Apple's iOS gains ground on Android in US as iPhone retains smartphone lead
For the three months ending in May, Apple's iPhone grew its dominating lead as the top U.S. smartphone, while iOS gained ground on Google's Android, says research firm comScore.
According to data from comScore's MobiLens and Mobile Metrix services, Apple's iPhone accounted for a 41.9 percent share of U.S. smartphone users in May, up 0.6 points from a month earlier. Samsung also enlarged its second-place piece of the pie with a 0.8 percent change over the same period, ending with a 27.8 percent share of the market.
Out of the top-five OEMs, only Apple and Samsung managed to gain subscribers over the three-month period, with LG and HTC both shedding 0.3 points to come in third and fifth, respectively. LG left May with 6.5 percent of the market, while HTC managed 5.1 percent. Motorola held steady with 6.3 percent, coming in fourth.
Google's Android remained the No. 1 smartphone platform in the U.S. with a 52.1 percent marketshare, or 10.2 points more than Apple's iOS. The world's largest mobile OS showed no movement, however, meaning the iPhone's 0.6 percent increase came from less popular platforms like fourth-place BlackBerry, which lost 0.6 points in the three-month period.
Microsoft's Windows Phone came in third with no change in marketshare, while Symbian rounded out the top five with 0.1 percent of the market, down 0.1 percent from February.
comScore estimates some 169 million people owned smartphones in the U.S. during the May period, up 4 percent since February. Smartphones now account for 70 percent of the nation's overall cellular market.
According to data from comScore's MobiLens and Mobile Metrix services, Apple's iPhone accounted for a 41.9 percent share of U.S. smartphone users in May, up 0.6 points from a month earlier. Samsung also enlarged its second-place piece of the pie with a 0.8 percent change over the same period, ending with a 27.8 percent share of the market.
Out of the top-five OEMs, only Apple and Samsung managed to gain subscribers over the three-month period, with LG and HTC both shedding 0.3 points to come in third and fifth, respectively. LG left May with 6.5 percent of the market, while HTC managed 5.1 percent. Motorola held steady with 6.3 percent, coming in fourth.
Google's Android remained the No. 1 smartphone platform in the U.S. with a 52.1 percent marketshare, or 10.2 points more than Apple's iOS. The world's largest mobile OS showed no movement, however, meaning the iPhone's 0.6 percent increase came from less popular platforms like fourth-place BlackBerry, which lost 0.6 points in the three-month period.
Microsoft's Windows Phone came in third with no change in marketshare, while Symbian rounded out the top five with 0.1 percent of the market, down 0.1 percent from February.
comScore estimates some 169 million people owned smartphones in the U.S. during the May period, up 4 percent since February. Smartphones now account for 70 percent of the nation's overall cellular market.
Comments
Very impressive for Apple considering this is the 'slowdown' before the storm when the iPhone 6 is released.
I agree. Samsung has just had its "peak" following release of its latest refresh, and Apple continued to suck up market share. This bodes very well for the coming iOS refresh and a resultant phenomenal growth in market share by Apple.
Apple will have an extremely strong lineup with the 5C for free and the up to 5.5 inch iPhone that I can't see android manufacturers being able to hold on to much market share.
Just whatever GoogleBots and carrier salesman can give them, that's it.
I agree. Samsung has just had its "peak" following release of its latest refresh, and Apple continued to suck up market share. This bodes very well for the coming iOS refresh and a resultant phenomenal growth in market share by Apple.
?? umm... Samsung's 0.8% growth over 3-month period is a sign that Samsung just had its "peak", but a teeny-weeny 0.6% gain is an indication of Apple's market dominance -- or sucking up market share?
?? umm... Samsung's 0.8% growth over 3-month period is a sign that Samsung just had its "peak", but a teeny-weeny 0.6% gain is an indication of Apple's market dominance -- or sucking up market share?
As you failed to notice, Samdung released their new flagship and only got .8 percent.
Apple is running on phones that are several months old and pretty much matched Samdung's gains.
Very impressive for Apple considering this is the 'slowdown' before the storm when the iPhone 6 is released.
I agree. Samsung has just had its "peak" following release of its latest refresh, and Apple continued to suck up market share. This bodes very well for the coming iOS refresh and a resultant phenomenal growth in market share by Apple.
My thoughts exactly. Samsung is the biggest competitor, by far. Their flagship just released within the past few months. This is a peak season for them. Their gains a small considering. Meanwhile, Apple sees gains at only 0.2 % less change than Samsung. This during Samsung's peak, Apple's historically slowest quarter, only 2 current phone models from Apple, and 1 size, while Samsung blankets the market at every size.
This data sums things up obviously. In terms of market share, Apple does more with less (2 current models, 1 screen size), pretty much equaling market share growth (and leading with marketshare per brand), with what it takes Samsung multiple models at every screen size to accomplish.
So add a screen size in fall for Apple. This will not only equal Apple's traditional peak season, but go beyond. They could potential have 3 screen sizes for the first time. And they are entering the bigger screen market for the first time... The 5 and the 5s did not really attract the bigger screen market at all. It merely extended the current length at the time, which was not a big enough change.
If Apple continues to sell the 5 and the 5s this will be the first real time they will hit both small and big screen markets. I wonder if they will continue to sell all 3 (assuming all rumors of a 4.7 and 5.5 are correct). It would be smart to keep the 5s around as along as at least the 4 has been around.
?? umm... Samsung's 0.8% growth over 3-month period is a sign that Samsung just had its "peak", but a teeny-weeny 0.6% gain is an indication of Apple's market dominance -- or sucking up market share?
It kinda is when you consider Samsung sells, even here in the U.S. market, a lot of cheaper phones. So it's not exactly a battle of how much money consumers spend on each brand. If that was the stakes, Apple would trounce Samsung by a much wider margin and would have shown a lot more growth this last quarter as well.
Eventually, Samsung came along with the Galaxy series. Since they were unable to accomplish the kind of major innovation that sway end-users to buy their product, they augmented what innovation they were able to come up with by copying designs both in hardware and software that Apple had come up with. This allowed them to produce a product that, on the surface, offered the major features of the iPhone, but at a better price than the iPhone. Ultimately, this accomplished two things: 1) it allowed them to increase their velocity in terms of gaining marketshare from competitors, primarily at the expense of Nokia and RIM (but Samsung increased their overall velocity relative to Apple), and 2) it allowed them to increase their margins overall. This was interesting, because it ate away at profits that may have otherwise gone to Apple, which emboldened Samsung and gave them increasing marketing power. Eventually, Apple sued them and inevitably won, but the ~1 billion dollar settlement (that Samsung might eventually have to pay Apple) was a relatively small price to pay for the overall increase in profits that this new tact was gaining Samsung.
The problem with Samsung's approach is that it is self-limiting. By copying Apple, they are appealing to a market that want Apple products, but, for whatever reason (usually price, but include other factors such as investment in the Android ecosystem), cannot make the commitment to buy an Apple product. As the remaining (non-Apple, non-Samsung) marketshare is claimed by these two companies, the trajectories, velocities, or whatever you wish to call it will inevitably decrease. At some point in a two-horse race, the market leaders must inevitably run out of any extra marketshare to target, and must then attempt to take marketshare directly from the other competitor. Unfortunately for Samsung, there are more people converting from Android to iOS rather than the other way around. As a result, it is inevitable that Apple will win this race, barring some significantly new innovation from a competitor (Samsung, Microsoft, Amazon, etc.). However, Samsung will, at that point, own enough of the market that their mobile product line will still be a major source of income to the company.
In the above case, Samsung doesn't lose, because it is a huge, global organization making thousands of products (everything from microwaves to Oil-tankers), and as such, the smartphone market is simply a way to increase its cash reserves for the next investment it makes. However, while Samsung doesn't exactly lose, Apple does win, because it makes only a handful of products, so the iPhone represents the large percentage of Apple's bottom line. Assuming Apple can continue to innovate, and can continue to capture marketshare, they will continue to enjoy wide margins, which will result in the continued production of amazing products for end-users, assuming the market pressure remains. Without the market pressures from companies like Samsung, Apple would cease to have a *need* to innovate. If all the competition folded, and ceded the market to Apple, we would start to see Apple products being release less often, with less innovation, and with less quality. Apple, like all companies, are in business to make money, not for altruism toward their customers. This unlikely scenario would allow Apple to continue making the high margins it currently enjoys, without having to spend the billions of dollars it is currently spending on R&D. The only loser in this case is the consumer buying this product, since they become locked into a high-priced product that no longer benefits from innovation. This is the disadvantage of a de facto monopoly.
All that being said, I have been an Apple iPhone user since July 2007 when I walked into an AT&T store to see what all the fuss was about with the new Apple phone. Once I realized I could get the "real" internet and not that WAP garbage that other manufacturers offered at the time, I couldn't leave the store without one. The halo-effect worked on me as well; I now have virtually all Apple products with the exception of one home computer that will eventually be replaced by an Apple.
I do enjoy seeing Apple win, but I hope the competition never goes away, because the continued innovation is a bigger victory for me than seeing Apple win the race. I want this to be a close race that never ends, with Apple always leading by a nose.
After iPhone 6 release, Android will drop below 50% because many of android users will get 5.5" iPhone.
Competition, at least in terms of marketshare, it good for the consumers as it creates pressure to innovate and produce better products. That being said, I still get a lot of satisfaction over these reports of Apple quietly taking the market from Samsung and other manufacturers, precisely because these other manufacturers are so dishonest in their presentation of both their own products and of the iPhone and other Apple products. When Apple entered this market, the competition was operating on razor-thin margins, which on some level precluded serious innovation (because it costs big money in R&D to innovate), and instead depended on selling huge numbers of phones to recover their investments and make a profit. Industry leaders at the time, such as Microsoft's Steve Balmer, literally laughed at Apple when they entered the market. There were initially some corrections (such as Apple lowering the original iPhone price by $200 after only a few months), but the product was so innovative that consumers accepted the price overall, and were willing to pay the "Apple tax" to have a premium product. An interesting issue that I don't see people talk about is that Apple generated a margin of profit that did not previously exist in that market; they single-handedly redefined the ceiling for profits in the smartphone (or even cell-phone) arena and then started rapidly claiming those potential profits. The iPhone became their most successful product in history and drove Apple to the position of most profitable technology company in the world.
Eventually, Samsung came along with the Galaxy series. Since they were unable to accomplish the kind of major innovation that sway end-users to buy their product, they augmented what innovation they were able to come up with by copying designs both in hardware and software that Apple had come up with. This allowed them to produce a product that, on the surface, offered the major features of the iPhone, but at a better price than the iPhone. Ultimately, this accomplished two things: 1) it allowed them to increase their velocity in terms of gaining marketshare from competitors, primarily at the expense of Nokia and RIM (but Samsung increased their overall velocity relative to Apple), and 2) it allowed them to increase their margins overall. This was interesting, because it ate away at profits that may have otherwise gone to Apple, which emboldened Samsung and gave them increasing marketing power. Eventually, Apple sued them and inevitably won, but the ~1 billion dollar settlement (that Samsung might eventually have to pay Apple) was a relatively small price to pay for the overall increase in profits that this new tact was gaining Samsung.
The problem with Samsung's approach is that it is self-limiting. By copying Apple, they are appealing to a market that want Apple products, but, for whatever reason (usually price, but include other factors such as investment in the Android ecosystem), cannot make the commitment to buy an Apple product. As the remaining (non-Apple, non-Samsung) marketshare is claimed by these two companies, the trajectories, velocities, or whatever you wish to call it will inevitably decrease. At some point in a two-horse race, the market leaders must inevitably run out of any extra marketshare to target, and must then attempt to take marketshare directly from the other competitor. Unfortunately for Samsung, there are more people converting from Android to iOS rather than the other way around. As a result, it is inevitable that Apple will win this race, barring some significantly new innovation from a competitor (Samsung, Microsoft, Amazon, etc.). However, Samsung will, at that point, own enough of the market that their mobile product line will still be a major source of income to the company.
In the above case, Samsung doesn't lose, because it is a huge, global organization making thousands of products (everything from microwaves to Oil-tankers), and as such, the smartphone market is simply a way to increase its cash reserves for the next investment it makes. However, while Samsung doesn't exactly lose, Apple does win, because it makes only a handful of products, so the iPhone represents the large percentage of Apple's bottom line. Assuming Apple can continue to innovate, and can continue to capture marketshare, they will continue to enjoy wide margins, which will result in the continued production of amazing products for end-users, assuming the market pressure remains. Without the market pressures from companies like Samsung, Apple would cease to have a *need* to innovate. If all the competition folded, and ceded the market to Apple, we would start to see Apple products being release less often, with less innovation, and with less quality. Apple, like all companies, are in business to make money, not for altruism toward their customers. This unlikely scenario would allow Apple to continue making the high margins it currently enjoys, without having to spend the billions of dollars it is currently spending on R&D. The only loser in this case is the consumer buying this product, since they become locked into a high-priced product that no longer benefits from innovation. This is the disadvantage of a de facto monopoly.
All that being said, I have been an Apple iPhone user since July 2007 when I walked into an AT&T store to see what all the fuss was about with the new Apple phone. Once I realized I could get the "real" internet and not that WAP garbage that other manufacturers offered at the time, I couldn't leave the store without one. The halo-effect worked on me as well; I now have virtually all Apple products with the exception of one home computer that will eventually be replaced by an Apple.
I do enjoy seeing Apple win, but I hope the competition never goes away, because the continued innovation is a bigger victory for me than seeing Apple win the race. I want this to be a close race that never ends, with Apple always leading by a nose.
I believe this is the longest post in the history of AI except the article itself. Damn. No wonder you've had only 2 posts so far.
It's amazing how well Apple is doing with its older phone models.
Apple's older models kept pace with Samsung's newest stuff. Wow.
Yes it does make one wonder what's going to happen when Apple releases phones that appeal to whole new segments of the market.
I wish I had cash to buy more APPL.
Hey guys,
aren't those your tiny gains just numbers that fall into range of statistical error. It is funny to see fighting about that.
And in the world is situation different. Apple cares only about big strong markets in others countries are numbers quite different.
But I agree that iPhone 6 and discounted old models will help Apple a lot.
We know how many Apple sold -- that's the only true piece of data here. The rest is a bunch of crappy consultant estimates since we have no real data from any of the others (probably because they don't want us to know the truth).
It seems like it would be more accurate to say that Apple has gained at Blackberry's expense. Apple's gain almost exactly matches Blackberry's loss. Android's flat.
For whatever these numbers are even worth, that is.