PDA

View Full Version : Research Firm Claims iPad Only Has 61% of Tablet Market




MacRumors
Jul 21, 2011, 05:12 PM
http://images.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/07/21/research-firm-claims-ipad-only-has-61-of-tablet-market/)


The iPad has a 61 percent share of the tablet market (http://in.reuters.com/article/2011/07/21/idINIndia-58371120110721) in the last quarter, according to research firm Strategy Analytics -- but not everyone is convinced that its numbers are accurate.
http://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2011/07/ipad2_hero.jpg


The firm claims Android increased its share to 30 percent, up from just 2.9 percent a year ago, when Apple claimed 94.3 percent of the tablet market. But Daring Fireball's John Gruber isn't buying it (http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/07/21/strategy-analytics).
Looks like those numbers are for units shipped, not units sold (http://www.zdnet.com/blog/microsoft/report-microsoft-worldwide-tablet-operating-system-share-at-5-percent/10128). Except that for Apple those numbers are one and the same, because they're selling iPads as fast as they can make them. Judging by Google's own numbers for Android OS versions in use, it sure seems like a lot of Android 3 tablets are sitting on store shelves.Gruber points out (http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/07/21/strategy-analytics) that same research firm, Strategy Analytics, placed iPads at a 75 percent share in the holiday quarter (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-01-31/android-tablets-gain-on-ipad-in-fourth-quarter-researcher-says.html) last year -- but it only looked at shipped products. Not those actually in the hands of customers.

In its earnings call earlier this week (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/07/19/apple-reports-record-breaking-q3-2011/), Apple COO Tim Cook noted that at the end of the June quarter "we were still selling every unit we could make during the quarter and that was the situation as we ended the quarter."

During the same call, Tim Cook had much to say (http://seekingalpha.com/article/280344-apple-management-discusses-q3-2011-results-earnings-call-transcript?part=qanda) about how Android "activation" numbers are calculated versus iOS:
I think the Android activation number is a difficult one to get our hands around, because unlike our numbers, which you can kind of go to our data sheet and you can add the iPods and the iPads and make a reasonable approximation of the iPod touch which spans over half of our iPod sales. You can quickly see that in the June quarter that we sold over 33 million iOS devices and across time, as Peter mentioned in his opening comments, we are now over 222 million cumulative iOS devices. And so we think this is incredible. And so our numbers are very straight forward, they're transparent and they're reported quarterly.With Apple selling record numbers of iOS devices, and recording record profits (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/07/19/apple-reports-record-breaking-q3-2011/), the Apple brass don't seem too concerned with Android's tablet numbers.

Regardless, with the public buying every iPad Apple can make, there doesn't seem to be much Apple needs to do -- other than build more iPads.

Article Link: Research Firm Claims iPad Only Has 61% of Tablet Market (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/07/21/research-firm-claims-ipad-only-has-61-of-tablet-market/)



dethmaShine
Jul 21, 2011, 05:20 PM
I call that ********.

I have yet to see an Android/Windows/Nokia/HP tablet in the market being actually used by some people. Maybe there are those people; but 40% tablets other than the iPad comes as a shock to me.

Who is buying those tablets? No one's buying PlayBook OR Motorola XOOM or ...

I really like the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 and the ASUS Transfer. But they together couldn't take 20% of the market. :(

res1233
Jul 21, 2011, 05:21 PM
What did they do? Survey people who went to Android.com? This seems unlikely.

NebulaClash
Jul 21, 2011, 05:21 PM
It's very simple folks: look at the tablets you see in use. Are iPads only making up 6 out of every 10? No? You see more like 8 or 9 out of every 10? That's how you know this study (like so many) is flawed.

The iPad is dominating the tablet market in such a way that certain other companies are trying to find ways to create market studies that show otherwise. It's an old game.

macrumors12345
Jul 21, 2011, 05:23 PM
We've seen this story before (http://andersonmichael.wordpress.com/2011/06/24/sold-not-shipped/). After all, Samsung claimed it had already sold 2 million Tabs six months ago.

mrtune
Jul 21, 2011, 05:30 PM
Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

61%? I'm not buying it. I haven't even seen a tablet other than an iPad in the wild yet.

All I see is iPads and Kindles out there. But I don't consider a Kindle a tablet.

dejo
Jul 21, 2011, 05:32 PM
It's very simple folks: look at the tablets you see in use. Are iPads only making up 6 out of every 10? No? You see more like 8 or 9 out of every 10? That's how you know this study (like so many) is flawed.
Looking at "tablets in use" (a very personal, subjective thing) is an even more-flawed approach (not that I really agree with Strategy Analytics' numbers).

nagromme
Jul 21, 2011, 05:36 PM
I call that ********.

I have yet to see an Android/Windows/Nokia/HP tablet in the market being actually used by some people. Maybe there are those people; but 40% tablets other than the iPad comes as a shock to me.

Who is buying those tablets? No one's buying PlayBook OR Motorola XOOM or ...

I really like the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 and the ASUS Transfer. But they together couldn't take 20% of the market. :(

I know one Xoom owner, who is a die-hard Apple hater (no facts or reason required). So I’ve seen one of those—and some attempts to get it to do anything as well as the iPad. (“This can do that too!” is seldom accurate in practice.) I also once saw a super-cheap Android tablet from Asia, at a hobby event, which could do very little and had broken repeatedly. So the proud owner showed off its features.... via videos played on his “backup” tablet: an iPad!

Other than those two, I have never seen a non-iPad tablet in the wild.

Porco
Jul 21, 2011, 05:38 PM
I wonder how many of the 39% were tablets prescribed by a doctor?

Stella
Jul 21, 2011, 05:39 PM
I call that ********.

I have yet to see an Android/Windows/Nokia/HP tablet in the market being actually used by some people. Maybe there are those people; but 40% tablets other than the iPad comes as a shock to me.

Who is buying those tablets? No one's buying PlayBook OR Motorola XOOM or ...

I really like the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 and the ASUS Transfer. But they together couldn't take 20% of the market. :(

Nokia don't have a tablet... thats why you've never seen one.

OllyW
Jul 21, 2011, 05:51 PM
61%? I'm not buying it. I haven't even seen a tablet other than an iPad in the wild yet.

I haven't seen any tablet in the wild yet.

coder12
Jul 21, 2011, 05:59 PM
I haven't seen any tablet in the wild yet.

Walk in tall grass with lots of Poké Balls, eventually you'll see and catch one. ;)

I've been blessed with the opportunity of mass-deploying iPads for our school, only 1120 left to go! I've yet to see anything other than an iPad in the wild also.

paul4339
Jul 21, 2011, 06:24 PM
the report is for the period ending Dec 31 2010.
What good is that info?

Asus, Acer, Motorola, RIM, HP didn't have any offering; and Apple didn't release the iPad 2 yet. It was basically Samsung Galaxy tab vs. iPad 1 - and that's old news.

Since then, ASUS, Acer and maybe Samsung are the only one that seem to be selling, but iPad 2 has been flying off the shelves.

.

NebulaClash
Jul 21, 2011, 06:55 PM
Looking at "tablets in use" (a very personal, subjective thing) is an even more-flawed approach (not that I really agree with Strategy Analytics' numbers).

Unless you are a researcher, it's the best we can do on a personal level. And when something is supposed to be as popular as Android devices are supposed to be (according to all those studies), you'd think we see more of them around in the wild the way we do Apple devices.

cleric
Jul 21, 2011, 06:59 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

Units shipped not sold!

Inopia-Vi
Jul 21, 2011, 07:06 PM
Who knows how high is the stockpile of android tablet at locals FutureShop, Staples and Best Buy... Too high? :p

LizKat
Jul 21, 2011, 07:06 PM
It's very simple folks: look at the tablets you see in use. Are iPads only making up 6 out of every 10? No? You see more like 8 or 9 out of every 10? That's how you know this study (like so many) is flawed.

The iPad is dominating the tablet market in such a way that certain other companies are trying to find ways to create market studies that show otherwise. It's an old game.

:D :D those other guys all have a copy of How to Lie With Statistics (by Darrell Huff, illustrated by Irving Geis), an illuminating little book first published in 1954, and featured in most economics curricula ever since.

Rodimus Prime
Jul 21, 2011, 07:11 PM
I know one Xoom owner, who is a die-hard Apple hater (no facts or reason required). So I’ve seen one of those—and some attempts to get it to do anything as well as the iPad. (“This can do that too!” is seldom accurate in practice.) I also once saw a super-cheap Android tablet from Asia, at a hobby event, which could do very little and had broken repeatedly. So the proud owner showed off its features.... via videos played on his “backup” tablet: an iPad!

Other than those two, I have never seen a non-iPad tablet in the wild.

Well you have to remember those craplets are not counted by Google.

As for the survay I would not call it that good. 61% is way WAY to low for iPad market share.

As for tablets in the wild I have seen a few different ones when I have gone out to eat at lunch some around campus but for the most part I do not see any tablets. The ones I do see are mostly iPads but I have seen clearly some of the others.

I personally would love to get my hands on a galaxy tab but can not justify the cost. I am not locked into the Apple eco system but tablets just are not something I really am digging yet.

S.Jobs
Jul 21, 2011, 07:25 PM
So 2 devices have 61% of the market while the 39% left is divided up with like 100s of devices with different operating software. Good for you apple :apple:

HiRez
Jul 21, 2011, 07:37 PM
I've seen a total of 3 Android tablets that I can remember...ever. iPads? There's at least 6 people within 50 feet of me here at work who I know have them, and I've seen many others out on the street.

NebulaClash
Jul 21, 2011, 07:52 PM
I was recently at an airport where, in a gadget shop, I saw a bunch of tablets. First time I've ever seen any of them. I had not even heard of some of them.

I see iPads being used almost every day. Whoever cooked up this survey needs to realize that when you push propaganda, you need to make it at least semi-believable.

res1233
Jul 21, 2011, 07:55 PM
I was recently at an airport where, in a gadget shop, I saw a bunch of tablets. First time I've ever seen any of them. I had not even heard of some of them.

I see iPads being used almost every day. Whoever cooked up this survey needs to realize that when you push propaganda, you need to make it at least semi-believable.

No, you don't. You just have to cover it with stuff people want to hear. You can make people believe anything that way.

tzeshan
Jul 21, 2011, 08:01 PM
Of course since these things are called Android tablets.

http://www.buydig.com/shop/product.aspx?sku=ARC70250GB
http://www.sears.com/shc/s/p_10153_12605_00382003000P?sid=I0084400010000100600&aff=Y
http://www.buy.com/prod/coby-kyros-mid8024-4g-8-tablet-computer-s5pv210-1-ghz-black-800-x-600/q/loc/101/221637867.html

marksman
Jul 21, 2011, 08:26 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_4 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8K2 Safari/6533.18.5)

This is some top notch research. Anyone who can spell tablet knows this is not true.

*LTD*
Jul 21, 2011, 08:45 PM
Here's the answer to anyone's question regarding this issue, and it's already in the article:


In its earnings call earlier this week (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/07/19/apple-reports-record-breaking-q3-2011/), Apple COO Tim Cook noted that at the end of the June quarter "we were still selling every unit we could make during the quarter and that was the situation as we ended the quarter."

During the same call, Tim Cook had much to say (http://seekingalpha.com/article/280344-apple-management-discusses-q3-2011-results-earnings-call-transcript?part=qanda) about how Android "activation" numbers are calculated versus iOS:

I think the Android activation number is a difficult one to get our hands around, because unlike our numbers, which you can kind of go to our data sheet and you can add the iPods and the iPads and make a reasonable approximation of the iPod touch which spans over half of our iPod sales. You can quickly see that in the June quarter that we sold over 33 million iOS devices and across time, as Peter mentioned in his opening comments, we are now over 222 million cumulative iOS devices. And so we think this is incredible. And so our numbers are very straight forward, they're transparent and they're reported quarterly.

With Apple selling record numbers of iOS devices, and recording record profits (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/07/19/apple-reports-record-breaking-q3-2011/), the Apple brass don't seem too concerned with Android's tablet numbers.

Regardless, with the public buying every iPad Apple can make, there doesn't seem to be much Apple needs to do -- other than build more iPads.

Article Link: Research Firm Claims iPad Only Has 61% of Tablet Market (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/07/21/research-firm-claims-ipad-only-has-61-of-tablet-market/)

Corban987
Jul 21, 2011, 09:01 PM
The numbers could be correct, I know lots of ANDROID users, but I rarely see them use them because they are not functional enough. Most of the users find them not so user friendly. I ask if they have an app and they say no, I show them how to get the app and they go WOW. At least everything is in the appstore for apple and easy to find. ANDROID market is not so great.

Most ANDROID tablets sit in peoples cupboards as they received them as a gift for a phone plan or for buying some furniture, they are not used. In airports, all I see are iPads. I take mine out to watch a movie and others do the same, at least 30% of people in international airports have iPads.

wovel
Jul 21, 2011, 11:06 PM
Looking at "tablets in use" (a very personal, subjective thing) is an even more-flawed approach (not that I really agree with Strategy Analytics' numbers).

Are you sure? As far as I can tell their numbers are just made up. Their report at the end of last year had Apple with only a 75% share.. They would have to give a pretty compelling description of their methodology before I would believes there methods are any better then personal anecdotes.

wovel
Jul 21, 2011, 11:09 PM
The numbers could be correct, I know lots of ANDROID users, but I rarely see them use them because they are not functional enough. Most of the users find them not so user friendly. I ask if they have an app and they say no, I show them how to get the app and they go WOW. At least everything is in the appstore for apple and easy to find. ANDROID market is not so great.

Most ANDROID tablets sit in peoples cupboards as they received them as a gift for a phone plan or for buying some furniture, they are not used. In airports, all I see are iPads. I take mine out to watch a movie and others do the same, at least 30% of people in international airports have iPads.

I am amazed by the number of iPads in airports. If you go into an airline lounge, they are everywhere. I have seen 1000s of iPads and even one or two bulky windows tablets over the past 16 months of traveling. I have seen 1 Xoom. I assume the gu worked for Motorola, but maybe they sold it.

Joker2206
Jul 22, 2011, 01:28 AM
Even if this is the truth, it's still on side of Apple a big time. I mean, iPad is 1 product (eventually 2 but from same company) and it has so large portion of the market while android tablets share the rest of the market with many other companies which equals much much less money for them.

2 Replies
Jul 22, 2011, 01:34 AM
I call that ********.

I have yet to see an Android/Windows/Nokia/HP tablet in the market being actually used by some people. Maybe there are those people; but 40% tablets other than the iPad comes as a shock to me.

Who is buying those tablets? No one's buying PlayBook OR Motorola XOOM or ...

I really like the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 and the ASUS Transfer. But they together couldn't take 20% of the market. :(

Only a complete and utter FOOL makes a claim such as
"No one's buying PlayBook OR Motorola XOOM or ..."
If even ONE person buys them, you're wrong.
...and It just so happens that this iPhone user (myself) does not own an iPad (and would never waste money on one), but instead owns a Viewsonic gTablet (an Android tablet that would fall squarely in your '...' category), so there you go. Your statement that no one buys them is proven wrong by counter-example.
And also remember that the wildly popular "Nook" is ALSO an Android tablet.

Besides, (what so many people here seem to overlook is).... tablets are more likely used in the home rather than outside, so expecting to witness an accurate subset of those in use, while out and about, is a ridiculous borderline ludicrous expectation.

But even so, did you ever consider that you didn't see non-apple hardware because you weren't looking for non-Apple tablets?
People tend to focus on and remember items that stand-out to them, and ignore or forget the others.

Or perhaps it's just that by the nature of the beast, Apple users tend to flash their gadgets more than others. Amongst all my co-workers, family and friends, the balance of Android to WinPhone7 to iPhone is (oddly) in that same order in terms of popularity (greatest to least). (Yes, more people I know own Android devices than iPhones. I myself, a multi-generational iPhone owner.)
Yet it seems the opposite order in terms of how often the user shows-off their handset. (My friends who own Android phones could care less about flashing it around, while the iPhones/iPod touches are always being shown off... even if no one cares. WinPhone7, somewhere in the middle... but the interest seems to be more of an odd curiosity than ohhs and awws.)
Now this is just my personal experience, and I'm not deluded enough to believe that what I witness is true across the board, but it makes sense, knowing the style-stigma/stereotype for Apple products that they'd be flashed around much more.
So perceived usage, could be skewed by that human condition.

As for this report, I say their findings are totally plausible.
Apple has always tried to drive sales by exaggerating their perceived product image.
Hell, it was the whole POINT to their stupid Mac vs PC ad campaign, and even Mac fans and Apple store employees will admit how inaccurate the images of Mac users and PC users Apple portrayed were.
So it makes sense that they would report their gross product sales numbers as use numbers, instead of revealing the actual numbers they have for actively used devices.
Apple has no reason to not inflate their use numbers.

neko girl
Jul 22, 2011, 01:39 AM
So it makes sense that they would report their gross product sales numbers as use numbers, instead of revealing the actual numbers they have for actively used devices.
Apple has no reason to not inflate their use numbers.
Every tablet usage study out there supports Apple's sale numbers. Also, every tablet usage study does NOT support the report in the article. Apple has a fiduciary responsibility for the tablet sales numbers they report. Google consequently, does not.

I think this guy has the right idea:
https://twitter.com/#!/rsynnott/status/94124787961569280

What is 1.35 mil vs. the total number of iPads sold so far, again? Seems like Android tablet sales are "quite smooth".

2 Replies
Jul 22, 2011, 02:00 AM
Every tablet usage study out there supports Apple's sale numbers.(bolding emphasis mine)

Obviously not.
Again, if even a single usage study exists that does not support Apple's sales numbers, then your statement is false. And with the existence of the study featured by this very article; QED, by counter-example.


Apple has a fiduciary responsibility for the tablet sales numbers they report. Google consequently, does not.

Google doesn't sell tablets, they merely supply the OS that manufacturers install on their hardware.
Why would anyone even expect Google to report hardware sales numbers?
Like expecting cows to report milk or cereal box sales, or rice growers to report sake sales numbers, or expecting automotive sales numbers from brake-pad manufacturers.
Seems like a kinda stupid expectation. :rolleyes:

But okay, I'll digress and revise. Apple has little (not no) reason to not inflate their use numbers.

Otaviano
Jul 22, 2011, 02:15 AM
The only way I see that number being accurate is if they are reporting units shipped rather than units sold. I just see no other way that I can believe that is true. Here the iPad 2 remains more or less sold out in every retailer, and other tablets don't gather any interest at all. Since this entire tablet craze started I can think of one non-iPad tablet I've seen out in the wild.

I wonder if Android will be able to maintain it's explosive growth in tablet industry. One thing I believe about Android's success in the mobile industry is that they essentially tied together a huge chunk of market share that already existed. HTC, Samsung, Motorolla, and so on were already successful players with market share, good distribution, and great subsidy deals in place. Android just unified them under one flag. It gave Android a great base to move forward from and then strong sales have done the rest.

Alternatively in the tablet field there is no existing marketshare to be had, it all needs to be built from the ground up. There is the distinct possibility that this plays out similarly to how the iPod race played out. Where despite analysts warnings Apple is able to maintain a large majority of the marketshare. A lot of the practices Apple used to maintain their iPod lead like buying out components are still in play, and Apple has only gotten better at it.

Time will tell I guess. I'm waiting to see how the Amazon tablet will do, which ironically enough is really bad for Google.

bushido
Jul 22, 2011, 05:19 AM
I haven't seen any tablet in the wild yet.

i havent seen one yet either besides the apple store

*LTD*
Jul 22, 2011, 05:45 AM
Based on the data we see from both Apple and Google (Apple's sales data and Google's activation data), it looks like the tablet market in no way resembles the smartphone market. At all. It looks like Apple has sold to customers over 21 times more iPads than all Honeycomb Android tablets combined.

The iPad didn't enter the tablet market. The tablet market that existed before was not actually a market - at least not a viable one. The iPad created the tablet market, and it resembles very closely the position the iPod had in the digital music player market a decade ago than it does the iPhone in 2008.

The funny thing is, is that the only viable and discernible tablet market remains the iPad market. And it's growing at quite a rate. Imagine if it really does turn out to be an iPod situation. But this time, it's not about a music player. It's about computing at large.

Consider this: Apple is to the post-PC era what Microsoft and Intel combined were for the PC era. They control the dominant software platform and reap the majority of the profits from hardware. Imagine how big a combined Microsoft and Intel would have been 20 years ago. Then consider that the Post-PC/mobile market is going to be bigger than the PC market.

blackburn
Jul 22, 2011, 06:14 AM
I'm not defending apple, but yesterday I went to a big shopping surface, a guess what people were toying with ipads and macs. Now there's something called pc experience but *nobody* was there.
I never saw anybody with an android tablet so far, just ipads (but not much).

I've activated my android phone about 10 times now since it tends to need a hard reset once in a while.

Piarco
Jul 22, 2011, 06:30 AM
I know twelve people with iPads and one with a Galaxy Tab (the original 7"). And even they also own an iPad.
My experience may not be representative by any means, but these figures are definitely wooly at best.

litchie
Jul 22, 2011, 06:46 AM
Where have the android pads gone?

NSeven
Jul 22, 2011, 07:05 AM
AHAHAHHA .............ONLY !!!!!

Id say thats pretty damn good.

batchtaster
Jul 22, 2011, 07:29 AM
Looking at "tablets in use" (a very personal, subjective thing) is an even more-flawed approach (not that I really agree with Strategy Analytics' numbers).

That I have not ever seen anyone using a non-iPad tablet is not subjective. Not in the slightest. It's not subject to my feelings, taste or opinions, which is what the word "subjective" actually means. It's simply a fact. Just as it is with anyone else. You either have or you have not. How many you remember is also not subjective; it's just data with varying degrees of accuracy.

What I think you mean to say is that the penetration will be different for different people, since it's not "6 out of every 10". However, when you total it against everybody on this board, everybody you know, etc, then it must statistically approach the numbers being claimed. The larger the sample, the more accurate the result. And since there are a number of "zeros" being claimed by people here, the non-iPads have a lot of ground to cover to approach 61%.

NebulaClash
Jul 22, 2011, 07:39 AM
The insidious nature of this study is that it posits a trend that is in Android's favor. Look how an Android supporter will take this data:

"Wow, in Q4 '10 we were at 2.9%, and now just two quarters later we are up to 30%! At that rate we'll be over 50% by Q4 '11. We win!"

So look around you this Christmas season. If you don't see a 50-50 split of tablet usage, you'll know this trend does not exist.

roadbloc
Jul 22, 2011, 07:58 AM
The numbers could be correct, I know lots of ANDROID users, but I rarely see them use them because they are not functional enough.I would disagree with that. My father works for a certain UK bank which has just started trialing the use of Android tablets for his work. When I asked why not an iPad to him, he said it was because they were insecure and lacked certain resources needed for the job.

So if anything, it's the iPad that lacks functionality. Not that Apple should care, they're doing well in the consumer side of things.


The iPad didn't enter the tablet market. The tablet market that existed before was not actually a market - at least not a viable one. The iPad created the tablet market...That is just utter nonsense. Next you'll be trying to say Apple created the Phone market. And the PC market. :rolleyes:

Adidas Addict
Jul 22, 2011, 08:09 AM
It's not surprising if android tablets have increased their share, they only cost £50-£70 ($80-$100) for cheap resistive screen tablets. Completely different market, and most people I know that have bought the cheap droid tablets sell them on within the week.

NebulaClash
Jul 22, 2011, 08:24 AM
I would disagree with that. My father works for a certain UK bank which has just started trialing the use of Android tablets for his work. When I asked why not an iPad to him, he said it was because they were insecure and lacked certain resources needed for the job.

So if anything, it's the iPad that lacks functionality. Not that Apple should care, they're doing well in the consumer side of things.



Ah, your father has been misinformed. The U.S. investment banks are all over the iPad without any security issues or issues with resources. Sounds as if your dad has one of those IT shops that learned it's good for their job security to be anti-Apple. Or some other explanation for why he would mischaracterize the iPad. Businesses are flocking to the iPad, so clearly they are not the way your father described them.

That is just utter nonsense. Next you'll be trying to say Apple created the Phone market. And the PC market.

Apple certainly did not create the tablet market, since Microsoft struggled for ten years to get people to buy theirs. Apple certainly did not create the phone market, but no one claimed that.

But Apple most certainly did create the PC market, unless you count the Altair.

Popeye206
Jul 22, 2011, 08:25 AM
I don't buy it. The 40% might make sense if they compared all shipped to channel tablets.... but bought by customers. No way. I've only seen a couple non-apple tablets in the wild and they were in airports.

In contrast, even here in NE PA, I seen iPads everywhere in the wild. I'd be shocked if non-Apple tablets have 10% share yet of actual sold units.

Popeye206
Jul 22, 2011, 08:28 AM
That is just utter nonsense. Next you'll be trying to say Apple created the Phone market. And the PC market. :rolleyes:

Have to disagree with you and agree with the other poster. Tablets were not catching on until the iPad came out. Only used in very specific B2B applications if anything. Apple did create the tablet for the masses. Sorry... but the numbers support this.

Oh... Apple did more to create the PC market in the early days than MS. Apple was shipping PC's before MS even made it's first million. As for smart phones... yup... didn't create them, but they sure did change them.

*LTD*
Jul 22, 2011, 08:42 AM
That is just utter nonsense. Next you'll be trying to say Apple created the Phone market. And the PC market. :rolleyes:

The tablet market was dead before Apple came along.

As to the latter, I certainly wouldn't say that, although it certainly feels like it.

kdarling
Jul 22, 2011, 09:40 AM
When Apple says they sold all the iPads they had been able to manufacture this quarter, they meant to retailers.

No manufacturer reports the number of tablets (or phones) actually bought by an end consumer. That goes for Apple, Samsung or any other maker.

We have to resort to other means. One way of counting is to use the number of activations. Unfortunately, Apple doesn't report those for tablets, and Google doesn't count most of the cheap ones, nor do they break out tablets from phones (except for reported Honeycomb tablets, which are undoubtedly the minority of tablet sales).

--

Another way is to survey stores. Both IPads and Android tablets can be seen sitting on some store shelves. This tells us that retailers jumped on the tablet craze, but some stocked up too much.

IPads are very popular (I just gave one to a daughter yesterday, even though she has an Android phone), but not everyone can afford them. So a lot of people are buying under-$200 Android tablets (which are usually best used as kids' tablets, but are okay for browsing and a few games. These tablets are usually not reported in Google's activation numbers.)

--

Observation: tablets tend to be used mostly at home, so they're not seen that much. I've only seen iPads at airports, and they're only noticeable because they're so big. I probably wouldn't notice 7" Android tablets because I'd think they were e-readers instead.

ctdonath
Jul 22, 2011, 09:43 AM
Only a complete and utter FOOL makes a claim such as
"No one's buying PlayBook OR Motorola XOOM or ..."
If even ONE person buys them, you're wrong.

In a soundbite-oriented casual conversational medium, such terms as "nobody does X" is shorthand/code for "well yeah a few people do X but the numbers are so small as to be overwhelmed by the huge percentage of those doing Y instead".

Of course people are buying PlayBooks and XOOMs.
People bought MS Kins too - but not enough worth noting save for sheer novelty of how few.

Amazing how many people take a soundbite medium and expect participants to write voluminous tomes of perfect accuracy in every tweet-sized quip.

The term you need to investigate is "sarcasm".

And also remember that the wildly popular "Nook" is ALSO an Android tablet.

Which is part of the confusion about such statistics: yeah, it runs Android, but given the device is built & marketed as a reader with a few appish minor features, does it count? Does a battery & motor strapped to a bicycle count into electric-car usage statistics?

But even so, did you ever consider that you didn't see non-apple hardware because you weren't looking for non-Apple tablets?
People tend to focus on and remember items that stand-out to them, and ignore or forget the others.

To the contrary: looking for tablets in the wild, methinks the rare non-iPad instances would stand out as memorable.

As for this report, I say their findings are totally plausible.

Sure they're plausible, depending on how you squint at them. As another noted, this may be a good case study for How To Lie With Statistics: if you're including Nooks and other Android-running devices which are rarely used - by design! - for their full potential, and including "shipped but not sold", and "bought one and shelved it 'cuz it sucks", and "bought several (returning some) before settling on one to actually use - and it's an iPad"*, and ... then yeah, grasping at all statistics and ganging up hundreds of products to tout "hey, non-iPads make up half the market share of ONE PRODUCT FROM ONE COMPANY", then yeah it's plausible.


* - of tablet owners I know, 6 own iPads (just one tablet each), while the other 3 have purchased at least 6 non-iPad tablets between them. From one angle, that's 50-50 iPad vs non-iPad; from another angle, it's a 6-1 ratio 'cuz 5 of the non-iPads are shelved or returned; from a third angle it's a practical 100% iPads because the one in-use exception is used exclusively as an e-book reader.

NebulaClash
Jul 22, 2011, 10:18 AM
To the contrary: looking for tablets in the wild, methinks the rare non-iPad instances would stand out as memorable.

Exactly. I'm very interested in what tech other people are using, and I really notice it. That's how I saw the rise of iPods a decade ago, and the relative paucity of other MP3 players in comparison. It's also how I notice the many Android phones and Blackberries in use, and how the Blackberry suddenly became the teen girl phone of choice a couple of years ago. And it's also how I saw how popular the Kindle is.

And it's also how I know the iPad is kicking the butt of every other tablet out there. I routinely see iPads in use. I've yet to see any other tablet used by anyone, anywhere. Others have seen them? Cool. I haven't. And I look.

tzeshan
Jul 22, 2011, 10:27 AM
We have to resort to other means. One way of counting is to use the number of activations. Unfortunately, Apple doesn't report those for tablets, and Google doesn't count most of the cheap ones, nor do they break out tablets from phones (except for reported Honeycomb tablets, which are undoubtedly the minority of tablet sales).


IPads are very popular (I just gave one to a daughter yesterday, even though she has an Android phone), but not everyone can afford them. So a lot of people are buying under-$200 Android tablets (which are usually best used as kids' tablets, but are okay for browsing and a few games. These tablets are usually not reported in Google's activation numbers.)


I am curious. How does Google know a tablet is under-$200 Android tablets?

kdarling
Jul 22, 2011, 10:49 AM
I am curious. How does Google know a tablet is under-$200 Android tablets?

The point is, they usually don't know about them at all.

Google is only counting activations of devices using their services. On better tablets, you go through a Google activation process on first startup.

Most of the inexpensive tablets have not licensed Google apps, and many cannot even access the Market unless you sideload a hacked version... which is actually probably pretty common.

As for Honeycomb, if you regularly visit woot, ubid, redtag, ebay, craigslist and all the other tablet outlets, it's easy to notice that almost all inexpensive Android tablets are running Froyo 2.2 these days. (Which is at least a step up from a year ago, when many were running 1.6).

--

The upshot is: many, many inexpensive tablets are not counted by Google either by activation or by Honeycomb counts.

tzeshan
Jul 22, 2011, 10:59 AM
The point is, they usually don't know about them at all.

Google is only counting activations of devices using their services. On better tablets, you go through a Google activation process on first startup.

Most of the inexpensive tablets have not licensed Google apps, and many cannot even access the Market unless you sideload a hacked version... which is actually probably pretty common.

As for Honeycomb, if you regularly visit woot, ubid, redtag, ebay, craigslist and all the other tablet outlets, it's easy to notice that almost all inexpensive Android tablets are running Froyo 2.2 these days. (Which is at least a step up from a year ago, when many were running 1.6).

--

The upshot is: many, many inexpensive tablets are not counted by Google either by activation or by Honeycomb counts.

I am still confused. Isn't the Android OS free? Why can't the cheap Android tablets license it? Why would any retail outlets sell them if they can not be activated? Wouldn't they get a lot of returns? I thought some Android buyers are stupid. But I would not think they are this stupid.

kdarling
Jul 22, 2011, 11:08 AM
I am still confused. Isn't the Android OS free? Why can't the cheap Android tablets license it? Why would any retail outlets sell them if they can not be activated? Wouldn't they get a lot of returns?

The Android OS itself is free and does not require activation.

Including Google services with the device requires a license from Google. (I have no idea how much they charge for that.)

I thought some Android buyers are stupid. But I would not think they are this stupid.

There's no call for insults.

NebulaClash
Jul 22, 2011, 11:09 AM
That makes sense about the cheaper tablets, yet I've not seen them in the wild either.

dBeats
Jul 22, 2011, 11:37 AM
Google is really good at adding new features to things, but really bad at making it all make sense. It all has a "beta" feel to it. Like it was made by people who get more excited about the algorithm they made rather than whether it was useful or intuitive.


Also, why is the android logo a green space alien? Never understood that....

NebulaClash
Jul 22, 2011, 11:41 AM
Also, why is the android logo a green space alien? Never understood that....

Might as well ask why Verizon advertised Android phones by expliciting showing users being turned into machines. In both your example and mine, these are ideas that teen boys find exciting, and everyone else finds repellant at worst or silly at best. Good examples of techies approving the ads and missing the big picture.

kazmac
Jul 22, 2011, 11:52 AM
I wonder how many of the 39% were tablets prescribed by a doctor?

Thank you for the chuckle. Molto Bene, Porco. :D

Yamcha
Jul 22, 2011, 01:02 PM
I think the 94% claim is no longer true, at least from what I've seen in the web, Apple did have that 94% marketshare, but Android now has 30% marketshare..

Apple is still the leader :P, and honestly I've tried many tablets, seen many reviews and I don't think there is a better experience then what the iPad offers..

But I have to admit that HP Touchpad and Blackberry Playbook have got Multi-Tasking right imo...

kdarling
Jul 22, 2011, 01:08 PM
Also, why is the android logo a green space alien? Never understood that....

It's a robot, not an alien.

AFAIK, they've never said why, but here's a guess:

Android as a company was founded to make phones more aware of their owners. Preferences, locations, interactions, etc. In other words, a mix between robots and humans, which could be roughly defined as an "android".

Perhaps we are the human part, and the mascot is the robot part ?

As for green, who knows. I'm still trying to figure out why Apple's logo went from rainbow to chrome-silver :)

irnchriz
Jul 22, 2011, 04:40 PM
They need to stop all the 'tablet market' crap. Looking at the recent Apple iPad sales figures highlights the fact that there is an iPad Market and no one gives a crap about the droid pads.

Spoony
Jul 22, 2011, 05:07 PM
This is where using Accounting Definitions (GAAP) is misleading.

Shipping Terms define "Sales/Revenue" for accounting purposes.

Millions of Android tablets shipped to best buy are counted as sales and an estimate of sales returns and allowances is recorded for ones that are returned to the manufacturers.

You can't use Accounting Definitions to describe Market Share of a product!!!!!! That doesn't even make any senes and it's misleading and lazy reporting.

I thinbk the active Honeycomb users is like 1% of all android devices out there. That is a little over 1 Million. Compared to Apples I have no idea what their ipad sales are 30M? That is more insane than the iPod market.

Stop using Accounting Definitions to be misleading.

accessoriesguy
Jul 22, 2011, 06:45 PM
a single device (fine 2) with greater than 60% of a market is rather incredible regardless :D

kdarling
Jul 22, 2011, 08:34 PM
I thinbk the active Honeycomb users is like 1% of all android devices out there. That is a little over 1 Million. Compared to Apples I have no idea what their ipad sales are 30M?

As mentioned above, there are far more Android tablets without Honeycomb than with. So they won't show up on an OS pie chart.

a single device (fine 2) with greater than 60% of a market is rather incredible regardless :D

Very true, assuming it keeps that 60% going forward.

roadbloc
Jul 23, 2011, 08:30 AM
Ah, your father has been misinformed. The U.S. investment banks are all over the iPad without any security issues or issues with resources.
Well I'm from the UK, so that actually has nothing to do with what I was on about.

NebulaClash
Jul 23, 2011, 09:13 AM
Well I'm from the UK, so that actually has nothing to do with what I was on about.

Perhaps, but since the IBs I was talking about are multinationals, and obviously have a big UK presence, it's absolutely true that in the UK too the iPad is a big choice of the business world.

And since 80% or more of the Fortune 500 are creating pilot programs (or already deploying) iPads, it's clear business does not find security issues with the iPad. It's big in business already.

MacinDoc
Jul 23, 2011, 12:03 PM
Well I'm from the UK, so that actually has nothing to do with what I was on about.
Perhaps not, but it's important to note that the Android OS is inherently less secure that iOS because the App Marketplace is not regulated, so malware is a much higher risk for Android-based devices, unless they are locked down so that no additional apps can be installed.

roadbloc
Jul 23, 2011, 05:37 PM
Perhaps not, but it's important to note that the Android OS is inherently less secure that iOS because the App Marketplace is not regulated, so malware is a much higher risk for Android-based devices, unless they are locked down so that no additional apps can be installed.
Android provides the flexibility for the bank to apply their own security software, encryption, bootloader, etc onto the tablets, pretty much integrated into the OS, like they do with the Windows based laptops used for his work.

iOS is simply not flexible enough. The bank needs to be able to have full control of the OS. Android provides it, iOS doesn't.

NebulaClash
Jul 23, 2011, 07:59 PM
Android provides the flexibility for the bank to apply their own security software, encryption, bootloader, etc onto the tablets, pretty much integrated into the OS, like they do with the Windows based laptops used for his work.

iOS is simply not flexible enough. The bank needs to be able to have full control of the OS. Android provides it, iOS doesn't.

Oh well, that's entirely different. For them Android is the requirement. But that's not the same as saying there is something wrong with the iPad in business, for most businesses are having no issue using them. Most businesses don't need to install bootloaders.

Gasu E.
Jul 25, 2011, 03:37 PM
I wonder how many of the 39% were tablets prescribed by a doctor?

I thought I saw some tablets at BestBuy; but on closer look they were suppositories.

neko girl
Jul 30, 2011, 12:45 PM
Again, if even a single usage study exists that does not support Apple's sales numbers, then your statement is false. And with the existence of the study featured by this very article; QED, by counter-example.
This article does not point to a usage study. It is a market share statement made by an analytics firm that hasn't provided any data to back up its statement. Please point me to a usage study that contradicts my statement.

Why would anyone even expect Google to report hardware sales numbers?
Then why does Andy Rubin keep tweeting activation numbers? I'm confused. Is there any third party verification (at all) of what this guy keeps tweeting? Not one.