Now they'll try to cash in on all that data they're collecting from the Android crowd
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.
Android Dominates Nearly 80% of Smartphone Market, iOS Drops to 13% Share
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Now they'll try to cash in on all that data they're collecting from the Android crowd
I do completely understand the Apple-supporting standpoint that iPhones sell less but there's more profit, more loyal customer base etc., but I see Android as more of a cancer.
Whether it's on cheap "POS" phones or top-quality phones like the S4, the operating system (which is what the front page article is about) is on all of them, all over the world, in the hands of the rich and the poor. iOS, on the other hand, is in the hands of a very small percentage which is getting smaller.
When the next stage comes, whatever that may be, Android have a significant customer base who understand and are familiar with the OS.
I don't see Apple are 'doomed' or in any real danger at the moment, but I am concerned that they seem to be ignoring what's going on around them and the tide could turn very suddenly. When it does, I'm not sure they're in the strongest position.
The title of this article is very misleading, it suggests that Android holds an 80% share of all the phones in the market, which is likely not true.
What it actually means is that Android sold 80% of smartphone market in the previous quarter. Which is a very different stat.
What it actually means is that Android sold 80% of smartphone market in the previous quarter. Which is a very different stat.
Not all people buy Android phones because they are cheap, those buying the latest flagship models certainly don't.
When I upgraded my iPhone in May, the HTC One was exactly the same price as the iPhone 5 and the Galaxy S4 was more expensive.
Out of 10 people on the street, only one would have iPhone...all others would have mostly Samsungs.
Don't fall on Apples crap "they have android device on shelves". They sell loads of Android devices. It is not suprising really. When you can get android phone from 100 to 500$ dollars off contract and every month there are like 3 new android phones coming out, off course they would sell. Be as it may, not every person wants 800$ phone. A lot of people want just phone and do some web browsing from time to time. And they are happy with 200$ Samsung S mini line. Its not lost sale for Apple, but it does add to Android number.
If Apple does not do some smart move about it (and i am not sure that Tim Cook showed that he can do that), they would indeed become niche phone brand like they are with Mac with market share in single digits.
No you keep inferring from my posts that I'm suggesting such. I'm not. Please see my signature. iOS is hardly monolithic these days. Don't be so sensitive.
free phones are great
they're giving Android phones away. practically throwing them at people. free phones. what do you expect.
they're giving Android phones away. practically throwing them at people. free phones. what do you expect.
S
syd430
Guest
For most people, a spec sheet and price is everything. How much Ghz, RAM and for how much money. Tell me these and i'll decide if I want to buy. Greater specs > better phone, period. Lets not bother to consider things like the implementation, tight software/hardware integration, quality, intuitiveness and thoughtfulness of a product. "What you mean the iphone 5 ONLY has a 1.3 Ghz dual core? hahaha stupid isheep, my Android phone is 1.5 Ghz dual core! surerly that means my phone is faster. How can 1.5 Ghz be slower and laggier than 1.3 Ghz, it's impossible! Apple never invented anything too, they stole everything, it's all just marketing wizardry blah blah blah"
Apple risks being irrelevant outside of the US, that's where the growth is, and Apple is not competitive there with $600 phones. This weakness is masked in the US because Apple gets a higher subsidy (compared to android phones) from the major carriers. The risk for Apple is that the subsidy model could change in a heartbeat. If that happens, a company selling $600 phones will be irrelevant in the US as we'll. everyone likes to talk about Apple's profits. Much of that profit comes from the $400 subsidy that the US carriers pay to Apple. The carriers see this as Apple essentially stealing their profit. It's not sustainable. At some point the subsidy model will get exposed by carriers offering lower monthly bills for an in subsidized phone. When that happens Apple's incredible profits vanish. Apple needs to get their act together and design a phone that can compete internationally.
S
syd430
Guest
Apple actually has a higher relative market share compared to the US in most other developed countries. I think you mean outside of developed countries and not "outside the US". By the way, Apple phones are subsided the same if not greater than most Android flagships here in Australia. So I don't know where you got that stat from. Unless again, you are confusing developing countries like China and India with all countries outside the US.
But my original argument is that there are other measures of "most." For example, even though there are more Android phones shipping, Apple iOS developers are making a much higher percentage of money. I think developers are more interested in profit, than number of phones shipped.
Android is available on handsets from many different manufacturers (HTC, Samsung, LG, etc.) while iOS is only on Apple phones.
I wonder what would be the total market share of the iPhone compared to the Galaxy.
I wonder what would be the total market share of the iPhone compared to the Galaxy.
Exactly. I'm sure the bulk of the Android shaere is made up of the cheaper spec phones running Pre Jelly Bean Android versions that can't run the latest apps.
What's interesting is the current Apple flag ship model vs the current non Apple flagship model. And in that comparison the competition is gaining (the iPhone still leads though).
IMO totally different subject. The fact is they didn't, and I doubt it would have made much of a difference, if the other variables remained the same. But a direct answer to your question, A Closed system did not prevent Apple form doing anything. What closed did, was provide us with a great and stable mobile platform, but at the same time, prevented other manufacturers from helping grow that platform.
Never thought globally versus the US so it is a great thing it bring up. I agree that if Apple did release devices globally at the same time, it would have helped their overall market share, however I maintain the belief that the openness of the entire android ecosystem still would have prevailed.
Potentially a different topic again, though I am not 100% sure what real world example those companies created.
that would only be a fare comparison if there were no other android phones but the Galaxy. all those other android buyers would probably gravitate right towards the Galaxy, so the end comparison would be about the same.
Market share doesn't mean a thing.
If Android was the only game in town, god forbid, I'd give up on mobile phones and tablets completely.
More people are wising up to Google than you think; honestly, I don't see Google lasting much longer given some of their terrible decisions lately (like focusing on stupid glasses). What they need to do is get rid of the three stooges at the top before Google hopes to gain back any traction they once had.
If Android was the only game in town, god forbid, I'd give up on mobile phones and tablets completely.
More people are wising up to Google than you think; honestly, I don't see Google lasting much longer given some of their terrible decisions lately (like focusing on stupid glasses). What they need to do is get rid of the three stooges at the top before Google hopes to gain back any traction they once had.
A quick search on line
http://www.iphonehacks.com/2013/07/ios-europe.html
led to some numbers that suggest iOS market share being the highest in the US (40% and growing), in the 20's in Australia & the UK, and in the teens in the rest of Western Europe.
True, my comparison is mostly about the subsidized market vs. the unsubsidized market. And Australia may line up closer to the US than China/Inda in that respect.
The key point is this: Most of the people in the world have a cell phone, including many who live on just a few dollars per day. In countries with a significant population with low incomes, the cost of cell phone service will always be low so that everyone has access. It follows that in those markets there will never be enough cash flow on the bits to subsidize a $600 phone. You could argue that voice/text will remain cheap and data will be more expensive, but I doubt that, bits always get cheaper. And without a subsidized model, Apple (IMO) has no competitive product.
Its a classic case of a company letting quarter to quarter profits undermine their long term health. The subsidized model (and by that I mean where they get double the subsidy of an Android phone) is unsustainable, and Apple needs to learn to compete without that crutch.
This thread is interesting because different people have different perspectives on what Apple "should" do. Some say its all about profit. Some say market share, some just want them to make the phone they personally want. For me, being a fan of Apple's user experience, I want as many other people to enjoy the experience as much as I have... so market share is important. Market share is also needed to keep their ecosystem/services vital and the company viable in the long run.
Hope for more competition...
From a producer standpoint, Windows is competing with Android, not Apple - that is, software that any hardware maker can use.
In this sense, it'll be a great thing for competition when Samsung, with half the Android market, switches to that new Intel backed open source OS, Tizen. Then there'll be two huge players in the "software everywhere" camp.
From a producer standpoint, Windows is competing with Android, not Apple - that is, software that any hardware maker can use.
In this sense, it'll be a great thing for competition when Samsung, with half the Android market, switches to that new Intel backed open source OS, Tizen. Then there'll be two huge players in the "software everywhere" camp.
I'm wondering how the Android vs iOS landscape will evolve when Samsung is going to promote Tizen OS?
Every techblog has been reporting over the last couple of weeks that Samsung is preparing to start promoting their own Tizen OS in smartphones, tablets, cars and so on.
Could be interesting times for Android if Samsung's number one OS will be Tizen.
Every techblog has been reporting over the last couple of weeks that Samsung is preparing to start promoting their own Tizen OS in smartphones, tablets, cars and so on.
Could be interesting times for Android if Samsung's number one OS will be Tizen.