhone subscribers, out of approximately 21m iPhones sold in the US since June 2007.
I agree. Numbers I have place AT&T iPhone subs north of 15M. Also consider that some of those iPhone replacements are still in use as WiFi only devices (basically a touch). AdMob doesn't capture nearly the percentage of iPhone OS devices in use as it does Android.
I dunno, a mature OS with reasoned, well spaced and timed updates seems far more appealing.
Then again at this point in my life I would prefer my phone to be a well honed tool instead of a science project - to each his own.
To each his own indeed. I personally like this "science project" ability of Android. If you leave it alone, it's not a bad OS (opinion here). But you have the option of being able to tinker with it if you want. Feeling sluggish? Overclock it. Want a feature that's on another Android phone? There's most likely an app or developer ROM that covers it.
One example I'll give is the Home screen launcher. Compare the N1's launcher to vanilla Android and you'll see a lot to be desired in the vanilla one. No fear, because there's an app called LauncherPro which mixes the best of the N1 and HTC Sense into one.
Andriod's competition is microsoft & not apple as apple doesn't license it's iphone OS. Apple competes with H/W & S/W with hardware manufactures who can only choose from andriod (free) & windows(paid) as software for their Hardware and use it to compete within themselves & Apple. Andirod is acting more as a catalyst for the price controlling of windows, Moreover the H/W manufactures will never let any one company control the platform which they made (then how can someone say that Apple controls it's own platform). So, Andriod will be there & so will Windows, unless google decides to make it's own Hardware.
But the good part is that there is no Wintel (windows + intel) ruling the arena.
Comments
Google's problem will soon be that nobody believes AdMob's numbers.
They'll simply be viewed as self-serving.
Wow, cynical. And Google's scarcely completed the acquisition. I am having a hard time seeing the problem in numbers that say the iPhone OS bests Android 2 to 1 in the US and 10 to 1 elsewhere. OMG. Biased against the iPhone!
Their methodology could have flaws of course. Can we be sure that their sampling accurately reflects the market? But, I am at a loss to see why any but the most warped mind would see dastardly intent and bias behind the very normal reporting of very normal quarterly or semi-annual or annual statistics.
Android ... Windows Phone 7 is their true competitor.
Apple will always be Apple.
The outcome may be a no brainer, actually. And, this may be the revenge of Netscape, more than a decade later. The only difference would be Google, unexpectedly becoming Netscape's surrogate avenger.
Netscape revolutionized internet browsing when it introduced its easy to use Netscape Navigator in 1994. Microsoft using its domination in the PC countered with Internet Explorer in 1995 for free. Guess who won?
Now Google Android vs Windows Mobile. Different arena -- battle of OS for mobile devices. Unlike the iPhone OS or RIM OS (which are not licensed to others), both of the aforementioned mobile OS come from companies that are predominantly not phone manufacturers.
The Android OS is open source, forked from the original Linux OS under initial tutelage by Google's Android Inc; and now more broadly by the "Open Handset Alliance [OHA] a consortium of 65 hardware, software, and telecom companies devoted to advancing open standards for mobile devices" -- Wikipedia. Make no mistake about it though, Adnroid's primary contributor is still Google.
In contrast, the "Windows Mobile OS" is proprietary and has to be licensed from Microsoft. However, the "latest metamorphosis" Windows Phone 7, Microsoft's attempt to rejuvenate its sagging Mobile Phone OS, is not compatible with earlier Windows Mobile OS iterations (up to Windows Mobile 7), that were now all scrapped.
The direct customers of Android OS and Windows Mobile OS (Windows Phone 7) are phone manufacturers, not the actual consumers of the phones. The Android OS is free. Microsoft was not so willing to share what it will charge for "Windows Phone 7", however, it charged around $8-15 per phone for the prior Windows Mobile iterations.
The total revenue would be pocket change for Microsoft, but when one considers millions of phones, that is a lot of unrealized profits for phone manufacturers that may already have rock bottom profit margin. Just like the Netscape vs Internet Explorer battle played out in the 1990's, the final outcome would not come as a surprise:
JOKE OF THE WEEK: Microsoft Plans To Charge For Its Mobile Operating System
http://www.businessinsider.com/micro...revenue-2010-2
This led to the unsolicited advice to Microsoft:
Why Microsoft Should Make Its Own Phone: Windows Mobile Revenue Stinks (MSFT)
http://www.businessinsider.com/2008/...e-stinks-msft-
If Microsoft heeds the advice, it may be as well-received as the Zune. In this regard, Microsoft did announce its own branded phones, the Microsoft Kin (two versions), on 12 April 2010, (available online and stores May 2010) as Verizon exclusive in the US, and through Vodafone in Europe in Autumn.
Overall, the smartphone business grew year-over-year as of the first quarter of 2010, with two exceptions:
\t\t
Nokia *Symbian
RIM
iPhone
Android
Windows Mobile
Linux\t: 1.99M, \t-21.5%
CGC
N.B.
I assume the data for the iPhone OS, refers to the smartphone only, not including the iPod Touch. The recent introduction of the iPad will further increase the growing ecosystem of iPhone OS mobile devices. There were concept models planned as competing products from the other OS, two already went back to the drawing board (HP Slate) or scrapped (MS Courier).
The only android phone I've played around with is the Droid. I was not impressed. I've heard the HTC ones are good, and Nexus one, but I've yet to see one irl.
I was thinking about that line too, it doesn't make much sense. "If only half are still used". That's a pretty big assumption, that 50% of the iPhones and Touches sold are still being used. I think more than that are still in service. I know my 3G, my brother's, and my brother-in-law, the guy at the deli, and a few others that are still rocking them. Only my brother-in-law had the original iPhone, but that was sold off, and I believe still in service. To assume half of all iDevices are not in service is a bit of a leap, then, from where I'm standing.
Exactly. I would be willing to wager somewhere between 80-90% of all iPhones sold are still in use. Here's why:
1. For example, my wife and I still have and use our 1st generation iPhones. We rarely, if ever, use apps that spew ads. I hate ads in apps. I will buy apps that don't have ads because I am so tired of the constant in-your-face, everywhere you go, advertising that has polluted the planet.
2. We plan to buy the forthcoming 4th generation iPhones to replace our old ones. But will that remove our old phones from the installed base? NO. We will be discontinuing cell service on the old phones, but handing them over to the kids to be used as if they were iPod touches.
I know lots of people who do this. They, like us, are expanding the installed base. The iDevices are the longest life mobile devices on the planet. Other companies' junk phones come and go every year, but in Apple's camp, that problem has been fixed. I imagine our 1st gen iPhones will have a total lifetime of about 6 years, and despite the quality and longevity of these items (or more likely because of it) Apple continues to sell more and more iDevices.
We're supposed to believe the AdMob/Google numbers when the Google fans want to show how great Android is and how everyone's switching to Google.
But when they want to show that Apple has a monopoly and is unfairly restricting competition, they'll pull out different numbers that say that Apple sells 96% of all online apps.
Are one or the other sets of stats inaccurate? Which one? Both?
Looks like Android is off to a great start.
Yea, I'm guessing once froyo ships on phones it'll really start to gain traction. It's not even out yet and I want a Sense UI update using it. Only one more week until my EVO gets here. I'm pumped
Then why do they have this kind of roadmap? I mean three major releases in one year sounds crazy.
Most software developers follow the "little and often" mantra. Of course, marketing and management usually try their hardest to ruin software devs' best intentions.
Aren't some of those NTT DoCoMo Symbian based phones locked down, so you can't install apps etc, thus why they aren't counted as smartphones?
I don't know, I kept my western phone when I lived in Japan. It's a bit of a moot point though since other platforms without native 3rd party apps (iPhone OS v1, arguably BB OS) have counted as smartphones in the past.
*** Visitors' OS ***
Windows 92.4%
Mac 5.2%
iPhone 1.6% (does not include iPod)
.
.
Android 0.1%
All the more striking because iPad has not been released in Japan yet.
You don't get it, do you?
We're supposed to believe the AdMob/Google numbers when the Google fans want to show how great Android is and how everyone's switching to Google.
But when they want to show that Apple has a monopoly and is unfairly restricting competition, they'll pull out different numbers that say that Apple sells 96% of all online apps.
You see? Choose the data you wish that supports whatever silly argument you want to make.
Damn it, I just rebuilt that Irony-O-Meter from the last time you broke it!
I don't see the point in your post (other than to poke fun at something that isn't Apple). It's true that people are jumping onto the Google/Android bandwagon in decent numbers. It's also true that Apple does control the majority share of the apps out there.
With your third paragraph, you're implying that Google/Android is as big of a presence as Apple. But yet you scoff at the numbers that show Google is gaining ground. Which is it? You can't have it both ways.
I like to go by what I see, and that is a helluva lot of iphones out there! I ride the train everday, and if someone has a smartphone..9 times out of 10 its an iPhone. I don't think i've ever even noticed anyone with an android phone.
The only android phone I've played around with is the Droid. I was not impressed. I've heard the HTC ones are good, and Nexus one, but I've yet to see one irl.
Same exact experience for me. I also think that a lot of Droid buyers are persons without any real experience with Apple products, specifically the iPhone and it also feel like it's their first smart phone purchase. I have also observed that a lot of them have 'upgraded' from the BlackBerry. In other words, I think there is a perception that the Blackberry is not "smart enough?" This is not all that surprising since a lot of people left the BB for the iPhone.
Love or hate Android, Apple does need the competition
I never understand this sentament.
Why does Apple "need" the competition?
If anything else, the rest of industry needs the inspiration from Apple as the smartphone market was anemic, boring and extremly disfunctional before Apple entered it. The tablet market was basically non-existant after 10 years of missteps by Microsoft and zilch from the mighty Open Source community.
Apple is the clear leader here, not the other way around. Everyone else needs to compete with Apple or be left in their dust.
Which is why their true competitor is Microsoft.
And why is that? Is it assumed that MS will just automatically rule the corporate space?
If that's your assumption, you couldn't be more wrong. I have seen more interest and demand for the iPhone vs. the Blackberry than even I had assumed would happen. When OS 4 arrives with it's remote management, provisioning and application deployment the gloves will be OFF. MS will still be a bit player, and RIM is in serious trouble.
Two years from now it will be startling how fast the mobile space in the entrprise changes.
So let's review some of the Android ice cream flavors, all of which are based on ice creams actually made on Iron Chef (original and/or American):
- Broccoli
- Asparagus
- Trout!
Tasty goodness indeed! Gonna need a lot of sprinkles on that trout, thank you.LOL - best post in a long time!
AND WHY ARE YOU AND OTHER APPLE-ITES SO O.K. WITH OVERPAYING FOR A PHONE???
Who's overpaying? Phones and plans are basically the same cost.
The mere fact that you trot out the overly tired "Apple is overpriced" meme is further indication that you have no real arguments of substance.
Well, that and your post history
I never understand this sentament.
Why does Apple "need" the competition?
If anything else, the rest of industry needs the inspiration from Apple as the smartphone market was anemic, boring and extremly disfunctional before Apple entered it. The tablet market was basically non-existant after 10 years of missteps by Microsoft and zilch from the mighty Open Source community.
Apple is the clear leader here, not the other way around. Everyone else needs to compete with Apple or be left in their dust.
First off, because if there wasn't any competition for Apple, it would become a monopoly and will get tied up in legislative tape even more so than it is now.
Second, as much as people want to believe, it's not always Apple that comes up with something new and innovative. If it was Apple only, there would be no need to come up with something great in a timely manner. Lets say the only smartphone you could by is from Apple. If it doesn't have a feature, what are you going to do? There's no competition to go to. In that case, Apple has just as much of a chance of sitting on its butt as RIM has done because it knows that the consumer has no choice other than to pick their product. And RIM is only now changing the way their OS looks to be more non-business friendly. Would you be willing to wait if Apple became like that?
The competition can, will, and does give Apple something to better itself on. Google does come by and kick the bar a bit higher. Then Apple will follow suit. It's good for Apple, it's good for Google. Most importantly, it's good for us.
Android OS is still an immature product and the smartphone market as a whole moves very quickly. Rapid software cycles make a lot of sense right now. Android isn't the only one with this model. Other, more established players are doing it too.
I dunno, a mature OS with reasoned, well spaced and timed updates seems far more appealing.
Then again at this point in my life I would prefer my phone to be a well honed tool instead of a science project - to each his own.
... The reality is that fragmentation scarcely bothers most users. ...
Well, actually, I think the fragmentation is intentional and serves Google's purposes:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/showp...&postcount=185
No, it suggests Admob's network is limited.
AT&T has reported activating 9m iPhones in the last 9 months. Most analysts believe AT&T has 15 to 16m iPhone subscribers, out of approximately 21m iPhones sold in the US since June 2007.
I agree. Numbers I have place AT&T iPhone subs north of 15M. Also consider that some of those iPhone replacements are still in use as WiFi only devices (basically a touch). AdMob doesn't capture nearly the percentage of iPhone OS devices in use as it does Android.
I dunno, a mature OS with reasoned, well spaced and timed updates seems far more appealing.
Then again at this point in my life I would prefer my phone to be a well honed tool instead of a science project - to each his own.
To each his own indeed. I personally like this "science project" ability of Android. If you leave it alone, it's not a bad OS (opinion here). But you have the option of being able to tinker with it if you want. Feeling sluggish? Overclock it. Want a feature that's on another Android phone? There's most likely an app or developer ROM that covers it.
One example I'll give is the Home screen launcher. Compare the N1's launcher to vanilla Android and you'll see a lot to be desired in the vanilla one. No fear, because there's an app called LauncherPro which mixes the best of the N1 and HTC Sense into one.
Which is why their true competitor is Microsoft.
There is iPhone, and there are iPhone wannabes.
Andriod's competition is microsoft & not apple as apple doesn't license it's iphone OS. Apple competes with H/W & S/W with hardware manufactures who can only choose from andriod (free) & windows(paid) as software for their Hardware and use it to compete within themselves & Apple. Andirod is acting more as a catalyst for the price controlling of windows, Moreover the H/W manufactures will never let any one company control the platform which they made (then how can someone say that Apple controls it's own platform). So, Andriod will be there & so will Windows, unless google decides to make it's own Hardware.
But the good part is that there is no Wintel (windows + intel) ruling the arena.