Android and iOS Now Control Over 80% of Smartphone Sales in U.S.

[GreyStreet]

The first step would be for Google to lock out OEMs and take control of the entire product, from cradle to grave. The only way Google will truly nail the UI/hardware combination is by adopting the only business model suited and geared for that endeavour: vertical integration.

Until then, you get whatever is on the OEM menu. Supersize it for 25 cents. Just don't ask where the meat's from.

Yeah, there's never been a successful hardware agnostic operating system that I can remember.

----------

I know. Apple must have had an awful time trying to implement all them Android features into iOS 5.

This.

I just read the article "iOS: A Visual History" on TheVerge.com and thought to myself, "I already had all that" when I got to the features list for iOS 5.

No doubt original iPhone was a game changer, but it's been slow to evolve since.

 

[Dmunjal]

When you have a new innovation come to market like touchscreen smartphones, the closed, central model works better initially because they can control all aspects internally. But over the long run, the open, distributed model always wins. There are many examples of this. MacOS vs. Windows, OSI vs. TCP/IP, Unix vs. VMS/SNA. Even in politics, democracies usually outlast totalitarian regimes like communism.

 

[Michael Scrip]

As someone who worked for a major phone manufacturer in the early 2000s I can tell you, for a fact, that you're 100 percent wrong.

Touch screen phones have been in the works for awhile. Further - even if that phone (the n87) came out several years ago - it most definitely would not be something "like" what you'd be using now.

With or without apple- technology progresses. Apple has done and continues to evolve and create amazing products in the marketplace. But to believe that they are the only ones while other companies just wait to see what Apple does to determine their product line is a fallacy.

Of course all manufacturers were working on touchscreen technology. Most of those companies were already making cell phones a decade before Apple jumped into the mobile market... and some already had touchscreens (albeit resistive and/or stylus-based)

You're right... the touchscreen was not Apple's invention. But it wasn't just the touchscreen... it was the total re-imagining of what a phone could be.

This was the phone Palm announced just 2 days before Apple announced the iPhone:

Yep... another Treo.

So... was Palm working on WebOS and the Palm Pre before the iPhone? Did Palm already have a plan to totally revamp their product line?

Did Apple just get lucky and announce the iPhone 2 years before Palm planned to announce the new Palm Pre?

I doubt it. The Palm Centro was Palm's next phone... and it was launched in October 2007. That's a full 9 months after the iPhone announcement.

Clearly Palm wasn't working on the next big thing... they were still making phones like the Treo and Centro. I think the next few generations of Palm phones would have looked the same if it wasn't for the iPhone.

Also... would RIM have ever made the Blackberry Storm if it wasn't for the iPhone? That was way too far outside of RIM's comfort zone... and it looked like a direct response to Apple.

All of these manufacturers made no hints about their "next generation" of phones...

And yet... they all started showing up after the iPhone.

Strange coincidence?

 

[reefoid]

Well it does. It doesn't mean that it isn't good for anyone or that no one will buy them. But in terms of design, UI and hardware, they're relics. They exist because it's Google's business to spread Android around to as many OEMs as possible, and cover nearly every conceivable form factor, from the slick and pretty, to the downright ugly and superseded. This at the very least, pads market share numbers and serves as a way of introducing a cheap "gateway" device before someone is ready to move up to a better one.

Here we go again.

A couple of weeks ago you were telling me that I was wrong to claim that the SGS2 was the best phone for me as, apparently, its not a subjective choice. We must all bow down and accept LTD's infinite wisdom and accept that the 4S is the perfect phone for everyone.

Now you're telling everyone who prefers a physical keyboard on their phone that they are wrong as well. My dad has tried touchscreen phones and hates them. He much prefers to use a physical keyboard so has a BB. He's not some freak of nature, he's a normal phone user who just happens to prefer physical keyboards.

Those phones don't exist 'to spread Android around to as many OEMs as possible', they exist because there is a market for them. Can you not understand that? (That's a rhetorical question as I know what your answer is).

 

[KnightWRX]

OSI vs. TCP/IP

Did you just compare a theoritical model to an actual protocol stack ?

You could have used IPX/SPX vs TCP/IP (but of course then your analogy would have fallen apart).

 

[Tunster]

Did you just compare a theoritical model to an actual protocol stack ?

You could have used IPX/SPX vs TCP/IP (but of course then your analogy would have fallen apart).

That comparison made me laugh when I saw it being a network guy here.

Anyway. All that matters is Apple took the bull by the horns, developed a product ahead of its time, took a huge chuck of the market share quite impressively with a single phone model for a few years, everyone else is just catching up. We all know Apple caught the competition out by surprise because they don't make statements/comments/promises about any product until release.

I see that other corporations haven't taken the same mould. With the quick pace of tech today, why tell everyone 18 months before hand what you're going to produce? Especially when it follows a similar line of products you had before hand. That's where Nokia and Palm went wrong. Slow progress and didn't understand that there was a need to push to touchscreen/smartphone tech.

And as a matter of opinion here, I think Android was released in the end to flood the market so Google could make $$$ on ads based on losing control of being number 1. If Google had been quicker to develop the platform and have control of its own hardware pre-iPhone days, I'm sure it would of done.

The hardware intentions of OS development? Anyone developing their own closed software/hardware has control of that (Apple and RIM now if you exclude Nokia selling its soul to M$). Google's android doesn't and has that framework to cater for a wide range of combos.

No doubt original iPhone was a game changer, but it's been slow to evolve since.

I know. Apple must have had an awful time trying to implement all them Android features into iOS 5.

These are the two most ridiculous comments. Firstly, Apple has and always taken the stance to develop on its own two feet without reaction to anyone else. Again, the iPhone would never have appeared if it went along with the crowd at the time. Maybe watch phones are the next thing? It'll take a company to produce something we think we don't need and realise it'll benefit us in ways we didnt realise.

Secondly, phones had notification menus (WM, Android from the start, RIM?) ever since iOS1. It believed their own system was better (individual notifications from each app) and stuck to it until it developed a better system with the help of a jailbreaker app developer.

Sheesh, I must stop here!

 

[samcraig]

Firstly, Apple has and always taken the stance to develop on its own two feet without reaction to anyone else.

I think you are entitled to this opinion. I, however, think it's completely inaccurate.

Yes - on many levels they do things their way and in their own time. But they are certainly affected and react to the marketplace as well.

 

[KnightWRX]

everyone else is just catching up.

Well, Apple is catching up (or has caught up) in certain areas. The iPhone wasn't feature complete on launch and many phones had features that Apple didn't have and implemented later :

- Multi-tasking
- Programmable native applications
- Installable applications
- MMS
- Copy/Paste
- Video confenrencing
- Integrated messaging client

And there are things they have yet to catch up on :

- Profiles (loved those things for my Sony Ericsson T610 back in 2003)
- NFC (transfer songs, contacts, payments)
- Induction charging (love that about my Touchpad)

So it's not a black or white scenario. Apple is not "ahead" and everyone else is not "catching up". It really depends on what functionality you're talking about. And really, the opinion here of "if Apple isn't doing it, it's not useful" is quite boring in light of the fact it was applied to all the features I stated Apple initially didn't have until they implemented it. Apple does look beyond their own lab and stuff and do implement things other vendors have had.

 

[samcraig]

Well, Apple is catching up (or has caught up) in certain areas. The iPhone wasn't feature complete on launch and many phones had features that Apple didn't have and implemented later :

- Multi-tasking
- Programmable native applications
- Installable applications
- MMS
- Copy/Paste
- Video confenrencing
- Integrated messaging client

And there are things they have yet to catch up on :

- Profiles (loved those things for my Sony Ericsson T610 back in 2003)
- NFC (transfer songs, contacts, payments)
- Induction charging (love that about my Touchpad)

So it's not a black or white scenario. Apple is not "ahead" and everyone else is not "catching up". It really depends on what functionality you're talking about. And really, the opinion here of "if Apple isn't doing it, it's not useful" is quite boring in light of the fact it was applied to all the features I stated Apple initially didn't have until they implemented it. Apple does look beyond their own lab and stuff and do implement things other vendors have had.

You also left out the app store.

The iPhone didn't have one at launch and other platforms had them.

 

[KnightWRX]

You also left out the app store.

The iPhone didn't have one at launch and other platforms had them.

I was rolling it into "installable applications" since there's no other way to install applications. But indeed, the concept of an app store isn't new either, it's something Apple took from existing solutions.

 

[Tunster]

Well, Apple is catching up (or has caught up) in certain areas. The iPhone wasn't feature complete on launch and many phones had features that Apple didn't have and implemented later :

- Multi-tasking
- Programmable native applications
- Installable applications
- MMS
- Copy/Paste
- Video confenrencing
- Integrated messaging client

You could agrue that they didn't spend the time implementing such items because:

a) The first model was a 2G phone (rule out MMS/Video/Apps - due to lack of bandwidth)
b) Again, the first model was to test the water. It's primary function was showing off the touchscreen UI. (the same with the first iPad with an adapted iOS3)

I don't disagree that Apple have played a part of catching up, but the things they have caught up on aren't major features in everyday world. Concentratrate on the things that make a difference and sort out the rest later.

And there are things they have yet to catch up on :

- Profiles (loved those things for my Sony Ericsson T610 back in 2003)
- NFC (transfer songs, contacts, payments)
- Induction charging (love that about my Touchpad)

Profiles? Way back in pre-smartphone days that was a cool feature. Why do I want to readjust to complicated profiles now?

NFC? Not really a huge feature to implement yet as people are only getting used to the concept and security is a big thing at the moment with NFC. I appreciate Apple's approach to wait until the right moment.

Induction charging? More hassle than it's worth and something else to go wrong.

So it's not a black or white scenario. Apple is not "ahead" and everyone else is not "catching up". It really depends on what functionality you're talking about. And really, the opinion here of "if Apple isn't doing it, it's not useful" is quite boring in light of the fact it was applied to all the features I stated Apple initially didn't have until they implemented it. Apple does look beyond their own lab and stuff and do implement things other vendors have had.

Nail on the head there. But, this "catching up" thing is more getting the product right. The formula for the iPhone has been spot in all the generations. HTC could have a phone with A to Z of features? Doesn't mean to say they're ahead than Apple with features A to C? If features to A to C are implemented with great care to detail and features A to Z were all consistantly exectuted poorly, why would anyone want a quantity of no quality features? I see Android devices in the latter category.

Personally, Apple made the mobile phone much more exciting to use than the other competitors. The concept, design, marketing, execution. I don't think anyone else has caught up with using the concept of creating technology with a zing of art.