Android overtakes Apple's iPad in tablet marketshare, approaches in revenue earned

13468911

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 204
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jungmark View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mstone View Post



    Well i have anecdotal evidence too. I upgraded my iPad 3 and the wife upgraded her iPhone 5 and neither of us like the new interface design.




    Fact: people hate change but after a while many come to embrace it.

    After much complaining she settled on: "No big deal, I just think it is frugly" (exact quote). Personally I find it much more objectionable than she does.

  • Reply 102 of 204
    N
    mike54 wrote: »
    Maybe the main reason is that iOS is dependant on pixel size for the apps which requires developer work, whereas Android can auto-scale up to a higher res/bigger screen? 

    Nope.
  • Reply 103 of 204
    rogifan wrote: »
    I thought iOS 7 was resolution independent? Is that not the case?

    Doesn't work like this. The grid (iOS) has always been 1024x768. Retina means 4 pixel in one pixel space, more quality. People only concern pixel clearly never done any development work. The myth about android auto scaling ... Find me one document actually talk about it. nope Android so-called auto scaling is just like you blow up a 10 pixel gif to fit a 1920x1080 screen - looks like crap.
  • Reply 104 of 204
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    adamc wrote: »
    Have you tried using an iPad mini?

    There is no difference and you can't see the pixel as Sammy claimed.

    I gave it up and went back to the regular iPad because it rendered all web text in small fonts.

    It is the sum and not parts which makes the iPad mini a great product but if you want specs buy an android.
    Yes I've used a mini and yes I think the display is inferior. So retina display is now considered a "spec"? I guess then if/when Apple announces a retina mini they won't mention the retina part because only Android buyers care about "specs". That's probably why Apple didn't mention iPhone 5S was 64-bit. Just more "specs" only Android users care about. ;)
  • Reply 105 of 204
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    An A7 based retina mini with touch ID will dominate holiday sales, and number two will be the full size iPad.
    Yes, yes yes. This would be a killer product. A non-retina mini with A6 chip would just be milking consumers for another year.
  • Reply 106 of 204
    It's the cheap $100 Big Lots tabs that boost those Android sales. Awful, cheap tablets that are two to four OS versions back.
  • Reply 107 of 204
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mstone View Post

     

    That is certainly a possibility, but I was thinking more along the lines of Android. I only upgraded one iPad to iOS 7 and I am very disappointed with the new interface. I am in a quandary what to do with my other iOS devices. Although I like most of the new features, I hate the interface theme.


     

    Let go of your anger. Hate only leads to The Dark Side (Android).

  • Reply 108 of 204
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jungmark View Post





    Outside of maybe a qtr or two, Apple has rarely been dominant in smartphone market share. Most devs still develop for iPhone first even though Android is #1 in shipments. Devs also make more money on iOS.

     

    Google generates more revenue from iOS than they do from Android.

  • Reply 109 of 204
    WRT the price of storage upgrades on the iPad and iPhone: If MS had the same price structure on the Surface—scratch that, they do—that would be gouging. Apple uses such a huge fraction of the world supply of flash memory that they have to discourage upgrades by rationing through price.

    If they suddenly reduced the cost of each storage upgrade, or abruptly doubled capacity in their whole line, like everybody keeps urging them to, they would have to essentially corner the market. In addition to being investigated by various governments, and pilloried in the press, the marginal price would soar completely out of sight.

    Believe me, they know what they're doing, but laying it out in so many words would be worse than simply being accused of price-gouging. Only when the supply expands to cover the resulting need could they increase the storage/price ratio in their units. Of course, this is a classic chicken-and-egg paradox, since Apple is the 800-pound gorilla in the flash market.

    ETA: Plus, I think these estimates of $10 for 16 GB of storage are confusing the cheap crap flash memory that's used in those thumb drives you bought at Staples (and in those $49 Android tablets) with the high-quality (and ruinously expensive) flash memory that's used in iOS devices and computer SSDs.
  • Reply 110 of 204
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mac-sochist View Post



    WRT the price of storage upgrades on the iPad and iPhone: If MS had the same price structure on the Surface—scratch that, they do—that would be gouging. Apple uses such a huge fraction of the world supply of flash memory that they have to discourage upgrades by rationing through price.



    If they suddenly reduced the cost of each storage upgrade, or abruptly doubled capacity in their whole line, like everybody keeps urging them to, they would have to essentially corner the market. In addition to being investigated by various governments, and pilloried in the press, the marginal price would soar completely out of sight.



    Believe me, they know what they're doing, but laying it out in so many words would be worse than simply being accused of price-gouging. Only when the supply expands to cover the resulting need could they increase the storage/price ratio in their units. Of course, this is a classic chicken-and-egg paradox, since Apple is the 800-pound gorilla in the flash market.



    ETA: Plus, I think these estimates of $10 for 16 GB of storage are confusing the cheap crap flash memory that's used in those thumb drives you bought at Staples (and in those $49 Android tablets) with the high-quality (and ruinously expensive) flash memory that's used in iOS devices and computer SSDs.

     

    I think the profit Apple makes from selling a 32GB over a 16GB device is around $70, with about $30 going to the price of the memory and the cost of producing the modified device to accommodate that extra flash. That is not that bad is it seems, where some people think $100. This is one area where they can make a buck. Many lines of business have such opportunities to make extra money. No one can blame them for it, that's why they're in business. 

  • Reply 111 of 204
    adamcadamc Posts: 583member
    mstone wrote: »
    That is certainly a possibility, but I was thinking more along the lines of Android. I only upgraded one iPad to iOS 7 and I am very disappointed with the new interface. I am in a quandary what to do with my other iOS devices. Although I like most of the new features, I hate the interface theme.

    They will always be people who love felt and suede and I don't see Apple changing direction for the design of their iOS 7.

    As you said they are targeted at the young and for your information they are many young at heart too.
  • Reply 112 of 204
    adamcadamc Posts: 583member
    mstone wrote: »
    I see your point but when you look at it from the other side, one could argue that Apple's profit from iPad sales exceeds all other tablet manufacturers combined.

    It makes no sense to reverse the equation when there are no profits on the competitor's side.  

    How do we sell below cost? We make it up in volume!

    Volume doesn't work when a product is not selling.

    Now you know why Amazon at time lose money and make very little profits.

    Btw it is not because they are reinvesting their money. To let stocks sit in the warehouses cost money, a lot of it.
  • Reply 113 of 204
    wingswings Posts: 261member

    Oh, is this the same ABI Research that ran a headline back in January 2013 that read, "ABI Research Forecasts 45 Million Windows Phone and 20 Million BlackBerry 10 Smartphones in Active Use at Year-end"

     

    Yeah, that one.

  • Reply 114 of 204
    adamcadamc Posts: 583member
    rogifan wrote: »
    Yes I've used a mini and yes I think the display is inferior. So retina display is now considered a "spec"? I guess then if/when Apple announces a retina mini they won't mention the retina part because only Android buyers care about "specs". That's probably why Apple didn't mention iPhone 5S was 64-bit. Just more "specs" only Android users care about. ;)
    If you want to call it 'spec' by all means.
    As I said if you want more specs go android as you said the nexus 7 has 12 hour of battery life.
  • Reply 115 of 204
    poksipoksi Posts: 482member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mike54 View Post

     

    Maybe the main reason is that iOS is dependant on pixel size for the apps which requires developer work, whereas Android can auto-scale up to a higher res/bigger screen? 


     

    Please, don't talk about things you obviously don't know anything about. Scaling is not taken for granted, there are different screen ratios, that make deal especially with images and screen organization, image sizes are not easy to deal with and can be distorted in pixel-play stretching and this all coms with CPU/GPU Battery cost.

  • Reply 116 of 204
    poksipoksi Posts: 482member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post





    I thought iOS 7 was resolution independent? Is that not the case?

     

    Point me to the site where such nonsense in written, please :)

  • Reply 117 of 204
    lawrance wrote: »
    I'm waiting for the retina mini myself. I wonder if Apple will ever add a USB port to their iPad line. It would sure open it up to be a lot more useful.

    WiFi over USB. For those living in the past, like you, there is this:
    400
  • Reply 118 of 204
    sol77sol77 Posts: 203member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mstone View Post

     

    IMO Apple needs to bail on the hideous iOS color scheme, zooming motion and translucency or they are going to alienate their core target market. If they are looking to appeal to the pre-teen, tweerer, and teen market then the new interface makes complete sense. But to middle age adults who have been their main customer demographic since the introduction of the iPhone, there is not much appreciation for the latest interface design. I predict either a radical reversal of interface design or a radical abandonment of iOS devices by the 30-50 year-old adult market segment .


     

    Your argument is that people aged 30 to 50 are going to switch mobile platforms...because of a color scheme?

  • Reply 119 of 204
    sol77sol77 Posts: 203member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mstone View Post

     

    Well i have anecdotal evidence too. I upgraded my iPad 3 and the wife upgraded her iPhone 5 and neither of us like the new interface design.


     

    Two people not liking a product advertised to hundreds of millions is "anecdotal evidence"....of what?

     

    The Anthropic Principle: familiarize yourself with this concept.

     

     

     

     

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mstone View Post

     

    That is certainly a possibility, but I was thinking more along the lines of Android. I only upgraded one iPad to iOS 7 and I am very disappointed with the new interface. I am in a quandary what to do with my other iOS devices. Although I like most of the new features, I hate the interface theme.


     

    A quandary...over a few native apps with new colors and translucence effects? Are you going to be okay?

  • Reply 120 of 204
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Lawrance View Post



    I'm waiting for the retina mini myself. I wonder if Apple will ever add a USB port to their iPad line. It would sure open it up to be a lot more useful.

     

    Consider holding your breath and stomping your feet. I'm sure glad you trolled on in for that cute "add a USB port" line. For what? I cannot think of anything way the addition of one would help even the smallest amount of people.

Sign In or Register to comment.