Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Android to Surpass iPhone in Market Share by 2012?

Liquorpuki said:
For those who like the iPhone, this works in our favor. With iPhone OS, there's only one hardware platform developers have to deal with. All they need to do for QC is make sure their apps work on the latest OS rev.
Click to expand...

The iPhone platform has some significant variations. Location precision (lack of GPS), microphone or speaker existence on the touch, existence of MMS, CPU speed between models, amount of RAM (a potentially big problem for game makers).

So software that runs fine on one phone won't run on others and might even brick them because of different hw configurations. It happened with Windows Mobile.
Click to expand...

Really. Do you have an example of an app bricking a WM phone?

It's rare that an app will make your OS unstable, brick your phone, and make you restore factory settings just to get it running again.
Click to expand...

Sometimes it just takes getting an iPhone OS update to get into that situation.

Far as jailbreaking, to put it in perspective, look how bad Verizon cripples ALL their phones on release.
Click to expand...

Verizon doesn't cripple their smartphones. Even their GPS is unlocked now.

Yea I have to hack the iphone to install maybe 5 choice apps I can't get otherwise,
Click to expand...

So you admit that it's hobbled in its stock form? ATT / Verizon / Sprint don't block any apps you want to use on their smartphones. Or themes. Or anything else.

but at least my phone didn't have its GPS and bluetooth disabled, RAM cut in half, wi-fi disabled so I'd have to use 3g even though I'm at home, etc
Click to expand...

The iPhone's Bluetooth was crippled to begin with... and still is. The original iPhone will always lack GPS and 3G.

I would just stick with the claim that Apple's total control over their platform can be helpful.
 
pdjudd said:
Yes, I have. Several times. Things have changed, but the base premise of the article still applies - Microsoft Got Lucky - there is no way to suggest that Apple can pull that off in this day in age when the world depends too much on Microsoft. The article deals with past actions affecting the present. Its very relevant. Its point is that MS got successful because of how it parlayed successes over time, not because it embraced an "open strategy". They did that years ago. Read the whole thing. Grueber makes a point that still applies today because marketshare in the OS world has changed very little.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry OSX market share would most definitely go up. From a business perspective though it would would be a terrible move, you are right about that. Profits would drop as Apple would get next to nothing from the sale of software only. The market share of OSX would drop once Apple went bankrupt.

Allowing greater access to your product almost always leads to larger sales volumes, but it isn't always in your best interest.
 
pdjudd said:
Yes, I have. Several times. Things have changed, but the base premise of the article still applies - Microsoft Got Lucky - there is no way to suggest that Apple can pull that off in this day in age when the world depends too much on Microsoft.
Click to expand...


Well I think the original argument was not about Apple copying MSs success. I think we all agree that indeed MS got extremely lucky (but also showed a lot of skill and ruthlessness in exploiting that luck). However, the original argument was more about whether Mac OS would enjoy a higher market share if it were open to PCs. It probably would if Apple supported only "certified systems" to avoid driver issues. In any case, it is extremly unlikely that this is going to happen and therefore pure, rather meaningless speculation. :)
 
nagromme said:
Valid points, except you're looking at a micro-niche of power-users, while the iPhone's massive growth comes from a much broader market than that. Android will (and does) take some power-user market share, and I look forward to seeing where it goes.

The big thing though is DEVELOPER share. Apps. Android will run--in different flavors--on a number of different phones, offering choice in screen size, features, hard vs. virtual keys, etc. That sounds great--but will the same APP run on all those flavors? No. The app market will be fragmented among incompatible models. There's no good way out of that--it's one advantage Apple's model will hang on to.
Click to expand...

I was thinking about it and come to think about it the different flavors of phones still comes down to the OS being the same. Just look at OSX and Windows, people test it on the OS but do not test it on all the hardware configurations. Hell if you just go with Macs you have an insane number which is small compared to windows.

You test it on the OS and call it good you might test it on 2-3 types of hardware if you are being very careful but most of the time if it works on one it is going to work on them all.. Android will be the same.
 
slu said:
I hope my sarcasm meter is broken.

If it is not, comments like this are exactly what is wrong with this forum.

What does Microsoft has to do with topic?
Click to expand...

No sarcasm at all. I know Microsoft wasn't specifically in the topic, but it relates heavily. Apple, Google, and Palm are all going to be big players in the mobile computing world. Microsoft, RIM, and Symbian are all very outdated and behind. I think it is all very interesting. I wasn't alive when the personal computing revolution went down, but this is the same type of revolution.

It is very relevant because it seems like Google is becoming the new Microsoft. There are some big differences though that make me not despise Google, such as how they are pretty open. I rejoice in Microsoft failing because the world and technology is a better place without them hindering innovation and progression with all their illegal proprietary lock-in antics they constantly shove down peoples' throats! :rolleyes: RIP Micro$oft! :p
 
Android should easily surpass the iPhone in market share, IMHO. So what?

It's an OS written to run on a multitude of hardware and is/will be heavily customised by both manufacturers and operators. Due to this I doubt it'll ever match the iPhone for quality, while in terms of market share it should clean up.
 
Speedy2 said:
Depends on what you're selling. How much money is Google really making with those Android licenses and the market place? How much are the handset makers making with Android?

Google MAY have a better margin, but Apple has a much bigger market for sure since they add most of the value.
Click to expand...

ya that's why I said "generally", however, Googles main source of revenue is advertising. So all google wants is more and more people with smart phones.

It doesn't matter that they give android for free because if you own an iphone or some other smart phone, most likely you're using Google for some kind of search. All this results in more money for Google, and better margins, as developing the hardware like apple will increase costs..
with software, it's way cheaper..

apple iphone is only one product, there are many people who may be priced out, or people who prefer real buttons, or people who just like other phones. Android will eventually beat Apple when it comes to market share. It's inevitable.. and that is their business plan..

and Google does have better margins than Apple.. look up their quarterly reports..

now this doesn't mean android will be a better product, but the OS will be in a greater number of handsets compared to the apple OS.

A perfect example is Microsoft VS Apple,

Microsoft was smart to not get involved in the hardware..
and look their market share..
 
And because Android and Google operate in an "integrative and open environment, [they] could easily top ... the singular Apple," he said.
Click to expand...

It's 2009. Are people still turned on by buzzwords like this?

I assume by "integrative and open," they mean open source. That's great and I love open source software (though there's been some debate as to how open Android really is) but here's the deal. Time and time again we see that what really matters in consumer tech is what works for the buyer, not what makes sense behind-the-scenes for developers. There are lots and lots of open source projects out there that have had success but very few instances where one has toppled and established closed source system. Even Firefox, one of the most popular pieces of open source software out there, is still way behind Internet Explorer.

If Apple keeps pumping out great ideas and maintains the level of quality they've delivered so far, there's no logical reason to think something will overtake it just because it's "integrative and open."
 
Rodimus Prime said:
And how does carrier matter at all in your argument. Sorry but that entire augment there has no meaning in this debate.
Click to expand...

You were arguing in your little list that having to jailbreak their iphone is gonna make users want to migrate to Android phones. Jailbreaking is basically hacking and phones are hacked because functionality is crippled. I'm pointing out that Android phones can have the same problem, especially if they come out on carriers such as Verizon, which goes further and also cripples hw features iPhone users take for granted.

kdarling said:
The iPhone platform has some significant variations. Location precision (lack of GPS), microphone or speaker existence on the touch, existence of MMS, CPU speed between models, amount of RAM (a potentially big problem for game makers).
Click to expand...

The context isn't how many variables exist but how many variables devs have to deal with. iPhone app developers have to deal with much less than developers on decentralized hardware platforms. WM developers have several different OEM's to deal with as well as all their models and generations thereof. If you can't see how the complexity translates into a harder development process, I don't know what to tell you.

kdarling said:
Really. Do you have an example of an app bricking a WM phone
Click to expand...

I had a couple apps brick my i730 back when I was on Verizon. I ended up having to hard reset and resync all my contacts.

kdarling said:
Verizon doesn't cripple their smartphones. Even their GPS is unlocked now
Click to expand...

the folks at the Verizon forums disagree with you

kdarling said:
So you admit that it's hobbled in its stock form? ATT / Verizon / Sprint don't block any apps you want to use on their smartphones. Or themes. Or anyt
Click to expand...

First most phones I've seen are hobbled in its stock form, not just the iPhone. But personally I think the quality of the iPhone and all the other things the design engineers got right outweighs the fact I have to jailbreak it to put a 5x5 matrix of icons on my screen out the box.

I hate AT&T service here in LA and I hate the fact I can't tether but I put up with it because it's such a good phone. I don't care that Android or Sprint doesn't screen apps because to take advantage of that, at this point in time I'd have to downgrade to a shttier phone and go to an app store that has less than 25% of the apps Apple does, and ironically, because they don't screen, more of them suck

kdarling said:
The iPhone's Bluetooth was crippled to begin with... and still is. The original iPhone will always lack GPS
Click to expand...

Crippled means the hw is functional but was disabled by the carrier or MFGer. An iPhone that wasn't designed with a GPS chip is not crippled. An iPhone having a fullly functional GPS chip that won't work without purchasing Telenav is crippled.
 
Liquorpuki said:
I had a couple apps brick my i730 back when I was on Verizon. I ended up having to hard reset and resync all my contacts.
Click to expand...

If you were able to reset and get it working again, then it wasn't bricked. "Bricked" means that the device now has the functionality of a brick. You cannot reset a brick, and certainly can't synch contacts with one :)
 
What a bunch of bs!!!

Oh so now we have Android. First it was the Palm Pre that was going to kill the iPhone, that did not happen, then it was this or that touch screen phone that was going to kill the iPhone and that did not happen. When Android first came out with the G1 that was going to kill the iPhone, that did not happen and now we have more Android devices killing the iPhone, not going to happen. This is a load of crap from people who don't know what they are talking about. Android is hard to develop for and is at least two years behind Apple at the moment, how is this going to happen? This is the stupidest prediction I have ever heard from people who don't like Apple for some reason that I cannot understand, let's stop predicting which device is going to be King and just see what happens!!! The main reason I say this will not happen is that Android is only being adopted by technophiles and not everyday people, the iPhone is being adopted by apple technophiles and everyday people, it is the everyday people that decide which device is king and they will not adopt Android unless the OS is completely overhauled in a different direction, people like my 63 year old father have an Iphone now and there is no way he would ever want or use an Android based phone. Tech analysts need to think of everyday people when they predict this crap and not techies who hate Apple for some reason or another!!!
 
Come on...

The iPhone clearly has the traction and the momentum. Unless Apple builds a clunky square with a cheap keyboard and a lousy screen that barley has room for a giant clock, the iPhone will remain king. See who laughs last when iPhone crosses 100M units sold.

Oh BTW, did I mention they have the App Store. The ecosystem is well defined and by the time 2012 comes around they App Store will have over 100,000 apps.
 
dyler said:
Oh so now we have Android. First it was the Palm Pre that was going to kill the iPhone, that did not happen, then it was this or that touch screen phone that was going to kill the iPhone and that did not happen. When Android first came out with the G1 that was going to kill the iPhone, that did not happen and now we have more Android devices killing the iPhone, not going to happen. This is a load of crap from people who don't know what they are talking about. Android is hard to develop for and is at least two years behind Apple at the moment, how is this going to happen? This is the stupidest prediction I have ever heard from people who don't like Apple for some reason that I cannot understand, let's stop predicting which device is going to be King and just see what happens!!! The main reason I say this will not happen is that Android is only being adopted by technophiles and not everyday people, the iPhone is being adopted by apple technophiles and everyday people, it is the everyday people that decide which device is king and they will not adopt Android unless the OS is completely overhauled in a different direction, people like my 63 year old father have an Iphone now and there is no way he would ever want or use an Android based phone. Tech analysts need to think of everyday people when they predict this crap and not techies who hate Apple for some reason or another!!!
Click to expand...

no offense, but market share is completely different from "superior product"

they do not go hand in hand, and a company with a larger market share can put out an inferior product (example: Nokia)

more phones with android are going to be sold because there are 40 times the number of handsets android is going to be on..
not a big deal, and apple fans should not be threatened..

the author is just stating simple facts..
 
laprej said:
For example, every phone manufacturer is going to have their own set of features. Some may have cameras, vibration, video playback, etc. With the iPhone, you know exactly what is there and what the device you're targeting can do. You can build better applications to utilize the specific hardware.
Click to expand...

Of the 6 iPhone OS devices so far released (still more than Android), each has their own set of features. Some may have cameras, vibration, video playback, etc. There is also an enourmous range of CPU and GPU ability. I think the only consistent thing so far has been the screen size and the fact that apps can only use touch and none of the buttons.

So there is a similar (smaller) problem that exists for developers on iPhone. It's unfortunately why Firemint say they won't release Real Racing 3GS too. Android tries to keep fragmentation to a minimum by running everything in a virtual machine but ultimately it has the same problem.

These aren't game consoles that are released once every 5 years.
 
Not a chance

No way. Apple will continue to release new hardware and updates as the iPhone continues through it's lifecycle. It is a recognized brand and like it or not, the control Apple exerts over the user experience maintains it's value.

Android is not recognizable to the general consumer, will be on some hardware manufacturer's phone, won't be consistent in its implementation, and will end up being just another phone OS.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7C144 Safari/528.16)

Wait a minute, windows mobile is on multiple phones. Why won't they take over iPhone's market share? Everything is always so pie in the sky. I remember when the iPhone was supposed to be a disaster and a sure failure. Something sure went wrong there.
 
Good luck to them then...
I predict Google will be bankrupt by 2012 when the VC's realize they're not achieving anything.
 
1 iPhone Model (3 capacities) on AT&T vs many different Android Phones on all the other providers...

Seems possible to me...

(I can see a FREE Android Touchscreen phone with unlimited voice, data, and text for $70/month from someone out there to try to beat AT&T's offering - which isn't very hard to do...:eek:)
 
camarobh said:
No way. Apple will continue to release new hardware and updates as the iPhone continues through it's lifecycle. It is a recognized brand and like it or not, the control Apple exerts over the user experience maintains it's value.

Android is not recognizable to the general consumer, will be on some hardware manufacturer's phone, won't be consistent in its implementation, and will end up being just another phone OS.
Click to expand...

Android my not be recognizable to the average consumer but GOOGLE sure as hell is.
You average consumer has figured out that Android is made by Google. People trust Google and know they put out some great stuff. People know about google maps, google earth, google street view and Gmail shall I go on..

All great things. People know the Android phones are made by google. The customization is a huge selling point as you can add a lot of apps. Set up the interface to exactly how you like it. Something you can not nor ever will be able to be done on the iPhone. That limitation is really a bad point about the phone.
 
paradox00 said:
I'm sorry OSX market share would most definitely go up. From a business perspective though it would would be a terrible move, you are right about that. Profits would drop as Apple would get next to nothing from the sale of software only. The market share of OSX would drop once Apple went bankrupt.

Which is kinda the point. Short term improvements are meaningless if they go right back down. I don;t contend that they would go up, but the whole point of increasing sales is to hope that they stay up. Otherwise it’s just a waste of time. You can;t just say “market share will go up”. Their market share goes up the minute a Mac gets sold. We have to look at the long run which you point out, will invariably go down and possibly lower than the base. A net loss kinda contradicts the idea of increased market share.

But this is all conjecture since Apple has already indicated that they are not playing the market share game.

Allowing greater access to your product almost always leads to larger sales volumes, but it isn't always in your best interest.
Click to expand...
Of course that statement is true. But does that require Apple to license their hardware out to others? I argue that it’s not the case. Taking the MS approach fundamentally changes Apple’s business. They don’t have to do that. Of course the Grueber article covers that too. There are tones of ways to increase access to your product. The tough part is making it profitable. Both Microsoft and Apple accomplish that goal just fine without getting into a fight that results in a bad outcome for Apple or MS.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back