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.
Google Chairman Eric Schmidt Says Android is 'Pretty Clearly' Winning the Mobile War with Apple
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
u say it as if there's no "AD" on iphone. whats this "iads" thing?
there ARE ADS on both ios and android free apps. they only show up when YOU/USER installs some "free" apps that make money through ads. so if you don't want to see ads, then pony up cash, buy the app and dont use free apps. don't give the impression that one platform is ad only.
Probably, but we will never know since this is not Apple's style. I see this playing out the same way it did 20 years ago when Apple and Microsoft were fighting it our over the Desktop space. That ended poorly for Apple, and ultimately needed a 150 million dollar investment from Microsoft to right the ship.
When there is over 500 phones competing with one (okay, 2) phone, I'd say barely having market share over them is not winning.
Except this time Apple has the profits, the enterprise penetration, and the developers. Pretty significant difference.
And the myth continues!
Not accurate.
You can assert that a lot of Google's revenue (and thus Android) is funded by money made from advertising but not fully-funded.
As one example - Google has paid membership services such as youtube and gmail. Part of Google's revenue is therefor not entirely ad based as their revenue stream isn't soley advertising, now is it.
But feel free to continue to post what you know is false. Wouldn't be the first or last time...
Except this time Apple has the profits, the enterprise penetration, and the developers. Pretty significant difference.
And the myth continues!
Not sure about myth.
Walter Isaacsons Steve Jobs biography states:
Job's Speaking:
I called up Bill and said, Im going to turn this thing around. Bill always had a soft spot for Apple. We got him into the application software business. The first Microsoft apps were Excel and Word for the Mac. So I called him and said, I need help. Microsoft was walking over Apples patents. I said, If we kept up our lawsuits, a few years from now we could win a billion-dollar patent suit. You know it, and I know it. But Apples not going to survive that long if were at war. I know that. So lets figure out how to settle this right away. All I need is a commitment that Microsoft will keep developing for the Mac and an investment by Microsoft in Apple so it has a stake in our success."
Doesn't sound so mythical to me.
The myth is that the investment was needed by Apple. They had around $4 billion at the time if I remember correctly. The investment was purely symbolic. It was the commitment from Microsoft to continue Mac development that was important to Apple.
As pointed out in your quote, the investment was also part of a settlement.
Despite the 14% worldwide marketshare, Apple's iOS still is the primary platform for app developers and rakes in the majority of profits for devs as well.
If your platform isn't the top choice for devs, then what good is having the most marketshare? At that point it just because a nice number on paper.
If your platform isn't the top choice for devs, then what good is having the most marketshare? At that point it just because a nice number on paper.
If we're talking company buys, very much this. Android is currently know for being the least secure of the mobile OSs, even base Android. iOS hit the cross-breed between user freedom and lockdown out the gate better. To do the same would require a custom targeted build of Android that would end up looking like Apple's current walled garden. Amazon is doing this kinda, but with the consumer in mind and not the phone market.
Perhaps Microsoft can stumble its way back on to the stage with an enterprise friendly mobile OS... oh wait Windows RT on the Surface doesnt have important enterprise features... oops.
Everyone has a choice, loyalty is important
I understand loyalty, however sometimes loyalty prevents objectivity. In the case of this article and the many comments I've read I'm seeing a lot of loyalty but not a lot of objectivity.
Everyone can choose their next phone from their preferred provider, iPhones cost about $200 with a new service agreement, new release Android phones also cost about $200 with a new contract. So why are people choosing to to purchase Android's at a pace of 3 to 1?
Features and a wide variety of handsets not offered by iPhones or with inferior performance on iPhones. Voice command accuracy and simplicity, 4G eighteen months ahead of the iPhone, navigation that works and keeps you from getting lost, integration with Microsoft software applications (used by about 90% of all businesses), simple expandability of RAM, replaceable batteries, and the list goes on.
I miss a few things with my android device, no iTunes, the sense that I'm a superior consumer, hmmm, and what else? Oh feeling like I'm wiser than the rest. No wait, I've owned Macs and PCs, there is no difference, they all work well, last a long time, I just have to make everything work with the rest of the world when I use my Mac, oh and pay an arm and a leg extra to get a lit Apple image on the lid. I do feel like I'm the smarter consumer.
The reason Apple is so successful is it has created perhaps the most brand loyal consumers in history, so loyal, they will defend Apple and demean it's competitors any chance they get. They will even ignore superior products!
I suspect by now you've stopped reading but if you haven't I'll address the advertising funded Google strategy. It is transparent to the user, no more ads are showing up on my phone than on your iPhone. The internet and most sites rely on advertising and they do not care if you are accessing the site from an iPhone or an Android or a Windows phone.
Finally copying / stealing, are these devices that similar? Did, Chrysler copy Henry Ford's invention, who gave Henry the idea of a motor driven carriage, some things are destined to be very similar, with similar features. Each manufacturer tries to "out innovate" the other, and as such they act a little like Sir Isaac Newton when he said, "If I have seen further than other men, it's because I stood on the shoulders of giants." Innovation is a continuous stream. Has Apple stolen, yes, as have almost every innovation driven companies, some of what they all do is a composite of the past and their vision of the future.
I have been extremely pleased with my Motorola Droid X and now my Samsung Galaxy S3, I think they both had innovations which put them ahead of the current model of the iPhone when I bought them, they also contained many of conceptual building blocks which created the iPhone, some of which were Apple generated and others from the rest of the market.
I understand loyalty, however sometimes loyalty prevents objectivity. In the case of this article and the many comments I've read I'm seeing a lot of loyalty but not a lot of objectivity.
Everyone can choose their next phone from their preferred provider, iPhones cost about $200 with a new service agreement, new release Android phones also cost about $200 with a new contract. So why are people choosing to to purchase Android's at a pace of 3 to 1?
Features and a wide variety of handsets not offered by iPhones or with inferior performance on iPhones. Voice command accuracy and simplicity, 4G eighteen months ahead of the iPhone, navigation that works and keeps you from getting lost, integration with Microsoft software applications (used by about 90% of all businesses), simple expandability of RAM, replaceable batteries, and the list goes on.
I miss a few things with my android device, no iTunes, the sense that I'm a superior consumer, hmmm, and what else? Oh feeling like I'm wiser than the rest. No wait, I've owned Macs and PCs, there is no difference, they all work well, last a long time, I just have to make everything work with the rest of the world when I use my Mac, oh and pay an arm and a leg extra to get a lit Apple image on the lid. I do feel like I'm the smarter consumer.
The reason Apple is so successful is it has created perhaps the most brand loyal consumers in history, so loyal, they will defend Apple and demean it's competitors any chance they get. They will even ignore superior products!
I suspect by now you've stopped reading but if you haven't I'll address the advertising funded Google strategy. It is transparent to the user, no more ads are showing up on my phone than on your iPhone. The internet and most sites rely on advertising and they do not care if you are accessing the site from an iPhone or an Android or a Windows phone.
Finally copying / stealing, are these devices that similar? Did, Chrysler copy Henry Ford's invention, who gave Henry the idea of a motor driven carriage, some things are destined to be very similar, with similar features. Each manufacturer tries to "out innovate" the other, and as such they act a little like Sir Isaac Newton when he said, "If I have seen further than other men, it's because I stood on the shoulders of giants." Innovation is a continuous stream. Has Apple stolen, yes, as have almost every innovation driven companies, some of what they all do is a composite of the past and their vision of the future.
I have been extremely pleased with my Motorola Droid X and now my Samsung Galaxy S3, I think they both had innovations which put them ahead of the current model of the iPhone when I bought them, they also contained many of conceptual building blocks which created the iPhone, some of which were Apple generated and others from the rest of the market.
I'll just address this part, because your whole premise is wrong. You can't compare pricing for only top end Android phones, and then switch to market share for all Android phones.
Android phones are available cheaper than the iPhone in most (almost every?) market. They are also in many more markets. (I think I read that iPhone carriers only service 50% of the global subscribers. Could be wrong there.)
On the one carrier that Android does not have a pricing advantage (AT&T), the iPhone has a 77% share of activations.
And the myth continues!
The Microsoft Brigade will never stop gripping that old chestnut.
Winning what?
Wheres that report that just came out about web traffic, and how even as apple is outsold they still are have more traffic than android.
Wheres that report that just came out about web traffic, and how even as apple is outsold they still are have more traffic than android.
Yes. I guess it's a lot like you who will never stop gripping onto the old chestnut that Android is completely funded by advertising and other chestnuts like that.
Why worry about the plank in your eye when it's easier to worry about the dust in someone else's eye.
Pricing question
It is true there are many models of of Android phones designed to appeal to multiple price points, however, most cheaper models are the $200 model that is 6 months old and now priced lower since the pace of innovation by an aggressive open structured group of providers and application developers is constantly working to outdo their former or someone else's latest leading edge product. It's the same reason the Android system is attracting the lion's share of the market.
It is true there are many models of of Android phones designed to appeal to multiple price points, however, most cheaper models are the $200 model that is 6 months old and now priced lower since the pace of innovation by an aggressive open structured group of providers and application developers is constantly working to outdo their former or someone else's latest leading edge product. It's the same reason the Android system is attracting the lion's share of the market.
I don't know what your point is here. (I don't even think it's true. There are plenty of Android models introduced at low price points. As low as $150 without a contract.) My point was that much of Android's market share is made up of devices that are cheaper than the iPhone. You tried to paint the picture that price wasn't a factor.
My opinion is the main reasons Android "is attracting the lion's share of the market" are price and distribution. Not the other stuff you tried to attribute it to. My evidence is AT&T, the one place Android has neither of these advantages.
Android does advertising. I will gladly BUY an app a lot of the times to remove said ads. iOS doesn't have ads. I pay the little extra (or none extra compared to the S3) to have the best quality possible.
SOME Andriod phones fit that category, the majority don't.
Just look here http://dx.com/c/cell-phone-599/cell-phones-511
and there are hundreds of other Android phones that can be bought with no contract very very cheaply. These Andriod phones are being used to replace feature phones, however web stats show they are NOT being used for web browsing, NOT being used for purchasing products and services, and NOT generating advertising income for Google.
I don't follow you.
Android (as an OS) doesn't have ads. Some apps have ads - others don't. Just like with iOS - it's up to the developer. And there are free/ad supported apps and paid (no ads) on both platforms. Further - there are paid for apps on both platforms that still don't remove the ads. Which is annoying on both Android and iOS.