Android vs. iOS Growth
asymco.com
asymco.com
I'm not really sure what conclusion he is trying to go for...
I don't think there is any problem with Android using the way paved by Apple and taking it a different direction.
Competition begets better products at cheaper prices, what more could a consumer ask for?
Symbian manage to screw up enough that by the time the iPhone came out they had such a poor UX that it's no wonder the iPhone succeeded.
I don't think he is trying to draw a conclusion, in fact he specifically says "One should be careful about drawing conclusions..."
Sometimes data are just data.
With a help of a rocket engine.
Geeks seem to ignore this point; likely because we'd been making fun of feature-phones for years before the smartphones hit. But those phones were well-liked by a great many people and had non-trivial brand loyalty.
Remember when Vista was "the fastest selling operating system ever" [1]?
Would it have been wise to read those first months of sales as indicative of interest-in and preference-for Vista and thus safe to extrapolate? Or was it due to other, stronger factors (bundling, brand-recognition) that have very clear analogues in the phone market?
[1] http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc749132%28WS.10%...
However the analogy to Vista doesn't strike me as valid, for a number of reasons. Vista is a version of Windows much like Froyo is a version of Android. Vista's growth was diffused by people not buying new computers; not because they chose computers other than those running Windows. Additionally computer manufacturers were more willing to continue to release computers still running XP; this is not analogous to the phone world (there is no demand for older versions of Android).
I guess what you are possibly suggesting is that Android adoption has been based on reasons apart from a desire to own an Android device; this may or may not be true. We won't be able to judge that until the wave of adopting users have come off their current contracts and are able to upgrade to a new phone. However this article specifically warns against extrapolating the Android data points as they currently are shown.
You questioned whether that state of affairs was relevant to future growth. My reply to that, was an example of a platform whose very-fast adoption was manufacturer-driven, specifically to point out that you can't reasonably extrapolate from short-run data in these situations.
As for the analogy, like any analogy, isn't worth arguing. You clearly saw what I was aiming at and that was its only purpose.
Again, the only time I brought up extrapolation was to point out that you can't. So I'm not sure why you've twice decided to point out that I'm agreeing with the article.
I guess you're trying to point out that there aren't two separate markets in the Android space(ie. Android vs iOS and Apple vs Motorola) and instead there is just one market (ie. Motorola-Android vs HTC-Android vs Apple-iOS). I just don't see that to be the case. The market seems pretty fragmented and rich. Everyone I know who's bought an Android phone has either shopped amongst the brands or has gotten an Android because "they heard the iPhone sucked". I haven't heard of any brand loyalty.
As someone in a 50/50 mix household of iOS and Android products, this is the kind of competition I relish in an industry. No one trying to box another out, neither one with any monopolistic tactics to crush the other; all on equal footing both financially and culturally. iOS attacks the high end with simplicity and seamless usability; Android with open configurability (in most instances) and endless options to make it yours.
The entire point of the article is that there is seasonality to the growth of Android. The point of the article is the shapes of the graphs not the absolute values.
Also, these kinds of observations don't make much sense - neither company discloses anything more than carefully worded tidbits. End-of-quarter sales numbers are the way to go.
This is some good science here.
Google is banking on consumers being too naive to realize they are getting a substantially inferior experience. Not a good bet in my opinion.
Apple is being stupid here by not calling Google's bluff and lowering prices even more aggressively. Nobody who used both phones side by side for a few days would prefer Android.
McDonalds in one of the most popular restaurants in the world. Is it because it has better food?
1) Many people love/crave McDonalds. The menu is optimized to appeal to human cravings for fats, carbs, and sweets.
2) McDonalds is also very inexpensive. Android phones sell for nearly the same price as iPhones.
Although I'd love to see an $87 handset from Apple, I don't see it happening when Apple is committed to going it alone. http://armdevices.net/2011/04/11/best-of-shenzhen-87-android...
Android's many partners strategy means it gets to capitalize on unexpected resources and niches that Apple's central planning mentality won't be able to access.
If you don't believe me, buy an Evo 4G and try to use it all day for a few calls and occasional surfing or app use. The battery will be dead by 4:30pm... and that is a phone that costs >= the iPhone 4G.
The low end Android phones are so far behind state of the art Android that they are simply a way of tricking unsuspecting consumers (drawn to the touch screen and shiny icons) into buying a low end phone that is locked into an already out of date OS version.
I realize consumers are naive now, but not for long. Google is trying to cash in on its brand image and help handset manufacturers hawk garbage phones at naive consumers. B/c of the contracts typically sold with the phones, human psychology often prevents these consumers from admitting they've been had. Worse, it may permanently sour many older users to smart phones.
I love Google and am actually rooting for Google to win or at least come out with a phone that I want to own, but let's at least be honest about its strategy to date. Getting an Android phone in 2011 is like buying a Gateway 2000 PC in 2000 -- loaded full of garbageware to the point of hampered performance, and full of bold claims about performance that don't hold water... coasting on the brand's previous accomplishments.
There are many people to whom $99 vs $0 up front would constitute a substantive price difference. And again... quality isn't a big factor for many, i.e. Mcdonalds (and the "quality" argument depends on use-case... voice search and turn-by-turn nav quality on Android, for example, are considerably superior).
>If you don't believe me, buy an Evo 4G and try to use it all day for a few calls and occasional surfing or app use. It will be dead by 4:30pm.
Yes, EVO is a battery hog unless tuned. Luckily there are other models of Android phone.
As for quality, I'd argue that at least 9 out of 10 people would judge the iPhone 4 to be superior in quality (build quality, app quality, usability) compared to any Android phone if given each phone for a few months.
You are correct about turn by turn, though the Mapquest 5 app for iPhone gives spoken turn by turn is 98% as good as Google's nav. Apple has really dropped the ball on nav and mail apps and that may account for 1 in 10 people preferring Android.
A friend got the latest/greatest Android phone a few weeks ago and returned it due to abysmal battery life. I really don't think the issue has been resolved... Is anyone using these phones before they are released? Why don't they ship with a battery that will last a full day? Another friend using an Evo 4G is getting 2 hours per battery and carries around 3 batteries just to get through the day. I didn't test this, but I think based on his usage that an iPhone 4 would last a full day with his usage pattern.
Well, looking at the graph featured in the article I'd say it's high time they get optimal. ;)
I admit it is very perplexing... both why Apple hasn't responded with a $0 (with contract) iPhone, and why Google has allowed the Android experience to be so mediocre.
Android feels geeky thus limits its audience. Ios is very well polished and fancy. Maybe some people might not like it, but still ios has a lot larger audience than Android.
This article sounds like saying "Both are great but android is catching up and will beat ios someday soon".
I highly doubt that. Until Google learns doing marketing as well as Apple, apple will be leading the market and eating largest piece of pie.
I must disagree on this. Android's adoption is both in high-end smartphones like the Nexus, as well as a lot of low-end, with-the-plan phones. What limits it's use is the geeky feeling you talk about.
I know a large segment of users who use Android, and only the technical ones are those who use features: everybody else basically has a dumb phone with a big screen and extra 20/month plan. The monopoly preventing the same gold rush on app development in Android that iOS has is that: paying users. They may be coming soon, though. I know plenty of iOS users about to jump ship to Android.
My mom will buy an app (iOS), my friends who develop software for a living won't (Gingerbread).
i never thought to look for a text pop-up app, i just figured that functionality was on my old phone and not my new one.
i didn't consider the advanced task killer widget would put a button on one of my home screens and take care of the work i put into the manage applications menu force killing things i don't want anymore.
i have two girlfriends that use android way smarter than me, the one who is reading an android development book.
http://geekfor.me/faq/you-shouldnt-be-using-a-task-killer-wi...
http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2010/04/multitasking-...
that said, low memory situations exist. task killing reduces their load on the system.
your links are informative, but i'm not going to let my phone crawl next time it starts to because i shouldn't have to kill apps in a perfect scenario.
i used to reboot my phone to reclaim performance, now i use a task killer.
from your first link:
"can be killed by the system in extreme low memory situations."
"and it will often be killed by the system when memory is needed elsewhere."
so task killers just accelerate the system's own ability to close applications that aren't being used anymore.
also, only two apps that i have offer the ability to close themselves. if i know i am done with the app for the next few hours, my task killer gives me the ability to close the app.
"Once Android determines that it needs to remove a process, it does this brutally, simply force-killing it. The kernel can then immediately reclaim all resources needed by the process, without relying on that application being well written and responsive to a polite request to exit. Allowing the kernel to immediately reclaim application resources makes it a lot easier to avoid serious out of memory situations."
Last weekend I spent some time traveling by train. Saw more of those cheap ZTE Androids than Symbian or iOS smartphones. Of course the question is whether those people are able (having credit card) or willing to buy an app.
Google is also making lots of money from the sale (and use) of iOS devices. People still search on iPhones, and people who search generally use the default search engine (Google on mobile Safari).
I spend an evening a week with a crossection of young people around the age of 18, none of whom are geeky.
There are plenty of Android phones around, though there appear at the moment to be more iOS devices.