Wonder how many Android users even notice it's even running Android?
Yup. On one hand, Android has ended up being the OS of choice for geeks who need to prove to themselves that they're smarter than your average iPhone buyer. By out-geeking them. As if anybody else actually gave a crap. (I suppose it's better for their mental health than playing video games all day.)
On the other hand, Android has also become the OS of choice for people who simply don't know any better or are locked in to Verizon or another non-AT&T carrier. "Wow, 2-for-1? Sign me up!" People who don't know any better (or just don't care) are evidently lured in by low price.
And every pretty much agrees that the Android market will pass the iPhone.
Of course Android will pass the iPhone's OS as it is only installed on a single phone. My question is, will any one of the many devices running Android ever have the kind of success enjoyed by the iPhone?
Lets remember the iPhone is going on its 4th Gen. Many of the Android phones are first generation phones. So many of them are going to fall short.
The user experience with many of these Android phones is very good considering they are first generation phones and a second gen OS. A few years from now it could be a totally different ball games when it comes to Android.
Android has had years to be developed. It was openly bought by Google in 2005(?) and we was well known before the iPhone was ever officially announced. The fact that Google had to make a switch from copying BB OS to copy iPhone OS is inconsequential as they released the first Android phone the next year, not long after the first 3G iPhone.
On the HW front, these vendors have had years to play around with the Android OS and have been building phones long before Apple entered the market.
I'm surprised that Apple has been able to increase its lead so much against these well worn handset vendors and Android. I figured that Android on phones would have out sold the iPhone by now. To me this shows Apple is much smart company than I gave them credit for and/or these other vendors are more incompetent than I thought.
This isn't quite as rosy as iPhone fans would like it to be. Keep in mind that the iPhone has been out for three years now, whereas Android phones have only been generally available for a little over 6 months. For Android to pick up that much market share in such a short time is phenomenal. And its growth rate certainly exceeds that of the iPhone. iPhone sales have slowed, while Android's continue to improve.
Long story short, there are a lot of iPhones out there, but if current trends continue, Android phones will not just outsell, but outnumber iPhones before we know it.
This isn't quite as rosy as iPhone fans would like it to be. Keep in mind that the iPhone has been out for three years now, whereas Android phones have only been generally available for a little over 6 months. For Android to pick up that much market share in such a short time is phenomenal. And its growth rate certainly exceeds that of the iPhone. iPhone sales have slowed, while Android's continue to improve.
Long story short, there are a lot of iPhones out there, but if current trends continue, Android phones will not just outsell, but outnumber iPhones before we know it.
All the talk about which features make which phone the one most likely to succeed is just a pissing contest.
The market is shaped by what the retailers can get out of it. For example, even though the iPhone is a clear leader in the market at the moment (ignoring BB, just iPhone vs Android), the major Telcos's in Australia will put 15 android or non iPhone other phones on the front page of their sales brochures, not the iPhone.
Why? Because they no doubt make more profit from flogging off the cheap competition than selling the iPhone. Telcos usually sell all phones for a premium no matter how cheap the manufacturer churns them out for.
If you think the vast majority of consumers that buy phones do so because of technical features you are as dilusional as those that thought the iPad would tank, and those that are holding their breath until 2012. (How ironic, Android will finally overtake iPhone the year the world ends) (no, I don't subscribe to that theory, just a but of fun)
Lets remember the iPhone is going on its 4th Gen. Many of the Android phones are first generation phones. So many of them are going to fall short.
I take your point. But this is also true: While many of those phones ARE first generation, they were not developed in a vacuum, but in the context of wide variety of competing hardware. To a degree, iPhone can only improve itself over its own last model, while the Android competition can use the strengths and weaknesses of many iterations of Android driven hardware on which to base their improvements. So the generational playing field is more level than it might appear.
I take your point. But this is also true: While many of those phones ARE first generation, they were not developed in a vacuum, but in the context of wide variety of competing hardware. To a degree, iPhone can only improve itself over its own last model, while the Android competition can use the strengths and weaknesses of many iterations of Android driven hardware on which to base their improvements. So the generational playing field is more level than it might appear.
Yes, so the generation of any Android phone is more correctly calculated as the number of all Android phones from all manufacturers produced before it, especially since they all end up sharing technology through Google, and are all copying each other as well as the iPhone.
Android has had years to be developed. It was openly bought by Google in 2005(?) and we was well known before the iPhone was ever officially announced. The fact that Google had to make a switch from copying BB OS to copy iPhone OS is inconsequential as they released the first Android phone the next year, not long after the first 3G iPhone.
On the HW front, these vendors have had years to play around with the Android OS and have been building phones long before Apple entered the market.
I'm surprised that Apple has been able to increase its lead so much against these well worn handset vendors and Android. I figured that Android on phones would have out sold the iPhone by now. To me this shows Apple is much smart company than I gave them credit for and/or these other vendors are more incompetent than I thought.
Well it wasn't until Apple starting making hugh leaps that the cell phone industry woke up. I am not sure it was incompetent more then no real competition. How bad is it that the Razr was the best selling phone around and everyone one earth seemed to want one. I mean what a joke. Blackberry was really the smartphone to have and the smartphone market was pretty dead except for business.
Before the iPhone how many consumers actually had data plans, not many that I knew. Most of the data plans were for business users.
The Android market had no real effort put into it until recently. Which again goes to show that the best way to breed innovation is competition. Not to mention everyone saw how fat Apple wallet was getting off this cash cow.
Well obviously my biostatistics/epi course from medical school was better than what they taught at your place.
I think the salient point is that application of statistics is not an exact science. It takes knowledge of the problem domain and an understanding of the data, as well as the mathematics of statistics to know what tests to apply. It's possible to "show" significant results by applying statistical tests incorrectly -- i.e., not only are the results not significant, but the entire misapplied analysis is in fact meaningless. You should consider the possibility that the statistical methods and tests you learned in bio-statistics and epidemiology classes may be wholly inappropriate to economic and market issues. It sounds like you are more hubris than thoughtful analysis, and I can't say you've demonstrated any deep knowledge of either the problem domain or statistics.
I take your point. But this is also true: While many of those phones ARE first generation, they were not developed in a vacuum, but in the context of wide variety of competing hardware. To a degree, iPhone can only improve itself over its own last model, while the Android competition can use the strengths and weaknesses of many iterations of Android driven hardware on which to base their improvements. So the generational playing field is more level than it might appear.
I don't disagree. The reality is Apple and the iPhone kick started the entire smartphone market. Of course there as the BB before the iPhone but the smartphone industry was a very boring to a degree stale industry.
Well it wasn't until Apple starting making hugh leaps that the cell phone industry woke up. I am not sure it was incompetent more then no real competition. How bad is it that the Razr was the best selling phone around and everyone one earth seemed to want one. I mean what a joke. Blackberry was really the smartphone to have and the smartphone market was pretty dead except for business.
The thing about the Razr is that it was the best solution to a completely different problem: the problem of how to make a phone as small as possible, without making it too small (what was that tiny little phone Ericsson (I think) used to make, so small you could barely hold it?), and get decent phone performance out of it. As such, it was an extremely good phone. But it was a solution to a completely different problem.
Quote:
Before the iPhone how many consumers actually had data plans, not many that I knew. Most of the data plans were for business users.
The Android market had no real effort put into it until recently. Which again goes to show that the best way to breed innovation is competition. Not to mention everyone saw how fat Apple wallet was getting off this cash cow.
Actually, I think your last sentence nails it. Competition isn't breeding innovation here. What's breeding it is one company producing a vastly superior product and then a bunch of companies are copying it trying to catch up and cash in on its success. I think the ability of competition, as a force in isolation, to produce innovation, is highly overrated and that it's an idea more strongly grounded in ideology and "the common wisdom" than in empirical evidence.
Edit: In fact, I would say that Android and Android phones represent no, or at most very little, innovation at all. The competition from Android represents a tacking on and refinement of features to the innovation that was the iPhone. It may result in better phones (better than preceding phones) but to call it innovation is to trivialize what innovation really is.
While I enjoy some of Apple's products, I'm leaving the iPhone behind. As an original iPhone owner, I've enjoyed the phone for the last 3 years and will be the first to say that it revolutionized the mobile industry. However, I'm not to happy with Apple's business strategies lately. Their walled garden, big brother attitude. I had to jail-break my phone just so I could access the file system and load the software that I want to load on it. It kind of sucks that Apple takes the attitude of telling it's users what they can load on the phones they bought. And more importantly, controlling hard working developers such as myself.
I've recently ordered a HTC Incredible from Verizon, which in NYC will allow me to actually make phone calls.
The way that Android integrates social media into its OS better get Apple's attention. It certainly kills the iPhone in that respect.
The stated specs are impressive, but as previously stated I wasn't able to see how well the images stacked up on a proper display.
I heard in another thread that 5 out of 5 people cannot even figure out how to take a picture with a Android phone. I think I heard from you that there is no camera app installed with the OS.
Comments
Wonder how many Android users even notice it's even running Android?
Yup. On one hand, Android has ended up being the OS of choice for geeks who need to prove to themselves that they're smarter than your average iPhone buyer. By out-geeking them. As if anybody else actually gave a crap. (I suppose it's better for their mental health than playing video games all day.)
On the other hand, Android has also become the OS of choice for people who simply don't know any better or are locked in to Verizon or another non-AT&T carrier. "Wow, 2-for-1? Sign me up!" People who don't know any better (or just don't care) are evidently lured in by low price.
Whaa?
OMG. OK, bad metaphor...
And every pretty much agrees that the Android market will pass the iPhone.
Of course Android will pass the iPhone's OS as it is only installed on a single phone. My question is, will any one of the many devices running Android ever have the kind of success enjoyed by the iPhone?
Lets remember the iPhone is going on its 4th Gen. Many of the Android phones are first generation phones. So many of them are going to fall short.
The user experience with many of these Android phones is very good considering they are first generation phones and a second gen OS. A few years from now it could be a totally different ball games when it comes to Android.
Android has had years to be developed. It was openly bought by Google in 2005(?) and we was well known before the iPhone was ever officially announced. The fact that Google had to make a switch from copying BB OS to copy iPhone OS is inconsequential as they released the first Android phone the next year, not long after the first 3G iPhone.
On the HW front, these vendors have had years to play around with the Android OS and have been building phones long before Apple entered the market.
I'm surprised that Apple has been able to increase its lead so much against these well worn handset vendors and Android. I figured that Android on phones would have out sold the iPhone by now. To me this shows Apple is much smart company than I gave them credit for and/or these other vendors are more incompetent than I thought.
Long story short, there are a lot of iPhones out there, but if current trends continue, Android phones will not just outsell, but outnumber iPhones before we know it.
This isn't quite as rosy as iPhone fans would like it to be. Keep in mind that the iPhone has been out for three years now, whereas Android phones have only been generally available for a little over 6 months. For Android to pick up that much market share in such a short time is phenomenal. And its growth rate certainly exceeds that of the iPhone. iPhone sales have slowed, while Android's continue to improve.
Long story short, there are a lot of iPhones out there, but if current trends continue, Android phones will not just outsell, but outnumber iPhones before we know it.
Refer to post #144.
The market is shaped by what the retailers can get out of it. For example, even though the iPhone is a clear leader in the market at the moment (ignoring BB, just iPhone vs Android), the major Telcos's in Australia will put 15 android or non iPhone other phones on the front page of their sales brochures, not the iPhone.
Why? Because they no doubt make more profit from flogging off the cheap competition than selling the iPhone. Telcos usually sell all phones for a premium no matter how cheap the manufacturer churns them out for.
If you think the vast majority of consumers that buy phones do so because of technical features you are as dilusional as those that thought the iPad would tank, and those that are holding their breath until 2012. (How ironic, Android will finally overtake iPhone the year the world ends) (no, I don't subscribe to that theory, just a but of fun)
Lets remember the iPhone is going on its 4th Gen. Many of the Android phones are first generation phones. So many of them are going to fall short.
I take your point. But this is also true: While many of those phones ARE first generation, they were not developed in a vacuum, but in the context of wide variety of competing hardware. To a degree, iPhone can only improve itself over its own last model, while the Android competition can use the strengths and weaknesses of many iterations of Android driven hardware on which to base their improvements. So the generational playing field is more level than it might appear.
Android isn't even a company but a free OS that is piggybacking onto an already existing cell phone business.
The so called Android Phone is nothing but a coalition of COMPETING cell phone makers pimping the OS.
I take your point. But this is also true: While many of those phones ARE first generation, they were not developed in a vacuum, but in the context of wide variety of competing hardware. To a degree, iPhone can only improve itself over its own last model, while the Android competition can use the strengths and weaknesses of many iterations of Android driven hardware on which to base their improvements. So the generational playing field is more level than it might appear.
Yes, so the generation of any Android phone is more correctly calculated as the number of all Android phones from all manufacturers produced before it, especially since they all end up sharing technology through Google, and are all copying each other as well as the iPhone.
Android has had years to be developed. It was openly bought by Google in 2005(?) and we was well known before the iPhone was ever officially announced. The fact that Google had to make a switch from copying BB OS to copy iPhone OS is inconsequential as they released the first Android phone the next year, not long after the first 3G iPhone.
On the HW front, these vendors have had years to play around with the Android OS and have been building phones long before Apple entered the market.
I'm surprised that Apple has been able to increase its lead so much against these well worn handset vendors and Android. I figured that Android on phones would have out sold the iPhone by now. To me this shows Apple is much smart company than I gave them credit for and/or these other vendors are more incompetent than I thought.
Well it wasn't until Apple starting making hugh leaps that the cell phone industry woke up. I am not sure it was incompetent more then no real competition. How bad is it that the Razr was the best selling phone around and everyone one earth seemed to want one. I mean what a joke. Blackberry was really the smartphone to have and the smartphone market was pretty dead except for business.
Before the iPhone how many consumers actually had data plans, not many that I knew. Most of the data plans were for business users.
The Android market had no real effort put into it until recently. Which again goes to show that the best way to breed innovation is competition. Not to mention everyone saw how fat Apple wallet was getting off this cash cow.
Well obviously my biostatistics/epi course from medical school was better than what they taught at your place.
I think the salient point is that application of statistics is not an exact science. It takes knowledge of the problem domain and an understanding of the data, as well as the mathematics of statistics to know what tests to apply. It's possible to "show" significant results by applying statistical tests incorrectly -- i.e., not only are the results not significant, but the entire misapplied analysis is in fact meaningless. You should consider the possibility that the statistical methods and tests you learned in bio-statistics and epidemiology classes may be wholly inappropriate to economic and market issues. It sounds like you are more hubris than thoughtful analysis, and I can't say you've demonstrated any deep knowledge of either the problem domain or statistics.
I take your point. But this is also true: While many of those phones ARE first generation, they were not developed in a vacuum, but in the context of wide variety of competing hardware. To a degree, iPhone can only improve itself over its own last model, while the Android competition can use the strengths and weaknesses of many iterations of Android driven hardware on which to base their improvements. So the generational playing field is more level than it might appear.
I don't disagree. The reality is Apple and the iPhone kick started the entire smartphone market. Of course there as the BB before the iPhone but the smartphone industry was a very boring to a degree stale industry.
Well said. Android: the Windows of the mobile OS world.
So do you think it will eventually be on 90+% of the mobile phones out there?
Well it wasn't until Apple starting making hugh leaps that the cell phone industry woke up. I am not sure it was incompetent more then no real competition. How bad is it that the Razr was the best selling phone around and everyone one earth seemed to want one. I mean what a joke. Blackberry was really the smartphone to have and the smartphone market was pretty dead except for business.
The thing about the Razr is that it was the best solution to a completely different problem: the problem of how to make a phone as small as possible, without making it too small (what was that tiny little phone Ericsson (I think) used to make, so small you could barely hold it?), and get decent phone performance out of it. As such, it was an extremely good phone. But it was a solution to a completely different problem.
Before the iPhone how many consumers actually had data plans, not many that I knew. Most of the data plans were for business users.
The Android market had no real effort put into it until recently. Which again goes to show that the best way to breed innovation is competition. Not to mention everyone saw how fat Apple wallet was getting off this cash cow.
Actually, I think your last sentence nails it. Competition isn't breeding innovation here. What's breeding it is one company producing a vastly superior product and then a bunch of companies are copying it trying to catch up and cash in on its success. I think the ability of competition, as a force in isolation, to produce innovation, is highly overrated and that it's an idea more strongly grounded in ideology and "the common wisdom" than in empirical evidence.
Edit: In fact, I would say that Android and Android phones represent no, or at most very little, innovation at all. The competition from Android represents a tacking on and refinement of features to the innovation that was the iPhone. It may result in better phones (better than preceding phones) but to call it innovation is to trivialize what innovation really is.
So do you think it will eventually be on 90+% of the mobile phones out there?
Playing coy now, are we?
I've recently ordered a HTC Incredible from Verizon, which in NYC will allow me to actually make phone calls.
The way that Android integrates social media into its OS better get Apple's attention. It certainly kills the iPhone in that respect.
The stated specs are impressive, but as previously stated I wasn't able to see how well the images stacked up on a proper display.
I heard in another thread that 5 out of 5 people cannot even figure out how to take a picture with a Android phone. I think I heard from you that there is no camera app installed with the OS.
Is there anything to that stuff?
Am I spot on or clueless?
Neither.