My 4 inch screen is a copy? My dual core processor with hdmi out is a copy? My 1080p video recording is a copy?
Wut?
A HTC Cha Cha* crashing the browser EVERY time I tried loading THIS page, then opening the browser went back to a single Google page, all of the open pages were gone.
A HTC Cha Cha* crashing the browser EVERY time I tried loading THIS page, then opening the browser went back to a single Google page, all of the open pages were gone.
*Got given one yesterday, switched from my iPhone for a few hours until I couldn't stand it any more.
Don't you sell these things? Try a Samsung SII and see if you have the same experience. Just curious. I haven't seen one in person yet and IIRC you said you had sold several of them.
Don't you sell these things? Try a Samsung SII and see if you have the same experience. Just curious. I haven't seen one in person yet and IIRC you said you had sold several of them.
The Galaxy S 2 looks just like an iPhone 4 in the marketing material, long experience with Samsung products has shown me that they don't tend to last too long, but never fear Samsung is ready to sell you a newer model.
The Galaxy S 2 looks just like an iPhone 4 in the marketing material, long experience with Samsung products has shown me that they don't tend to last too long, but never fear Samsung is ready to sell you a newer model.
Yes, but you said you actually had them for sale IIRC.
No one cares about the marketing material other than Apple do they? I'm curious if your hands-on with the Galaxy II is similar to the Cha-Cha (never seen or heard of that one)
[QUOTE=MacRulez;1947573]There may be other reasons why the stats collected at NetMarketShare and StatCounter demonstrate such a broad disparity with sales and activation rates.
This Nielsen study shows a very different picture of usage rates, contrasting with NMS and SC but more consistent with most other metrics we can find:
Yes, but you said you actually had them for sale IIRC.
No one cares about the marketing material other than Apple do they? I'm curious if your hands-on with the Galaxy II is similar to the Cha-Cha (never seen or heard of that one)
The experience of the screen not responding as it should e.g. menu items opening when the screen should be swiping across to a new one or the unlock screen not swiping properly, is exactly the same.
It seems to be an inherent problem with every Android device I've tried, from the HTC Magic to the EVO 3D, with Legends, X10's, X10 Mini Pro's, Ideos, Optimus, Optimus Black, Nexus S, Galaxy S, INQ Cloud Touch, Motorola Flipout, Motorola Milestone 2, Salsa and Cha Cha in between.
Not one of them has the smooth fluidity of iOS and the ability to read from a touch the intention of what a user is wanting to do based on the way the touch is instigated, they ALL get it wrong at one time or another, leaving the frustrating experience of having to close a program and navigate back to the start or just plain not doing what they are supposed to.
The constant stream of "hang on", "sorry about that", "almost got it" coming from the mouth of anyone trying to show something on an Android handset is blindingly obvious.
I'll sell you whatever you want to buy, a white Nexus S with a black front that's almost like an iPhone 3G/S or a white Galaxy S 2 with a white front thats almost like an iPhone 4.
The experience of the screen not responding as it should e.g. menu items opening when the screen should be swiping across to a new one or the unlock screen not swiping properly, is exactly the same.
It seems to be an inherent problem with every Android device I've tried, from the HTC Magic to the EVO 3D, with Legends, X10's, X10 Mini Pro's, Ideos, Optimus, Optimus Black, Nexus S, Galaxy S, INQ Cloud Touch, Motorola Flipout, Motorola Milestone 2, Salsa and Cha Cha in between.
Not one of them has the smooth fluidity of iOS and the ability to read from a touch the intention of what a user is wanting to do based on the way the touch is instigated, they ALL get it wrong at one time or another, leaving the frustrating experience of having to close a program and navigate back to the start or just plain not doing what they are supposed to.
The constant stream of "hang on", "sorry about that", "almost got it" coming from the mouth of anyone trying to show something on an Android handset is blindingly obvious.
Thanks for your opinion. So the unlock screen issue you mention doesn't appear to be a phone problem as much as some sort of response delay with that particular Android function?
Thanks for your opinion. So the unlock screen issue you mention doesn't appear to be a phone problem as much as some sort of response delay with that particular Android function?
My 4 inch screen is a copy? My dual core processor with hdmi out is a copy? My 1080p video recording is a copy?
Wut?
LOL. Translation: "That big throbbing bulge in my pants is my Android phone. Touch it...you know you want to. It's got the 1080peeeez. Oh, you don't gotz the 1080peeeez? You got the lil iphooone? I'm betta than yous, bitch."
Flaunting handset spec sheets on the Internets: boosting low self-esteems since 2008
That has as much credibility to me as this website.
If you're unfamiliar with these whores, I'll give you a little backstory. These are the guys who claimed they had seen a completely redesigned Mac Pro before the Nehalem line was released.
Black metal, entirely new case, new internals (larger, more SATA, PCIe, and 12 RAM slots), and all new ports on the outside. Huge article about how they had seen one.
And then the second it was released, they took all that out of the article (which was months old by that time) except for one paragraph stating that they had seen one before launch and it matched what Apple released exactly.
Also, their pages refreshed every 30 seconds automatically for more ad views.
Don't get me wrong: I have nothing against TechCrunch at all. But when someone claims to have seen something before release, writes about it, and doesn't bother to post any spy shots, I immediately have a PTSD-style flashback to MacOSRumors' article and instantly ignore anything they say.
Wow. Didn't even know MOSR was still around. Is it still run by Ryan Meader?
I may have to start adding this line to my description of televisions. Even when I'm in stores showing my family various televisions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001
Wow. Didn't even know MOSR was still around. Is it still run by Ryan Meader?
Don't know. I really don't want to give them any more page views than those required to perform a certain job (that job being checking my URL when I first typed it to make sure it was right). \
Price point is the key! If the Amazon tablet is cheap they will fly off the shelves! Not sure the OS will make a difference to the average consumer, I still think if they cost the same as the iPad then they will still purchase an iPad!
This.
The biggest selling factor of Android devices is price. If everything had the same price I have no doubt that Apple would be dominating the phone market similar to how it is dominating the tablet market. If Apple can keep the iPod relatively the same price as their competition Android tablets will never really catch on.
LOL. Translation: "That big throbbing bulge in my pants is my Android phone. Touch it...you know you want to. It's got the 1080peeeez. Oh, you don't gotz the 1080peeeez? You got the lil iphooone? I'm betta than yous, bitch."
Flaunting handset spec sheets on the Internets: boosting low self-esteems since 2008
Interestingly enough, the SGS II is thinner than the iPhone.
Using outdated stereotypes: How to argue against your competition since 2009
That being said, "it's got the 1080peeeez." might be the single greatest thing I've read all day.
There may be other reasons why the stats collected at NetMarketShare and StatCounter demonstrate such a broad disparity with sales and activation rates.
This Nielsen study shows a very different picture of usage rates, contrasting with NMS and SC but more consistent with most other metrics we can find:
What do you think is the reason for the differences between Nielsen's data and NMS's? How do their methodologies differ?
One suggestion has been that perhaps Android users are running apps more than the browser. I don't know if that's the case and I haven't seen any studies on that (though it would be interesting to learn of any if you know of them), but it would account for the numbers from those companies that count only browser user-agents. Looking at my own usage patterns, I see that most of my HTTP traffic is from apps, using the browser only when there's no app available.
Another factor may be that perhaps Android users visit the same domains more frequently than iOS users, who might be visiting a wider variety of sites. I'm not asserting this is the case, I simply don't know, but at the NMS site they explain that they only count a given visitor once per day, and I tend to visit a relatively small number of sites frequently throughout the day, often revisiting sites more often than I go to a new one.
Anything else that might account for these differences?
Good point - I do not know the methodologies of the reporting sources. I did take a look at the Nielsen blog and the usage was derived from billing data from OS. If we take what Horace has on his side, the increased usage may be due, in part, to that ad data difference he shares. I lean towards that as a possible source for 2 reasons. One, ad data would be a prevalent download hit to any phone access. And two - the reason Google did Android was not an altruistic endeavor - they want ad time and many new users to an Android experience may be the source of that usage. I will freely admit that I only used Android for a week or so on a Pandigital e-reader that was jailbroke to a Froyo OS. I did not see many ads, but there were some on my internet access, and of course I had no phone access in that manner - WiFi only. Not a statistically fair sample, but there we have it.
I still think that the idea of producer of electronics that is only waiting for the next version of a free OS, to be able to smack down the iPad is ludicrous on its face. Glad for the conversation !
Similar things were said about Android phones. Now they outsell iOS phones.
Time will tell. Nobody knows the future.
It is well worth remembering that similar things were said about Apple's dominance with the iPod. The position would crumble under the onslaught and Apple would be no more than a niche player. Last I read the iPod was about 70% of the market. Phones are mainly sold through carrier stores (Verizon, AT&T, Sprint and similarly in foreign markets with their carriers). That is easily a huge factor in why so many Android phones have been sold.
The point of this digression is that the pad market is more like the iPod market rather than the iPhone market. The cellphone carriers will play a much smaller role. On the other hand Apple and the iPad have a much improved position relative to the iPod when it debuted in 2001. Today Apple has an impressive and rapidly growing network of wildly successful Apple Stores that makes the retail channel much less problematic.
It is hard to see how Apple would lose its dominance in the pad market unless there is a major blunder
I think to compete with the iPad Corporations ought to market ultralight laptops as like having an iPad Pro, great battery life, portability and a keyboard. Surly the Macbook Air is a iPad Pro as well
- Device-based metrics (defined as "Smartphone market", "Tablet market", etc.)
The discussion here (and elsewhere) seems to bounce across these divides pretty liberally, mostly involving comparing an OS-based metric to a hardware/device-based metric. Which in my view is somewhat disingenuous...
With iOS these differentiators do blur somewhat. Also with Android, but IMO to a lesser degree. Simply because different versions of the Android OS are needed to support the different Android device types (while one version of iOS runs across all iOS-based devices).
So, let's take the first part: Individual Smartphone metrics.
The iPhone is clearly dominant. WIth the possible exception of one Samsung model in one market (its country of origin, South Korea), iPhones outsell all other individual handset models by a huge margin.
Next, OS-based metrics: If we're measuring overall Android OS adoption (as compared to iOS adoption), we must use aggregate numbers. If we're going to use aggregate numbers for one (e.g., the sum of all different models of individual handsets/devices running Android OS), then all devices running iOS must also be taken into account.
If you sum all Android-based handsets and tablets, and compare it to a sum of iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad devices (iOS-based), then iOS again clearly dominates.
Device-based metrics:
"Smartphone-only" metrics: This is the only measure where Android-based devices may appear dominant. It's true that if you take the aggregate sum of all "Android-based mobile phones", and compare that to number of iPhones, Android (an OS platform) will command a larger number than iPhone (a hardware platform). But again, you see, we must compare an OS-based metric to a device-based metric?
Summary:
- Total Individual Model metric: iPhone clearly dominant
- Total OS-based metric: iOS clearly dominant
- Aggregate number of mobile phone handsets running a single OS: Android leads.
Nevertheless, Apple dominates in profit (a >50% share of all mobile phone profit), and is now the world's most valuable company by a large margin. So, even if the total aggregate number of mobile phones is dominated by Android-based handsets, does it really make it a stronger, more dominant market?
Comments
Can't tell if trolling or just stupid
Android SOFTWARE has a larger market share than iOS, but only in Smartphones.
On that we agree. Where we disagree is that I don't know if the same phenomenon will happen in the tablet market.
My 4 inch screen is a copy? My dual core processor with hdmi out is a copy? My 1080p video recording is a copy?
Wut?
A HTC Cha Cha* crashing the browser EVERY time I tried loading THIS page, then opening the browser went back to a single Google page, all of the open pages were gone.
Cheap Android junk, LOLWUT!
*Got given one yesterday, switched from my iPhone for a few hours until I couldn't stand it any more.
A HTC Cha Cha* crashing the browser EVERY time I tried loading THIS page, then opening the browser went back to a single Google page, all of the open pages were gone.
Cheap Android junk, LOLWUT!
*Got given one yesterday, switched from my iPhone for a few hours until I couldn't stand it any more.
Don't you sell these things? Try a Samsung SII and see if you have the same experience. Just curious. I haven't seen one in person yet and IIRC you said you had sold several of them.
Don't you sell these things? Try a Samsung SII and see if you have the same experience. Just curious. I haven't seen one in person yet and IIRC you said you had sold several of them.
The Galaxy S 2 looks just like an iPhone 4 in the marketing material, long experience with Samsung products has shown me that they don't tend to last too long, but never fear Samsung is ready to sell you a newer model.
The Galaxy S 2 looks just like an iPhone 4 in the marketing material, long experience with Samsung products has shown me that they don't tend to last too long, but never fear Samsung is ready to sell you a newer model.
Yes, but you said you actually had them for sale IIRC.
No one cares about the marketing material other than Apple do they? I'm curious if your hands-on with the Galaxy II is similar to the Cha-Cha (never seen or heard of that one)
This Nielsen study shows a very different picture of usage rates, contrasting with NMS and SC but more consistent with most other metrics we can find:
http://www.androidpolice.com/2011/06...ns-make-sense/
What do you think is the reason for the differences between Nielsen's data and NMS's? How do their methodologies differ?
Ads
Yes, but you said you actually had them for sale IIRC.
No one cares about the marketing material other than Apple do they? I'm curious if your hands-on with the Galaxy II is similar to the Cha-Cha (never seen or heard of that one)
The experience of the screen not responding as it should e.g. menu items opening when the screen should be swiping across to a new one or the unlock screen not swiping properly, is exactly the same.
It seems to be an inherent problem with every Android device I've tried, from the HTC Magic to the EVO 3D, with Legends, X10's, X10 Mini Pro's, Ideos, Optimus, Optimus Black, Nexus S, Galaxy S, INQ Cloud Touch, Motorola Flipout, Motorola Milestone 2, Salsa and Cha Cha in between.
Not one of them has the smooth fluidity of iOS and the ability to read from a touch the intention of what a user is wanting to do based on the way the touch is instigated, they ALL get it wrong at one time or another, leaving the frustrating experience of having to close a program and navigate back to the start or just plain not doing what they are supposed to.
The constant stream of "hang on", "sorry about that", "almost got it" coming from the mouth of anyone trying to show something on an Android handset is blindingly obvious.
I'll sell you whatever you want to buy, a white Nexus S with a black front that's almost like an iPhone 3G/S or a white Galaxy S 2 with a white front thats almost like an iPhone 4.
The experience of the screen not responding as it should e.g. menu items opening when the screen should be swiping across to a new one or the unlock screen not swiping properly, is exactly the same.
It seems to be an inherent problem with every Android device I've tried, from the HTC Magic to the EVO 3D, with Legends, X10's, X10 Mini Pro's, Ideos, Optimus, Optimus Black, Nexus S, Galaxy S, INQ Cloud Touch, Motorola Flipout, Motorola Milestone 2, Salsa and Cha Cha in between.
Not one of them has the smooth fluidity of iOS and the ability to read from a touch the intention of what a user is wanting to do based on the way the touch is instigated, they ALL get it wrong at one time or another, leaving the frustrating experience of having to close a program and navigate back to the start or just plain not doing what they are supposed to.
The constant stream of "hang on", "sorry about that", "almost got it" coming from the mouth of anyone trying to show something on an Android handset is blindingly obvious.
Thanks for your opinion. So the unlock screen issue you mention doesn't appear to be a phone problem as much as some sort of response delay with that particular Android function?
Beyond the iPad and among other tablets, the 10-inch form factor has still performed 7-inch devices...
Maybe my mind is in the gutter, but I'd be disappointed if a 10-inch performed like a 7-inch.
Thanks for your opinion. So the unlock screen issue you mention doesn't appear to be a phone problem as much as some sort of response delay with that particular Android function?
It seems to be in the way Android handles touch.
My 4 inch screen is a copy? My dual core processor with hdmi out is a copy? My 1080p video recording is a copy?
Wut?
LOL. Translation: "That big throbbing bulge in my pants is my Android phone. Touch it...you know you want to. It's got the 1080peeeez. Oh, you don't gotz the 1080peeeez? You got the lil iphooone? I'm betta than yous, bitch."
Flaunting handset spec sheets on the Internets: boosting low self-esteems since 2008
That has as much credibility to me as this website.
If you're unfamiliar with these whores, I'll give you a little backstory. These are the guys who claimed they had seen a completely redesigned Mac Pro before the Nehalem line was released.
Black metal, entirely new case, new internals (larger, more SATA, PCIe, and 12 RAM slots), and all new ports on the outside. Huge article about how they had seen one.
And then the second it was released, they took all that out of the article (which was months old by that time) except for one paragraph stating that they had seen one before launch and it matched what Apple released exactly.
Also, their pages refreshed every 30 seconds automatically for more ad views.
Don't get me wrong: I have nothing against TechCrunch at all. But when someone claims to have seen something before release, writes about it, and doesn't bother to post any spy shots, I immediately have a PTSD-style flashback to MacOSRumors' article and instantly ignore anything they say.
Wow. Didn't even know MOSR was still around. Is it still run by Ryan Meader?
It's got the 1080peeeez.
I may have to start adding this line to my description of televisions. Even when I'm in stores showing my family various televisions.
Wow. Didn't even know MOSR was still around. Is it still run by Ryan Meader?
Don't know. I really don't want to give them any more page views than those required to perform a certain job (that job being checking my URL when I first typed it to make sure it was right).
Price point is the key! If the Amazon tablet is cheap they will fly off the shelves! Not sure the OS will make a difference to the average consumer, I still think if they cost the same as the iPad then they will still purchase an iPad!
This.
The biggest selling factor of Android devices is price. If everything had the same price I have no doubt that Apple would be dominating the phone market similar to how it is dominating the tablet market. If Apple can keep the iPod relatively the same price as their competition Android tablets will never really catch on.
LOL. Translation: "That big throbbing bulge in my pants is my Android phone. Touch it...you know you want to. It's got the 1080peeeez. Oh, you don't gotz the 1080peeeez? You got the lil iphooone? I'm betta than yous, bitch."
Flaunting handset spec sheets on the Internets: boosting low self-esteems since 2008
Interestingly enough, the SGS II is thinner than the iPhone.
Using outdated stereotypes: How to argue against your competition since 2009
That being said, "it's got the 1080peeeez." might be the single greatest thing I've read all day.
There may be other reasons why the stats collected at NetMarketShare and StatCounter demonstrate such a broad disparity with sales and activation rates.
This Nielsen study shows a very different picture of usage rates, contrasting with NMS and SC but more consistent with most other metrics we can find:
http://www.androidpolice.com/2011/06...ns-make-sense/
What do you think is the reason for the differences between Nielsen's data and NMS's? How do their methodologies differ?
One suggestion has been that perhaps Android users are running apps more than the browser. I don't know if that's the case and I haven't seen any studies on that (though it would be interesting to learn of any if you know of them), but it would account for the numbers from those companies that count only browser user-agents. Looking at my own usage patterns, I see that most of my HTTP traffic is from apps, using the browser only when there's no app available.
Another factor may be that perhaps Android users visit the same domains more frequently than iOS users, who might be visiting a wider variety of sites. I'm not asserting this is the case, I simply don't know, but at the NMS site they explain that they only count a given visitor once per day, and I tend to visit a relatively small number of sites frequently throughout the day, often revisiting sites more often than I go to a new one.
Anything else that might account for these differences?
Good point - I do not know the methodologies of the reporting sources. I did take a look at the Nielsen blog and the usage was derived from billing data from OS. If we take what Horace has on his side, the increased usage may be due, in part, to that ad data difference he shares. I lean towards that as a possible source for 2 reasons. One, ad data would be a prevalent download hit to any phone access. And two - the reason Google did Android was not an altruistic endeavor - they want ad time and many new users to an Android experience may be the source of that usage. I will freely admit that I only used Android for a week or so on a Pandigital e-reader that was jailbroke to a Froyo OS. I did not see many ads, but there were some on my internet access, and of course I had no phone access in that manner - WiFi only. Not a statistically fair sample, but there we have it.
I still think that the idea of producer of electronics that is only waiting for the next version of a free OS, to be able to smack down the iPad is ludicrous on its face. Glad for the conversation !
Similar things were said about Android phones. Now they outsell iOS phones.
Time will tell. Nobody knows the future.
It is well worth remembering that similar things were said about Apple's dominance with the iPod. The position would crumble under the onslaught and Apple would be no more than a niche player. Last I read the iPod was about 70% of the market. Phones are mainly sold through carrier stores (Verizon, AT&T, Sprint and similarly in foreign markets with their carriers). That is easily a huge factor in why so many Android phones have been sold.
The point of this digression is that the pad market is more like the iPod market rather than the iPhone market. The cellphone carriers will play a much smaller role. On the other hand Apple and the iPad have a much improved position relative to the iPod when it debuted in 2001. Today Apple has an impressive and rapidly growing network of wildly successful Apple Stores that makes the retail channel much less problematic.
It is hard to see how Apple would lose its dominance in the pad market unless there is a major blunder
- Individual Smartphone Model metrics
- OS-based metrics
- Device-based metrics (defined as "Smartphone market", "Tablet market", etc.)
The discussion here (and elsewhere) seems to bounce across these divides pretty liberally, mostly involving comparing an OS-based metric to a hardware/device-based metric. Which in my view is somewhat disingenuous...
With iOS these differentiators do blur somewhat. Also with Android, but IMO to a lesser degree. Simply because different versions of the Android OS are needed to support the different Android device types (while one version of iOS runs across all iOS-based devices).
So, let's take the first part: Individual Smartphone metrics.
The iPhone is clearly dominant. WIth the possible exception of one Samsung model in one market (its country of origin, South Korea), iPhones outsell all other individual handset models by a huge margin.
Next, OS-based metrics: If we're measuring overall Android OS adoption (as compared to iOS adoption), we must use aggregate numbers. If we're going to use aggregate numbers for one (e.g., the sum of all different models of individual handsets/devices running Android OS), then all devices running iOS must also be taken into account.
If you sum all Android-based handsets and tablets, and compare it to a sum of iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad devices (iOS-based), then iOS again clearly dominates.
Device-based metrics:
"Smartphone-only" metrics: This is the only measure where Android-based devices may appear dominant. It's true that if you take the aggregate sum of all "Android-based mobile phones", and compare that to number of iPhones, Android (an OS platform) will command a larger number than iPhone (a hardware platform). But again, you see, we must compare an OS-based metric to a device-based metric?
Summary:
- Total Individual Model metric: iPhone clearly dominant
- Total OS-based metric: iOS clearly dominant
- Aggregate number of mobile phone handsets running a single OS: Android leads.
Nevertheless, Apple dominates in profit (a >50% share of all mobile phone profit), and is now the world's most valuable company by a large margin. So, even if the total aggregate number of mobile phones is dominated by Android-based handsets, does it really make it a stronger, more dominant market?