Wonderfully distorted US figures... Honestly the US market is so out of kilter with the rest of the planet it's a joke.
Next you'll be saying the nobody uses SMS messages because you've just dragged out some US study.
Sales of Android-based smartphones are surging, tearing chunks of market share out of Apple, RIM, and Windows Mobile's hides. According to a report released Monday by the analysts at The Nielsen Company, although RIM and Apple still hold their number one and two positions as the top two suppliers of smartphones in the US, …
This post has been deleted by its author
The 3310 certainly doesn't run Symbian.
It's not a smartphone, was never sold as one, and doesn't even really qualify as having the Series 40 interface, as far as I can see.
Even if it did, that still wouldn't make it a "not-smartphone -but-Symbian" device, because Series 40 isn't Symbian either.
Series 60 is Symbian, and I still can't think of any phone that's powered by Symbian that doesn't qualify as a smartphone, certainly not in the range today, nor indeed in past years.
The last qarter global sales figures had Nokia Symbian smartphones at 41% given that other vendors are also still shipping a few as well, you have to that would put Symbian's global share at about 50%?. Given that this shows Symbian at 2% in the US market, what is the real rest of the world share of Symbian?
The big question: Is the US marketplace now a leading indicator for the rest of the world? When it comes to mobile it never has been in the past.
"Thats a nice computer, who makes it?"
Answer 1. "Dunno but it runs Windows"
Answer 2, "Apple"
We all know who won that round and with the emergence of Android Apple will most probably wind up in a niche again simply because they insist on binding hardware and software so tightly. Licence IOS ? No chance ! Licence OSX ? No chance !
Perhaps the rise of Android will make Apple think about their obsession with the 'experience' but somehow I doubt it.
Apple WANT to be a "niche" company. They've never been interested in corporate sales, or selling to techies, or selling to anyone *other* than those who appreciate good design.
This is why Apple's "total market share" tends to hover around the 10% mark in every market they enter.
Apple don't care about stuffing office buildings with iMacs because corporate IT buyers don't give a gnat's chuff about design or quality: they're only ever interested in corner-cutting and discounts. Apple don't sell to this sector as it can only ever be a race to the bottom. As Microsoft, Dell, HP, Compaq and many others have found to their cost.
And that's also why Apple won't give a damn if iOS tends to bumble around the 10-20% mark. As long as it's the 10-20% of the market that's willing to pay more for quality design—occasional slip-ups notwithstanding—Apple will get along just fine. Why would they care if Nokia or Motorola or RIM are selling devices by the millions when they're barely making pennies in profit off each one?
Say a £50 phone sells ten million units worldwide. If the cost to build and support it is £49, that's £10 million in profit. Not bad, but not brilliant either. But at the low end of the market, price is *everything*, and customers are more than willing to sacrifice design and usability if it means they can pay less.
At the higher end of the market, the design *is* important, as is its usability: if you're paying that much money for something, you bloody well expect it to work well and look good.
So, let's say your up-market £500 phone sells just *one* million units worldwide. But it only costs you £200 to make. £300 million in profit = Cha-CHING!
That is what Apple's business plan is all about. Big *margins* are what matter.
I was shown something interesting on my iPhone 3G yesterday by a colleague (who also has a 3G). A big fat crack in the black plastic where the connector is. Why is it there? Because Apple in their infinite money grabbing wisdom decided that a micro USB connection (which is much smaller) would not allow them to rake the money in so they use their own massive connector. The plastic on the iPhone is of such shocking quality that it flexes at this point in the middle. And so has cracked. His has also gone in the same place (admittedly far worse than mine as he did drop his, something I have not done)
This, along with Antenna gate, is why a Desire (or something similar) will be replacing it and not an iPhone 4.
Reasonable looks; I don't think the iPhone is a looker personally, I just got it as it had the best OS - for me - for a smartphone when I was buying. But I wasn't expecting such cheap materials in a shoddily designed product though.
You won't regret getting a Desire. I've had mine for 3 months and I still can't help fiddling with it! The screen is great, it's fast and I haven't found a single thing that I want to do with it that there isn't an app for so far.
Go for the black one though; the mucky purple-ish one doesn't look as good. And battery life is a bit low, but no worse than my friend's iPhone or my old HTC HD2.
I moved from an iPhone 3G. Generally I like the Desire better because it is so much more open (no more iTunes FTW!) and it treats you like an adult. Some things you may want to consider though:
- The battery life is much worse than my 3G was (which was poor to begin with). I pretty much have to charge it every day and this weekend I was using GPS a lot and the battery died by 3pm. Someone did point out to me that at least you can switch out the battery super easily but it's still a pain.
- It's a lot rougher around the edges in some ways than the iPhone. The iPodeque elements (movie watching / music listening) in particular are weaker.
That said, I gave my 3G to my fiancée and every now and then she asked for help with something on it and I shudder as Apple's total obsession with keeping the thing as tightly closed as possible comes flooding back to me. Then I use my Desire to wake my pc on lan and noodle around the network share with eStrongs File Explorer for some movies to watch while I wait for iTunes to get itself in gear :O)
"Apple WANT to be a "niche" company. They've never been interested in corporate sales, or selling to techies, or selling to anyone *other* than those who appreciate good design."
Pure unadulterated horseshit. Apple have been doing everything in their power to increase their market share as evidenced by the near continuous mainstream advertisments for iPhones, iPads etc. They have transformed themselves from a computer manufacturer to a media device & services provider precisely because they are making little headway vs Microsoft. These days they make their money from selling media and the devices you play media on. The more people who own these devices the more media they sell. It is quite obvious that they would like as much market share as they possibly can.
> Perhaps the rise of Android will make Apple think about their obsession with the 'experience' but somehow I doubt it.
Apple is making money hand over fist, they're more profitable than anyone else in their market, their cap is ludicrously high.
Why would they want to think?
Ever since they stopped making the Apple II they've stopped wanting to be open and play nicely with anyone else.
The following provides Q1 figures from IDC and Gartner. (Usually I would post the links to the original source and not the engadget spin doctoring and shilling, but this is more convenient!)
NB - the differences in accounting for this ... units shipped vs actual sales.
For info, here is IDC Q2 figures for all mobiles ... don't seem to have released Q2 for smartphone segment yet ... and not necessarily OS specific ...
Anecdotal I know, but Apple brand loyalty is MUCH higher in the US. If the iPhone is suffering against Android in the US, it's going to me MUCH worse elsewhere.
This sorta bears out, I know WAY more people with Android smartphones than iPhones. I know of at least 10 Android owners that picked them up this year. I know one person that bought a iPhone4 (he has since returned it anyway).
If you think that graph looks bad for Apple, wait till you see the global picture... In particular emerging markets, where Android can sweep up due to it's low entry level prices that Apple can't compete with.
This really isn't unexpected anyway, as phones like the HTC Desire totally blow the iPhone4 away on features, design, flexibility and price.
I have looked at android phones... and ttere are some really great 'droids out there... but my biggest issue is which android? 1.5, 1.6, 2.0, 2.1, 2.2.... and can I rely on updates???
It seems that the telcos (and manufacturers) are proving a huge stumbling block to updating of 'droid phones and unless you are willing to "root" the phone you get stuck with whichever version of android came with the phone.
That has to change, The telcos and manufacturers need to sort that out asap!
The SDK hasn't changed that much since 1.6.
If you have a device running 1.5, there will be a couple of high profile marketplace apps not available to you, otherwise anything newer will be just fine.
This fragmentation is a figment of Apple's imagination. Sure there are plenty of different versions of AndroidOS out there, but they all run the same apps on the marketplace, and that's what matters.
The reality is, the vast majority of phones, and almost all new phones are 2.1/2.2
As a developer myself, I target API Level3 (Android 1.5 or later), unless there is a very good reason not to. I have yet to find a reason not to.
Apple also have the same problem, iOS3, iOS4....
I've got an HTC Desire, great phone apart from a few niggles (but every phone I've ever had has had some things I would improve).
But it runs HTC's SenseUI shell thing which I believe will cause delays in Android updates being available.
I don't want to rely on HTC providing updates for my phone just in case they decide the Desire is discontinued in 18 months and stop providing updates, conveniently at the end of my contract!
However I would still rather rely on the hardware manufacturer for updates than the bloomin' network provider!
Some things I want Android to sort out:
1) tethering over bluetooth, it can do USB but with my previous few phones it's been so convenient to not have to carry a wire around.
2) FLAC (not for quality, just for laziness purposes so I don't have to re-encode to MP3 from my music server) and cue sheet support in the default music player, and ability to choose a root music folder as otherwise the auto-scan picks up loads of other sound files on the SD card.
3) Separate sync accounts for gmail, google calendar and google contacts, and disable automatic contact linking
4) Better control over outgoing data, anything that wishes to sync data should be listed in the "sync accounts" menu so it can be disabled. A sort of outbound software firewall.
5) Improvements to the default Mail program, have refresh and foders buttons in view rather than having to press the menu button to access
6) Ditch threaded SMS view and give me inbox/sent/drafts. Or at least give me the option to choose. It's annoying having threads of a few hundred messages.
So there we go!
If your app investment (in both money and time) exceeds the value of your phone you're going to stick with that platform - even if you don't upgrade every time.
And then there's perceived status and brand loyalty which is something Apple really understands.
It will take a lot to get iPhone users to switch to another platform - probably not worth trying at the moment when there's lower-hanging fruit elsewhere.
Not that I am calling iPhone users highly-strung fruits.
"Why? It sucks, I read this all the time!"
Stickiness. The reason Apple ties its music, video & apps to the iPhone is because they are tied to the platform. People are not being "loyal" to the platform in the traditional sense, they're stuck with it.
Which is why if anyone has any sense at all they won't build up a paid for collection in the first place. Use the free apps and be free to get the hell out of something better comes along. As it has.
It seems that the Android crowd is feeding mostly from iPhone to Android switchers, and a couple of Blackberry to Android switchers; but the increase in % seems to show that it isn't just switchers that are swelling the Android toters; it is also first-time smartphone buyers as well.
One thing that RIM should do is get out a combo touchscreen/keyboard device. I would definitely want one of those,as I like touchscreens but I wouldn't sacrifice my physical keyboard for a touchscreen. Hm... maybe HP should bring out something like the Palm Pre as well...
Remember those crybaby Chinese who were committing suicide at a regular clip having been forced to work 10x7 ? The Americans thought this might, just might reflect badly, so Apple, Dell, HP and some others pointed out they have a code of conduct for suppliers.
http://www.eicc.info/MEMBERSHIP.htm Happen to notice who doesn't belong ? Like maybe Google and Motorola ?
Pity. Just when those lazy slackers were getting used to the 10x6 schedule ...
I got my Desire the day it launched, and in 'a few weeks', my telco will be giving me 2.2
What other phone have you ever had, where you could rely on updates?
In the past I 'upgraded' WinMo phones using ROMs from the telco and forums.
In other words, you'll most likely get one upgrade from the telco, then it's down to you, but you'll be due an upgrade by then anyway.
Android device support is all over the shop. Part of the problem is that Samsung, HTC want people to buy a new device, not support an old one. At the same time, manufacturers have some duty of care to keep their device popular, especially when its still selling. Therefore I think HTC Desire owners are lucky that 2.2 turned up so soon because HTC were inclined in their own interests to update to it.
Apple have better upgrades IMO, but it's not entirely altruistic. They operate a golden cage that people are trying to escape from. They have to keep patching the OS to stop that happening.
That figure wasn't reported in the article, but based on my own experiences with a phone using a Microsoft so-called OS, the only way you'd get me to buy another is by including a second phone--and NOT a Microsoft-based phone, either. (Then again, Apple seems bound and determined to become the new Microsoft, as measured on the evil scale.)
By the way, I've been in the market for a new phone for six months, and leaning towards Android, but the Japanese market situation is rather confused and out of sync. I'm pretty sure that Brew is dominant here, but not even mentioned in the article. The company with the best position in Android phones has a terrible contract as regards data... Last time I had to wait about 4 years for anyone to offer what I wanted to buy.
Android is a Linux kernel with a BSD derived user space and a kernel extension for BSD / proprietary drivers. So it's Linux + BSD. Furthermore, the kernel & userspace are cut to the bone and primarily there to serve a Java derived runtime platform called Dalvik. Most apps run on Dalvik and are OS neutral so in theory Android could dump Linux entirely if it so wished without affecting most apps.
So you wouldn't find busybox there for example, or most of the other standard Unix commands for that matter.
I don't know why Linux is listed separately, but perhaps a bunch of purer Linux implementations have been lumped together separate to Android to be more measureable.
I think the difference is that with an Android phone, you can't actually get down to the Linux bit - everything runs on a layer above it.
Whereas on a native Linux device - something running Maemo, say - you can hold CTRL+SHIFT+X on the keyboard, and a bash terminal pops up. It literally is a Debian distro, and you can screw with it as such.
Android uses the Linux kernel, a cut down of the GCC toolset (I believe) and a custom framework/UI planted on top.
Most CLI Linux applications will need to be tweaked to be compilable and runnable on Android. GTK/QT applications don't have a hope in Hell.
At least that is how I understand it.
There aren't many non Android Linux base handsets out there yet. So the brand that is getting recognition.
Also Android may be based on Linux but you aren’t exactly getting the full Linux experience any more than you would if you got a TV set top box based on Linux. Phones like the N900 allow you to get to a Linux command line, and cross compile Linux apps and put them the your phone. App development for Android is more restricted (currently) only done using a Java like language.
I would guess if Nokia gets any traction with MeeGo in the US next year it will also get its own line rather than being just another Linux.
there is only 1 iphone (technically, 4 different versions), while there are more than 20 (that i know so far) different android phones in the world. few different RIMs and linux and other phones. is there a graph showing iphone 4 sales compared to each android phones?
i really want to see a graph that shows the average of iphone 4 sales compared to each individual android phones launched within the last 6 months.
most ppl actually buy an android phone because its a cheaper alternative for touch screen phones with amazing graphics. they go to a mobile shop and went 'oh, thats a cool phone, just like iphone, and its a lot cheaper too'. even if the shop do have iphones, the price will make buyers look away from it.
samsung and lg also have cheaper touch screen phones with their own os, but the interface and features arent really appealing.
yes, indeed. android users are on the rise. this is mainly because its more widely available compared to iphones. technical or other issues only have little influence these sales. price and availability has got more to do with it.
"i really want to see a graph that shows the average of iphone 4 sales compared to each individual android phones launched within the last 6 months."
It would be an interesting graph but it wouldn't tell you anything you probably can't guess for yourself. i.e. that some android phones like the Desire, Galaxy are more popular than others and that as an aggregate sales of all models are taking off big time. You can't see per model stats (though Google probably know them) but you can monitor % market share of various android versions here (http://developer.android.com/resources/dashboard/platform-versions.html). Takeup of 2.1 has been huge in the last few months.
"yes, indeed. android users are on the rise. this is mainly because its more widely available compared to iphones. technical or other issues only have little influence these sales. price and availability has got more to do with it."
I suspect you're right, but at the same time android delivers a comparable experience to the iPhone for less money. A lot less money in some cases depending on model and tariffs. People are starting to realise they can have an excellent phone which suits their needs and budget without paying an Apple premium on top. I expect the same will probably happen with tablet devices too when a bunch of cheaper Android / Windows 7 models start appearing with similar functionality to challenge the iPad.
I doubt it. It is reported that Ballmers SDF generator runs on the same fuel as Jobs' Reality Distortion Field generator. This fuel is created from exotic materials in a few highly specialised refineries around the globe. SJ is burning every fluid ounce produced right now.
"Of course your four month old phone will get a 2.2 update, question is will you get the next one?"
Question is, do you want the next upgrade? iPhone 3G users have been downgrading to older versions of the OS because iOS 4 killed performance. Android 2.3 or 3.0 may not run well on current handsets because they haven't been designed with that OS in mind.
Android is free, customisable and very flexible. Manufacturers can adapt the software and run it on hardware to cover all price points. Providers are free to choose their own pricing, tariffs and plans. For example there are teeny tiny smart phones like the X10 Mini. And models with physical keyboards. And models with large PMP like displays. Others with fancy cameras with flash. Others with lower res features for people on a budget. There are models from Samsung, HTC, Motorola, Sony Ericsson, Huawei, ZTE etc. And so on.
Android phones can be had for £100 on pay as you go and there is plenty of choice in the sub £300 range, many which are free on reasonable tariffs. Apple have nothing analogous and it's somewhat puzzling why not. I expect they'll have to launch something soon enough or their market share will continue to erode. At least you can now buy an iPhone SIM free and the number of providers carrying the phone has increased.
I have an X10 running android, and in october it gets upgraded to 2.1 or 2.2 =]
Only thing i don't understand is why do i have to wait?
The X10 is already the most expensive Sony Ericsson nad it doesn't come with the newest OS?
And glad to hear Android is catching up with Apple, not enough is said about the freedom you get running Android OS
Because the manufacturers have to faff with the update to put all their junk on it.
The Nexus 1 got 2.2 within days of release. If HTC, Sony and the others stopped faffing with the guts of Android, they'd be able to push out the updates much quicker. But no, alas they have to stamp their mark on it and the consumer suffers as a result.
Hopefully 3.0 (Gingerbread) will put a stop to this.
"the phone you get stuck with whichever version of android came with the phone."
Rubbish, I updated my T-Mobile G2 (Hero) from 1.5 to 2.1 yesterday. No rooting involved. Agreed, HTC, T-Mobile, Orange et al should have been a darned site quicker with the update but then mobile telecos are not old hands at this sort of thing.
So HTC, Dell, Acer, LG, Motorola, Samsung, Sony and all the other companies churning out Android phones put together are outselling Apple. Well, I'll bet Steve is crying into his rollneck jumper worrying by those stats.
If you want to talk about phone sales you should be printing iPhone 4 v Desire v Galaxy and so on.
according to canalsys, android outsold IPhone worldwide and they did in fact outsell iphone and RIM in US, just missing RIM worldwide by a small margin
Surerly this statement : "although RIM and Apple still hold their number one and two positions as the top two suppliers of smartphones in the US, Android phones are catching up " Is not really a correct comparison?
Andriod is not a 'supplier' of smartphones, but a licensed operating system. Samsung, HTC, LG etc.. would be the suppliers. The graphs are purely OS comparisons.
i know motorola and htc spend hundred of thousands, if not millions of bucks, in developers' salary and r&d hardwares to come out with their flavor of android for their devices.
this is one android phone i discovered which is quite nice too >> http://i-mobilephone.com.my/i-mobile_my/ProductsPage_6010.htm
there are quite a lot of android phones from china, taiwan, korea, with brands that you guys must probably never heard of. i know its being used in the u.s and other places and its much more cheaper than droid x or htcs. im not sure if these phones are included in the statistics or not. but i do think google collects data from these devices for their stats.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022