Apple's iBeacon Gains 'Made For iPhone' Specification

[lilo777]

I could be wrong about this but if i recall correctly it was android 4.3 that introduced built in support for BT LE...4.3 and higher versions only make up around 10% of android's own installed user base...

Image



This provides a list of devices running android that can support Bluetooth LE as of the time the report was written:




http://www.androidpolice.com/2013/1...app-ignores-all-the-phones-with-bluetooth-le/

Now a 120 million installed userbase doesnt look like 80+% of the smartphone market share Apple sold close to 150 million iPhones in 2013 most of which were 4s's, 5's, 5s's and 5c's (all bluetooth LE enabled)..In 2012 apple sold a ton of 4s's and 5's as well. Its highly likely that the current user base that uses bluetooth LE has more iPhones than android smartphones..

It does not really matter. Whoever is going to develop for this stuff (and I would argue that it's very overrated on this forum) should realize that for each iPhone sold today there are four Android phones being sold. By the time this technology matures (i.e. useful software is developed and someone other than MLB actually decides to use) the number of Android phones with bluetooth LE will be higher than the number of iPhones.

 

[vomhorizon]

It does not really matter. Whoever is going to develop for this stuff (and I would argue that it's very overrated on this forum) should realize that for each iPhone sold today there are four Android phones being sold. By the time this technology matures (i.e. useful software is developed and someone other than MLB actually decides to use) the number of Android phones with bluetooth LE will be higher than the number of iPhones.

Then why is time and time again developers choosing ios to make apps for first? Where is the facebook paper app on android for example? whose example was cited with the whatts app dealWhere's nike's fuel band app Thats a large company right there ..How many iPhones are sold yearly? Close to 150 million last year. How many Android phones with LT exist? Around 120 million. How many of those 120 million are with consumers that most likely will use their phones in retail and other areas? What's iOS marketshare in the US smartphone market? A tad higher than 40% (its 48% in the overall comparison of ios to android) and as of last year's stats, its growing on android. Which platform is dominating retail and has a recorder higher spending power? How many flagships are sold each year on android in areas which are retail heavy?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-r-levin/ios-edges-android-for-ope_b_4717499.html

 

[Michael Scrip]

It does not really matter. Whoever is going to develop for this stuff (and I would argue that it's very overrated on this forum) should realize that for each iPhone sold today there are four Android phones being sold. By the time this technology matures (i.e. useful software is developed and someone other than MLB actually decides to use) the number of Android phones with bluetooth LE will be higher than the number of iPhones.

And I'd be willing to bet that the iPhone would still have more engagement with these Bluetooth LE transmitters than Android phones do.

We've seen this before... Android phones outsell the iPhone 2:1, 3:1, 4:1, 5:1, 6:1, or whatever.

But the iPhone is still the platform that gets the most attention.

It will be another case where a smaller amount of iPhones is actually more valuable than a larger amount of Android phones.

 

[NT1440]

Incorrect. Bluetooth LE is part of the Android API.

I could be wrong about this but if i recall correctly it was android 4.3 that introduced built in support for BT LE...4.3 and higher versions only make up around 10% of android's own installed user base...

This is what I was referring to. Up until 4.3 there was no unified way to use BT LE as Google was banking on NFC, which clearly hasn't taken off as they hoped.

This leaves a massive amount of legacy devices that would need to have iBeacon support written for each make and model. Something no sane developer would want to put the effort into.

So debs have a choice, support only the latest and greatest Android devices running 4.3+, or the mountain of iOS devices that go back 2 generations with ease.

 

[Taz Mangus]

I could be wrong about this but if i recall correctly it was android 4.3 that introduced built in support for BT LE...4.3 and higher versions only make up around 10% of android's own installed user base...

Image



This provides a list of devices running android that can support Bluetooth LE as of the time the report was written:




http://www.androidpolice.com/2013/1...app-ignores-all-the-phones-with-bluetooth-le/

Now a 120 million installed userbase doesnt look like 80+% of the smartphone market share Apple sold close to 150 million iPhones in 2013 most of which were 4s's, 5's, 5s's and 5c's (all bluetooth LE enabled)..In 2012 apple sold a ton of 4s's and 5's as well. Its highly likely that the current user base that uses bluetooth LE has more iPhones than android smartphones..

According to this article: http://www.findingoutabout.com/android-users-spend-significantly-less-time-on-apps/

Flurry states that there were 564 million active Android devices globally at the end of April (versus 900 million total activations)

I would be curious to know, at the end April 2013, what the number of total iPhones activated are vs the total number of active iPhones. And how many of those 564 million Android devices were actually smart phones (not dumb or feature phones).

----------

It does not really matter. Whoever is going to develop for this stuff (and I would argue that it's very overrated on this forum) should realize that for each iPhone sold today there are four Android phones being sold. By the time this technology matures (i.e. useful software is developed and someone other than MLB actually decides to use) the number of Android phones with bluetooth LE will be higher than the number of iPhones.

You're right it does not really matter. And in that regard, neither does your speculation.

 

[vomhorizon]

And I'd be willing to bet that the iPhone would still have more engagement with these Bluetooth LE transmitters than Android phones do.

We've seen this before... Android phones outsell the iPhone 2:1, 3:1, 4:1, 5:1, 6:1, or whatever.

But the iPhone is still the platform that gets the most attention.

It will be another case where a smaller amount of iPhones is actually more valuable than a larger amount of Android phones.

Correct, there is plenty of data that suggests that market share based on devices sold means little when it comes to browsing habbits, spending habbits and actual feature use.

Remember this? These are the things retailers look at trying to judge habbits of their potential target customers..

Smartphones drove 28.5 percent of all online traffic compared to 18.1 percent for tablets, according to IBM. But tablets drove twice as many sales -- 19.4 percent of all online sales, to 9.3 percent for smartphones.
Tablet users averaged $95.61 per order, versus $85.11 for smartphone users.
IBM found that Apple iPhone and iPad users were bigger shoppers than their counterparts using Google Android-powered devices
As a percentage of total online sales, Apple's iOS was more than five times higher than Android, driving 23 percent of sales to 4.6 percent for Android.
On average, iOS users spent $93.94 per order, to $48.10 per order for Android, according to the survey.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/af...dg?docId=3bbca8b6-eda8-4be4-a296-95e798836615

 

[Michael Scrip]

Correct, there is plenty of data that suggests that market share based on devices sold means little when it comes to browsing habbits, spending habbits and actual feature use.

Remember this? These are the things retailers look at trying to judge habbits of their potential target customers..

http://www.google.com/hostednews/af...dg?docId=3bbca8b6-eda8-4be4-a296-95e798836615

Exactly.

I wish people would realize that market share doesn't always turn into results.

I've said this before and I'll say it again:

Android market share makes a great headline... but there no compelling story behind it.

 

[vomhorizon]

Android market share makes a great headline... but there no compelling story behind it.

There are a few upsides to the marketshare strategy of google/android for all concerns..

* OEM's get (and got) a very goog shot at taking on iOS from a software company that is innovative and cutting edge at what it does (compared to dinosaurs who are essentially hardware makers)

* Customers get the ultimate in choice when apple and google both go head to head for their business..

* Google gets a platform through which it ensures its "core" business of advertisement and search flourishes, in a time when the day' is not away when tablet and smartphone browsing will take over PHC based browsing.

Google has to have high market share, if it desires to keep its control of the search and advertising business..It cannot make the best smartphones int he world running android and give direct competition to samsung and LG..It needs all of the players to ensure that their devices while browsing use google's search and services (to this end google needs apple as well).

 

[LordVic]

Market share isn't completely useless stat.

It's just an overused stat in the smart phone wars. its one of the pieces of a puzzle. A puzzle that has 1000 pieces.

if you just look at once piece of a puzzle, you might get an idea for the whole puzzle, but you can't see the whole thing.

when you look at marketshare, you aren't seeing the whole thing.

 

[vomhorizon]

Market share isn't completely useless stat.

It's just an overused stat in the smart phone wars. its one of the pieces of a puzzle. A puzzle that has 1000 pieces.

if you just look at once piece of a puzzle, you might get an idea for the whole puzzle, but you can't see the whole thing.

when you look at marketshare, you aren't seeing the whole thing.

Both apple and google have different strategies and ambitions from their respective efforts in the mobile domain and can perfectly co-exist. Android should be more threatened from Microsoft and its OS ambitions since iOS is likely never to go on sale. Android model is simple: Provide an open source software with enough perks to keep a large chunk of OEM's happy and have them as a conduit for google search and services. This ensures that as mobile web browsing expands, google has its core-business covered..Google knows that its core business of PC advertisement will slow down due to users shifting to mobile and android provides them the platform to seek the same business.

Apple on the other hand makes HARDWARE and its software is not for sale to any OEM willing to pay up. Software serves only one purpose - To sell hardware..For apple market share is important but what is more/most important is to keep the development community healthy (which it is doing), offer allied services at par or superior to the competition and make sure device sales are on the right track.

 

[Michael Scrip]

There are a few upsides to the marketshare strategy of google/android for all concerns..

* OEM's get (and got) a very goog shot at taking on iOS from a software company that is innovative and cutting edge at what it does (compared to dinosaurs who are essentially hardware makers)

* Customers get the ultimate in choice when apple and google both go head to head for their business..

* Google gets a platform through which it ensures its "core" business of advertisement and search flourishes, in a time when the day' is not away when tablet and smartphone browsing will take over PHC based browsing.

Google has to have high market share, if it desires to keep its control of the search and advertising business..It cannot make the best smartphones int he world running android and give direct competition to samsung and LG..It needs all of the players to ensure that their devices while browsing use google's search and services (to this end google needs apple as well).

Oh yeah... Android is great for Google. But so is iOS.

If we're talking about Google... they're pretty well set in the mobile advertising business. Google is widely used on both Android and iOS. No one else even comes close (Bing?)

What I was saying about market share was... Android has a lot of market share... but the results aren't as big as you think they would be.

Or in other words... iOS has less market share... but it has huge results.

So when someone (lilo) starts crowing about Android market share... I wish he'd take a look at what is actually going on.

We've all seen the links posted in this thread. There are countless examples showing that Android has the most market share... but that iOS has more spending per app, more app usage, more engagement, etc.

And like you said... those are the things that retailers look at. And developers too.

.

 

[LordVic]

Both apple and google have different strategies and ambitions from their respective efforts in the mobile domain and can perfectly co-exist. Android should be more threatened from Microsoft and its OS ambitions since iOS is likely never to go on sale. Android model is simple: Provide an open source software with enough perks to keep a large chunk of OEM's happy and have them as a conduit for google search and services. This ensures that as mobile web browsing expands, google has its core-business covered..Google knows that its core business of PC advertisement will slow down due to users shifting to mobile and android provides them the platform to seek the same business.

Apple on the other hand makes HARDWARE and its software is not for sale to any OEM willing to pay up. Software serves only one purpose - To sell hardware..For apple market share is important but what is more/most important is to keep the development community healthy (which it is doing), offer allied services at par or superior to the competition and make sure device sales are on the right track.

completely agree.

the issue is that when Apple was the only game in town, or very early on in the smartphone wars, They screamed marketshare stats.

now that they're not the "leader" in it. They're screaming it's irrelevant.

Mixed messages thats all. Which adds to the continued added confusion in the use of the Statistics.

tis just that Apple and google have two completely different approaches to their ecosystems. And choice is great for us all to have. Competition drives each company to improve and constantly give us bette,r faster, more useful products. if we went back 10 years ago and showcased the tech of today and the connected world, We'd be shocked with just how fast and far it's come in a relatively short period fo time.

heck, i still remember downlaoding my first webbrowser to experience the first real iteration of the WWW and HTTP protocols.


I'm of the mindset that both, and ALL can exist. there's no shame in being #2, or even #3 or #10 in the marketplace. if your device is profitable (means stability of future support), Has the tools you need to accomplish the tasks you want, Then who cares if it's iOS, android, Tizen, BB10. it does the job.

But there's little doubt right now which platform is the biggest earners overall. People on iOS spend more money. if you're a developer who wants to make an app that gets a much better chance of turning a profit quicker, You develop for iOS first.

Its silly to be exclusive...but you aim for the biggest potential income first.
During my business studies, I once had a professor who had a great point. If you're in the business of profit, Your target market is everyone. not everyone might want or buy it, But you always aim for 100% of the market.,

 

[vomhorizon]

completely agree.

the issue is that when Apple was the only game in town, or very early on in the smartphone wars, They screamed marketshare stats.

now that they're not the "leader" in it. They're screaming it's irrelevant.

,

Early on its its mobile business apple absolutely needed market share. They were a NOBODY in the mobile world and had to gain acceptance in a world dominated by blackberry, Nokia, Samsung and the likes. How much market apple was pulling away from these competitors was extremely important. Apple probably still cares about marketshare within the category of products it competes in. Apple does not make a 200 dollar smartphone, does its marketshare in that category matter? Like Tim Cook explained, they are only interested in the top market segment where they compete with the flagship devices from other android and windows based OEM's. Apple is in the business of making one phone every year (they are still a young company if you look at how long they have been making phones)..For a ONE phone company they sold 148 million phones in the premium market last year. Thats what apple cares about. I am sure they will revise their expectations if they decide to compete in more than one market (Phablets and premium phones perhaps)..

 

[LordVic]

Early on its its mobile business apple absolutely needed market share. They were a NOBODY in the mobile world and had to gain acceptance in a world dominated by blackberry, Nokia, Samsung and the likes. How much market apple was pulling away from these competitors was extremely important. Apple probably still cares about marketshare within the category of products it competes in. Apple does not make a 200 dollar smartphone, does its marketshare in that category matter? Like Tim Cook explained, they are only interested in the top market segment where they compete with the flagship devices from other android and windows based OEM's.

those are interesting questions that can be debated for hours on end by analysts and forum goers with no real concenses though.

The important thing to recognise is that they are just statistics. Nothing more. It's how we use the statistics to paint a picture that matters. And how we use that information changes depending on the picture we want to paint.

It could easily be said for example that Apple has 0% of the budget marketshare (though, it's intentional). Or iPhone is 100% of the iPhone marketshare....

Or that 99% of all statistics are pulled out of the ass.

making any blanket statements based on one measurable metric is an un-intelligent thing to do.

I just think that overall, because of the sheer size of the market itself, we're talking between ALL smartphones (BB, Win, Android, iOS) there are an estimated of over 1 Billion sold (from cheap knockoffs to high end devices) and unless you're being paid a large sum of money for exclusivity to one platform, you should be aiming for everyone.

1bn target market is a lot better than 500million. or even 900 million

 

[vomhorizon]

It could easily be said for example that Apple has 0% of the budget marketshare (though, it's intentional).

Thats by choice..Apple does not wish to compete in the budget category..Where you can have phones for as low as 100-120 Dollars (off contract)

Or iPhone is 100% of the iPhone marketshare....

LOL

 

[LordVic]

Thats by choice..Apple does not wish to compete in the budget category..Where you can have phones for as low as 100-120 Dollars (off contract)



LOL

just making a point that numbers can be used by any group to show any bias if it's used in the right light with the right conditions thats all

it doesn't matter who publishes it. There is a reason for that publishing and we, (who want to believe we're intelligent) need to use our logical thinking skills to be able to understand what we're reading, and the consequences of what they're reading.

Unfortunately, Opinions based out of ignorance and a lack of critical thinking skills are way too prevalent online.

I try and be as agnostic to the brand names behind all this crap. I just hate (it's a bit of a pet peave) when someone spouts ignorance as fact and refuses to accept they may be wrong. I blame it for the grey hair

P.S. i'm not saying that about you, just the general "you" or "We". you've been pleasant!

 

[Tech198]

"Made for iPhone" NOT iOS ?

This would have said better, since it basically dubs one product out of the picture, or Apple just "assumes" that everyone is going to be using iPhone's, when in reality, its complete off-base.

 

[SockRolid]

I guess it depends on where you live, here in Houston and the surrounding areas there are NFC readers at registers everywhere. All the new credit card swipe machines have a tap reader on them. Even my hospital has a NFC reader on its vending machines that I personally use all the time.

But hey... don't let facts get in the way. Judging by your demeaning post you are just going to dismiss them all anyways.

But hey... have you ever seen anyone use Google Wallet?
No? Yeah, me neither.

----------

They already did. They filed for a patent on the 14th of this Feb. They're calling it "Flybell", a wireless beacon.

----------------------

As for those wondering if it works with other devices (android), the answer is YES. They specifically state "Other Bluetooth 4.0 enabled devices".

There ya go. NFC is circling the drain.

 

[TheHateMachine]

But hey... have you ever seen anyone use Google Wallet?
No? Yeah, me neither.

Considering I see myself do it whenever I use it and witness other people using it at the vending machines... yes I do. I've never seen anyone use iBeacons so that must be circling the drain then.

There ya go. NFC is circling the drain.

 

[lilo777]

There ya go. NFC is circling the drain.

That's what some Apple fan think. In the real news however they report the following:

"NFC technology is now quickly becoming a standard mobile payment method throughout established markets. Market Research Firm IHS today released a new report showing just how fast NFC is spreading.

The report estimates that NFC-enabled mobile phone shipments hit 275 million units last year, up 128% from the estimated 120 million shipped in 2012. The market is expected to rise another 50% this year to a predicted 416 million units shipped and by 2018 the market is predicted to reach 1.2 billion."

 

[Taz Mangus]

$19 billion dollars figure will convince any developers who might still think that "iOS first" strategy is a thing of the past (I am not sure if there are any such developers left, actually.

http://preorder.moov.cc/

Q: What platforms will Moov support at launch?
A: Moov is compatible with iPhone 4s and above. It is currently not compatible with Android phones. But, don’t let that stop you. We are working on delivering an Android-compatible platform by the fall of 2014, i.e. 3 months after launch.

It is sad the amount of rubish you post. I am embarassed for you.

 

[vomhorizon]

That's what some Apple fan think. In the real news however they report the following:

"NFC technology is now quickly becoming a standard mobile payment method throughout established markets. Market Research Firm IHS today released a new report showing just how fast NFC is spreading.

The report estimates that NFC-enabled mobile phone shipments hit 275 million units last year, up 128% from the estimated 120 million shipped in 2012. The market is expected to rise another 50% this year to a predicted 416 million units shipped and by 2018 the market is predicted to reach 1.2 billion."

I don't think apple will have any trouble doing NFC for future phones if it indeeds turns out to be superior to iBeacons..They have authenech which has plenty of expereince with NFC and integrating it

http://thenextweb.com/apple/2012/08...cause-needed-new-technology-quickly-products/

AuthenTec announced on May 8, 2012 that it had introduced “its first smart sensor specifically tailored for secure NFC mobile commerce.” The product is a new 192 pixel by 8 pixel fingerprint sensor that includes “hybrid fingerprint matching, AES, RSA and SHA encryption blocks, and One Time Password (OTP) generation.”

Put simply, it can interact directly with payment applications (including Passbook) to offer secure authentication and help process NFC commands based on the positive authentication of the user. This includes payments, but other NFC-centric processes like door entry and interaction with smart tags.

The above component may not be what Apple and AuthenTec were working on, but the technology is there. A sensor that is 1.3mm could even be incorporated into a Home button.

 

[lilo777]

http://preorder.moov.cc/



It is sad the amount of rubish you post. I am embarassed for you.

And who cares? Are you trying to compare Moov with WhatsApp? Obviously there are plenty of developers on each side of the fence that develop for just one platform. My point is that all significant developers/companies now support multiple platforms.

BTW, here is quote from TechCrunch:

"Moov was built by Nikola Hu, a former Apple and HALO game engineer, and Meng Li and Tony Yuan. They both struggled with working out and were not getting results because they weren’t conducting there workouts properly.

Moov is running its own crowdfunding campaign, opting out of the usual Kickstarter or Indiegogo campaign to “be closer to early supporters/users.”

The team is looking to raise $40K, which will allow for an initial shipment of about 650 Moov units at $59 a pop. If you’re interested in improving your form (in more ways than one), head on over to the Moov crowdfunding page and get to pledgin’."

This part: "They both struggled with working out and were not getting results because they weren’t conducting there workouts properly." is just hilarious.

So, they are trying to raise $40K. I could have given them $40K if they were not just iOS

 

[SockRolid]

That's what some Apple fan think. In the real news however they report the following:

"NFC technology is now quickly becoming a standard mobile payment method throughout established markets. Market Research Firm IHS today released a new report showing just how fast NFC is spreading.

The report estimates that NFC-enabled mobile phone shipments hit 275 million units last year, up 128% from the estimated 120 million shipped in 2012. The market is expected to rise another 50% this year to a predicted 416 million units shipped and by 2018 the market is predicted to reach 1.2 billion."

Big NFC fan, are you?

----------

Considering I see myself do it whenever I use it and witness other people using it at the vending machines... yes I do. I've never seen anyone use iBeacons so that must be circling the drain then.

I just completed an app development contract in Silicon Valley.
Didn't see a single person use Google Wallet. Not even in Mountain View.
And Mountain View is, as you well know, where Google's headquarters is located.

So yeah, we're all entitled to our opinions, aren't we?

 

[Taz Mangus]

And who cares?

Apparently you do otherwise you would not have taken the time to go out and research what I posted. Even went into the article and read it. Like I said, I feel embarassed for you.