US vs other countries
"Losing the war" is a bit strong when you compare the size of the handset market in AU or GB compared to US. Do you have global numbers rather than picking and choosing small-ish countries?
Apple's iPhone now accounts for over half of US smartphone sales, but in the UK and the rest of Europe – and the rest of the world, for that matter – Android phones still hold a healthy lead. "Apple has reached a major milestone in the US by passing the 50 per cent share mark for the first time, with further gains expected to …
Most people I know in Cambridge have Android.
Note that iphones often seem more widespread, but for some reason Apple users seem far more likely to walk around holding their iphone or ipod in front of them, where as everyone else sticks in in their pocket. Also it's far more easier to recognise, due to the fewer models, and the ridiculous obvious Apple logo all over it. So you notice the one or two iphone users when walking somewhere, but you don't notice the 100 Android users.
With the S3 alone outselling the Apple flagship, it's clear that it's a myth that Android sales are mainly coming from cheaper sales. Also consider that these days, many Apple sales come from cheaper models, because many of their sales come from older models still available (even the ancient 3GS I've still seen on sale).
Plus, being cheap doesn't mean junk. It's well publicised how Apple has massive profit margins. Other manufacturers deliver what people want *and* do it at a lower price. Apple just pocket the profits for themselves.
Apple do have big profit margins but remember that is also because they have invested in their own stores (both online and physical) so do not have to share that margin.
Out of that they have to develop iOS (most of Android is a relatively simple re-badge), provide better support and provide iCloud services for free for the life of the device. Someone like Samsung has no physical stores I am aware of, support is typically by telephone or possibly from the retailer that sold it (although most lose interest in anything more than a DOA swap and / or after 30 days).
So it also comes down to you can buy a SIM free Galaxy S3 for about £100 less (once it has been discounted) than an iPhone 5. With the S3 you get ad supported (free) services from Google (not provided by Samsung). With the S3 you may get limited help from the retailer but it's nothing like the in-store setup / ongoing help you can get from Apple. Apple are still supporting the 3GS (in that it runs iOS 6) - it's around 4 years old - not confident Samsung will still provide the same for their devices after that time.
Samsung have to be cheaper but in reality £100 difference is a couple of pounds per month on a 2 year contract and if the Apple device lasts longer or is worth more at the end of its contract (to sell / trade in against the next) there may be no difference at all.
"Note that iphones often seem more widespread, but for some reason Apple users seem far more likely to walk around holding their iphone or ipod in front of them, where as everyone else sticks in in their pocket"
Due to the fact androids use real bluetooth so a headset is the prefered method of not having to display and therefore "lose" your handset to the local drug / mugger / youth crowd
Ah Cambridge... 20% socially inept, egotistical students who have no genuine need for a phone.10% technical types who work in the technology park and mainly use Android. 10% rich types who will buy the most expensive phone offered regardless of its capabilities. 60% drugged up types who use Blackberry or Symbian, if anything.
Lol, the cambridge I know (quite well) is full of foreingers, tourists or imbred rich kids who don't know what technology is as long as it is 'super simple' because daddy bought it. Where universities have "bedders" because kids don't know how to make the bed themselves "the maid usually does that sort of thing" and the kids have pets like " apraying mantis' called portia." (I kid you not)
Yeah, really are the kind of people that can choose anything other than the MOST expensive fanboi item on the market. (With daddy's money) They are however a very small percentage of the UK market.
Some people just won't accept that Apple isn't seen as all that great once you get outside the US.
As for smallish countries, EU is bigger as a market share and the UK is one of the top ten economies on the planet (germany is another) so if they are not considered good things to compare then I don' know what is. The rest look like good choices from the rest of the continental areas.
"I work in IT, and what I find as a generalisation is that Americans I work with own iPhones in general the British own Android..." because the phones are given away for free with extremely cheap contracts. That's not to say that Android is better than iOS or vice versa. However, to suggest that Brits and Europeans as a group generally "choose" Android in preference due to it's being superior is highly misleading; it's popular because it's cheap. This isn't ment a a slight, it is fact. It also worth noting that this not the same as saying that it's shit. When you look at a market where there is more parity in cost (like the USA) you see the share is far more even. Of course, the baying fandroids here won see that.
I have no issue with 'Android' - Google are playing a very good game with it. I have a few issues with Google and their data mining. But for people to be jumping all over Samsung when all they are doing is making the best Android phone (for now) in 6-12-18 months it will probably be someone else - Motorola perhaps?
I'm sure Americans would be happier buying a (US) Motorola than a (Korean) Samsung...?
is here and anonymous again.
How big and brave of him/her (but likely some 23 yr old spotty bloke who thought his iDevice would get him laid but given how ugly he is even the Devil struggled to make hell freeze over for that one)
( yes, think I'll keep re-posting this until you decide to reveal yourself)
My theory is people who actively choose a smartphone mostly choose iPhone - whereas a large proportion of Android sales are to people who do not even know or care what they get - it's just part of a 'free' contract upgrade / renewal. Of all the Android phones I have seen many are used for little more than making calls and sending texts and some of the users even refer to them as 'i' phones - many have no data tariff or are on PAYG.
So wait - Android is bad because people only get it "free" on contract, and it's bad because its users are on PAYG? Which is it?? And why don't either of these criticisms apply to iphones, is there some magic third way? (Well, I guess there's buy outright, and have a SIM only contract, but I don't see why that's better, nor is there any evidence that people do this more with Apple, and on any platform, a minority of people do it this way.)
My observation is that many people buying Apple phones just do so because they have no idea that other phones are available. Even more so for ipads, where 10" Android tablets are unheard of, whilst the entire media hyped the ipad even before it was announced.
And virtually everyone buying iphones are just getting them "free" on contract. My experience is that Android, aside from being far more popular anyway, is also full of users who know about the different kinds of smartphones - considered Apple, and turned it down.
It's not Android is 'bad' because people get it free - it's just less of an informed choice - people are more likely to buy higher end phones after more consideration / research - people at the lower end get Android by default and probably don't really know or care.
"people buying Apple phones just do so because they have no idea that other phones are available"
What an absolute crock - as if you can not be aware other phones are available - that's like trying to convince someone the Ford Focus is the ONLY car.
Shh... Don't tell A Nony Mouse, that he is an embarrasment to the gene pool. Facebook has just this month incentivized it's employees to DROP Apple and get Androids. WHY. Androids are being activated with a 2 to 1 ratio over Apple. Facebook. And Facebook wants it's LARGEST market to be experienced by it's employees.
Strictly BUSINESS. No emotion. Just facing the facts. Apple (ONE company ) against The DROIDS? With MORE (Panasonic, Toshiba, et al) coming? What, you think Apple will WIN this? No. AND it's only justice.
By the way, I built my 1st computer in 1983. Formed a company in '86. Just retired this year. I KEEP my skills up to date. AND only own Androids. Can't wait for the outcome of CES to make my next purchases. You can bet it WON'T be anything by that IP stealing Apple. I was at XEROX when we saw APPLE snuggle up to our west-coast campus at XEROX PARC then literally steal OUR IP. Laws were different then. If it were now, XEROX would OWN Apple. See, we HAD product shipping. Apple destroyed our market by selling at 20% of our price, our own ripped off IP. No justice. Sad really. Bus as I earlier said. Justice will legally rear it's head.
Anyway, for myself and all my associates ( all entreprenuers ), some with advanced degrees, we vote with our wallets. And all vote ANDROID. Spread the word.
Oh..And, I live in AMERICA... Quit embarrasing us. That's it..
How come you're more upset at Apple for "stealing" Xerox IP when Microsoft also "stole" the IP (and arguably made a truckload more money doing it).
If Apple did "steal" it, how come Apple paid Xerox $1m in stock and why did they send engineers to Apple to help them implement the GUI?
Is it just possible that you never in fact worked for Xerox and that you are in truth a troll who thinks they have some kind of big story that once told will cause everyone to immediately stop buying Apple products because of some mysterious hate complex you have? I have news for you, those in the know are already aware that the "Apple stole Xerox IP" story is complete bunk.
Really, we get it, you don't like Apple.
"My theory is people who actively choose a smartphone mostly choose iPhone - whereas a large proportion of Android sales are to people who do not even know or care what they get"
Your theory is garbage - in fact many people wanting a smartphone go for an Android because it isn't locked down, and has more features, so you can do more "smart" things with it.
Plus, anecdotally I know of 8 people in the last 6 months that had iphones and have gone with Galaxy S III's - that doesn't fit under your fanboi view of the world.
"My theory is people who actively choose a smartphone mostly choose iPhone"
And mine is that iFanboys are desperately grasping at straws as Apple inevitably head back to niche status.
Never mind sweetie.. Just say that market share is meaningless. And tell us again about Apple's market cap..
"Do you have global numbers rather than picking and choosing small-ish countries?"
As the article said (if you'd bothered to actually read it) the survey took in 5 Euro countries including the UK and Spain (not small countries), Brazil (emerging, but big market) and Australia (small, but large penetration in terms of smartphones).
Europe, USA, Oceania, South America is a pretty comprehensive chunk of the mobile phone using world. Just be thankful the researchers didn't include stats from Asia fanboi - that would really show an ugly picture for Apple...
I'd also consider how the stuff goes on Brazil. Other than being the only country that doesn't talk Spanish in Latin America, well, they're part of Latin America. Which as a whole outnumbers the US as a market.
And guess what? Android rules this market as well. It used to be BlackBerry, but in the last year they've moved on to BlackBerry. Yes, a few have gone iPhone but most of 'em have gone Android.
Apple will eventually lose the smartphone war. Hopefully they'll lose the "patent trolling" war as well.
Because Samsung seems to be replacing quite a few (66 page thread @ XDA Developers) Galaxy S3 which die for no reason after just 200 days.
Samsung is reportedly quietly replacing faulty Galaxy S III devices according to many users on XDA Developers. The issue appears to be related to the NAND becoming corrupted and killing off the Galaxy S III’s mainboard, which causes the phone to essentially “brick” itself. Users have reported the issues have affected some devices after 150-200 days after purchase. Users on XDA Developers and Reddit are also saying Samsung is replacing affected smartphones (rooted or not) with new ones that could potentially be just as faulty in another 200 days.
If you 'feel' the S3 it's just cheap compared to an iPhone 5 and when you factor in the service Samsung is miles behind. My colleague was not impressed when he was without his Samsung for over 3 weeks when it developed a fault - when my iPhone did (camera lens got dislodged and to be fair probably cause by a heavy drop) took it back to the Apple Store - 20 minutes later fixed. Another colleague had a 3GS that developed a tiny crack near the dock connector - they just replaced it with a brand new one there and then.
"If you 'feel' the S3 it's just cheap compared to an iPhone 5 and when you factor in the service Samsung is miles behind. My colleague was not impressed when he was without his Samsung for over 3 weeks when it developed a fault -"
The prices of the GS3 and the iphone are virtually the same - the iphone is getting its a$$ kicked because Apple has done absolutely nothing with the interface or abilities of the iphone since it allowed apps. If anything (see: maps) they have made things worse for petty business reasons.
I wasn't impressed when I had to book a week in advance, take an afternoon off work and drive 20km's out of the CBD to talk to a "genius" to get my 3GS fixed.
Took my original Galaxy to a dealer 2 doors from my work, took all of 3 minutes and had the phone back that afternoon working fine.
Maybe Apple's service is OK overseas, but its absolute rubbish in Australia, far worse than what Samsung offered the 1 time I had to have my phone looked at.
PS - Apple don't replace phones under warranty with new phones - you get a refurb - so that "new" 3GS was actually a broken one someone had already returned, and Apple fixed up
"My colleague was not impressed when he was without his Samsung for over 3 weeks when it developed a fault"
The thing with any non-iPhone is that you simply pop the SIM out and slot it into another device (like a simple mobile, feature phone, or other Android smartphone) on the same network. We've got about 6 or 7 eligible Orange (sorry, EE) devices kicking around at home which would accept the SIM from a Samsung without skipping a beat.
iPhone of any vintage - not so much of an option...
Samsung or Samdung as they should really be called.
Full access to memory from a /dev in the kernel. NAND corruption, a special number you can dial to wipe the device. Have a missed anything?
Hardly a quality product is it? oh but it can detect your face and turn off the screen when you're not looking at it? whoopee do, that's hardly of any use when it won't turn on any more.
Samsung are offering products that seem largely (at least originally) copied from Apple - appear to be lesser quality / less well made and poor service - sounds a bargain.
If my phone broke I would need a replacement almost immediately - not in a matter of weeks from now - if I got a Samsung and it went faulty (not if but when I should add) I would end up buying a replacement = expensive business. At least with Apple your phone goes faulty and the resolve it very quickly either by mail or one of their stores.
A friends iPhone developed a fault - he called them on Monday afternoon - on Tuesday a pre-paid return package arrived - it went back Tuesday afternoon - Apple confirmed it arrived Wednesday - posted out a replacement on Wednesday (same day turn around!) and he got it on Thursday morning. You can't really ask for more than that unless he had booked an appointment at a store and they would have swapped it there and then.
"Samsung are offering products that seem largely (at least originally) copied from Apple "
What complete and utter garbage. I'm so sick of this "you can't make a phone that's a rectangle because Apple did it". Its just Apples MO - drag every competitor that dares beat you into court.
You DO realise Apple's patents are being thrown out at the moment don't you? Pinch to Zoom is now toast, hopefully this stupid "rounded corners" lunacy will go next.
"If my phone broke I would need a replacement almost immediately - not in a matter of weeks from now - if I got a Samsung and it went faulty (not if but when I should add) I would end up buying a replacement"
Then you'd be a moron (or more likely an Apple shill!!)
So will the Fandroids stop complaining about IOS versions and obsolescence.
I got a new Galaxy Mini for a family member as a Christmas Present. I was shocked to find that it is still running Android 2.3. Now I'll have to flash it with Cyanogen to make it half decent.
The other thing is that I found that the HTC (while it sucks) mods to the UI are much more usable than the Samsung ones (at the same Android revision).
That argument is a non starter - Android 2.3 is old - you buy a new device you want the current OS. Even my 4 year old iPhone 3GS can run iOS 6 so from a security and feature point of view I am still able to 'use' the phone.
iOS has such a huge number of apps available and the OS does basically everything almost all users could need so your feature argument is irrelevant.
Actually your 3GS runs a cut down version of ios 6 compared to the version that is on the iphone 5.
I've got two really old android phones here which while officially will never go higher than the 2.3.7 they were supplied with, they both are running cyanogenmod 4.1.2 which has transformed the phones.
Yes it runs a cut down version, that's due to lack of memory and CPU speed. But you at least have the choice.
The 3GS was released over three years ago. three years and six months ago to be exact. The Android phone of that year was the HTC Hero which has only just got Android 2.3 thanks to enthusiasts.
Comparing who gets what updates is pointless, when they run entirely different OSs. If a dumb phone always had the latest updates, that wouldn't make it better. What matters is how the features compare. And it seems apple users needed those updates to get things like maps and copy paste, that android 2.2 already had.
The things that are new in android 4 do seem to be things that need the newer hardware, all the simpler features are already there.
Android 2.3 is Gingerbread. Initially released at the end of 2010 with API level 9 it was upgraded to API level 10 on the third release (2.3.3) in early 2011. The current release is Gingerbread 7 (2.3.7) with 8 already available from some sites.
Android 3 is not applicable to phones. Android 4 may eventually replace most Gingerbread uses on tablets and phablets but 2.3.x is still being updated with new releases and new features, just like iOS is.
As has been observed many a time, there are Androids and Androids.
Not all Android phones are being purchased as smartphones, but sometimes more as a high end feature phone.
No doubt at some point featurephones will go completely, to be replaced by Android handsets. However, there will be a world of difference between the most basic, several releases old cheapo phone, and the latest Samsung Galaxy Leather bound portfolio, or whatever comes after the Note....
The different users will have radically different usage patterns, with some content to remain with whatever ships with their phone, others subsisting solely on free apps, and yet others prepared to pay for quality apps for their phone and provide an income to developers.
This type of differentiation is going to be far more relevant than the latest iPhone/WinPhone/Android breakdowns.
It's like calling a basic Nokia running S40 a smartphone - sure it can do email and can do web but it's a total dog on a small screen and standard phone keyboard. Android get installed on the cheaper but volume end of the market as it's easy for manufacturers and makes their devices sound better than they are. Most users do not know and I expect do not get round to any more than phone calls and texting.
J2me phones are called feature, not dumb. But it's not as simple as running native apps. WP can't do native, nor could android in the earlier days, and still most apps aren't native. Why is native code better?
Then there's a certain phone that couldn't do apps at all, but got counted as a smartphone...
Basically it's just a marketing term.
Look again. S40 phones have either full qwerty keyboard, or touchscreens. They've had this for years. They are smartphones by any sensible definition, albeit low end, but they don't get included in the stats. Meanwhile the iphone got counted, even when it couldn't run apps. It means that 100% of apple sales get compared to only some of Samsung and Nokia's. Complete spin.
......... are an "advanced user" (as the PR boys put it) and know enough to be able to "root and rom" a device yet you managed to buy that phone without being aware of which iteration of Android it was running? You were "shocked"? Hmm, for some reason I detect a certain aroma coming off of your posting.
"While Apple's iPhone sales may have passed that 50 per cent milestone in the US, Kantar Worldpanel ComTech's stats show that Cupertino is losing the smartphone war in hefty chunks of the world."
I come in peace - Apple computer and Android phone and tablet user.
In Apple's postion I wouldn't be losing too much sleep over "losing" the smartphone wars. Share isn't everything. The margin on every iPhone sold is fine, thank you, and only Samsung out of the Android camp is making any money. Meanwhile Nokia and RIM's choices have put them on a fast track to oblivion. :(
It's just the same as PCs. Apple's total market share is diddlysquat compared with with the massed rank of Windows OEMs. But who is making the returns?
The "BMW niche strategy" for keeping shareholders happy has a lot going for it. Just ask Ford, GM, FIAT, Renault, and Peugeot-Citroën, all of whom are struggling to make the sums add up in their European operations.
Well... the 12 week period is Sep 2 through Nov 25. During that time the iPhone 5 launched in the US... but the Samsung Galaxy S III was launched on May 29th. Based on what we know of Samsung's sales, two thirds of the units sold before the end of November were sold before the beginning of September!
The HTC flagship (the One X) launched in May, so also falls outside this window.
LG have a couple of units that were launched in the time frame, but they don't account for a lot of units anyway.
Finally, the LG/Google Nexus 4 was launched 2 weeks before the end of this period.
I agree with the premise: the year end (or rolling 12 month) figures will paint a very different picture, where "50%" is not a number associated with Apple!
I've got to side with eSeM and Malcolm. This is a marketing geek report for momentary bragging rights. No investor worth half his portfolio would put any stock in it. I mean come on, it doesn't even include growth for the period and while I'm fairly sure more phones were shuffled this quarter than the same quarter a year ago it isn't measured or even mentioned so it's perfectly plausible that the market actually contracted and the contraction was just slower for some companies in certain regions.
Hell, the US market could have contracted and the EU market tripled or the US market could have grown at twice the rate of the EU and we would never know the difference from this report. If the various markets grew or shrank at roughly equal rates we would know a tiny bit more but it's still largely something for marketing folks to take to their bosses and say, "see, I deserve a bigger holiday bonus this year."
On a side note RIM's BB10 devices are set to launch early next year and I hope, if only for the sake of consumer choice, they put up a better showing in next years TTM data.
Given that the S3 alone outsold Apple's flagship, it's clear that Samsung etc do fine at the high end too.
And whilst Apple may get all the IOS sales, Samsung Android phones alone outsell Apple (throughout 2012 - by Q3, this was as much as 2 to 1).
The phone networks give vast amounts of marketing for Apple's phones, and it's available and offered to people on loads of contracts.
"BMW do not care if they sell as many cars as Ford."
*shrugs* So if sales don't matter, why do Apple fans bleat on about it all the time in the first place, trying to spin Apple sales as being high? You're right, it doesn't matter. Lots of people buy Addidas on Burberry, but it doesn't mean that I have to. I'd rather buy what I like. Which is Android.
"*shrugs* So if sales don't matter, why do Apple fans bleat on about it all the time in the first place, trying to spin Apple sales as being high? You're right, it doesn't matter. Lots of people buy Addidas on Burberry, but it doesn't mean that I have to. I'd rather buy what I like. Which is Android."
Christ, you speak contradictory shite. All you bang on about is market share you soporific twat.
"People CHOOSE iPhone - people get given Androids by DEFAULT when upgrading contracts"
Yes, people "choose" iPhone' but for many it isn't a considered decision. They are merely following the plebeian groupthink that says Apple is best.
A lot more people buying high end Android phone will have considered their purchase as they are spending a similar amount ( to the cost of an iPhone) on a device that isn't an iPhone.
"Because of course there wasn't any Android phones released in that same 12 week period..."
Quite the opposite - the iphone 5 was the first new iphone for 2 product cycles - there was a massive amount of pent up demand within apple's userbase for a new device (not a slightly warmed over "S" model).
So these figures included arguably Apple's strongest sales event for a few years, and started after Samsung's Galaxy S3 had already been launched - hence the time scale advantages Apple, most likely so they could go with the 50%+ in the US headline
You wish but Apple sales are typically very strong over Xmas.
You can see it in the streets - people are using and BUYING iPhones and iPads, John Lewis were selling bucket loads of them. I was in the queue for customer collections - about 10 people in front of me (well it is Xmas) and 4 of those people were buying iPads (3 of them were buying 2).
In the store people were asking the sales guy (while pointing at a Samsung) if this was an iPad - he had to redirect them to the Apple iPads which is what they were looking for.
The Nexus 7 is 'ok' but at £100 less than an iPad Mini - over it's lifetime it's not a huge cost and I've compared them side by side and guess most people who did will realise why. I'm not saying the Nexus is 'crap' but the screen is worse, it's chunky in comparison and feels cheap.
Conservatively these things will last 3+ years - so over 36 months a ~£100 cost is equivalent of £3 a month = pretty irrelevant.
Whether or not that is true (and I'd observe that Amazon Kindle Fire units seem to be very strong at the moment, too, so I'd hesitate before asserting that Apple is benefiting disproportionately)...
.... the period that the report covers is Sep 2 through Nov 25. This is not "over Xmas".
Sorry this whole calendar stuff is so obviously confusing you!
I know a lot of people who wanted an iPhone 5 but have delayed as availability has not been as easy (i.e. Apple selling every one it can make) but either bought in December or plan to buy early next year. Apple also started selling in China (probably after this survey) - so a lot more sales to add.
All I want is a high end well made phone at a cheap price don't care what it runs really. (As long as it is not Brew or Bada) - Tizen would be ok (Symbian is also fine by me - Windows Mobile dunno if it was modern hardware and a really good implementation of 6.5)
At the moment I use a Lumia 800 (Before that I had an Xperia Play which was absolute crap so no way I will buy Sony again).
(I am not really careful with smartphones or any technology really).
I am careful with my kindle (Never touch the screen) and my vinyl.
Why would you buy a 'high end' phone if you don't care what it runs - the point of buying a high end phone would be to use it's features and run apps. So you may buy an iPhone 5 or that Nokia Pureview if a camera was your highest priority, an iPhone 5 if you wanted the widest choice of apps or an Android if you wanted the ability to 'tinker' more.
More importantly I would rather what I want not be fashionable so it can be bought sim free at a better price.
(Don't care at all about looks or how thin it is either.)
I care about the battery / how fast it is / how good the stock firmware is (If Android).
(If the stock firmware sucks then the code is likely junk and a mess and its quite unlikely to be fixed by the so called community there is the odd exception but not something I would base a purchasing decision on).
Which manufacturer sells the most high end smart phones , becuase thats the most important stat, becuase that will show you whose making the actual money in the market. Rim is the only one so you can see how they are performing . Aplle is the only maker of iOS so you can see how they are performing. However the Andriod is made up of every manaufacturer , which means you cant tell which within that group is the biggest and best performing.
When this is done for PCs it is split out by company, why not for phones? and also why is the total number of phones, never mentioned , if we don't know how big the pie is, and whether it has shrunk or not, just using percentages is useless!
I think this is known (and the answer is a certain Korean company whose name begins with S and end with ung). We know that the Galaxy S III outsells the iPhone 5, plus they have the Note II and Galaxy Nexus and "lesser" phones like the Axiom, Relay, Rugby, Exhibit... with the old-model iPhone 4 challenged by the Galaxy S II, etc.
(I know the "lesser" phones may not qualify as "high end" by some definitions of "high end", but they're out there.
I can see a vague reason to care about OS sales if you're an app developer (though you're probably more interested in people that buy apps for cash given the growing storm over "tracking under 13s" for advertising) so you'd probably want to know numbers of $$$/£££ spent per OS owner, what's far more useful is the number of Handsets each company sells, and probably what category of handsets...
Also are they tablet or phone sales? Or both?
The figures don't seem very helpful for anyone really.
Considering Apple is a single brand selling a single phone (mostly - yes I realise they often sell the previous model at a lower price as well) compared with almost every other brand selling Android (yes I also realise there are Nokia phones and Blackberry) it's an amazing market share. A fairer comparison would be Apple vs Nokia (running Windows Phone) or Apple vs Blackberry.
But Samsung Android alone outsell Apple (at least they have all through 2012, by a factor of 2 to 1 in Q3 - of course a contrived survey 12 weeks right after the iphone 5 launch, when Apple's sales are known to be highly seasonal, is going to show Apple in a better light).
And only selling a few models (which isn't just one, as you concede) isn't a reason to make it more impressive - that's Apple's choice. There are potentially advantages to having fewer models (e.g., it means developers can focus on it more easily. I might as well say "Well the only reason Apple sold more is that they have fewer models, so it's easier to support - it's quite impressive that Android sells well, despite having lots of different models to support". If it turns out that offering more choice to consumers is what is more popular, then that's tough luck to Apple.
We have got my daughter a Samsung Galaxy Ace for Christmas. It comes with 2.3 Gingerbread (I think). She won't care what version of Android it's running as long as she can make calls, text, take pictures/video and use Facebook she will be happy.
I think a large number of Joe Public will have the same attitude.
Do commentards get reward points for spamming their tribal brand loyalty?
It's a non-story, dressed up as a security blanket for fruitbois.
Most of the tekky nerds I come into contact with, are rooting their droidphones, and being annoyingly public about it. The managerial classes are just purring laboriously about the user experience on their fruitphones.
They're only techtoys. I find it very difficult to be ragingly enthused by any of them, beyond the basic functionality.
Having the interwebs in the palm of your hand merely expands the intrusion of tech into free time that began with mobiles. You WILL answer that fatuous email, you WILL rebutt/"like" that snarky fb post etc. To the point where life going on around you is abstracted out of all recognition.
The volume of zombeez completely absorbed by their phones at every possible moment, whether as a means to avoid social contact (public transport), or as part of some curious ritual that involves being constantly connected to the matrix, is kinda weird. There's a macabre element of compulsive herd behaviour to it, which, as a student of human behaviour, I find slightly sinister.
Alerts and relentless geotagging in particular have a strong whiff of imminent O.B.E.Y. about them.
People haven't spoken on public transport for decades. Before phones they read newspapers and books.
I read a book on my phone and listen to music. I have no interest in any of the people on the train, maybe on a whole train there would be a half dozen people I'd be able to have a good active conversation about things that interest me and the chances of being anywhere near them are very low.
Other people are generally over rated, that's why we have friends, people that we've decided we enjoy spending time with.
"...things that interest me...". Are you sure you've got any real, human friends? How about you listening to what interests them? You may grow a few new brain cells, get some new ideas.
I know,, get an app that listens to you babbling on about what interests you. A good app may even make encouraging sounds as if it's listening and cares.
Apple sells on "lifestyle" and being cool, not technical ability. It's an effective marketing ploy but there is a danger that cool can become uncool overnight. Apple might suddenly cave in, but I hope not as the competition is healthy. If only Samsung and Apple could treat the workers a bit better.
What I want to know is this. I bought a Galaxy Tab 2 10.1, with the money back from Samsung it works out at £188, for the 16GB version. A 32GB memory card off E-Bay for £9 and I'm set up, for the price I'm happy with the performance of the TAB so what does the iPad offer in comparison for the prices that are charged? I have quite few apps, I'm not a gamer, and the only gripe I have is some of the software that came with the TAB, I don't use it.
I have looked at different versions of the iPad and the prices charged, and I am missing something, yes I have actually handled iPad's in the shops but still don't know what all the fuss is about unless its just the fact that the computer as we know it has shifted dramatically from the desktop to mobile, other than that the arguments still seem to be Apple fanboys against other fanboys.
I suppose it depends on what you use them for. My Mrs has a Tab 2, I have an iPad. Web browsing = same. Email = same, games = same with some exceptions, YouTube =same. The "general' functions on both of them are the same. Why pay more?
The iPad has some very specific apps that I need and are not available on Android devices. BTW the Tab 2 was an absolute bargain with the money back offer.
"The iPad has some very specific apps that I need and are not available on Android devices."
Think you just answered your own question.
Also if you already have iTunes purchases then the iPad makes more sense. If you put a value on 'service' the iPad makes more sense. At the end of the day if you want a device for web / email there is not going to be a lot of difference (although I still prefer Safari) - but iDevices do have more and better quality apps but your choice could just come down to 1 app if that was important to you.
So Android has grown in market share. So what? What are the actual sales figures? Are Apple selling less phones? "Android" isn't a direct hardware - it's an OS. How many people buying £100 Android handsets could afford an iPhone anyway? If all Android handsets cost the same as an iPhone, would they still have a lead? Do half the people with Android handsets even know what an Android is? etc etc
So long as Apple are selling lots of phones and making lots of cash, I doubt they could actually care less about "market share". And don't give me the whole "App Store" crap (developers focusing on market leader) - again, those with expensive iPhones most likely have more disposable income so buy more apps etc etc.
They do take hardware trade ins. "I know they do at AT&T and Target" Though its a sucker bet. You can get more in private sale. And the resale is incredibly high. For a two year old phone, its frankly a bit crazy.
I'd never pay $200 for a two year old phone. But as long as people do I'll take it. It saves me having to pay for my new contract phone.
A friend just bought her husband an iPhone 5 for Xmas. Technically it was a trade in deal as he had a iPhone 4 which was 2 years old - all they have to pay is $125 (US dollars), hand back the old phone and sign for another 2 years (and the monthly cost has actually dropped while he gets more minutes and data as well).
I also know a guy who sold his iPhone 4 a while back and got more than half of it's original value back after 2 years - be interesting to compare value of an 2 year old iPhone and 2 year old Galaxy II against their new values.
If you had used the two minutes you spent writing that post actually researching an answer you'd see that Galaxy devices have a similar depreciation curve to that of Apple devices. Its strange that they don't depreciate slower really since their old and tired batteries can be replaced unlike those in iPhones. I guess those that are buying secondhand Apple devices aren't the most savvy bunch.
Well that's the reality I have seen - we have gone through quite a few Android phones in our department - they are worthless out of contract as typically get no official updates. iPhones on the other hand are typically worth at least half after 2 years - that makes a big difference to the cost of ownership.
As soon as you cannot get easy / mainstream updates the phone is a brick and at least Apple support devices like the 3GS still which are 3-4 years old.
We have many application packages where the support company have gone out of business perhaps upto 10 years ago... That does not make the application worthless. Just perhaps difficult to support if something major changes such as the hardware, or other systems the app needs to work with.
The same applies to smart phones. Just because there are no more updates expected, it doesn't mean the phone is worthless. If it still does everything you need, then until the hardware fails, it's still a perfectly usable device.
Samsung are screwed when someone else makes the next best Android phone - Google are the only winners with Android. Apple are a single manufacturer and are doing very well while also providing a quality service - I would probably not buy Android based on service and support alone and I do not feel the need to tinker with the software on my phone and there are more apps on the iOS app store than you could need.
Developers know there is more money to be made on iOS (even - ironically - Google) so you can be pretty confident almost all apps will be on iOS (and probably first).
Don't they fucking just?
2007, original iphone launch (you know, the one that couldn't even do mms that every feature phone had done for years), I met an American who it took a whole 3 minutes to tell me he had an iphone, from cold. Three minutes. Poor fool thought I would be interested?
The iPhone's being pushed by AT&T and Verizon in the US, where as in Europe it's just another phone that's available on a huge range of networks and virtual networks without exclusivity.
Pretty much ever network here in Ireland, including some pretty small MVNOs all have the iPhone 5 available.
The other issue in Europe is that a lot of carriers tend to stick you on a special 'iPhone' tariff and contract which gives you fewer minutes, and fewer texts, and often less data than an equivalent general plan with a high-end Android and often a longer lock-in contract.
Given that the raw price of the iPhone is similar to the raw price of some of the top end Androids, I can only assume that the European carriers are getting a worse deal from Apple than they are from other handset makers, otherwise they would offer similar deals on them.
I also think in Europe the hype around the iPhone kind of died off more quickly than it did in the United States. Again, I'm not sure that Apple did as good a marketing job over here as it did in the US. The in-store displays are often rather lacking in luster and the networks generally seem to give the iPhone a push when a new model launches, then it just gets a stand down the back of the store somewhere. The top-end Androids look and generally are FAR more impressive in many respects too. I think many of us were waiting for some kind of radical new iPhone 5, and instead we basically got a slightly better screen and an extra row of icons.
The interface is also, as mentioned in previous posts, almost totally unchanged since the original iOS launch. It's a grid of icons. You can't even easily organise them without spending hours doing what is a bit like sorting tiles in a tile-puzzle game. Where as with most android setups, you have only the apps / widgets you want on your home screens and the rest are nicely (usually alphabetically) sorted in an app folder/drawer, neatly out of the way and easy to access. The iPhone's setup is akin to a computer that forced you to have absolutely everything on your desktop! It was fine when there were only a handful of apps to deal with, but nowadays it's getting a bit cumbersome and ridiculous.
From a European perspective, Apple is also obviously very very much more interested in its home market, particularly when you see things like the 4G just not working on European and Australian LTE networks as the iPhone 5 supports all the wrong bands for European networks which will be seeing widespread rollout in 2013. So, I mean why would I invest a lot of money / sign a long contract for a phone that will not fully support my local LTE networks, when there are androids that will?
That kind of stuff just annoys people and gives an impression of 'we only care about US customers'.
Siri didn't work in most European markets (even Ireland and Britain which speak English) for ages (still doesn't work in some markets), visual voicemail doesn't work in most setups here, etc etc etc..
If Apple want to get more market penetration in Europe, which is the world's largest consumer market in terms of raw spending power, it needs to compete with other suppliers and get pride of place on the networks, without just trying to lock them in and it needs to look at actually launching devices that work on European networks FULLY. Not releasing a handset that is not ready to roll on European LTE frequencies and not one with key features like Siri and Visual Voicemail forgotten about.
Anyway, I think that's why Android's doing better in Europe than in the US.
"Anyway, I think that's why Android's doing better in Europe than in the US."
So basically because they are cheaper - think most people already know that. I'd love to see all these Android phones that support UK 4G networks when - we only just have one and imagine the uptake is poor since the cost is so high and it is uncertain as to which networks will use / get which frequencies.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021