Android to Surpass iPhone in Market Share by 2012?

[speedriff]

@g58

So what is your job at Apple? The problem with Apple (trust me I love their products) is that they don't care what their customers want concerning wireless products. They seem to only change when they might lose marketshare. If you call that good business then I suggest a history lesson of Japanese business practices. They see a company that is succsessful but isn't giving customers what they want, they fill that demand and walk away (eventually) with all the marketshare. One only has to look at Cars, motorcycles, televisions etc. to see it. I am starting to think Steve Jobs is a douche for more reasons than flash. I am always reading articles about him having a little tantrum and banning this or that because someone made him mad. Grow up Steve and give your LOYAL customers what they want or we will go elsewhere when a viable alternative arrives. Don't fall into the, "The bigger they are the harder they fall" category. As for Flash, it may be a little buggy so let me download it at me own risk. Sorry, but Flash is everywhere and I am tired of not being able to view it. Someday that won't be the case but until then...let me have it. I'm going to spend $800 on an iPad when I can't view Flash content? Really? Sorry, not me. I will just stick with my trusty notebook.

 

[Stella]

I tried installing the android sdk, it is the usual linux crapfest of having to fix and tweak everything. After 1 hour I still could not get it working. Absolutely appalling, makes me wonder about google. Aapl wants max lockdown on all their **** but at least it works.

Ease of use - uh.. look at XCode:

You've got to go through bloody hoops to be able to debug Unit Tests on XCode! XCode can be extremely long winded, whilst in other IDEs - no hassles what so ever! I'm not saying that XCode completely sucks, but Apple could do a lot to improve it.


( Unit Tests considered being a vital part of application development )

 

[neilp4453]

It's a bit rich calling people delusional and then coming out with with wish list statements as if they're bound in volumes of 'The Future History of Smartphones vol ll'

The Android market has potential, but only for as long as lazy phone manufacturers, who have never learned how to do operating systems and software, are happy to grab a freebie. This situation is the same as you or me going to a fair and picking up a free dev copy of some new software... and then running a business off its capabilities. No license fee! That's the attraction.

The saved costs derived from having much lower in-house dev costs and shorter route to market make Android a gift. But not without major issues. CylonGlitch [above] makes this very valid point:

"... as many as 40 models of Android devices will ship, . . . "

"How the heck is a developer supposed to support that many different devices? Even if there were 5 different screen resolutions, it would be hard to optimize your app for each. Now different RAM configurations, different CPU's, different everything, OUCH."

It's a ludicrous state of affairs. A wet dream for the armchair geek maybe, but for the non geek buyer, the proposition is entirely different. It already gives me a headache just thinking about it.

With the iPhone, Apple have demonstrated one of the oldest marketing principles still holds true in the 21st Century. If you give people three models to choose from with two colour options, you make the proposition simpler.

But all other manufacturers are still depending on the old marketing model of offering a bewildering array of models to try and catch the entire market. Now, that model has failed already - because it doesn't work. The market is automatically diluted. So why are they still using it?

speedriff [also above] has decided Steve Jobs is a "douche" because he's being "hardheaded" over Flash, while "Other manufacturers are giving AMOLED screens and are getting better and better."

Apple make more profit from all their products than anyone else. One way they do this is by waiting until they can demand a very high proportion of a large enough production of a component [NAND flash memory, screens etc] at the most competitive price, or can manufacture in-house [CPUs]. That's not just good business, it's vital for long term survival.

Wait until June this year and we'll see the new iPhone with a longer [HD aspect ratio] OLED screen. And HTML5 is the future. in reality, Adobe are better candidates for the 'douche' epithet here. If Flash had fewer issues, maybe Apple would add it.

What you need to understand is that Apple is better at seeing, predicting and exploiting the WHOLE picture, than any other company in this game. And anyone who seriously thinks a disparate group of not for profit developers and a market full of lazy manufacturers with a 19th Century sales mentality are going to win this one, is simply not even looking at it properly.

You really think so? I don't think Apple has done anything exceptional. They built off of their popular iPod brand. Any company could do the same..unfortunately not every company has something as popular as iPod. Apple's entre into the smartphone market was guaranteed from the start.

In your post, all I see is you ranting about the superiority of Apple while downplaying potential competition by just overlooking what they have done thus far. In our case, competition is healthy because if it were up to people like you, we would have to accept an iPhone 4g with the same specs as an iPhone 3GS. Yes, I am greatly overexaggerating but I hope you see my point.

Apple will do very little unless they are pressured to do a lot. I guess you missed my point where I said Apple does this on a regular basis with all of their items. The last to implement anything new is not something they do because they are an epithet of marketing. They do it because they can.

 

[rhett7660]

You really think so? I don't think Apple has done anything exceptional. They built off of their popular iPod brand. Any company could do the same..unfortunately not every company has something as popular as iPod. Apple's entre into the smartphone market was guaranteed from the start.

In your post, all I see is you ranting about the superiority of Apple while downplaying potential competition by just overlooking what they have done thus far. In our case, competition is healthy because if it were up to people like you, we would have to accept an iPhone 4g with the same specs as an iPhone 3GS. Yes, I am greatly overexaggerating but I hope you see my point.

Apple will do very little unless they are pressured to do a lot. I guess you missed my point where I said Apple does this on a regular basis with all of their items. The last to implement anything new is not something they do because they are an epithet of marketing. They do it because they can.

I don't agree with this at all. There phone when it came out was a lot more expensive then a good majority of the phones out at the time. They were not subsidized at all. They had something that was different and new to the game. The App store wasn't even around for the consumer at that time. There were web apps but not applications like we know it now. Very limited ones at that.

They were going against the likes of Nokia and Black Berry. Heck at that point the iPhone wasn't even considered a smart phone was it? It didn't have really any tools to compete against Black Berry. All it had was a new user interface.

Sure there were going to sell some units but I don't think any of this guaranteed a winner. Especially in a market that was saturated with phones that cost 50 or less and or free if you sign up.

 

[yodaxl7]

iPhone is totally a trend. iPod is simply a dedicated device to play music and maybe video. The mult-touch and app store are two key creations that made the iphone a trend. That's why you see other companies following Apple's foot step. Android is a new niche that was a couple step behind iphone os. Google is a "business making" or "jump starter". So, there is no REAL support for Android os. Google is too open. This os will challenge the market weed out bad companies. However, this can hurt the android survival!! iPhone os will remain the dominant force as long as Apple continue to upgrade well.

 

[G58]

Why is this so difficult for people to understand?

...I don't think Apple has done anything exceptional. They built off of their popular iPod brand. Any company could do the same..unfortunately not every company has something as popular as iPod. Apple's entre into the smartphone market was guaranteed from the start.

I don't really know where to begin to reply to this simplistic tripe.

In your world, are the policemen made of sugar by any chance?

You: "don't think Apple has done anything exceptional." Buy a Nexus one then.

"They built off of their popular iPod brand."

How did they create the touchscreen iPhone BRAND from the iPod Touch BRAND - a product that was launches after it?

iPhone Release date: June 29, 2007
iPod Touch 1st generation Release date: September 13, 2007

Brands don't build technology. Brands only build limited awareness and trust. But if the iPhone wasn't as good as it is, and as new as it was when it was first released, it would not only not have benefited from any brand benefits created by previous iPod model, it would have failed, and damaged the iPod brand too.

"Any company could do the same..unfortunately not every company has something as popular as iPod."

If this was the case, it would be Nokia and RIM duking it out now. Your entire theory is immature and utterly flawed. It's Apple's business model that created this situation, aided and abetted by an utterly moribund mobile phone market prior to their intervention.

"Apple's entre into the smartphone market was guaranteed from the start."

Here I agree, but not for any of the reasons you've proposed. Apple's ace is OS X. The version used to power the iPhone is a cut down version of the full OS with a touch screen UI. Every other mobile manufacturer was always going to be at a disadvantage as soon as Apple decided to play in their pool.

 

[macUser2007]

The iPhone is great, IMO.

BUT, Android 2+ is getting to be a real contender. Donut may just be the one to take it to the next level. Notably, the new Androids have not been cheap clones, but rather well-thought out, feature-rich sets, like the Nexus One. With AMOLED screens larger than the iPhone's and robust hardware (e.g. better on-board GPS than the iPhone), I wouldn't be surprised if they take market-share aware from the iPhone.

I also think the "killer app" for the general population will be Flash, when it becomes available on the new sets. Suddenly, the iPhone will be the only large screen smartphone without access to the the full web.

For the iPad the lack of Flash will be a much larger problem. There are a bunch of tablets coming out, some sporting Android 2.x, all of which will run full Flash, and be able to access the full web. On larger screens, mobile versions of major sites suck, and some do not work at all.

And the general consumers don't really care when some sweaty geek foams at the mouth how much he hates Flash. They just want to be able to see all of the web, in its full Flash glory.

 

[FoxyKaye]

And the general consumers don't really care when some sweaty geek foams at the mouth how much he hates Flash. They just want to be able to see all of the web, in its full Flash glory.

For better and for worse.

I happen to be one of those Geeks foaming at the mouth about flash, and in general, I think that the reason why Adobe was so upset by Jobs' recent comments that they're lazy and all their products are bloated and inefficient is because they hit to close to home.

But you're also very right - the general consumer doesn't care about these points. On some level everyone "knows" that the Web "requires" flash, and without it they're not getting the full "experience." It's an easy hit for the competitor's marketing department to play up the full flash experience on devices that support it in comparison to the iPhone and iPad. Jobs can scream all he wants about HTML5 on the horizon, however, this isn't going to be fully realized for some time. Likewise, too many sites rely too heavily on flash content for its absence to not be felt.

I think not supporting flash is a mistake, despite its technical flaws. Maybe this is all just a play by Apple to get Adobe to make some real and necessary improvements to flash in the first place - especially in how it taxes processor cycles and affects battery life on OS X (and presumably the iPhone OS as well). It wouldn't surprise me at all to see some magical "reconciliation" between Apple and Adobe on this point sometime this year as the iPad hits the consumer market.

 

[inkswamp]

What are we on now, like, the 3rd rev. of the iPhone hardware? Think back to the 3rd rev. of the iPod (I don't even think that version had a color screen yet.) How about the third rev. of OS X? Third rev. of the iMac?

I think one thing speculation like should should take into account is that Apple is incredibly aggressive about updating their products and what lies ahead can often, drastically change the playing field.

Remember the end of 2006 when the Zune was announced and everyone was running around spazzing out about how dead Apple was and all the usual Microsoft cheerleaders in the tech press were practically wetting themselves in excitement? And a mere month later, what happened? The iPhone was unveiled and all but nullified the Zune.

I think anyone engaging in this kind of speculation should keep that in mind.

 

[austin610]

Surpass? I don't think so. Catching up.... maybe!

 

[ChazUK]

<snip>
Remember the end of 2006 when the Zune was announced and everyone was running around spazzing out about how dead Apple was and all the usual Microsoft cheerleaders in the tech press were practically wetting themselves in excitement? And a mere month later, what happened? The iPhone was unveiled and all but nullified the Zune.

I think anyone engaging in this kind of speculation should keep that in mind.

What could Apple possibly add to the iPhone which would equal the tech jump which nullified the Zune?

I can't see any phone manufacturer adding much more than is out there now. Faster CPU's, better radio tech, better network tech, better features (cam/storage etc) & updated software is about as far as it can go from here (from my limited vision).

If Apple ever did create such a generational leap as the Zune to iPhone leap this late in the game I would be heartily impressed with them!

 

[slotcarbob]

Comparing

Android is going to do what Windows did. Those who like that Windows experience (read "cheap") are going to go in that direction. Those that want the elegant, minimalistic, rock solid OS, continue to stay with iPhone.

One thing I did notice though, in any numbers comparisons. Apple sells one phone, with one OS, and currently with one carrier (a hated one, btw). Android is running on several phones, and many carriers. The actual comparison is flawed. Let me suggest this. If one gets a choice of 'Droid or iP (from a carrier that offers both) , the iP will win out, even if the iP is a bit more expensive.

On the subject of price, there is a good chance that Apple may be able to undercut others because they could be using their own chips, soon.

Lastly, I have tried both types of phones. Are you kidding me? 'Drois software is absolutely awful.

 

[ChazUK]

Android is going to do what Windows did. Those who like that Windows experience (read "cheap") are going to go in that direction. Those that want the elegant, minimalistic, rock solid OS, continue to stay with iPhone.

Define "cheap". The only people that save money are the manufacturers who have less licening fees with Android as it is open source. I know for one that the £420 (after 17.5% UK tax) I paid for my Nexus One was anything but "cheap".

One thing I did notice though, in any numbers comparisons. Apple sells one phone, with one OS, and currently with one carrier (a hated one, btw). Android is running on several phones, and many carriers. The actual comparison is flawed. Let me suggest this. If one gets a choice of 'Droid or iP, the iP will win out, even if the iP is a bit more expensive.

What about the rest of the world? iPhone is sold in multiple carriers outside the U.S.A. There is a whole worldwide market to dominate out there. Remember that the original article is citing "the global smart phone market by 2012".

On the subject of price, there is a good chance that Apple may be able to undercut others because they could be using their own chips, soon.

Would that not make the iPhone "cheap"? Nice to know that any money Apple can save to pass on to the customer is defined as "undercutting" yet when HTC, Samsung, Motorola, LG (et;al) are all "cheap" for using Android.

 

[macfan881]

The droid Phones are great but the one problem that remains with them that makes the iPhone so much better are the Apps I have not seen one app on the droid market place that says wow that looks great, granted the market place is new but still even the iPhone had better working/Looking apps in its first release than the android.

 

[Cerebrus' Maw]

Android is going to do what Windows did. Those who like that Windows experience (read "cheap") are going to go in that direction. Those that want the elegant, minimalistic, rock solid OS, continue to stay with iPhone.

Cheap? Android is simply software. It could run on hardware that cost a billion dollars or substantially less. And I'm pretty sure that there are Android phones out there that actually cost more then the 3GS. Does that make the Iphone a 'cheap' product.

And even if your argument held, why do we always equate expense with quality. There are plenty of cheap products out there that perform significantly better then their so called premium rivals. Every one applauded Apple for lowering the initial target price of the Ipad. But you wouldn't exactly call it cheap in a derogatory way.

Lastly, I have tried both types of phones. Are you kidding me? 'Drois software is absolutely awful.

I don't know do you mean Droid or Android here (Remember, one does not equal the other. Droid is a name of a phone from Motorola, Android is the open software operating system) Droid runs V2.0 of Android. The current Android army is running on 2.1, which everyone agreed was a massive improvement, and generally put it on Iphone level. There are some areas that need improvement, such as the Media player, but then there are other area's where it simply excels.

 

[ChazUK]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.1-update1; en-gb; Nexus One Build/ERE27) AppleWebKit/530.17 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/530.17)

The droid Phones are great but the one problem that remains with them that makes the iPhone so much better are the Apps I have not seen one app on the droid market place that says wow that looks great, granted the market place is new but still even the iPhone had better working/Looking apps in its first release than the android.

By "looks great" I take it you are referring to games?



The first game to really impress me on Android is ExZeus (also available on iPhone).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLa11Ah_nFQ

Other than that, general apps I used on my iphone work just as well (if not better thanks to multitasking last.fm comes to mind) on Android.

 

[taskmanager]

Apple will come up with something. Their fan base is too strong

 

[jimitrott]

Re:

Android might surpass the iPhone. The iPhone is limited to 1 device whereas the Android is spanned over many more devices and will continue to branch out.

 

[Insilin1i]

Android might surpass the iPhone. The iPhone is limited to 1 device whereas the Android is spanned over many more devices and will continue to branch out.

This could also be a flaw, I would be really annoyed if I bought the best droid available and then a month later another six of them come out better than mine. A lot of people like buying the best available and then riding it out until the next model is available, but when there phone gets replaced by another 40 phones I am not to sure how people will react.

 

[jayenh]

This could also be a flaw, I would be really annoyed if I bought the best droid available and then a month later another six of them come out better than mine. A lot of people like buying the best available and then riding it out until the next model is available, but when there phone gets replaced by another 40 phones I am not to sure how people will react.

iphone users are the only people who do this. before the iphone it was pretty well accepted that your new nokia/sony ericson/blackberry/anything is only going to be new for the next 3 months tops until the next model comes out. the mobile industry used to be probably the fastest paced of the tech industries and at it's peak no one gave a crap that there phone manufacturer brought out a new phone every couple of months.

i suppose it was a little easier to swallow with 12 month contracts being the norm until the last couple of years (in the uk at least), but this is the fault of carriers, not the phone manufacturers. they are doing the exact same release cycle they always have done.

edit: not all iphone users, obviously, but probably a larger proportion of iphone users than [insert any phone here] users based on the outrage when the 3gs came out. and that was possibly only because of assumption (the mother of all f... ups) due to the cheap/free (?) upgrade of the 1st gen to 3g. i bet there won't be that outcry this year.

 

[Toneaphone]

Android needs a successful app store first

Even though Android has more potential users, they will never be as successful as the iPhone until they improve their app capabilities. Once they do this, developers will make better apps and games, and customers will buy more. It ultimately boils down to the degree of consumption per user rather than the quantity of potential customers. One person can easily install 150+ apps for the iPhone in no time. Over 3 billion apps have been downloaded to date...It will be an extremely long time until Android meets that milestone.

 

[kdarling]

I politely disagree with the idea that lots of apps are necessary to make a smartphone popular. For one thing, I suspect there's not really more than a few thousand unique apps. Everything else is a variation and/or a lesser version of a good one.

Look at RIM. Only about 16,000 apps but they outsell many other phone types.

Look at the iPhone. Over 2,000 tip calculators alone! Nobody needs that many choices.

Windows Mobile has something like 30,000 apps. But out of a half dozen versions of each app, there will always be perhaps just two or three that are recommended between users most often: usually a free one, a paid inexpensive version, and a paid deluxe version.

As long as the major apps are available in a decent version, a phone will sell.

Again, the iPhone is an example. When it first came out, it was arguably just a feature phone with no apps. It had what other phones already had... Google maps, a browser, media player and some widgets. But it had nice ones which were easy to find and use... and that was enough to make it sell.

For that matter, the iPhone sold even without some of what I would consider major apps: VoIP and Slingplayer over 3G, MMS, Pandora in the background, decent home screen, and games.

I would say that the user experience and how it fits with that person's lifestyle, is far more important than apps.

Regards.

 

[macfan881]

This could also be a flaw, I would be really annoyed if I bought the best droid available and then a month later another six of them come out better than mine. A lot of people like buying the best available and then riding it out until the next model is available, but when there phone gets replaced by another 40 phones I am not to sure how people will react.

Its going on now I mean look at the Motorola droid when it first came out. then few months after thats out The Nexus One Incredible etc. This is why i hate this because I'm currently looking at a Droid as my next phone, but with the Nexus one and incredible coming out in March then there's the Droid and Eris too it makes it hard to chose one of these phones.

 

[GeekGirl*]

Having had the iPhone (3) and now the Nexus one, I have to say the Droid is a much better phone But will wait till summer and see what Apple releases.

 

[Macist]

The thing is, do Apple care about being outpaced sales-wise? They may just be content to make their products smoother and sexier than the better Android phones and be the Mercedes.

If they want to be in the sales race they need to get the 32MB iPhone free on £30 per month contract like other top-end smart phones, not £230 on a £35 per month contract. As Android and Maemo and tothers improve that massve Apple tax won't wash.

They also need an iPhone nano to compete with the HTC hero type phones.