That graph along with the statistic that show that the vast majority of mobile web browsing comes from iOS devices are the two most important sets of data, in my opinion. Market share stats like the one in this article don't tell the whole story because Samsung, in addition to their flagship S3 and Note 2, sells a bunch of very low end devices on all of the major carriers. As crappy as these phones are, they're still considered smartphones. The problem for Google/Samsung is that most people who buy these phones just use them as phones. They may not even know what apps are. iPhone users on the other hand tend to be much more aware of what their devices can do and generally sign on to expensive voice/data plans.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
18.5% of U.S. Mobile Phone Subscribers Now Using iPhones
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That graph along with the statistic that show that the vast majority of mobile web browsing comes from iOS devices are the two most important sets of data, in my opinion. Market share stats like the one in this article don't tell the whole story because Samsung, in addition to their flagship S3 and Note 2, sells a bunch of very low end devices on all of the major carriers. As crappy as these phones are, they're still considered smartphones. The problem for Google/Samsung is that most people who buy these phones just use them as phones. They may not even know what apps are. iPhone users on the other hand tend to be much more aware of what their devices can do and generally sign on to expensive voice/data plans.
Really interesting graph... something I see is that Samsung and HTC hardly changed over the years... all that happened is Apple ate Nokia, RIM, LG, and SE.
This is not true. Apple took the profits. But Android phones took the market share.
Nokia really took a bath over the recent years. They really took their eye off the ball.
I recall his goal being to get just 1% of the (overall, not just smart phone) market, no?
Isn't profit what those manufacturers are after? The only company looking for market share rather than profits on hardware is Google, because they don't make their money selling hardware, but rather by mining user data in order to sell targeted ads.
Basically, except Google and Samsung, the whole Android industry is struggling.
If I'm understanding correctly, negative profits on hardware without any sales on services after means those companies would be better not selling smartphones at all if they don't expect to make any profit in the future either.
"Those companies" are also a rather large group. HTC, RIM, LG, Sony, Nokia, ZTE, Motorola...
That is not entirely accurate. The cheapest iPhone now is $450. You can get a gazillion Samsung Galaxy handsets for $100 contract free. Not necessarily the Galaxy S3 or Note II, but definitely all those Galaxy [word] line.
I love Apple, and only use iOS products, but in terms of affordability, Samsung overall wins.
Yes. But to be fair - that was rhetoric. Do you really believe that's all he/Apple wanted? It was his "out clause" in case he was quote and the iPhone was a failure.
Off of the ball? No. More like bet all their money on a horse that has never raced before in its life.
The cheapest iPhone is $450? How so? You can get an iPhone for free. And subsidized up to $299, now?
I think the disparity between what the study says and the number of iPhones/Androids you see out in the wild can be explained by the fact that US carriers try to up-sell and convert to Android very hard because they are the most profitable smartphones for them. A very large portion of those devices are with people who would have otherwise owned a "dumbphone" like an LG enV or a Samsung Gleam, but are now carrying around a Galaxy 2 or Rezound. Unfortunately, because they were up-sold, and not genuinely interested in the platform, most of these users just pull them out to write a quick text or watch a video on youtube, and then shove them right back in their purse or pocket. To many owners, it is just a dumbphone with youtube and internet access. That would explain why the Google Play store has such low performance compared to the App Store. In contrast, everyone who buys an iPhone wants the iPhone, and is more likely to explore the device's capabilities.
Apple did not take profits away from Nokia. Apple made the profits by itself. This is why Apple becomes the largest market cap company. Nokia did not make a lot of profits despite selling like one billion phones a year.
This is the "stickiness" that Apple has over Android OS phones. Some iPhone users bail, but the most recent data show 88% retention, the highest by far of any smartphone manufacturer, so in theory, and probably in fact, Apple has a shot at picking up disgruntled Android OS users, and significantly, so does Nokia.
Picking up a few percent of the other guys users every time a contract expires and a new iPhone on contract is purchased is likely what we are already seeing in the U.S.market, even against the spiffs and bogos prevalent amongst the Android OS smartphones offered by the carriers.
Slow but steady assimilation.
Interesting that 53% own smart phones. That leaves a vast untapped market of 47%. At this point it is clearly not the cost of smart phones, but rather the cost of the contracts.
Will the carriers simply be content with half the population as customers, but paying very high prices for the privilege, or will they offer rational plans featuring charges for only the data used and attract those who cannot afford the current plans or refuse to pay the price.
Will the carriers simply be content with half the population as customers, but paying very high prices for the privilege, or will they offer rational plans featuring charges for only the data used and attract those who cannot afford the current plans or refuse to pay the price.
I don't think GoldenJoe is that far off. I know people just like what he describes. Not everyone is a teen, 20 or 30 something user. I think the older users (50+) that are not tied to surfing non-stop get these for very limited use or are up-sold into a smart phone when they really don't need it or use it.
Whilst Apple no doubt win hands down when it comes to profit per device. We've got no way of knowing Androids income as its split.
You've got the handset profit, that can be worked out the same way you work out iPhone handset profits, but then you've got the licensing side of things.
Google make a fair bit from licensing their 'GAPPS' service in Android, then you've got the appstore, search revenue via android handsets, etc.
Is it as high as Apples? Nobody can answer that. Not you nor I. We can only go on speculation. For example, a year ago Oracle claimed Google make $10m a day just from handset activations.
You have to compare apples to apples. Android is on a lot of handsets. Apple only makes a few. Retention to the OS is more important then, right?
If that's the case - (http://appleinsider.com/articles/11..._rate_next_nearest_hardware_is_htc_at_39.html)
HTC, Motorola and Samsung combined (retention) is 92 percent. Granted - they make phones that are not Android.
So you can't really compare.
I would say both OSes are doing very well in keeping loyalty.
Companies are not in business to get market share. They are in business to make a profit. Where's the data on comparing smartphone profits? That's the only thing that really matters to a company.