I don't know about the breakdowns but I know for sure that Google definitely has high profit margins, significantly higher than those of the Android manufacturers. This is to be expected. It's similar to what's happening in the PC ecosystem. Microsoft has the high profit margins but the manufacturers have no more than a razor-thin margin. By using Windows, manufacturers are robbed of the ability to innovate and differentiate their products. Pretty much the only avenue for product differentiation is on price. That's why PCs are so much cheaper than Macs. There are so many devices out there that aren't that much different. PCs have been been reduced to almost a commodity. Neither Microsoft nor the manufacturers can establish a brand.
The margins for Samsung and other Android manufacturers are not even in double digits, and some are in the negatives. Carriers are handing out Android phones like candy. However, at least with Android, since it's open-source, manufacturers actually have some avenues to differentiate their products, but still, the main point is price. The results is that Google has the high margins while the manufactures are relegated to Foxconn clones, making no more than broken pennies on the dollar.
Google's profit from this are a rounding error in its financials.
If/when it gets reported as a business segment, we'll see. Until then, their claims are worth squat.
With all these problems, it is very surprising that Android is so much more popular than iOS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tjw
Of course it is not. Android offers CHOICE, iOS does not. Fragmentation is overblown by the apple press. As just posted, a skin or UI overlay is not fragmentation.
With all these problems, it is very surprising that Android is so much more popular than iOS.
Actually, it's not that surprising. There will always be popularity in things that are cheap and free. And no shortage of suckers willing to suffer with an inferior product and/or experience. Only thing is, now this suffering is called "enjoying openness, freedom and choice" (by joining the Android sheep, ironically).
iOS also has some fragmentation, just not as bad as Android. 3 screen resolutions, 4 generations of processing power on the iPhone, a few on iPod Touches and of course 1 generation of iPads. Different memory sizes.
Again, not nearly as bad, but there is something.
Did you fall and bump your head? Or are you just stupid? The subject of the story is fragmentation of the Android OS! What you describe is NOT fragmentation of the iOS, just that there a a FEW different devices, but iOS remains the same across ALL devices with the exception of the iPad but even that is going to go away very soon. Then ALL iOS devices will run the same OS with the exception of the older devices. Android on the other hand, you can get two new phones from different providers and chances are they won't be running the same OS.
I wonder why there aren't many 500+ or above downloads of paid titles.
Source (Check the graph titled "Distribution of free and paid apps in Android Market")
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster
Android users don't actually buy apps!? What are all those PAID APPS doing in the market place then? And seeing as how I've bought PLENTY of apps in the few months I've had this phone, I can't take that statement seriously. Buying apps is so easy and they're so cheap, it seems like an even bigger hassle to try and pirate them! KIDS might pirate them, but people with jobs have no reason to.
Another lame story from Daniel that sounds more like Apple propaganda than having any useful content.
Failed to mention the Tweetdeck developer that Jobs referenced as having trouble dealing with the alleged fragmentation. The developer stated that is was NOT a problem, that Jobs was incorrect.
Curious that Daniels lengthy article failed to mention that...
The issue is that google is allowing the fragmentation to happen instead of laying their hand down and saying "here are the standards you have to meet" and then leaving it at that. That's what they should be doing. By doing this although it might still look like there is lots of choices and stuff, it all works together. Heck, when there is an update you should be able to get it and not have the phone makers dealy it so that their crummy interfaces have to follow suit. Google should have said "go on and make the interace but you have to meet these X requirements so that we can update the phones when we feel like and we won't break your UI or other stuff.
"Forgetting Android" is that like "forgetting" that iPads, iPod Touch's and Apple TV's are all iOS devices and as such should also be included with iPhones in the sales figures...
...but that would mean that Android is not "winning" yet, would it not?
The convenience of the "forgotten".
Quote:
Originally Posted by tjw
Platform that matters? Perhaps they are investing time and effort into it because android, by the end of next year, will be much more dominant that iOS. Forgetting android would be like trying to be a leader in computer software and only developing for the mac.... Even if android is more fragmented mobile developers will have to consider it if they want to reach the most people
Another lame story from Daniel that sounds more like Apple propaganda than having any useful content.
Failed to mention the Tweetdeck developer that Jobs referenced as having trouble dealing with the alleged fragmentation. The developer stated that is was NOT a problem, that Jobs was incorrect.
Curious that Daniels lengthy article failed to mention that...
Why are there so many people who despise Apple and it's products parking their carcasses on AI? Are they paid to do so? What do they gain from the constant sniping? They have an automatic gag-reflex with anything pro-Apple or anti-other. I can't understand why they are here except to annoy people, seriously can't you go elsewhere? If you cannot coherently and logically argue your case, I would prefer not to read your posts. Although there is some comedy relief in these ridiculous posts.
Of course it is not. Android offers CHOICE, iOS does not. Fragmentation is overblown by the apple press. As just posted, a skin or UI overlay is not fragmentation.
iOS offers you the choice between a great phone at three capacities and (soon) two colors, a non-phone device that can run all the same apps without a GPS, also at three capacities including 64GB, the top-rated and top-selling tablet in the world at three capacities, with or without built-in 3G connectivity. Ignoring the white iPhone, that's TWELVE different devices in three form-factors you can choose from.
Android gives you the choice of one or two pretty good handsets, a few dozen mediocre handsets, about 50 crap handsets, and about ten crap tablets, all at different resolutions and with different processors, none of which have higher app RAM than any of the iOS devices, none of which have a significantly faster processor than the iOS devices, and none of which have a higher flash RAM capacity at a similar price than the better iOS devices.
Some choice.
GM offers far more models of car than Porsche does. I guess that means GM is a better car because you have more choice.
Actually, it's not that surprising. There will always be popularity in things that are cheap and free. And no shortage of suckers willing to suffer with an inferior product and/or experience. Only thing is, now this suffering is called "enjoying openness, freedom and choice" (by joining the Android sheep, ironically).
Dropping to his level == no points for either of you.
You're clearly not very intelligent, and even after I've explained why they call it an open OS, you continue to post this abortion of thought.
you don't need to be a rocket scientist to know that when your device needs "rooting" in order to gain access to certain feature it's called NOT OPEN (aka locked down).
I am not sure how many ways are you trying to spin this, but face the facts already.
There is not one single android phone out there that is not LOCKED DOWN. Even google's own Nexus one is LOCKED DOWN.
With all these problems, it is very surprising that Android is so much more popular than iOS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tjw
Of course it is not. Android offers CHOICE, iOS does not. Fragmentation is overblown by the apple press. As just posted, a skin or UI overlay is not fragmentation.
Android shills conversation recorded.
That's just plain silly. Why would Google pay people that make Android owners look like a bunch of annoying wankers?
If you insist they are shills then they belong to Apple, not Google.
Why are there so many people who despise Apple and it's products parking their carcasses on AI? Are they paid to do so? What do they gain from the constant sniping?
I know, right? I can understand people who like cars talking with other people who like cars, or people who like guns talking with other people who like guns. Or people who like Apple talking with other such people. But to go to such a place for a product you don't like is just sad. Go find something you do like, and stop ruining other people's fun.
With all these problems, it is very surprising that Android is so much more popular than iOS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tjw
Of course it is not. Android offers CHOICE, iOS does not. Fragmentation is overblown by the apple press. As just posted, a skin or UI overlay is not fragmentation.
It's not really that surprising to me, Bill. More devices, more people will buy them. Also, it might be relevant to note that phone subsidies are such that while some people will pay for "better" hardware, I don't think most are evaluating software performance at the time of their subsidized hardware purchases. Very few consumers (overall) know the hardware specs like tech geeks on forums might. What may need to happen for the Android marketplace to succeed is to give even more hardware spec transparency to the end user to make these decisions. And then the software devs will need to set minimum hardware/software requirements to run ... just like the PC industry already is today.
Android OS offers choice, it is certainly true, but this is the consequence of having that choice. I'm pretty moderate in terms of these kinds of brand loyalties, but I think fragmentation is a serious issue for Android. It's one reason why I am happy to stay away from for now.
For Google to truly follow the MS model, they would have to license the OS. This would give them more say in the interface design, which would influence the hardware design. MS did this with their vendors for every version of Windows. Sure, vendors loaded their shovelware on top, but the Windows desktop and design was consistent. That isn't happening in the Android market right now. IMHO, the Nexus and possibly the G1/G2 phones are the only "real" and "true" Android experience because they keep the basic Android interface on good hardware. I am an iPhone user myself, but I come from the Blackberry side of things, where there is also only one interface. Consistency will win out with users and developers in the long run. The "tinkerers" will always find another outlet (Linux, Android, et al)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber
And it's only going to get worse as more and more device makers come out with more and more "differentiated" hardware and proprietary software layers, and Google puts more and more versions of Android out there. Eventually Google may have to "close" the platform and actually sell licenses to Android in order to head off a growing chorus of user complaints over all the incompatibilities. This is the downside to Google using the Microsoft model for platform dominance. It worked for MS because they had a head start in a new market. But with Apple already having established the market and imbued it with its high level of reliability, simplicity and quality, it means the Droid has to fight an uphill battle. Droid may have pulled even in numbers, but the more numbers, the bigger the problems.
Comments
I don't know about the breakdowns but I know for sure that Google definitely has high profit margins, significantly higher than those of the Android manufacturers. This is to be expected. It's similar to what's happening in the PC ecosystem. Microsoft has the high profit margins but the manufacturers have no more than a razor-thin margin. By using Windows, manufacturers are robbed of the ability to innovate and differentiate their products. Pretty much the only avenue for product differentiation is on price. That's why PCs are so much cheaper than Macs. There are so many devices out there that aren't that much different. PCs have been been reduced to almost a commodity. Neither Microsoft nor the manufacturers can establish a brand.
The margins for Samsung and other Android manufacturers are not even in double digits, and some are in the negatives. Carriers are handing out Android phones like candy. However, at least with Android, since it's open-source, manufacturers actually have some avenues to differentiate their products, but still, the main point is price. The results is that Google has the high margins while the manufactures are relegated to Foxconn clones, making no more than broken pennies on the dollar.
Google's profit from this are a rounding error in its financials.
If/when it gets reported as a business segment, we'll see. Until then, their claims are worth squat.
With all these problems, it is very surprising that Android is so much more popular than iOS.
Of course it is not. Android offers CHOICE, iOS does not. Fragmentation is overblown by the apple press. As just posted, a skin or UI overlay is not fragmentation.
Android shills conversation recorded.
With all these problems, it is very surprising that Android is so much more popular than iOS.
Actually, it's not that surprising. There will always be popularity in things that are cheap and free. And no shortage of suckers willing to suffer with an inferior product and/or experience. Only thing is, now this suffering is called "enjoying openness, freedom and choice" (by joining the Android sheep, ironically).
iOS also has some fragmentation, just not as bad as Android. 3 screen resolutions, 4 generations of processing power on the iPhone, a few on iPod Touches and of course 1 generation of iPads. Different memory sizes.
Again, not nearly as bad, but there is something.
Did you fall and bump your head? Or are you just stupid?
Source (Check the graph titled "Distribution of free and paid apps in Android Market")
Android users don't actually buy apps!? What are all those PAID APPS doing in the market place then? And seeing as how I've bought PLENTY of apps in the few months I've had this phone, I can't take that statement seriously. Buying apps is so easy and they're so cheap, it seems like an even bigger hassle to try and pirate them! KIDS might pirate them, but people with jobs have no reason to.
Failed to mention the Tweetdeck developer that Jobs referenced as having trouble dealing with the alleged fragmentation. The developer stated that is was NOT a problem, that Jobs was incorrect.
Curious that Daniels lengthy article failed to mention that...
http://www.businessinsider.com/tweet...e-jobs-2010-10
...but that would mean that Android is not "winning" yet, would it not?
The convenience of the "forgotten".
Platform that matters? Perhaps they are investing time and effort into it because android, by the end of next year, will be much more dominant that iOS. Forgetting android would be like trying to be a leader in computer software and only developing for the mac.... Even if android is more fragmented mobile developers will have to consider it if they want to reach the most people
Another lame story from Daniel that sounds more like Apple propaganda than having any useful content.
Failed to mention the Tweetdeck developer that Jobs referenced as having trouble dealing with the alleged fragmentation. The developer stated that is was NOT a problem, that Jobs was incorrect.
Curious that Daniels lengthy article failed to mention that...
http://www.businessinsider.com/tweet...e-jobs-2010-10
Lame story from Daniel? Which part of "Rovio just said it, check their blog" you didn't get??
Of course it is not. Android offers CHOICE, iOS does not. Fragmentation is overblown by the apple press. As just posted, a skin or UI overlay is not fragmentation.
iOS offers you the choice between a great phone at three capacities and (soon) two colors, a non-phone device that can run all the same apps without a GPS, also at three capacities including 64GB, the top-rated and top-selling tablet in the world at three capacities, with or without built-in 3G connectivity. Ignoring the white iPhone, that's TWELVE different devices in three form-factors you can choose from.
Android gives you the choice of one or two pretty good handsets, a few dozen mediocre handsets, about 50 crap handsets, and about ten crap tablets, all at different resolutions and with different processors, none of which have higher app RAM than any of the iOS devices, none of which have a significantly faster processor than the iOS devices, and none of which have a higher flash RAM capacity at a similar price than the better iOS devices.
Some choice.
GM offers far more models of car than Porsche does. I guess that means GM is a better car because you have more choice.
I wonder why there aren't many 500+ or above downloads of paid titles.
Source (Check the graph titled "Distribution of free and paid apps in Android Market")
That's actually really interesting but it's hard to draw a conclusion without the corresponding graph of the App Store.
Does Apple even release those kind of stats?
Actually, it's not that surprising. There will always be popularity in things that are cheap and free. And no shortage of suckers willing to suffer with an inferior product and/or experience. Only thing is, now this suffering is called "enjoying openness, freedom and choice" (by joining the Android sheep, ironically).
Dropping to his level == no points for either of you.
You're clearly not very intelligent, and even after I've explained why they call it an open OS, you continue to post this abortion of thought.
you don't need to be a rocket scientist to know that when your device needs "rooting" in order to gain access to certain feature it's called NOT OPEN (aka locked down).
I am not sure how many ways are you trying to spin this, but face the facts already.
There is not one single android phone out there that is not LOCKED DOWN. Even google's own Nexus one is LOCKED DOWN.
GM offers far more models of car than Porsche does. I guess that means GM is a better car because you have more choice.
It does in my case!
Not the best analogy perhaps.
With all these problems, it is very surprising that Android is so much more popular than iOS.
Of course it is not. Android offers CHOICE, iOS does not. Fragmentation is overblown by the apple press. As just posted, a skin or UI overlay is not fragmentation.
Android shills conversation recorded.
That's just plain silly. Why would Google pay people that make Android owners look like a bunch of annoying wankers?
If you insist they are shills then they belong to Apple, not Google.
Why are there so many people who despise Apple and it's products parking their carcasses on AI? Are they paid to do so? What do they gain from the constant sniping?
I know, right? I can understand people who like cars talking with other people who like cars, or people who like guns talking with other people who like guns. Or people who like Apple talking with other such people. But to go to such a place for a product you don't like is just sad. Go find something you do like, and stop ruining other people's fun.
With all these problems, it is very surprising that Android is so much more popular than iOS.
Of course it is not. Android offers CHOICE, iOS does not. Fragmentation is overblown by the apple press. As just posted, a skin or UI overlay is not fragmentation.
It's not really that surprising to me, Bill. More devices, more people will buy them. Also, it might be relevant to note that phone subsidies are such that while some people will pay for "better" hardware, I don't think most are evaluating software performance at the time of their subsidized hardware purchases. Very few consumers (overall) know the hardware specs like tech geeks on forums might. What may need to happen for the Android marketplace to succeed is to give even more hardware spec transparency to the end user to make these decisions. And then the software devs will need to set minimum hardware/software requirements to run ... just like the PC industry already is today.
Android OS offers choice, it is certainly true, but this is the consequence of having that choice. I'm pretty moderate in terms of these kinds of brand loyalties, but I think fragmentation is a serious issue for Android. It's one reason why I am happy to stay away from for now.
And it's only going to get worse as more and more device makers come out with more and more "differentiated" hardware and proprietary software layers, and Google puts more and more versions of Android out there. Eventually Google may have to "close" the platform and actually sell licenses to Android in order to head off a growing chorus of user complaints over all the incompatibilities. This is the downside to Google using the Microsoft model for platform dominance. It worked for MS because they had a head start in a new market. But with Apple already having established the market and imbued it with its high level of reliability, simplicity and quality, it means the Droid has to fight an uphill battle. Droid may have pulled even in numbers, but the more numbers, the bigger the problems.