It will be some time before Android is really competitive. Apple's developer SDKs and tools are much better then Googles. Apple has a significant advantage when it comes to mobile app development. It is difficult to write anything beyond simple apps that wrap around a web page (like Facebook) or OpenGL based games on an Android device. Android web surfing is probably up because that (and Google Maps which is better then on the iPhone) is all you can do well on an Android phone. iPhone users probably use applications in place of web browsing for many tasks. Android will probably be very popular among people who just want to surf the web, but may never gain traction among users who want to run apps. I think the iPhone actually lives up to the hype and Android falls short when you actually try to use their phone to run applications. As others have said, a lot of people chose an Android device on Verizon. Those same people carry an iPod touch to run applications. There is a significant conversion rate (I don't have the link handy) for Android to iPhone users. There is virtually no defection from the iPhone. Market share doesn't tell the whole story. I still find it incredible how many professionals are using OS X. These are the people really propelling the economy. Something just doesn't feel right about comparing a NetBook to a MacBook Pro. You can of course slant statistics to any point you want to prove, but I care more about use-share and dollar-share then market-share. I think that Microsoft would trade places with Apple right now if they could.
I think google should get credit for achieving this web use statistic though. It is really pretty impressive, but to be fair to Apple it is the only thing they have been focusing on. They certainly have not been focusing on Apps. For various reasons I don't think Apple has wanted to make a less expensive iPhone with more limited capabilities to compete with Android. If Android continues to increase their market share after Apple switches to Verizon, maybe they will.
It will be some time before Android is competitive? Really? I have been reading the comments and this has got to be the most delusional. If Android is not competitive, why the fantastic sales? If people cannot do similar things on Android based smartphones, why are they paying the same price for the hardware? Where did those 60,000 apps come from. I have been reading top 100 apps listings and Android seems to have great apps just like for Apple iOS.
Competition is here and its a threat to Apple. Wake up.
It will be some time before Android is competitive? Really? I have been reading the comments and this has got to be the most delusional. If Android is not competitive, why the fantastic sales? If people cannot do similar things on Android based smartphones, why are they paying the same price for the hardware? Where did those 60,000 apps come from. I have been reading top 100 apps listings and Android seems to have great apps just like for Apple iOS.
Competition is here and its a threat to Apple. Wake up.
Maybe you should read more then the first line of my post. Android's SDK is not competitive. Android will possibly never be competitive in Apps. I said nothing about the phone not being competitive.
It will be some time before Android is competitive? Really? I have been reading the comments and this has got to be the most delusional. If Android is not competitive, why the fantastic sales? If people cannot do similar things on Android based smartphones, why are they paying the same price for the hardware? Where did those 60,000 apps come from. I have been reading top 100 apps listings and Android seems to have great apps just like for Apple iOS.
Competition is here and its a threat to Apple. Wake up.
95% of apps on the android are useless, the other 5% are iPhone clones.
I have never seen an Android phone in the wild in the UK yet, everybody I meet has an iOS device.
This argument is full of android zealots. Nevertheless I want to correct some assumptions, and misleading facts.
1) Apple outgrew the market in the 2nd quarter, which will be it's weakest quarter this year. Androids "catchup" was confined to the US - where it went ahead, but the US figures played into the world figures. One quarter of catchup is not the same as an installed base.
2) The iPhone i4 and 3GS 8MB are selling like hotcakes. Apple clearly said in the 2Q conference call that their YoY run rate was an increase of 90% until they announced the iPhone 4. Even factoring in the 1.7 million sold in the last 3 days their final year on year increase was 60%. So sales dropped off a cliff for a month. Hard figures, not speculation. So people who were unaware of the iP4 until the announcement held off from then, and the people who were aware of it were holding off all year ( like me, for instance). This quarter I expect a sequential increase on 100% or more.
3) People who buy Android in the US wanted an iPhone like device but not AT&T. That will change next year.
4) Please include the iPod Touch ( and now the iPad) in all quarterly comparisons. That matters to developers. Every holiday quarter Apple sells about 20M iPods, otherwise 10M. About half are touches, this will probably increase this year. Conservatively expect 15M iPod touches to come out to December. All running 4.X. Developers rejoice.
5) Steve announced 230K new activations a day. That is iPhone or iPad 3g only, and excludes iPod touches. It runs to 7M a month or 21M a quarter. It includes iPad 3Gs but it does not include upgrades ( i.e. sales to old customers, which must be 50%). The maths is simple here, the iOS is pulling ahead of Android this quarter rather sharply. Sales could be 40M.
To those of you who think that this is a re-run of the Mac - Windows market please learn about some other markets. The PC market is anomalous in being a dual platform. The Mobile market was multi-platform before the iPhone, it was after the Android, and it will be post Windows 7 - which will also be licensed ( so why do the licensing will always win brigade ignore Windows 7?) . Windows 7 will attract that portion of the Apple hating Windows loving crowd who now go to Android. It will be Windows 10%, Android 20%, iOS ( all devices) 40-50%. Sold apps will be far higher on the App Store, and will attract more developers.
Lastly Apple dont care about profits. They dont give their shareholders any money. Unless the company is losing money they dont look at it. They could, after all, make money from an Apple branded Windows machine.
Steve is a founder CEO, which is quite a different beast from a MBA CEO. He wants to win. Look at the prices of iPods. They want that in the Phone market too.
For those of you who think it is about money, not market share, when has Steve every mentioned the Apple Stock. Has he ever crowed about becoming the biggest company in the US? he belittled the idea at D8.
No, he comes on an talks about sales, and market share, and apps, and numbers of downloads and so on.
They want to win the Phone OS war,because they believe their OS is better, and they will because the OS is better.
( Android lovers will probably come back on that one, but trust me as a developer, it is night and day. Android is vile, ugly, restrictive, iOS is desktop quality SDK, and to us the SDK is the OS).
Excellent post. This is worth quoting in entirety.
As a developer too, I agree with this. Beyond creating an app that could otherwise be a web page, Android does not offer developers much functionality. It was described as an API that Microsoft might come out with (i.e. uninspired) by the developer of FaceBook. It works, but there is nothing that feels next generation or forward thinking.
Why would Apple care if their share of mobile browsing was declining? It's not as if their advertising model depends on eyeball looking at internet ads (e.g. Google's ad model); Apple depends on in-application viewing.
So I really don't see how this matters.
Especially as iPhone is the app platform - most users minimise their use of web browsers in preference to specialized apps.
Later, as Apple kicks other advertising and analytic companies off the platform, these stats will dive even further, even if market share remains the same.
If we just look at the Mac in the past decade and the traction it's gaining we see that it's the second most popular type of computer IN THE WORLD. And it's laptop sales are nearly reaching to the top. The fact is iPhone's got massive market share and if Android doesn't deliver as good as experience as iPhone many people will convert. We don't have to compare, to see which one's better and is getting more coverage... yes folks iPhone. I just see Android as another phone OS in the 'other' section. Which makes the other section quite big I know.
What do you base that on? It seems to be the premise you rely upon, but I don't see any support.
Got any facts to prop up that crucial contention?
Oh, the iPad is the ultimate content consumption device, didn't you know? Apparently it is no good for content creation or for the enterprise, or for salesmen, or for education, or for the medical or law sectors. Hey, all it IS good for is browsing, right?
Now, you seem to have one or two premises yourself. You seem to be arguing with just about everyone on here.
So, Apple is apparently not a software company but Apple and most of us here are supposed to give two hoots about the Android OS apparently catching up with iOS web market share (depending how you count it, such as by counting iphones only apparently), when a more natural comparison might be to compare it by comparable devices, individual smartphone models or even individual manufacturers, etc. I mean, suddenly there is a real contender of a "platform" here, despite the various involvements of the individual carriers, the individual handset makers and the widely varying form factors and hardware features; any mention of "fragmentation" is a nefarious myth created by Apple fanbois, and Apple doesn't really have a viable platform unless it by the most serendipitous of accidents, because who on earth would ever count ipods and ipads among iPhones? For a start, no-one has really anything to put up against the whole vertical integration and success of the app store and iTunes (despite the bloat), so it wouldn't be fair to others to include all the aspects of Apple's iOS platform; secondly, there may be something to the articles that suggest the only things that are being counted are those that include 3G connectivity because the carriers have a big vested interest in this and they require it for accessing Google's app stores. So much for the open, neutral Google. So much for the gains Apple made in reducing carrier power to dictate hardware. Oh well, let's not take into account any of these issues, because Apple is all about the hardware and profits. Google is so open, Apple is so closed and we can conveniently forget all the (truely) open standards that Apple pushes and all the barriers that it is trying to knock down, only for creepy shysters like Eric to put right back up again.
So, a big contention from iOS detractors, that gets a lot of attention, is how a lot of iOS Internet activity is not done through the "browser" at all, it is done through the thousands and thousands of apps that connect directly to the Internet themselves. Games, in app purchases, magazines, books, business databases, social networks, reference, etc., etc. This doesn't count for some reason, probably because Google says it doesn't count; Google can't track that use of the internet and that is just not fair! Google doesn't get a piece of this, therefore it is defined as Internet use, but not "browsing" the www. Oh no, the www is dying! Apple is destroying the www! Quick, write another sensational headline!
So, because Apple is versatile; because iOS actually scales and developers can do so many things with it; because people are actually finding all kinds of new uses for their iOS devices, most of which include constant internet connection; because they are making inroads into enterprise and education and business: the detractors all want to have their cake and eat it too. However, whichever way you cut the cake, and however the stats are manipulated or not, all the companies wish they could emulate Apple.
BTW, the comparison of Apple's market cap to MS is appropriate. For years, it was said that Apple was doing something wrong because they stayed so small and failed to emulate MS the king of tech companies, by doing such things as licensing the OS. MS was always the success story, the rock that all other companies absolutely relied on (despite costing them billions in lost productivity and time). Apple was so niche, apparently, that no-one cared if they folded, and Michael Dell famously said so. Furthermore, MS SHOULD be the larger-- the margins on sticking a piece of plastic in a box or sending a few serial numbers to another company are incredible. MS prints money, their revenue has been astronomical. Apprently it is not fair that Apple can enter so many new markets so successfully.
But hey, after MS crowing about OS marketshare for yonks, despite the fact that Apple is apparently not a software company, size suddenly no longer matters. Suddenly, size has nothing to do with being the people's choice (because afterall everyone used a PC because they chose to and they loved it!) Size is now all about how devious Apple is in locking us in and in going after profits! If this all wasn't so hypocritical, back to front and so completely farcical, it would be sad -- but it is hilarious!
Keep it up, and keep entertaining us every other post. I am sure you will get there in the end and find a way to have your cake and eat it too (not!).
The iPhone is at saturation. They need to open up to other carriers in order to have growth.
And whether you believe in it or not, the antennagate probably scared off many who might have thought about getting their first iPhone.
Probably, but Apple has some time before they actually have supply to sell these people something. The feature phone market is falling out as more people adopt smart phones. Apple really can't build them fast enough to satisfy the extra demand. These people need to go somewhere. My interests (and livelihood) revolve around Apple products, so I bought an iPhone 4. It took weeks to get here. If I wasn't such a geek, I may have just bought an Android phone instead of waiting.
If Android ever surpasses iOS market share it will be more like the netbook vs the macbook. They may sell 90% of the units and make 10% of the profit. It is inevitable for Android market share to grow as the low end of the smart phone market grows. These are simply users upgrading from feature phones. Apple is selling at their capacity. They couldn't "steal" this market share away from Google if they wanted to. There simply are not enough units. There is a good chance that Android will become the "stepping stone" platform to an iOS device in the long run.
I'm reluctant to comment on OSX because I am not a software developer. I have enough on my plate being a software user.
But...When Snow Leopard came out, it wasn't as much a leap forward as it was a foundation for things to come. So what happened?
All I hear from Apple is iOS, iOS. I have iOS coming out of my ears. There is no information or even interest really on what is next for real computers that get work done.
Seems to me that Apple has left the creative community behind in order to cater to teenagers who want to text and ping all day. Usually while walking or driving. Makes me sad.
You here a lot about iOS in the media because it's the next big thing. What do you hate about iOS? I do like the Mac OS, and it has a long way to go. But I want to see iOS evolve as well. The Mac is not going to go out of production anytime soon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtron
In the computer market as a whole, Macs are not important.
In the niche markets you identify, the Mac sells well.
Do you know what your saying? Seriously? These are not unimportant markets. Science, Eduction and the Media are very IMPORTANT parts of our lives. A lot of these things are done using Apple, and find these platform's VITAL. Just because you don't see a lot of things doesn't make it less important.
I do also think Android will lose some traction as people see what a dodgy piece of software it is.
> The amount of browsing that those few iPads are doing is not insignificant.
Facts: In a recent overview by NetMarketshare.com the iPad already has 0.27 % of the total browsing (worldwide), as opposed to the best-scoring Android version, 2.1, at 0.09 %. If you add Android 1.6 and 2.2, the combined result is 0.17 % - lower that the iPad alone.
It will be some time before Android is really competitive. Apple's developer SDKs and tools are much better then Googles. Apple has a significant advantage when it comes to mobile app development. It is difficult to write anything beyond simple apps that wrap around a web page (like Facebook) or OpenGL based games on an Android device.
Then how do explain the fact that Android is growing so much faster than iOS?
1. iPhone supply is barely meeting demand. Sure, the US market has reached saturation, but why expand carrier selection if you can't provide the extra supply? Sure, two new plants are going up, one for a GSM iPhone (which won't be ready until 2011) and another for a CDMA iPhone (should be ready late this year). But until then, US saturation is moot. Android can have its day.
2. Notice that Google is fragmenting their tablet OS business already. So now developers will have to develop tablet-based apps for two different Google OSes (Chrome and Android). This reminds me of web developers developing for IE6, IE7, IE8 ... then everyone else. Why waste that time if you're a mobile OS developer, especially if iPad eventually becomes available on most or all cell carriers?
Also: What if Oracle's lawsuit destroys Android? Well, that means developers will have to move all their tablet apps to Chrome, and those who got an Android tablet will have to buy a Chrome tablet -- or an iPad. And what about the smartphone market? Unless Chrome is ported to smartphones, then Google has to start from scratch in smartphones.
And look at it from a business perspective. Businesses in general don't like uncertainty of the future. They also like mass vertical integration of technology, as it makes operations less unwieldy. So let's say that businesses want to deploy tablets in the field. If they go Google, Android is the choice over Chrome, because of Android's vertical integration between smartphones and tablets. And if Oracle's lawsuit destroys Android, then businesses will have to make an expensive transition to another platform. Perhaps Oracle's lawsuit is meritless, but there is that uncertainty. With all this general uncertainty in Google's camp, both related to the Oracle lawsuit and not related to it, I don't see how smart businesses go Android or Chrome for smartphone or tablet.
3. This means that WebOS and BlackPad will be the iPad alternatives, especially for enterprises. With all the momentum in personal apps already going to iPad, I don't see how other tablet platforms go mainstream outside of enterprises.
4. The dark horse in all of this is Windows Phone 7. From a consumer perspective, it doesn't look all that good (no multitasking, no cut/copy/paste, crummy web browser). But Apple, RIM, and Google should take a good long look at WinPhone7's impressive enterprise tools (including deep Office support), because if they don't respond fast, Microsoft could easily become the gold standard mobile OS in the enterprise market.
5. BlackPad may be the one thing that saves RIM against Microsoft in the enterprise world. Remember, any company who wants to implement tablets is best served by having their cellphone OS be the same OS as their tablet OS. So far, Microsoft hasn't been sold on developing a tablet version of WinPhone7, as Apple, HP, RIM, and Google all have their own vertical integration tablet/phone solutions either here, or coming. Businesses currently on BlackBerry could just bolt on BlackPad support very easily, and be done.
Anyway, what developer is going to back THAT horse, an entire user base looking for free everything?
There's plenty of facts out there if you care to look. No need for conjecture.
"Android App Growth on the Rise: 9000+ New Apps in March Alone
According to recent statistics from AndroidLib.com, the Android Marketplace saw 9,331 new mobile applications added to its app store during the month of March, 2010. This number is even more phenomenal when you look at the Android Marketplace's historical growth. In December of last year, for example, there were 3,807 new applications added to the Android app store. By January, 4,458 more were added. In February, 5,532 arrived. And now, 9,331.
Well i'ts' been over on month and a half that I've been waiting to get an iphone as Apple "can't cope with demand". Ford is building cars faster than their building iphones for "/%% sake. If apple on stopped creating a false shortage I can assure you that IOS would be definitly widening the gap with android.
> The amount of browsing that those few iPads are doing is not insignificant.
Facts: In a recent overview by NetMarketshare.com the iPad already has 0.27 % of the total browsing (worldwide), as opposed to the best-scoring Android version, 2.1, at 0.09 %. If you add Android 1.6 and 2.2, the combined result is 0.17 % - lower that the iPad alone.
Comments
It will be some time before Android is really competitive. Apple's developer SDKs and tools are much better then Googles. Apple has a significant advantage when it comes to mobile app development. It is difficult to write anything beyond simple apps that wrap around a web page (like Facebook) or OpenGL based games on an Android device. Android web surfing is probably up because that (and Google Maps which is better then on the iPhone) is all you can do well on an Android phone. iPhone users probably use applications in place of web browsing for many tasks. Android will probably be very popular among people who just want to surf the web, but may never gain traction among users who want to run apps. I think the iPhone actually lives up to the hype and Android falls short when you actually try to use their phone to run applications. As others have said, a lot of people chose an Android device on Verizon. Those same people carry an iPod touch to run applications. There is a significant conversion rate (I don't have the link handy) for Android to iPhone users. There is virtually no defection from the iPhone. Market share doesn't tell the whole story. I still find it incredible how many professionals are using OS X. These are the people really propelling the economy. Something just doesn't feel right about comparing a NetBook to a MacBook Pro. You can of course slant statistics to any point you want to prove, but I care more about use-share and dollar-share then market-share. I think that Microsoft would trade places with Apple right now if they could.
I think google should get credit for achieving this web use statistic though. It is really pretty impressive, but to be fair to Apple it is the only thing they have been focusing on. They certainly have not been focusing on Apps. For various reasons I don't think Apple has wanted to make a less expensive iPhone with more limited capabilities to compete with Android. If Android continues to increase their market share after Apple switches to Verizon, maybe they will.
It will be some time before Android is competitive? Really? I have been reading the comments and this has got to be the most delusional. If Android is not competitive, why the fantastic sales? If people cannot do similar things on Android based smartphones, why are they paying the same price for the hardware? Where did those 60,000 apps come from. I have been reading top 100 apps listings and Android seems to have great apps just like for Apple iOS.
Competition is here and its a threat to Apple. Wake up.
It will be some time before Android is competitive? Really? I have been reading the comments and this has got to be the most delusional. If Android is not competitive, why the fantastic sales? If people cannot do similar things on Android based smartphones, why are they paying the same price for the hardware? Where did those 60,000 apps come from. I have been reading top 100 apps listings and Android seems to have great apps just like for Apple iOS.
Competition is here and its a threat to Apple. Wake up.
Maybe you should read more then the first line of my post. Android's SDK is not competitive. Android will possibly never be competitive in Apps. I said nothing about the phone not being competitive.
It will be some time before Android is competitive? Really? I have been reading the comments and this has got to be the most delusional. If Android is not competitive, why the fantastic sales? If people cannot do similar things on Android based smartphones, why are they paying the same price for the hardware? Where did those 60,000 apps come from. I have been reading top 100 apps listings and Android seems to have great apps just like for Apple iOS.
Competition is here and its a threat to Apple. Wake up.
95% of apps on the android are useless, the other 5% are iPhone clones.
I have never seen an Android phone in the wild in the UK yet, everybody I meet has an iOS device.
This argument is full of android zealots. Nevertheless I want to correct some assumptions, and misleading facts.
1) Apple outgrew the market in the 2nd quarter, which will be it's weakest quarter this year. Androids "catchup" was confined to the US - where it went ahead, but the US figures played into the world figures. One quarter of catchup is not the same as an installed base.
2) The iPhone i4 and 3GS 8MB are selling like hotcakes. Apple clearly said in the 2Q conference call that their YoY run rate was an increase of 90% until they announced the iPhone 4. Even factoring in the 1.7 million sold in the last 3 days their final year on year increase was 60%. So sales dropped off a cliff for a month. Hard figures, not speculation. So people who were unaware of the iP4 until the announcement held off from then, and the people who were aware of it were holding off all year ( like me, for instance). This quarter I expect a sequential increase on 100% or more.
3) People who buy Android in the US wanted an iPhone like device but not AT&T. That will change next year.
4) Please include the iPod Touch ( and now the iPad) in all quarterly comparisons. That matters to developers. Every holiday quarter Apple sells about 20M iPods, otherwise 10M. About half are touches, this will probably increase this year. Conservatively expect 15M iPod touches to come out to December. All running 4.X. Developers rejoice.
5) Steve announced 230K new activations a day. That is iPhone or iPad 3g only, and excludes iPod touches. It runs to 7M a month or 21M a quarter. It includes iPad 3Gs but it does not include upgrades ( i.e. sales to old customers, which must be 50%). The maths is simple here, the iOS is pulling ahead of Android this quarter rather sharply. Sales could be 40M.
To those of you who think that this is a re-run of the Mac - Windows market please learn about some other markets. The PC market is anomalous in being a dual platform. The Mobile market was multi-platform before the iPhone, it was after the Android, and it will be post Windows 7 - which will also be licensed ( so why do the licensing will always win brigade ignore Windows 7?) . Windows 7 will attract that portion of the Apple hating Windows loving crowd who now go to Android. It will be Windows 10%, Android 20%, iOS ( all devices) 40-50%. Sold apps will be far higher on the App Store, and will attract more developers.
Lastly Apple dont care about profits. They dont give their shareholders any money. Unless the company is losing money they dont look at it. They could, after all, make money from an Apple branded Windows machine.
Steve is a founder CEO, which is quite a different beast from a MBA CEO. He wants to win. Look at the prices of iPods. They want that in the Phone market too.
For those of you who think it is about money, not market share, when has Steve every mentioned the Apple Stock. Has he ever crowed about becoming the biggest company in the US? he belittled the idea at D8.
No, he comes on an talks about sales, and market share, and apps, and numbers of downloads and so on.
They want to win the Phone OS war,because they believe their OS is better, and they will because the OS is better.
( Android lovers will probably come back on that one, but trust me as a developer, it is night and day. Android is vile, ugly, restrictive, iOS is desktop quality SDK, and to us the SDK is the OS).
Excellent post. This is worth quoting in entirety.
As a developer too, I agree with this. Beyond creating an app that could otherwise be a web page, Android does not offer developers much functionality. It was described as an API that Microsoft might come out with (i.e. uninspired) by the developer of FaceBook. It works, but there is nothing that feels next generation or forward thinking.
Why would Apple care if their share of mobile browsing was declining? It's not as if their advertising model depends on eyeball looking at internet ads (e.g. Google's ad model); Apple depends on in-application viewing.
So I really don't see how this matters.
Especially as iPhone is the app platform - most users minimise their use of web browsers in preference to specialized apps.
Later, as Apple kicks other advertising and analytic companies off the platform, these stats will dive even further, even if market share remains the same.
What do you base that on? It seems to be the premise you rely upon, but I don't see any support.
Got any facts to prop up that crucial contention?
Oh, the iPad is the ultimate content consumption device, didn't you know? Apparently it is no good for content creation or for the enterprise, or for salesmen, or for education, or for the medical or law sectors. Hey, all it IS good for is browsing, right?
Now, you seem to have one or two premises yourself. You seem to be arguing with just about everyone on here.
So, Apple is apparently not a software company but Apple and most of us here are supposed to give two hoots about the Android OS apparently catching up with iOS web market share (depending how you count it, such as by counting iphones only apparently), when a more natural comparison might be to compare it by comparable devices, individual smartphone models or even individual manufacturers, etc. I mean, suddenly there is a real contender of a "platform" here, despite the various involvements of the individual carriers, the individual handset makers and the widely varying form factors and hardware features; any mention of "fragmentation" is a nefarious myth created by Apple fanbois, and Apple doesn't really have a viable platform unless it by the most serendipitous of accidents, because who on earth would ever count ipods and ipads among iPhones? For a start, no-one has really anything to put up against the whole vertical integration and success of the app store and iTunes (despite the bloat), so it wouldn't be fair to others to include all the aspects of Apple's iOS platform; secondly, there may be something to the articles that suggest the only things that are being counted are those that include 3G connectivity because the carriers have a big vested interest in this and they require it for accessing Google's app stores. So much for the open, neutral Google. So much for the gains Apple made in reducing carrier power to dictate hardware. Oh well, let's not take into account any of these issues, because Apple is all about the hardware and profits. Google is so open, Apple is so closed and we can conveniently forget all the (truely) open standards that Apple pushes and all the barriers that it is trying to knock down, only for creepy shysters like Eric to put right back up again.
So, a big contention from iOS detractors, that gets a lot of attention, is how a lot of iOS Internet activity is not done through the "browser" at all, it is done through the thousands and thousands of apps that connect directly to the Internet themselves. Games, in app purchases, magazines, books, business databases, social networks, reference, etc., etc. This doesn't count for some reason, probably because Google says it doesn't count; Google can't track that use of the internet and that is just not fair! Google doesn't get a piece of this, therefore it is defined as Internet use, but not "browsing" the www. Oh no, the www is dying! Apple is destroying the www! Quick, write another sensational headline!
So, because Apple is versatile; because iOS actually scales and developers can do so many things with it; because people are actually finding all kinds of new uses for their iOS devices, most of which include constant internet connection; because they are making inroads into enterprise and education and business: the detractors all want to have their cake and eat it too. However, whichever way you cut the cake, and however the stats are manipulated or not, all the companies wish they could emulate Apple.
BTW, the comparison of Apple's market cap to MS is appropriate. For years, it was said that Apple was doing something wrong because they stayed so small and failed to emulate MS the king of tech companies, by doing such things as licensing the OS. MS was always the success story, the rock that all other companies absolutely relied on (despite costing them billions in lost productivity and time). Apple was so niche, apparently, that no-one cared if they folded, and Michael Dell famously said so. Furthermore, MS SHOULD be the larger-- the margins on sticking a piece of plastic in a box or sending a few serial numbers to another company are incredible. MS prints money, their revenue has been astronomical. Apprently it is not fair that Apple can enter so many new markets so successfully.
But hey, after MS crowing about OS marketshare for yonks, despite the fact that Apple is apparently not a software company, size suddenly no longer matters. Suddenly, size has nothing to do with being the people's choice (because afterall everyone used a PC because they chose to and they loved it!) Size is now all about how devious Apple is in locking us in and in going after profits! If this all wasn't so hypocritical, back to front and so completely farcical, it would be sad -- but it is hilarious!
Keep it up, and keep entertaining us every other post. I am sure you will get there in the end and find a way to have your cake and eat it too (not!).
Sent from my iPad.
The iPhone is at saturation. They need to open up to other carriers in order to have growth.
And whether you believe in it or not, the antennagate probably scared off many who might have thought about getting their first iPhone.
Probably, but Apple has some time before they actually have supply to sell these people something. The feature phone market is falling out as more people adopt smart phones. Apple really can't build them fast enough to satisfy the extra demand. These people need to go somewhere. My interests (and livelihood) revolve around Apple products, so I bought an iPhone 4. It took weeks to get here. If I wasn't such a geek, I may have just bought an Android phone instead of waiting.
I'm reluctant to comment on OSX because I am not a software developer. I have enough on my plate being a software user.
But...When Snow Leopard came out, it wasn't as much a leap forward as it was a foundation for things to come. So what happened?
All I hear from Apple is iOS, iOS. I have iOS coming out of my ears. There is no information or even interest really on what is next for real computers that get work done.
Seems to me that Apple has left the creative community behind in order to cater to teenagers who want to text and ping all day. Usually while walking or driving. Makes me sad.
You here a lot about iOS in the media because it's the next big thing. What do you hate about iOS? I do like the Mac OS, and it has a long way to go. But I want to see iOS evolve as well. The Mac is not going to go out of production anytime soon.
In the computer market as a whole, Macs are not important.
In the niche markets you identify, the Mac sells well.
Do you know what your saying? Seriously? These are not unimportant markets. Science, Eduction and the Media are very IMPORTANT parts of our lives. A lot of these things are done using Apple, and find these platform's VITAL. Just because you don't see a lot of things doesn't make it less important.
I do also think Android will lose some traction as people see what a dodgy piece of software it is.
> Originally Posted by krabbelen
> The amount of browsing that those few iPads are doing is not insignificant.
Facts: In a recent overview by NetMarketshare.com the iPad already has 0.27 % of the total browsing (worldwide), as opposed to the best-scoring Android version, 2.1, at 0.09 %. If you add Android 1.6 and 2.2, the combined result is 0.17 % - lower that the iPad alone.
The numbers are here.
I would call a quarter of one percent "insignificant". We can disagree on this one.
Android is everywhere!
IOS devices are not.
I don't really know where you get your ideas or even what they are. Sorry.
It will be some time before Android is really competitive. Apple's developer SDKs and tools are much better then Googles. Apple has a significant advantage when it comes to mobile app development. It is difficult to write anything beyond simple apps that wrap around a web page (like Facebook) or OpenGL based games on an Android device.
Then how do explain the fact that Android is growing so much faster than iOS?
1. iPhone supply is barely meeting demand. Sure, the US market has reached saturation, but why expand carrier selection if you can't provide the extra supply? Sure, two new plants are going up, one for a GSM iPhone (which won't be ready until 2011) and another for a CDMA iPhone (should be ready late this year). But until then, US saturation is moot. Android can have its day.
2. Notice that Google is fragmenting their tablet OS business already. So now developers will have to develop tablet-based apps for two different Google OSes (Chrome and Android). This reminds me of web developers developing for IE6, IE7, IE8 ... then everyone else. Why waste that time if you're a mobile OS developer, especially if iPad eventually becomes available on most or all cell carriers?
Also: What if Oracle's lawsuit destroys Android? Well, that means developers will have to move all their tablet apps to Chrome, and those who got an Android tablet will have to buy a Chrome tablet -- or an iPad. And what about the smartphone market? Unless Chrome is ported to smartphones, then Google has to start from scratch in smartphones.
And look at it from a business perspective. Businesses in general don't like uncertainty of the future. They also like mass vertical integration of technology, as it makes operations less unwieldy. So let's say that businesses want to deploy tablets in the field. If they go Google, Android is the choice over Chrome, because of Android's vertical integration between smartphones and tablets. And if Oracle's lawsuit destroys Android, then businesses will have to make an expensive transition to another platform. Perhaps Oracle's lawsuit is meritless, but there is that uncertainty. With all this general uncertainty in Google's camp, both related to the Oracle lawsuit and not related to it, I don't see how smart businesses go Android or Chrome for smartphone or tablet.
3. This means that WebOS and BlackPad will be the iPad alternatives, especially for enterprises. With all the momentum in personal apps already going to iPad, I don't see how other tablet platforms go mainstream outside of enterprises.
4. The dark horse in all of this is Windows Phone 7. From a consumer perspective, it doesn't look all that good (no multitasking, no cut/copy/paste, crummy web browser). But Apple, RIM, and Google should take a good long look at WinPhone7's impressive enterprise tools (including deep Office support), because if they don't respond fast, Microsoft could easily become the gold standard mobile OS in the enterprise market.
5. BlackPad may be the one thing that saves RIM against Microsoft in the enterprise world. Remember, any company who wants to implement tablets is best served by having their cellphone OS be the same OS as their tablet OS. So far, Microsoft hasn't been sold on developing a tablet version of WinPhone7, as Apple, HP, RIM, and Google all have their own vertical integration tablet/phone solutions either here, or coming. Businesses currently on BlackBerry could just bolt on BlackPad support very easily, and be done.
Anyway, what developer is going to back THAT horse, an entire user base looking for free everything?
There's plenty of facts out there if you care to look. No need for conjecture.
"Android App Growth on the Rise: 9000+ New Apps in March Alone
According to recent statistics from AndroidLib.com, the Android Marketplace saw 9,331 new mobile applications added to its app store during the month of March, 2010. This number is even more phenomenal when you look at the Android Marketplace's historical growth. In December of last year, for example, there were 3,807 new applications added to the Android app store. By January, 4,458 more were added. In February, 5,532 arrived. And now, 9,331.
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives...march_2010.php
Macs have the largest marketshare in terms of profits
Say what?
Shouldn't android be passed ios by now? I mean I think it's sad that they aren't.
Why is that sad?
Lastly Apple dont care about profits. They dont give their shareholders any money. Unless the company is losing money they dont look at it.
Your ignorance is surpassed only by your self-confidence.
You know little or nothing about business if you think that the above is accurate.
> Originally Posted by krabbelen
> The amount of browsing that those few iPads are doing is not insignificant.
Facts: In a recent overview by NetMarketshare.com the iPad already has 0.27 % of the total browsing (worldwide), as opposed to the best-scoring Android version, 2.1, at 0.09 %. If you add Android 1.6 and 2.2, the combined result is 0.17 % - lower that the iPad alone.
The numbers are here.
That actually means lots of android devices are not used to browse the web.