Google Chairman Eric Schmidt Says Android is 'Pretty Clearly' Winning the Mobile War with Apple

[vrDrew]

Originally Posted by SomeDudeAsking

You have a woefully incorrect guess of how much ads make. Woefully.

I think you need to read this.

So in terms of returns, Android is sustainable. However, in relative terms the value created leaves much to be desired. Whereas Android generates $1.70/device/year and thus an Android device with a two year life generates about $3.5 to Google over its life, Apple obtained $576.3 for each iOS device it sold in 2011[4]. The economics of Android are nothing like the economics of iOS.

[entatlrg]

Originally Posted by AidenShaw

Isn't choice a wonderful thing?

Android is the right choice for more people than IOS, and part of that is that there is a wider choice for hardware.

I know that every time I say choice, that someone in Cupertino kills a kitten.

Choice, choice, choice.

That's just it, Android isn't the 'choice' or preference of most people. Free and cheap Androids, pushy salespeople and heavy promo from the cellular companies make it so.

Give cellular companies a greater profit margin than Apple offers and put out 300 competing devices most of which are free or cheap against a handful of iPhones and for sure Android is going to get the market share by a huge margin.

If the average consumer was well and honestly informed pre-purchase Apple's market share would be much larger. imo

[haruhiko]

Originally Posted by lucaseve

There are more flies than men on the Earth.
Therefore for Eric Schmidt flies rule the planet... ;-)

Moron > Genius
i.e. Morons are winning.

[AppleScruff1]

Originally Posted by entatlrg

That's just it, Android isn't the 'choice' or preference of most people. Free and cheap Androids, pushy salespeople and heavy promo from the cellular companies make it so.

Give cellular companies a greater profit margin than Apple offers and put out 300 competing devices most of which are free or cheap against a handful of iPhones and for sure Android is going to get the market share by a huge margin.

If the average consumer was well and honestly informed pre-purchase Apple's market share would be much larger. imo

You can get a free iPhone 4 or a 4S for $100. Consumers buy what they want.

[RSL]

My brother had an Android phone. Felt buggy. Never got Skype to work properly. (I had Skype working flawlessly on iOS 3.0.) Moved to iPhone this year and he's blown away.

Whatever Android is winning, then good for them. But honestly they're no competition for Apple.

[Asia8]

I don't have enough money for Apple products, so I've got an Android. And I absolutely love it, it is the best phone I've ever had, if you ignore the issues... such as:

* SMS message rejected due to lack of space (30MB not enough space for 1 SMS? Can't store on SD-Micro?)
* Many apps don't work due to compatibility issues with my handset.
* Slow interface
* Apps crashing

There's definitely something to be said for having limited models that will 100% support the apps you download / purchase. Too many models, inconsistencies and such is the real killer of android.

[KnightWRX]

Originally Posted by entatlrg

Well for sure. Chevy's sell better that Porsche. Does that mean Chevy is better?

If we were discussing Vertu phones vs iPhone, maybe your analogy would stick, and no we couldn't say the iPhone (Chevy) is better. But Eric is not referring to Vertu now is he ? He's talking Android (Ford) vs iOS Phones (Chevy). And he's talking marketshare numbers.

----------

Originally Posted by RSL

My brother had an Android phone. Felt buggy. Never got Skype to work properly. (I had Skype working flawlessly on iOS 3.0.) Moved to iPhone this year and he's blown away.

How was that video chat over 3G networks working in iOS 3.0 ? Not so flawlessly.

(took quite a while for Skype to implement 3G video chat as Apple was blocking such features).

[rjohnstone]

Originally Posted by Asia8

I don't have enough money for Apple products, so I've got an Android. And I absolutely love it, it is the best phone I've ever had, if you ignore the issues... such as:

* SMS message rejected due to lack of space (30MB not enough space for 1 SMS? Can't store on SD-Micro?)
* Many apps don't work due to compatibility issues with my handset.
* Slow interface
* Apps crashing

There's definitely something to be said for having limited models that will 100% support the apps you download / purchase. Too many models, inconsistencies and such is the real killer of android.

You bought a budget phone.
Remember the old saying, you get what you pay for.
High end Android phones don't tend have the issues you're experiencing. Buggy apps are an issue for everyone, including iPhone users.

I do agree that a minimum standard should be set for Android handsets, but when the OS is essentially free (Google APPS actually cost the manufacturer money), you can get garbage.
Google tried to push for an 18 month refresh cycle to keep the OS current, but many manufacturers have all but ignored it.

[kdarling]

Originally Posted by vrDrew

I think you need to read this

Unfortunately, that article is based on some popular misconceptions, and thus ends up with bad conclusions. For example:

"Furthermore, Google also testified that iOS accounts for two thirds of their mobile search revenues."

FALSE. This was based on a video of a few seconds of cut-off testimony before Congress, that was widely disseminated, and that ... typically for the internet these days... no one checked on.

However, if you take the time to actually go watch the ENTIRE testimony, you'll find that what Google's lawyer said was that iOS accounted for two thirds of mobile search, but that the percentage was IRRELEVANT because search was not their major mobile revenue source.

"They could be counting ads on all mobile browsers as well as ads running inside all apps on all platforms. "

The testimony went on to state that the overwhelming majority of Google mobile ad income comes from ads inside apps, NOT from browsers.

Not your fault. Most of the internet seems to work off bad data that was edited with an agenda. That's why I always try to trace info back to its original source. It's rarely what reporters print.

[BaldiMac]

Originally Posted by LongTime techie

It is all the stuff, including a free market where multiple companies compete to sell and android device, it is not a "price controlled market" plus technology which is up to 18 months ahead of what's available on the slow paced iPhone.

If that's true, then why does the iPhone outsell Android phones when you control for price and distribution?

[uburoibob]

Bachelor's degree in obviosity?

Originally Posted by Stella

"The better product" - well, thats subjective isn't it? What is "the better product"? Ask half a dozen people and you'd get various answers.

You can say "who is winning" by various statistics - what is it? Sale figures, profits? Each are valid, each, iOS and Android are "winning".



Salesman talk. Nothing more, nothing less. It was a get out clause.

Apple ( Steve Jobs specifically ) liked to use sales figures when it suited Apple.. SJ claim they didn't care about sales for its desktops - because it would be pretty minor compared to windows, but couldn't stop talking about the market share of iTunes and iPods in keynotes, because they were high percentages. He wouldn't boast about Apple PC sales when Apple were selling less than 1 million per quarter back in early to mid 2000s. When Apple PC sales started to become impressive, SJ started to quote sales figures for all computer sales.

[Renzatic]

I finally got a goodly amount of hands-on time with a Galaxy S3 and an Atrix HD yesterday. I really don't get the fuss about how iOS and the iPhone are so much better than anything the competition offers. How Android is a laggy, "hot mess" in comparison.

Yes, there are some things I like about iOS better. I think the text and icons looks better (but that's always been Apple's thing), prefer the way it handles pinch to zooming, and don't like having the software buttons onscreen at all times. Yes. The Android phone did hiccup and get a slight framerate hit in certain places on the Atrix (which was on ICS, I checked), but it's hardly something I'd roll my eyes at while holding up my comparatively dainty little iPhone 4 and invoke the glories of Steve Jobs over.

The differences in quality between the two are about nil. iOS has some advantages, but they're slight, spit shine and polish things, not the defining points between glorious usability and broken crap.

You know those people who show up, say "I used an Android phone for 5 minutes. It was horrible, and I ran back to the warmth and safety of my iPhone with open arms, how can anyone use this piece of junk blah blah blah"? They're full of crap. I'm now even more convinced they picked up an Android phone dead set on not liking it, and got exactly what they went looking for.

[cynics]

Yes!! We did it!! Boom in your face iOS users!! If your not pretty clearly first then your pretty clearly last!!

/sarcasm to emphasize how dumb this is

[vikingjunior]

Honestly I saw this coming there is no way Apple is going to keep up with all these manufactures offering Android it's Microsoft/Apple all over again. Apple doesn't learn from there mistakes.

[BaldiMac]

Originally Posted by vikingjunior

Honestly I saw this coming there is no way Apple is going to keep up with all these manufactures offering Android

The billions of dollars in profit Apple brings in while all these manufacturers offering Android except Samsung and HTC are losing money could help.

it's Microsoft/Apple all over again.

Except Apple has most of the profits, more developer support, and more enterprise penetration this time. Seems to me that those are pretty important differences.

Apple doesn't learn from there mistakes.

I suppose they just got lucky over the last decade.

[vikingjunior]

Originally Posted by BaldiMac

The billions of dollars in profit Apple brings in while all these manufacturers offering Android except Samsung and HTC are losing money could help.



Except Apple has most of the profits, more developer support, and more enterprise penetration this time. Seems to me that those are pretty important differences.



I suppose they just got lucky over the last decade.

All valid although I was talking about SUSTAINING the profits. I tip my hat to Apple for the whole iphone success but at this pace they will not sustain the success. So let's see what the next decade brings. Honestly I think Google/Motorola is going to corner the market. I don't see the Apple's maps in the Google Play store.

[vrDrew]

Originally Posted by kdarling

Unfortunately, that article is based on some popular misconceptions, and thus ends up with bad conclusions. .

The fact of the matter is that Google's own financial statements fail to report a huge influx of mobile search or advertising revenue. It simply isn't there, for reasons that are immediately apparent to anyone who owns a smartphone: a tiny screen isn't particularly convenient format for viewing and/or clicking on a Google-served ad.

We might argue what fraction of Google's oft-touted "mobile run rate" is attributable to iOS versus Android, but the bottom line is that whatever this fraction might be, the top line itself simply isn't that big. (On the order of a billion or so per quarter.) If you want to argue that Google is recording billions (the only significant amount in the mobile OS business) of revenue directly attributable to Android, then kindly cite your source.

Until you do so, I remain steadfastly unconvinced that Goggle is by any meaningful measure "winning" the mobile OS "war."

[BaldiMac]

Originally Posted by vikingjunior

All valid although I was talking about SUSTAINING the profits.

Then why did you compare it Microsoft/Apple? Apple was never in a position of strength in the PC market like it is in the phone market.

I tip my hat to Apple for the whole iphone success but at this pace they will not sustain the success.

That's not true. They are currently growing, so at this pace they would sustain success.

Honestly I think Google/Motorola is going to corner the market. I don't see the Apple's maps in the Google Play store.

I don't know where you are coming from here.

[vampyren]

Originally Posted by Nova Sensei

That's like Hyundai bragging about selling more cars than Rolls Royce.....

I'm not saying iOS is a Rolls Royce, but c'mon Eric, be real here.

Spot on! I love mu iphone(s), actually got a GSIII instead of iphone5 which i'm also liking alot but i will go for iPad mini and also next iPhone5s if Apple increase the screen a bit more. But your comment is really what i been saying all along to the Android users

[LagunaSol]

Originally Posted by kdarling

FALSE. This was based on a video of a few seconds of cut-off testimony before Congress, that was widely disseminated, and that ... typically for the internet these days... no one checked on.

However, if you take the time to actually go watch the ENTIRE testimony, you'll find that what Google's lawyer said was that iOS accounted for two thirds of mobile search, but that the percentage was IRRELEVANT because search was not their major mobile revenue source.

Actually, aren't you confirming his point? He said:

"Furthermore, Google also testified that iOS accounts for two thirds of their mobile search revenues."

So while you say search is not their major mobile revenue source, he merely stated that "iOS accounts for two thirds of their mobile search revenues."

(Emphasis mine.)

[AidenShaw]

Originally Posted by BaldiMac

If that's true, then why does the iPhone outsell Android phones when you control for price and distribution?

What does that even mean?

By the numbers, Android outsells - it has greater market share.

No amount of wonky "normalization" manipulation can change that fact.

You could just as easily say that the Iphone 5 is the largest selling phone with a 4 inch 1136x640 pixel screen. True that.... But rather meaningless....

[BaldiMac]

Originally Posted by AidenShaw

What does that even mean?

In the context of the discussion, I was referring to the fact that on a carrier where Android does not have a pricing advantage, AT&T, the iPhone represents 77% of smartphone activations. My point was to support my theory that the two main reasons for Android's market share lead are price and distribution. This theory was a rebuttal to the claim that Android supposed feature advantages were responsible for its market share lead.

By the numbers, Android outsells - it has greater market share.

Absolutely.

No amount of wonky "normalization" manipulation can change that fact.

I wasn't trying to.

[samcraig]

Originally Posted by BaldiMac

In the context of the discussion, I was referring to the fact that on a carrier where Android does not have a pricing advantage, AT&T, the iPhone represents 77% of smartphone activations. My point was to support my theory that the two main reasons for Android's market share lead are price and distribution. This theory was a rebuttal to the claim that Android supposed feature advantages were responsible for its market share lead.

It can be a combination. It's not necc one or the other.

[SomeDudeAsking]

Originally Posted by BaldiMac

In the context of the discussion, I was referring to the fact that on a carrier where Android does not have a pricing advantage, AT&T, the iPhone represents 77% of smartphone activations. My point was to support my theory that the two main reasons for Android's market share lead are price and distribution. This theory was a rebuttal to the claim that Android supposed feature advantages were responsible for its market share lead.

AT&T didn't carry any Android phones until a couple of years ago. All they had before that for years was iPhones so of course AT&T would have a skewed demographic of iPhone activations.

[BaldiMac]

Originally Posted by samcraig

It can be a combination. It's not necc one or the other.

Anything's possible. But I think the numbers from AT&T support my theory that pricing and distribution are far and away the most significant factors.