Because Apple cares about market share above all else? What's their market share for iPhones and Macs for the last decade?
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.
2016 Internet Trends Report: Global Smartphone User Growth Slowing as Android Outpaces iOS
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Because Apple cares about market share above all else? What's their market share for iPhones and Macs for the last decade?
There's one reason Apple's unit growth is slowing: saturation. There's no reason to sell more units if it doesn't bring in more money.
My guess from here is that their unit volume will continue a slow decline as prices among their competitors race to the bottom. Apple prices will probably fall more slowly than the rest and eventually unit volumes will stabilize at a market share smaller than what they have today. At this point, Apple will be able to generate enough profit to continue producing a product for a segment of the market that values it.
Everybody here will continue to whine and moan about how Apple sucks while we wait for the next break through.
This isn't hard to predict-- we've seen this pattern over and over. First with computers, then iPods, now iPads, and very soon iPhones. Apple doesn't play in markets with razor thin profits. They play in markets that value their products.
When those products are brand new, everybody thinks they're awesome and that Apple will be a mass market behemoth. When the market saturates and Apple's market share declines, people thinks Apple is a high priced seller of boutique items. Then the next category opens up and the sequence repeats.
When you look at it though, they don't really change themselves so much-- it's just that the market around them changes.
You do realize that planned obsolescence has been part of the personal computer and smartphone industries from the very beginning, right?
16gb iPhones in 2016 though... yes that is not forgivable.
Wait, what?
AMZN does make money, but leaving that aside, I think you need to read up on the boom and bust of the dotcom bubble... There was a lot of this talk back then and it didn't turn out well.
"It's a new economy, the old rules don't apply."
"Fundamentals don't matter, market share matters."
Pop!
Oh, I'm sorry. Are we having a discussion or an argument? I must have missed the instructions at the door.
I was referring to the person comparing Samsung to Apple. The chart says nothing about that. Yes, a chart comparing apples to oranges makes sense if you are only concerned with how they fit in the fruit market. As a matter of fact, this market share comparison makes less sense than comparing apples to oranges. It is more like comparing apples to raisins. (you can buy a bunch of raisins for the price of one apple)
In other words, for measuring iOS success, the chart doesn't say much at all.
The iPhone SE may be able to help them get in the slightly less expensive market, but they aren't competing in the sub-$50 market that Android can be found. As for HTC 3rd Gen vs the iPhone 6. That is an argument for another thread, but I will just say I think you are wrong.
Yes, Samsung makes phones that we can compare, but saying that Apple sold less iPhones than all of the brands and off brands that sell Android at price points that put them in the check out lane at Walgreens, really doesn't say anything about Apple. Which was my point.
"Profitability" shouldn't mean any more than "market share" does to the average consumer. People bring up profitability here because the place is crawling with posters who will point at things like "market share" as evidence that Apple is doomed and/or sucks, etc. To the consumer, market share should only matter to the point that a favored device has a large enough share to warrant the availability of compatible accessories, apps, etc. Once that point is reached, market share shouldn't matter to almost anyone.
Profitability is meaningful for the reason that it is an indicator that Apple puts out products that are good enough to command a premium in a competitive marketplace. Apple has never been that concerned about market share, because maximizing market share is achieved by capturing the low end of the market and selling at greater volume. Apple isn't going to do that, because that involves figuring out what corners to cut in order to make the cheapest products.
Profitability in these contexts is meaningful because, bizarrely, Apple is criticized by people here for not being more like Microsoft or Android, in spite of the fact that that is precisely the reason that Apple is such a successful company.
Android phones, especially the cheaper ones need to be replaced much more frequently. No wonder shipping numbers are higher. Android phones on landfill chart would look similar.
Would like to see how many phones of each platform are actually in use. At least for the app stores, their revenue and incentive for developers to build apps for one of the platforms, that more interesting than units shipped.
So Android phones are either stuck on shelves or sitting in landfill? Of course they are!
That's a pure fandom comment... Many place or i should say networks around the world offering it.
Apple themselves offer it via their upgrade program.
I agree it is "poor value" but you can only vent that blame towards apple and their focus towards the share holders. The whole company is riding on the iPhone sales. Most people in the real world don't care about who gots the biggest market share until you come to places like this..
So, does OS market matter? and why get upset about it?
Or what is actually US only, Its to be expected off-shore sales are going to trend far differently that US sales. Just because you are getting outsold in china, does that really matter to what you market in the US? only if you try to market cheap crap in the US to standardize your production lines. The blathering about global markets is so much BS, separate out to continents at least beforehand.
Utterly pointless. Like comparing Say, Tesla to every other car manufacturer together. Doesn't matter in the slightest.
Perhaps comparing a single manufacturer might be right like Samsung.... but they make dozens of phones across the world do again it doesn't scan.
Or Window and OS X for that matter
Perhaps comparing a single manufacturer might be right like Samsung.... but they make dozens of phones across the world do again it doesn't scan.
Or Window and OS X for that matter
ok - another silly debate about market shares - iOS may not dominate the market bc only apple makes iOS devices.
Android is open and most phones are now android based - cheap to expensive. Nokia based phones are gone and replaced with crap android based phones. while apples may not dominate mobile OS but it is still making profit and selling well. Apple ecosystem is still intact and working well. What i can you say about fragmented android os?
[doublepost=1464902507][/doublepost]
indeed wealthy people have more money than all poorer people put together.
Android is open and most phones are now android based - cheap to expensive. Nokia based phones are gone and replaced with crap android based phones. while apples may not dominate mobile OS but it is still making profit and selling well. Apple ecosystem is still intact and working well. What i can you say about fragmented android os?
[doublepost=1464902507][/doublepost]
indeed wealthy people have more money than all poorer people put together.
Just wait until the next WWDC and what crap the put out again. It's very discouraging seeing apple in number 2 spot but who is really surprised.
I gave specific examples of how the iPhone is cutting edge. You did not.
You must have missed the Macrumors sign at the door.
What is wrong with the pricing? iPhone 6 16GB = $650 vs Samsung GS7 = $700-$800 (depending on where you purchase it). All flagship Samsung phones are priced $50 higher than the iPhones. LG, HTC even sell their phones around those price points. The only way it can be cheaper is if Apple makes a bargain phone which the iPhone SE is doing handsomely well at.
I do firmly believe that Apple needs to add more features to iOS instead of concentrating on adding the most minimally hardware upgrades to the iPhone every year. Adding new features to the software to make things more appealing and interesting that differentiates your market from Android will create more appeal to new buyers. This is why people are so attracted to Android ever so much now than ever previously.
Take a look at those Galaxy phones, hardware-wise and software they got it down real good on looks. It's hard not to like them. I personally stick to my iPhone because I love the wafer thin phone that's big and yet easy to carry and the battery life. Hate those antenna bands though.
Because you have zero clue if 16GB actually has any effect on market share. I highly doubt it's a deal breaker for anyone. If you want an iPhone, you'll get an iPhone.
Rather, it's the other way round. iPhones make more profit precisely because they are better for that particular segment of consumers who appreciate what the iPhone does and more importantly, don't mind paying a premium for this.
It's the people who can't seem to wrap their heads around this simple logic who conclude that the only reason why people buy iPhones in the face of cheaper alternatives is because they are mindless sheep.
Pricing of these kinds of phones are out of reach for a lot of people. Adding more features to iOS would turn the platform into bloatware. The aim is to keep it simple and accessible. There isn't much appealing about Samsung hardware, total bling, with aspects borrowed from the iPhone. Samsung has little originality and certainly no taste overall. iPhone antenna bands and protruding camera have been a disappointment.
Yeah the problem is profit means nothing to a person buying a product from any company.
You think iOS products don't age well?? Have you used many Android devices?
I'm not hating on Android. Both platforms are superior in different areas, but I think that one area that Apple wins in is longer life cycles. Say what you will about planned obsolescence, but every iOS device since circa 2011 can run the latest OS and received the ability to update on the same day. The majority of Android devices on the market are at least two OS generations behind. Many devices only get one or two OS updates in their entire life cycle, and never get to run the latest version. Plus many have manufacturer skins over the stock OS which slow down the performance right out of the box.
The only way to get an Android device that enjoys the same long term support that every iOS device does is to buy a Nexus.
[doublepost=1464926504][/doublepost]
"Winning" is somewhat subjective. Is winning selling more phones or making more profit? Also consider that all of those Android phones come from many different manufacturers while all the iOS sales are just one company. Furthermore many cheap Android phones sell at virtually no profit at all, just to get the Android platform into more hands, to make money through apps.
Not saying that you're necessarily wrong about Apple's greed and declining innovation, but it's hard to declare who's winning or losing when they're not even playing the same game. Consider how many more Windows PCs sell compared to Macs as well.
Part of this issue is that price wise you can spend 600 on a 32GB S7/edge and put an SD card in it and get a further 200GB of storage while a 128GB IPhone sets you back nearly 800 and for the what each product does you can see why so many say you get far better value for money using android devices.
I guess it depends how you use your phone and what means more...if you love onscreen widgets and like to make your home screen however you want it then android is always the way to go as you will always see everybody's iPhones looking the same where on android that is hardly ever the case.
I guess it depends how you use your phone and what means more...if you love onscreen widgets and like to make your home screen however you want it then android is always the way to go as you will always see everybody's iPhones looking the same where on android that is hardly ever the case.
The main issue I have with the whole "profit means nothing to me as a consumer, therefore it's not important at all" argument is that it basically assumes that only that person's opinion and priorities matter and nothing else. Which strikes me as extremely self-centred. He is but just one person in the greater scheme of things, yet he somehow expects Apple to cater to his every whim, without giving any thought to the possible ramifications or if it is even feasible or possible in the first place.
The universe is somehow expected to revolve around this one person and this one person alone. I want this. I expect that. I want I want I want. Apple must adhere to my every demand or else. Or else what?
Who does this person think he is?
This just means there is a conflict of interests between the people who run Apple and the people who buy their products. Same as with any company. Apple wants to earn as much as they can, while users want to pay as little as they can. Obviously, neither extreme is desirable. The best that can be done is to find a middle ground, which I feel Apple has done admirably. Their products are expensive, yes, but not excessively so compared to the rest of the competition, while offering a good enough user experience to the small but extremely lucrative market who can afford them.
Apple is, surprise surprise, a profit-maximising company first and foremost. However, because they sell the user hardware (and the user experience), there is every incentive for them to want to create great hardware so that people will be willing to buy them. This at least means that the company's priorities are aligned with that of the user, because the only way you are getting me to buy an Apple product is if I am convinced it suits my needs. And Apple has gone on to profit immensely by doing precisely that - make great products and not treat their customers like dirt.
Profit may mean thing to the buyer. It doesn't mean that profit is meaningless to the current discussion at hand.