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 Tops 50% Share of Smartphone Sales, But Apple Still Dominating Profits
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I honestly do not know. it's not to make money. Cause apple ***** all over them in that department. So I don't know.
Last edited by a moderator:
Some songs are not matched for unknow reasons. I just checked iTunes store and all of my unmatched songs are there. Strange.
marketshare means developers means good apps means good ecosystem, but if the company that supports it doesn't make money, they disappear and leave you hanging. Palm, Microsoft, HP have all left people hanging, but only on stuff they dropped because of no marketshare. I can't think of a good market leader failure, but maybe android can pull it off
It is not the installed base that counts, it is the number of users that would potentially be willing to part with their money.
Since according to the trolls iOS is for people who get ripped off and enjoy it, it should be clear what OS you should develop for
It is not the installed base that counts, it is the number of users that would potentially be willing to part with their money.
Since according to the trolls iOS is for people who get ripped off and enjoy it, it should be clear what OS you should develop for
yes - by all means - resort to namecalling.
"troll" is one of the most overused and INCORRECTLY used words on this forum
Sure. 50% of the market profits spread out of over how many handset manufacturers? We know what percentage of the profits Apple is making from iOS. It doesn't take a mathematician to understand why the numbers work in Apples favor.
Just because two people use the same wood and nails to build their respective houses doesn't mean both equally appreciate the importance of load-bearing walls.
Right now Intel is trying very, very, very hard to convince PC makers to sell laptops that would compete with the MacBook Air. And guess what, they can't. Intel is willing to spend hundreds of millions to help them, and they can't build anything that matches the MBA. Dell tried to build a laptop that would compete with the previous revision of the MacBook Air (the Dell Adamo) and guess what: It was more expensive and inferior in every way (admittedly you could get them at a good price in the closing down sale).
And yes, I know that Dell sells an Alienware laptop that crushes any Apple laptop. In performance, price, and weight (5.6 kg, so it _really_ crushes it)
You're out of date. The revenue sharing model was used only for the original iPhone. Since the 3G it's been a carrier subsidized model like most other phones.
Apple is making lots of money because it only sells profitable products. If you look at the other manufacturers you'll see that many or even most of their handsets never make any money or make tiny margins at best.
On the other hand Apple is selling only in the high to medium-high parts of the market. They're also releasing only a small range of phones and so they spend less on R&D per handset sold. Add in the pull that the iPhone has which allows them to get better money from networks and you have a recipe for high profit margins.
No one is 'overpaying' for Apple products.
It works like this:
Value = what people are willing to pay
So if people are willing to pay the price then they are paying what the thing is worth.
----------
Yep. Heart, lungs, kidneys all pretty much the same as anyone else's. It's how those bits are put together and the things they do that matter!
On the other hand Apple is selling only in the high to medium-high parts of the market. They're also releasing only a small range of phones and so they spend less on R&D per handset sold. Add in the pull that the iPhone has which allows them to get better money from networks and you have a recipe for high profit margins.
No one is 'overpaying' for Apple products.
It works like this:
Value = what people are willing to pay
So if people are willing to pay the price then they are paying what the thing is worth.
----------
Yep. Heart, lungs, kidneys all pretty much the same as anyone else's. It's how those bits are put together and the things they do that matter!
Still regular style mammary glands, fat, blood vessels and skin cells. Of course her's are very nicely put together components. It's all in the design and finish.
----------
Not really. But a lot of PC users have different ideas of what they value. Apple users clearly place a premium on design and finish. They value more highly ease of use and high standards of customer service. That's a perfectly fine choice. But others might value other things. None of us has any right to tell people what they should and should not value.
What SeniorGato1 should be complaining about is the 35% of Apple profits being sucked in by our government.
It will be interesting to see in a few years how this all sorts out. Companies other than Apple, have to start making money in this market otherwise they will not stay in this market forever and move onto more profitable ventures.
However, with that said, what in consumer electronics really makes good money these days?
However, with that said, what in consumer electronics really makes good money these days?
Sigh.
17,295.3 is not a dip in sales over 13,484.4. Yes, marketshare declined but that's due to the growth of the market from 81m to 115m, but there was no dip in unit sales.
That's a really good point. No one is making much money selling PCs these days either. They hope, I think, to make money selling tablets.
The issue is to do with commodification. When you can't clearly and easily differentiate your product from that of a competitor, when you have nothing that cannot be found elsewhere, you end up competing only on price. That's why Nokia were and remain so disinterested in the Android platform. They saw that they would be driven to ever lower margins and they were right. That's why they belatedly turned to Windows Phone after struggling to get Symbian moving.
Apple can differentiate it's products through the software and services that are available only to those products. iOS, iTunes, iCloud, the App Store, Siri; these things are not available elsewhere and so Apple can maintain a profitable position.
The question is, how will anyone else do this? Amazon can. Google might have a chance if they do something with Motorola. This would, however, alienate HTC and Samsung. If Nokia can stay tight with MS they might also start turning a profit again. RIM are dying a slow and painful death, so they're out.
If we take what this article is all about, the individual manufacturers don't matter... so they are not pillars. Apple's smart phones rank at the top of the list among smart phone manufacturers in terms of sales. Apple's iOS ranks among the top for all mobile devices.
Any way you cut it, Apple is clearly successful. Will Google be able to turn its OS into an advertising bonanza? Probably, until the users get tired of the ads and find a way to opt out. It will be a similar problem for the Kindle Fire... once someone jailbreaks it and disconnects it from Amazon's ecosystem, then Amazon will lose money.... Big time.
I disagree. They are definitely pillars. If you remove the manufacturers - you have no devices that support android. That makes them a pillar in the business model.