Droid, Android, Google Phone. Myriad manufacturer UIs, fragmented OS versions. Android is as much of a brand as Linux is.
Droid, Android, Google Phone. Myriad manufacturer UIs, fragmented OS versions. Android is as much of a brand as Linux is.
Lol, just keep telling yourself that.
Proof to counter the assertion?
Not going to waste my time buddy
So stopping talking shit in the first place. What was the point of your post? If you don't have any value to add, don't post.
The operative wording in that article is *could* and that money they *could* make is not BECAUSE of android but BECAUSE of their advertising which is available on other platforms.
Google search is what is generating the revenue and that is available on multiple platforms. That money would have been there either way. The same could be said about subscription.
Now, the question is weather or not their mobile advertising is improving their bottom line. The answer to that question is most certainly yes.
You have to ask if the increase in advertising and subscription revenue is caused by the android platform. The answer is no.
So stopping talking shit in the first place. What was the point of your post? If you don't have any value to add, don't post.
Actually, my post was not ironic, as I was not in the act of attacking someone else for doing nothing of value but talking shit. Your post, on the other hand, was ironic because all you do is come in here and talk shit. Other than some minor factual disputes on the first page, this was a relatively tame thread until you came along with this inane blather. All you do is attack non-Apple phone manufacturers, you say things that you know add no real value to a discussion, all you want to do is spark a major flame war. Congrats, I guess, since the thread has exploded into worthlessness since then.
*I apologize to the mods for this post, but lets be serious...its very true, and this is far from the only thread where something like this has happened. I will not respond to anything else chris says in this thread.
Did I just describe iPhone v Android or was it Macintosh v IBM/Microsoft/PC? Hell, even all of the discussion about "Android" v "Droid" is the same as the early/mid- 80's when any "personal computer" that wasn't a Macintosh was referred to as an IBM because it was an 'IBM compatible' machine.
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.
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.
It's not intended to be a perfect analogy, but it is a valid point. Apple cannot maintain its position as market leader with a locked-down, walled-garden, one-phone-fits-all strategy.
Yes, history is repeating itself. Unfortunately, it seems Apple is reading from the same playbook, with the same black turtleneck at the helm...
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.
Apple could do several things to increase the share of OSX, just as they could with the iPhone, but they pick a business model that makes them lots of money on a sizable share of the pie (20-30%). It's just the way Apple operates. Their profit on each unit is much more than MS or Google will make so they don't need to sell as many.
Exactly. People like to equate market share to points in a sporting event. Just because you have the most points, does not mean you "won".
Then why do you constantly gloat about iOS being installed on more devices? Why do you constantly gloat about "Android needing an army of phones to compete with the iphone? Etc....
The goal isn't about installations rather the amount of revenue generated.
At this point in time it is clear that Apples business model is the winner.
I think you're missing his point. All you Apple fans say that since there's more iPhones out there, it's a better product, since there are more iPods out there, it's a better product which we obviously know is not true.