iPhone Market Share Dips Slightly as Android Increases Lead in Global Smartphone Race

[Renzatic]

Actually, my wife would love that device

She still prefers flip-phones in the first place, since they make sense to her as far as answering and hanging up (flip open/close), and a built-in resistance to drop damage.

She also has a terrible time with touchscreens, and would love something that she could dial using real buttons. She's used to doing that without even looking at the phone... something that's nearly impossible to do on an all-touch phone.

That's the thing, it's still a primarily a touchscreen phone, but it's got that pointless keypad on it. You don't even get the benefit of size that you'd get out of a regular flip phone. Plus, with the two screens, it's likely not any less fragile than a regular smartphone.

You gotta admit, the thing is kind of a dumb idea.

 

[Michael Scrip]

Yeah, I should've addressed that in my original post. The whole smartphone market has weirded out the usual status quo. In the past, the platform with the largest audience got the most support, and it almost always paid off. But when it comes to iOS and Android, things have weirded out considerably, and flipped around backwards. Now it's just one relatively small platform that nets the most sales, and the other is just...kinda...eh. I dunno what the hell they're doing over in Android land.

I think part of the problem is simply saying "Android" like it's a singular thing.

"Android" is actually made up of hundreds of phones from dozens of manufacturers. Some good phones... some terrible phones. "Android" could refer to a top-of-the-line flagship Android phone... or it could refer to a cheap no-name Android phone.

In the eyes of market share... all those phones rank equally. And cumulatively... "Android" phones have huge market share.

But developers can't simply look at that huge number and think that's where their market should be.

How many "Android" phones are super-budget phones that run apps poorly? How many "Android" phones are sold in developing nations that barely have 3G access? There are lots of factors to consider when you develop for "Android"

"Android" market share looks great on paper... but there's not much payoff for developers. They will continue to focus on the platform that may be smaller... but that pays better dividends.

 

[gnasher729]

"Android" market share looks great on paper... but there's not much payoff for developers. They will continue to focus on the platform that may be smaller... but that pays better dividends.

There is a lovely article on the register:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/01/27/feds_indict_android_pirates/

A company having 50,000 downloads to Android phones for a game but only 114 Android customers - and about ten times more iOS customers.

 

[ArtOfWarfare]

Apple just filed a patent for serving up ads based on our mood, which is determined partly by what we're doing, and partly via biometric readings. You can't get much creepier than that.

I agree. The difference (so far) is that Google actually has implemented creepy, unethical, and outright illegal ways of tracking you, whereas Apple has only filed a patent. Hopefully it's just an idea someone threw out, had patented, and will never actually be implemented.

Apple was already hacked into a while back, and had to shut down for days.

Was this meant to be a counterpoint? It backs up my point - no one is immune to this kind of breakin.

I think it'd be great if everyone had their own personal server. Let it be the thing collecting all our info in order to make our devices understand us better.

Moreover, each person could then charge for the ads we allow to be shown to ourselves!

Alas, most people can't afford the setup, which is why we end up relying on others to provide free storage and applications in return for us letting them get the advertising fee.

My setup is dirt cheap. I had a ten year old MacMini that was sitting around doing nothing - now it runs a mail server.

 

[gnasher729]

Seriously mate, it's clear you have no idea how much of a struggle it is for some people—supporting a family, perhaps a family member with a disability, paying off a mortgage, out-of-control credit card debt, out of work, or homeless… Incredible that you feel you speak for everyone because you and the people around you can all afford an iPhone.

Seriously mate, I expressly said that there are many people from who it is unwise to buy an expensive phone - but they can. And the ones you mention with out-of-control credit card debt already have an iPhone. Guess where the out-of-control credit card debt comes from.

 

[keysofanxiety]

Who cares if Apple has better profit margins for the iPhone 5S? The total profit is what matters for shareholders. If Samsung has a total profit of $2B and Apple $1B, as a shareholder would you really care if Samsung reaches its margin selling 10M units while Apple sells 2M?

I didn't mention profits once in my comment. Not once. Please read more carefully in future before getting riled up.

 

[parapup]

!

LG Confirms G2 and Nexus 5 Sales Gave its Mobile Business a Big Fourth Quarter Boost

That number, ahead of some market estimates, was buoyed by sales of the G2 and Nexus 5 smartphones. Though still distant rivals to Apple and Samsung, both Sony and LG managed to post significant market share gains during the quarter.

Pretty good considering they all sold "crappy" "dumb phones" - that too for "free"!

 

[dec.]

I agree. The difference (so far) is that Google actually has implemented creepy, unethical, and outright illegal ways of tracking you, whereas Apple has only filed a patent. Hopefully it's just an idea someone threw out, had patented, and will never actually be implemented.

Also one could add the fact that Google was caught while taking measures to track users surfing habits while lying right in their face about it. So yes, that would definitely raise some awareness of how Google values the privacy of their users - but I wouldn't let that lead to unfounded accusations in general.

 

[BaldiMac]

I'm sure there are a few more posts like that too, but overall it's the other way around.

I think there is a great deal of selection bias in that statement. Both on your part and the makeup of the forum. It's not very hard to understand that people would be more likely to question statistics that don't support their point of view.

People go to lengths to criticize and dismiss these reports, surveys, reviews, etc when there is the least bit negative mentioned where Apple is concerned.

And, again, the Apple cynics on this forum are probably just as likely to do the same for positive stories.

Me? I think just about every company on earth would like to be in Apple's position, shrinking market share or not. Apple could take a huge chunk of those markets if they wanted to, but it will come at the expense of their profits.

Yep.

But at what point do they stop hoarding the cash and return it to its rightful owners or spend it on growing the company? $200 billion? 500 billion? A trillion? What's the point?

That's another (very complex) topic.

 

[kerrikins]

Developer interest and iPhone success go together.

No developers = few applications = consumer interest drops.

A strong eco-system is important for smartphones. After all, what good is a smartphone that has no apps?

I'd be interested in seeing how many people on the lower end phones actually buy or use apps, though. Aren't the profit margins for developers much higher on iOS, so far? I mean, absolutely I see your point, I just think we have to remember the users who are switching from little flip phones to the low-end smartphones.

 

[cdmoore74]

I think part of the problem is simply saying "Android" like it's a singular thing.

"Android" is actually made up of hundreds of phones from dozens of manufacturers. Some good phones... some terrible phones. "Android" could refer to a top-of-the-line flagship Android phone... or it could refer to a cheap no-name Android phone.

In the eyes of market share... all those phones rank equally. And cumulatively... "Android" phones have huge market share.

But developers can't simply look at that huge number and think that's where their market should be.

How many "Android" phones are super-budget phones that run apps poorly? How many "Android" phones are sold in developing nations that barely have 3G access? There are lots of factors to consider when you develop for "Android"

"Android" market share looks great on paper... but there's not much payoff for developers. They will continue to focus on the platform that may be smaller... but that pays better dividends.

You make it seem that every budget Android phone that is released runs like crap. The Moto G ($179 for GSM and $99 for CDMA off contract) is actually a decent phone with a snappy 4 core processor with larger screen size and resolution than the iPhones 5s. Even the Nokia 521 (which I got for $59 off contract) is a pretty decent phone for what it is. Motorola is even running a sale today on the more upscale Motorola X for $299; over half the asking price of the iPhone 5s. That phone is just as capable as the more powerful Note 3.
People here can’t grasp that things change so fast in mobile. I can’t tell you what’s going to happen 2 years from now and no one here can either. What was true a few years ago is totally different today. Samsung may lose its grip on its Android dominance and another unknown Android OEM may take its place. To me Apple is wasting more time trying to battle one Android OEM in court instead of battling the entire Android platform with exciting products. Samsung is just a diversion while other Android partners are getting stronger.
And not everyone needs to spend money in an app store or have access to a billion apps. To perform basic task such as browse the internet, make calls and text is already built into any phone. You don’t need to lock yourself in a 2 year contract or pay $500 plus on an Apple device. No one here wants to admit that Android is that powerful and Apple just can’t keep up.

 

[AppleScruff1]

I think there is a great deal of selection bias in that statement. Both on your part and the makeup of the forum. It's not very hard to understand that people would be more likely to question statistics that don't support their point of view.



And, again, the Apple cynics on this forum are probably just as likely to do the same for positive stories.



Yep.



That's another (very complex) topic.

I read this forum almost daily and for many it way beyond being a fan of Apple products. And of course you think their is bias in my statements because they differ from you viewpoints. I can both praise and criticize Apple depending upon what is being discussed. I can't recall reading anything you have posted that is the least bit critical about Apple. From my perspective, it seems that you and several others go to great lengths to defend Apple no matter what. And I don't mean that as a put down or in a negative light at all, simply my opinion on what I read here.

 

[derek4484]

Ouch!

I wouldnt call going from 49.7% to 43.9% a "slight decrease" in USA market share.

thats a major drop, especially for year-over-year.

 

[i.mac]

Wow, Android has 83,5% in most of Latin America. That's surprising.

Latin America (and most of the world) is poor. Crapndroid phones are free. iPhone is expensive. Where's the mystery?

 

[BaldiMac]

I read this forum almost daily and for many it way beyond being a fan of Apple products. And of course you think their is bias in my statements because they differ from you viewpoints. I can both praise and criticize Apple depending upon what is being discussed.

Just to be clear, I didn't say you are biased based on your viewpoints. I said that there was selection bias involved in your claim.

I can't recall reading anything you have posted that is the least bit critical about Apple.

Even if that was true, why does that matter in any way?

From my perspective, it seems that you and several others go to great lengths to defend Apple no matter what. And I don't mean that as a put down or in a negative light at all, simply my opinion on what I read here.

I think you are confusing a lack of cynicism towards Apple with some sort of irrational allegiance. If you would like to discuss any of the claims that I have made in the past, go ahead and take it up in the appropriate thread. I'd appreciate if we could stay away from the ad hominem crap.

 

[Stella]

I'd be interested in seeing how many people on the lower end phones actually buy or use apps, though. Aren't the profit margins for developers much higher on iOS, so far? I mean, absolutely I see your point, I just think we have to remember the users who are switching from little flip phones to the low-end smartphones.

Its the general assumption that iOS developers bring in more money than Android.

 

[AppleScruff1]

Just to be clear, I didn't say you are biased based on your viewpoints. I said that there was selection bias involved in your claim.



Even if that was true, why does that matter in any way?



I think you are confusing a lack of cynicism towards Apple with some sort of irrational allegiance. If you would like to discuss any of the claims that I have made in the past, go ahead and take it up in the appropriate thread. I'd appreciate if we could stay away from the ad hominem crap.

IMO, it is worth mentioning when you claim that others are biased in their opinions while overlooking your own,

 

[BaldiMac]

IMO, it is worth mentioning when you claim that others are biased in their opinions while overlooking your own,

Again, I didn't claim that you were biased in your opinions.

To elaborate, there are two elements of selection bias in the original claim being discussed.

1) The posts that you, personally, notice. (As evidenced by the fact that you had "no doubt" that results would not be dismissed if they were pro-Apple. I provided you with a counter-example.)
2) People are more likely to question statistics that don't fit their viewpoint. And there are more people with pro-Apple viewpoints in an Apple forum.

Neither of these points of selection bias has anything to do with your opinion.

 

[Konrad9]

Have you ever tried to use an Android device these day's without Google's Apps -- it's pretty much a brick otherwise.

Maybe 'steal' is the wrong word maybe not..

http://business.time.com/2013/03/13/did-google-get-off-easy-with-7-million-wi-spy-settlement/
http://www.3news.co.nz/Google-in-br...chdog/tabid/412/articleID/323360/Default.aspx
http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/12/20/spain-fines-google-over-privacy-breaches/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolo...million-compensation-over-privacy-breach.html

The list goes on and on -- they have been caught many times trying to get around and get information they shouldn't be. Unless you run a rooted Android phone without any of Google's apps some of you're information will eventually get gathered and analysed, their entire business relies on nothing less than connecting the dots between your connected history to serve more targeted ads.

As we all know, Apple never borrows, steals, or rips off anything or anyone.

Never.

Not once in their history.

Nope.

 

[AppleScruff1]

Again, I didn't claim that you were biased in your opinions.

To elaborate, there are two elements of selection bias in the original claim being discussed.

1) The posts that you, personally, notice. (As evidenced by the fact that you had "no doubt" that results would not be dismissed if they were pro-Apple. I provided you with a counter-example.)
2) People are more likely to question statistics that don't fit their viewpoint. And there are more people with pro-Apple viewpoints in an Apple forum.

Neither of these points of selection bias has anything to do with your opinion.

So it depends on what the meaning of the word is is?

 

[knewsom]

Been saying how WP8 is a rising tide, remarkably refreshing, and that MS has really done something special for awhile now... good to see these numbers, and great to see some vindication and recognition from some of the folks on here.

 

[Michael Scrip]

You make it seem that every budget Android phone that is released runs like crap. The Moto G ($179 for GSM and $99 for CDMA off contract) is actually a decent phone with a snappy 4 core processor with larger screen size and resolution than the iPhones 5s. Even the Nokia 521 (which I got for $59 off contract) is a pretty decent phone for what it is. Motorola is even running a sale today on the more upscale Motorola X for $299; over half the asking price of the iPhone 5s. That phone is just as capable as the more powerful Note 3.
People here can’t grasp that things change so fast in mobile. I can’t tell you what’s going to happen 2 years from now and no one here can either. What was true a few years ago is totally different today. Samsung may lose its grip on its Android dominance and another unknown Android OEM may take its place. To me Apple is wasting more time trying to battle one Android OEM in court instead of battling the entire Android platform with exciting products. Samsung is just a diversion while other Android partners are getting stronger.
And not everyone needs to spend money in an app store or have access to a billion apps. To perform basic task such as browse the internet, make calls and text is already built into any phone. You don’t need to lock yourself in a 2 year contract or pay $500 plus on an Apple device. No one here wants to admit that Android is that powerful and Apple just can’t keep up.

I didn't say every budget Android phone runs like crap.

I said Android is comprised of flagship and budget phones.

Anyway... the whole point of my earlier comments was about developers. While Android has a ton of market share... it's clearly not getting the attention of developers.

Think about it... why would any developer focus on the iPhone when it only has 10% of the smartphone market?

Logic dictates that developers should rush to Android... since 8 out of 10 smartphones sold today run Android.

But they don't.

Cheap underpowered Android phones are one reason why.

Yes... the Moto G is a great phone for the money. We'll soon hear that 250 million Android phones were sold over the December quarter. But not all of them were as nice as the Moto G.

There ARE a lot of crappy phones being sold today. So when you take those phones out of the mix... and all the phones sold in developing nations with poor internet access... all of a sudden Android's market share isn't as big as you thought.

Again... the topic we were discussing was market share vs developer support.

And it doesn't look like Android's phenomenal market share is very attractive after all.

 

[paysdoufs]

Every time I post this, I get a huge number of people disagreeing with me. Still, I'm going to post it again:

The key reason iOS is losing ground is price. Plain and simple.

If Apple's plan was to provide a more attractive entry-level offering with the 5C, they failed miserably. Apple's older models are priced even higher than recent models of their competitors (such as Nokia).

Apple's prices seem to be set in stone. That's a tragic mistake, because those prices were set at a time when Apple had a huge lead over their competition. That lead is much smaller now, but the price difference is not.

Ultimately, that leads to Apple losing the value proposition. They're simply not worth the price difference. I don't recommend iPhones to my friends or family any more (in fact, my sister just picked up a Nokia Lumia for £70 unlocked and off-contract; fantastic value).

Apple is going to keep on losing market share until they get this.

Spot-on from A to Z. Apple seems to resist only in those markets (US, JP, AUS) in which contracts are the norm and they somehow succeeded in making the customers believe that the subsidized price is the net price...

To make matters worse, as can been seen from another MR article close by, the iPhone is their big cash cow. Losing smartphone market share will hurt them badly in the medium to long run. Prove? Look at the stock quote: As stellar as their quarterly results were, they didn't really seem to impress any investors...

Personally, before Xmas I was ready to spend ca. 400 CHF on a new smartphone. That would have gotten me a 2-year old, used iPhone 4S or a brand new Lumia 925. Pretty much a no-brainer, and so far I don't really regret my choice (although MS still needs to improve the IMAP behavior of WP 8).

Also, there was iOS 7 they're forcing you to adopt on new phones. Saw what it did on my wife's iPhone 4 --> not interested at all...

----------

Perhaps that was the case long ago, however Apple has (more or less) entered the cheap phone market by keeping the 4S in Production. Currently many carriers offer it free, or at ultra low prices. This makes it fair game for the iPhone to be viewed as competition for the low priced Android options.

We're talking about the 8 Go 4S, right
Come on - this is not a value proposition. It's a joke

 

[redhawk87]

You're dealing in if situations that don't exist (that I am aware of), I am talking about real world examples.

However with your reasoning on this, the point is moot anyways. If that device ran Android and you don't consider it to be a smartphone, then you would have to treat any device running iOS the same. So they cancel each other out.

There is no clam shell iOS device without a touch screen and no 3G or LTE connectivity. If there was, you are right, it would not be a smartphone. The free phones running Android with (or without) touchscreen displays and 3G or LTE connectivity ARE considered smartphones in my book. Just like the iPhone 5C IS a smartphone. What I was getting at is that a couple years ago, the free phones were clam shell phones or slider phones NOT running android (or iOS or BB10 or WebOS or Windows Phone 8 or Linux or Firefox OS or symbian) and did not count towards smartphone statistics. I am singling out android because the majority of cheap phones run it. There now has been a shift in that market. The free phone market is no longer dumbphones, but smartphones. In my personal opinion, that one fact would, by itself, cause Apple's market share to decrease solely based on Apple targeting the premium smartphone market where free phones do not exist. I think before when Apple really had no competitors in the premium smartphone market, theY could sell their year or two year old phones at discounted prices and people would still buy them. With increasing competition and Android maturing into a very capable operating system, people do not want Apples hand-me-downs anymore. That is why Apple went with the 5C instead of continuing to sell the 5. I personally dont think its different enough though to really grow it market share in this category. Its disappointing sales numbers would back that up. People do not like old, people like new.

 

[nebo1ss]

I'm sure there are a few more posts like that too, but overall it's the other way around. People go to lengths to criticize and dismiss these reports, surveys, reviews, etc when there is the least bit negative mentioned where Apple is concerned. Me? I think just about every company on earth would like to be in Apple's position, shrinking market share or not. Apple could take a huge chunk of those markets if they wanted to, but it will come at the expense of their profits. But at what point do they stop hoarding the cash and return it to its rightful owners or spend it on growing the company? $200 billion? 500 billion? A trillion? What's the point?

You see there is a problem with returning that cash to its rightful owners. Have you not noticed the last time they did a stock buy back they borrowed money to do it. Most of the Cash is money that Tax has never been paid on either in the country of origin or the USA. If they were to repatriate that cash to pay dividends or do a stock buy back it would immediately become liable to US tax.