the funny thing is that Android is really the anti iPhone. A lot of the whiners are the ones on Verizon. I mean granted you see AT&T people complaining, but in the rest of the world, the whole Android vs iPhone thing isnt as big. I feel as if its blown up because the US uses exclusivity, doesn't use unlocked phones, etc etc. CDMA vs GSM.
It seems like every point Android scores is one the iPhone fanbois lash back at, and every step the iPhone trips on generates a bunch of jeering oooooohs from the Android crowd.
You could look at Android as a full competing OS but while it's also partially acting as the Anti-Apple camp, I sometimes don't think it still can pull that fight off too well. The bottom line is 65-70% of the cell market is NOT on AT&T. And of the 30% that is on AT&T, how many are willing to deal with the iPhone and its contract. I think Apple does quite well for being in such a limited market.
How many people of the 65-70% get an Android phone because they feel its better than the iPhone? How many get an Android phone because that's all that there is on their network? How many people switched to AT&T for the iPhone? How many Verizon people would get an iPhone if it came to their network? See, there are so many variables right now this isn't even a fair comparison.
I feel as if phone sales and OS marketshare is completely fucked up in the US. It's not a true representation of marketshare. It's a representation of how the networks split up their OS allocations and who gets what subsidized phones.
The MP3 player market is totally different.
Here's a better picture. What if all the Android phones were available on every carrier, and what if the iPhone were available on every US carrier. How would you think the numbers would look?
If my aunt had a penis, would she be my uncle?
Apple CHOSE to:
- Make only one iPhone device instead of different form factors and price points
- Tie it to one network in the US
So what's the point of arguing what would happen if Apple made different choices? What matters is the reality we live in, not some hypothetical one.
This.
Exclusivity was part of Apples strategy. It doesn't matter how many people WANT something, if they can't get it that's the biggest product flaw of all.
It's not necessarily a flaw though. The limited presence causes people to want it more. I'd also argue that it's only so limited in the US given that the iPhone only works properly on 1/4 of the major carriers. So even if you could unlock and use on another network, very few T-Mobile users do this, and obviously the main rival Verizon is just out of the picture.
Now while the iPhone has exclusivity deals with many other carriers worldwide, at least there exists a HUGE unlocked iPhone market for other carriers. In essence, the exclusivity crap goes out the window especially when people are willing to deal with unlocked phones to begin with. But still, I agree exclusivity plays a huge role because iPhone prices are well above $700 USD worldwide. Adoption in Europe and Asia is ridiculously high. That's not saying Android doesn't stand a chance, but for a phone thats exclusively in certain countries and certain carriers, that's pretty damn good
I think for Apple to hold its own this well with ONE network and ONE phone is already pretty amazing. I'm glad Android's done well, but this shouldn't be taken as a "Hah iPhone" thing.
So in 2010 vs 1985 terms, if Apple = Apple and Google = Microsoft, who are RIM, Symbian, Microsoft, etc?
This has always been a flawed analogy, in that when Microsoft and Apple were battling it out, there weren't two other, already entrenched, personal computer platforms with greater market share than either.
A) Apple is not the market leader.
B) Android will never reach 95% market share, as was the case with Microsoft/Windows.
C) Even with a small percentage of the smartphone market (~25%), iOS would be more of a success than Mac OS. Apple is not looking to take over the world as they were with the original Macintosh computers. They just want a healthy ecosystem and they want to do it on their terms.
C) If you don't think Apple wants to take over the world with iOS you're deluded. Has Steve Jobs ever said "I just want my little piece and I'll let Bill/Google take the rest?"
I agree, but only to a certain extent. The Nintendo Wii used the whole shortage thing to make people want it more, but when that goes on for 5 years, you just allowed a whole market of other competitors to take a foothold. If the iPhone would have launched with a CDMA version alongside the GSM, and it was available on multiple carriers, then platforms like Android would have had a much harder time.
I just think Apple made the wrong move with ATT. Like you said, it's done amazingly well being one device on (what many consider to be) one of the worst carriers in the US. All things the same, there would be a lot more iPhones sold if it was even just on Verizon, and the Verizon network would go along with Apples "Just Works" strategy.
The whole smartphone explosion (yes, android included) would have never happened if Apple didnt partner with one company like AT&T in the US. Apple tried to go to verizon but verizon rebuffed them because they like to have a stanglehold over the OS on their phones. Oh yeah, and the popularity of the iPhone probably would have destroyed the 'nations best network' back in 2007. Verizon didn't wan't that type of reputation.
Its so ironic because this is what all the iPhone haters bring up the closed system of iOS. Verizon was very very very controlling over the OS on their phones up until the iPhone came out. Then google came along and finally convinced verizon to do it right with the droid. So you guys can thank apple for that.
The whole smartphone explosion (yes, android included) would have never happened if Apple didnt partner with one company like AT&T in the US. Apple tried to go to verizon but verizon rebuffed them because they like to have a stanglehold over the OS on their phones. Oh yeah, and the popularity of the iPhone probably would have destroyed the 'nations best network' back in 2007. Verizon didn't wan't that type of reputation.
Its so ironic because this is what all the iPhone haters bring up the closed system of iOS. Verizon was very very very controlling over the OS on their phones up until the iPhone came out. Then google came along and finally convinced verizon to do it right with the droid. So you guys can thank apple for that.
No, Apple = Apple and Google = IBM. The other players are ancillary and irrelevant.
B) Never say never
C) If you don't think Apple wants to take over the world with iOS you're deluded. Has Steve Jobs ever said "I just want my little piece and I'll let Bill/Google take the rest?"
Unless they aren't thinking in units shipped anymore. But who knows what Steve and his buddies have up their sleeves.
Apple is most certainly looking at profits.
According to Google, they make roughly $10 per Android user.
(Per the article stating 10 billion in revenue for 1 billion devices shipped)
Now, for Apple to make 10 billion in profits they would need to sell 30 million iPhones or 3% of what Google would have to ship.
Its so ironic because this is what all the iPhone haters bring up the closed system of iOS. Verizon was very very very controlling over the OS on their phones up until the iPhone came out. Then google came along and finally convinced verizon to do it right with the droid. So you guys can thank apple for that.
Are you trying to say that's a bad thing??? They're making money on it and are going to make money on it. You're trying to say Google's strategy is bad or something? They obviously know what they're doing and they're going to sell even more and more phones.
I want to point out that market share and the number of phones sold are somewhat unrelated, the smartphone market is huge and getting larger, that means smartphone sales by a manufacturer can double and they can still lose marketshare.
Also, don't forget to factor in things like international sales into your thinking...
We typically get spoon fed US #'s, and make generalizations that make no sense...
So you are saying 80% of statistics are bullshit 50% of the time?
The iPhone is only exclusive in some countries. In most of Europe, it's available from multiple carriers. So it might be less of a strategy and at least somewhat tied to technical reasons.This.
Exclusivity was part of Apples strategy. It doesn't matter how many people WANT something, if they can't get it that's the biggest product flaw of all.
I think the ratio is worse than that... Isn't there some "law" about that on the internet?
Ouch. For what it's worth, PM sends a lot of PM's so it's nothing personal.I only learn about the laws when I get the little PM saying I broke one
They look fine to me, and I'm not having any issues.Anyone else's quotes messed up? Mine are either blank or gibberish.
Google is betting that mobile data mining and ads will make $.
I fail to see any outcome that shows they're wrong...
Does Google get a cut of the sales of apps sold on the apps store?
The iPhone is only exclusive in some countries. In most of Europe, it's available from multiple carriers. So it might be less of a strategy and at least somewhat tied to technical reasons.
By which I mean, if other countries that are on GSM/UMTS exclusively and all use the same frequencies all have competition between carriers for the iPhone, then maybe the reason that the iPhone is exclusive in the US has less to do with strategy and more to do with the fact that our cell phone ecosystem is pretty fragmented (1700MHz, 850MHz, 2100MHz UMTS, and then CDMA on multiple frequencies).