Android Overtakes Apple in Australia | Hacker News Reader

Android Overtakes Apple in Australia

theage.com.au

67 pointsnreece47 comments

Does this really surprise anyone? The cheapest you can buy an iPhone (4 outright) is $450AUD and contracted plans with newer iPhones start at around $50-60AUD per month. Android are outright starting at $49 and available at all spend levels on plans.

To be honest what's surprising is it took this long...

> To be honest what's surprising is it took this long...

I agree. I think this goes to show just how much Australians are willing to pay for technology in general. It's a shame that we get shafted on a lot of technology/electronics but the fact is that people are willing to pay.

Speaking as a Canadian transplant to Australia via the US, the Australian mobile market is actually quite competitive compared to the US or Canada.

There are more operators relative to the population, there are more shorter-term plans (i.e., 1 year vs. 2 or 3) and the monthly rates are decent.

Most plans are 2 years.

Optus and Telstra both allow you to choose your payback plan and rate? So yearly is always possible, even if not seen on the posters.

For those who missed it, this is the most important paragraph in the article:

"It's a tablet Christmas there's no doubt about that," said Ben Mcintosh, general manager of technology and entertainment at Harvey Norman. "There is no doubt in my mind that we will sell out of just about every tablet we have in stock by the end of the month."

I'd better go out and get mine before they run out!

See: http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html

Australians have always been big Apple users, in my experience. Despite seeing statistics showing increasing share of Android, I always only ever saw Apple devices on the bus/train. Not very scientific, I know, but I have noticed more and more Android devices whenever I'm on the train in recent months.

I see the same thing, but here's some numbers to back up what we're seeing: http://gs.statcounter.com/#mobile_os-AU-monthly-201112-20121...

The jaws are closing, but slowly.

I see a lot about Android having a high market share. I've seen numbers like 70-75%. But I think Apple buyers are more affluent and buy more apps even though their market share is only 20%. A lot of people who used to have feature phones or buy the cheapest pre paid phones they can get, now get android phones. Virgin Mobile has one for like $60 my in-laws have. So my point is, while the high android market share is there, as an app developer, the market share in relation to app usage and spend is still skewed towards Apple for now.

At the same time, I don't see very many iPhone 5s around - I only know one person who has one (though they can be difficult to differentiate from the 4/4S), whereas it seems like everyone has a Galaxy S2 or S3.

The S2 really caught on in Australia due to some very agressive pricing. I'd say I see as many S2/S3s around as iPhones (and probably more than iPhone amongst younger people). They're everywhere.

That being said, there is an additional layer of difficulty when it comes to purchasing apps on Android that iPhone doesn't have - most people had an iPod and one point and have an iTunes store account set up already, possibly with some credit already on it (ITMS gift cards were popular presents for a while). Play store requires you to enter your credit card on a new account, which I suspect is a significant barrier to app purchases for many people, out of caution or laziness.

Also, due to the more technical nature of the Android developer crowd, with the exception of games, there is almost always a free equivalent to paid apps which are as good or almost as good.

The iPhone 5 was very difficult to walk in and buy without taking out a two year contract (the Apple Retail Store reservation system was a raffle). It only got better within the past two weeks. You can walk in and buy at an Apple Retail Store, and others like JB and DSE are selling the 16GB model outright.

I'm not from Australia, but I got a Google account with a credit card before getting an iTunes account, even though I owned an iPod for years before getting an Android. It's true nonetheless that iTunes has more people hooked up because of iPods, but it's only a temporary problem and I don't really think there are many young people with a credit card anyway.

On the technical nature of Android developers and free equivalents, personally I tend to get paid apps.

For instance I bought "Extreme Call Blocker", because blocking calls and SMS messages is difficult as Android's APIs for it are private and I couldn't find a free app that worked well. I also got "GreenPower Premium" for saving battery, because such an app saves you money (I needed more battery life and the alternative would have been to replace my phone). I also bought "Paper Camera" because it's a fun app and cheaper than one coffee.

In truth there aren't many free apps that are worthwhile, most of the useful ones being clients of online services.

As a 18 year old Australian, virtually everyone I know (my age) possesses a debit card, which is virtually the same for purchasing most things. Mastercard start giving them out when you are 16, so most young people have them. That is also the age most people start getting more expensive phones, but my opinion might be skewed by the fact that the iPhone came out in Australia when I was roughly that age.

I'm not very knowledgeable on the matter. Maybe you can enlighten me. Can an open source OS actually have private API's?

There is a lot of data supporting your claim.

But the key point is for now. Given current market trends, in the not too distant future there will be more money in Android. (Particularly since you don't need to give Apple a 30% cut.)

Actually if you want to sell apps through the Google play store you still need to give google a 30% cut [1]. With android you always do have the option to try through other app stores, or just allowing users to download the .apk from your website. However given how few people actually look anywhere else but the play store, you are going to take a hit much larger than 30% if you are not in google play.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Play#Applications

Really? Wow.

But at least you have the option of not using their app store. And I doubt that they are as draconian as Apple about in-app additional purchases for apps in their store.

Sure, you have the option of not using their app store. Any sane developer would realize that its financial suicide to ignore Google Play and release a purely sideloaded-apk app (or through Amazon's store, for that matter).

Google charges the same 30% transaction fee for in-app purchases as well, though I don't know what their policy is regarding Dropbox/Kindle/Skydrive-type apps.

From what I understand the policy is roughly: If you are selling something that can be used "outside" your Android app, then you are not required to use Google's payment processor and you can avoid the 30% cut. Amazon (and other ebook vendors) use this to sell books directly from their reader apps. I'm not sure what Dropbox, SkyDrive, etc do.

With Android you don't have to go through their store. For example I bought one Humble Bundle [1] pack of Android games (which was quite successful) directly from their website. Then I got a link in my email for their downloads and I could install them directly.

> given how few people actually look anywhere else but the play store

I do not believe the truthfulness of this statement, considering how many services get popular outside any app store. Do you think people find out about Twitter or DropBox by browsing the app store?

> you are going to take a hit much larger than 30% if you are not in google play

It really depends on what channels of distribution you can tap into. Some apps are popular only because they get promoted on the play store. Other apps are popular by other means. And no, you don't necessarily need a middleman.

IMHO, Android is much better in every regard, because on Android the walled garden is optional for everybody.

[1] http://www.humblebundle.com/

Yet so many Android phones are walled gardens in relation to manufacturer spamware and crippled upgrade paths.

Profiting from apps is hard for the majority of devs, and generally acknowledged to be more so on Android.

Heh, actually I bought the Android humble bundle as well. I loved the fact that they could do something like that on Android. Its true that there are loads of services that people find outside the app/play store such as twitter or drop box. But if I wanted to install a drop box client, the first place I would go is to the play store to search for dropbox!

It would be a really interesting experiment for an existing service to host an .apk on their website in addition to listing in the google play store. I wonder how many people would side load the app, vs just going through play?

The Google Play store charges developers with the same the 30% cut.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Play#Applications

Can we address this '30% cut' stuff? You are not blithely giving Apple or Google 30% of your 'profit', the 'cut' is actually a fee for hosting, distribution, license management, payment processing, possibly more and yes, a small amount of operating profit. If you sell your app on your own, you'll have to cover those costs yourself.

While I think you're right about average app expenditure, when we're talking about a 70-75% market share, I think the sheer numbers outweigh that.

I know that some time back there were complains that the Android Market wasn't making anyone money, but I think that's changed these days. And Samsung appear to be doing a great job of marketing a premium Android phone that will attract big spenders.

None of what you said is true.

Firstly the market share does not automatically translate into more app sales. http://www.androidauthority.com/developer-economics-128916/

Secondly having Samsung in the market means nothing. It's the ability to sideload apps that is reason for the high piracy rate and less willingness to pay for apps.

> It's the ability to sideload apps that is reason for the high piracy rate and less willingness to pay for apps.

This hasn't been true at all in my experience. Whereas it's very easy to jailbreak an iOS device and set up a 3rd party app store with pirated applications, having to manually download and sideload APKs on Android phones makes it much more difficult to pirate apps. In fact, I know several iOS users who have pirated all their apps, but I don't know any Android users who have.

True, not every Android phone is positioning itself as a powerhouse smart device.

As such, buying a cheap Android device today may not tell us much about OS loyalty?

May be a mute point.

Windows saturated the world for decades and people just used it because it swamped them of choice..... that still worked very much in Microsofts favour, and may ultimately mean Android/Adsense wins.

I wonder if this has something to do with the economy? Apple devices are expensive while on the contrary, you can get a prepaid Android phone starting at $49 in Australia with a camera and ability to download apps. I'm surprised it's taken this long, we always pay twice sometimes three times more than our American counterparts for shiny Apple gadgets (let alone everything else), I guess the appeal of Apple products are starting to become lost on us Aussies.

Apple's pricing in Australia is generally very competitive. I know for laptops you pay significantly more in Australia for brands like Lenovo (in comparison with their USA pricing).

On iPhone pricing in Australia, can someone let me know if this is a contract thing, like hidden costs on the US version, because the US store lists the cheapest iPhone 5 as $199, where the AU store lists it as $799. $199USD =~ $189AUD.

On the face of it it seems pretty unfair, is there something I'm missing?

$799 is the outright price: that is, not on a contract. If you buy one one a contract you might pay $5 per month over 24 months (depending on the plan and model you get).

Thanks, I had a suspicion this might be it, I don't suppose you've got any idea why Apple sell/advertise them in a contract by default there but not here?

So Going to Tesltra: http://www.telstra.com.au/mobile-phones/mobile-phones/iphone... or Optus: https://www.optus.com.au/shop/iphone or Vodaphone: http://www.vodafone.com.au/personal/iphone/home/iphone-5 the iPhone 5 is FREE* (*With Monthly payments of $50-$100 on a 2 year contract)

Sorry, I'm not sure if you're point out the existence of the plans here, or that they seem to be more expensive than what grandparent comment said they run for in the US.

If its the former, I was aware you could get them on a plan with a provider here, I was wondering why Apple hasn't partnered with Telstra or whoever to push the plans as the primary price point like they do on the US site and presumably in stores.

If its the latter, I wouldn't be surprised if that's just down more expensive data/phone usage plans?

Sorry - the point I was attempting to make (While tired/slightly-drunk) was that all the major carriers have free plans. SO the upfront cost of the phone would be $0 (Which is exactly the same up-front cost as he SGS-3, HTC-1XL, etc). I'm not sure that apple want to position themselves like that. For apples perspective -- having it be a $700ish phone is better than a "free" phone.

As to Apple not pushing the plans -- it could just be the fact that they don't have a "primary" partner. Since every Telco had the phone on launch -- Apple would become an intermediary offering choices (Is Optus or Telstra better in my area?).

If anyone stumbles on this, I actually ended up looking this up, thought I'd add it to the record ; ). Turns out it's considered third line forcing, and is illegal here, prohibited by the Competition and Consumer Act 2010, previously covered by the Trade Practices Act, here's the relevant section (hacked apart for clarity) [1]:

(a) supplies, or offers to supply, goods or services; (b) supplies, or offers to supply, goods or services at a particular price; or (c) gives or allows, or offers to give or allow, a discount, allowance, rebate or credit in relation to the supply or proposed supply of goods or services by the corporation; [...] on the condition that the person to whom the corporation supplies or offers or proposes to supply the goods or services [...] will acquire goods or services of a particular kind or description directly or indirectly from another person not being a body corporate related to the corporation.

Note that this only prevents Apple from selling a locked/contract device, carrier locked devices and contracts are fine, as long as they're part of a deal made explicitly between the customer and the third party. Back in 2008 they were making exclusive deals with single carriers in several countries, which would have pretty clearly violated this, so seems like Apple Australia were restricted to outright & unlocked devices, or only selling via carriers.

Now, though, Apple give a choice of carrier and an option to buy outright in the US (And other countries, I assume), which, IANAL, is probably still prohibited by section (b) or (c), ie, 'you can still buy it if you refuse the contract, but you get a cheaper price if you take the contract' sounds like it would still be covered by the 'at a particular price' clause.

[1] 47(6): http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2012C00877/Html/Volume_1#_...

The US$199 would be with a two year contract with a mobile carrier.

The A$799 is without a contract.

Thanks, I replied to codeka above:

Thanks, I had a suspicion this might be it, I don't suppose you've got any idea why Apple sell/advertise them in a contract by default there but not here?

On the contrary, I saved a couple of hundred dollars by getting a Macbook Pro from Japan. There's an Inquiry going on right now into IT-related pricing by Apple, Adobe and Microsoft:

http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w...

http://blogs.crikey.com.au/thestump/2012/04/15/parliamentary...

The price gouging of Australian consumers is especially noticeable when it comes to intangible goods like software and games purchased digitally. As an example, when Diablo 3 came out a few months ago I purchased it via the Blizzard store for $79 (no packaging costs, no distribution costs except for a little bandwidth) and yet I paid $79 for a computer game. While that doesn't sound too bad at first, friends of mine who purchased physical copies of the game from Dick Smith paid $59 for a physical copy that required packaging, printing and a CD, not to mention shipping costs as well as store markup. We are definitely being ripped off here in Australia, just because we can afford to pay more doesn't give companies the right to charge more (especially for digital downloads).

I doubt anything will come of the inquiry to be honest, but it is nice to think that perhaps things might change.

Apple is still expensive, but the whole "Apple Tax" meme is a myth. We pay barely more than GST than the US for Apple products, which are also never advertised with sales tax. http://anthonywrites.posterous.com/apple-tax-for-australians...

I think it's more to do with, like you said, Android phones covering such a huge spectrum of the market. Also that flagship models are often hugely discounted. Australian's love bargains.

I am not sure why exactly is this a big deal and even surprising. Apple's iOS sells on limited hardware and they do a release annually or lately semi-annually. On the other hand, there is a new worthy Android device coming out every two weeks from big shots like Samsung, HTC, LG, Motorola, Sony Ericsson to name a few. So it was only a matter of time before Android caught up with iOS and captured the market.

Android is the new Feature Phone in some ways (as well as high end models too).

Google always intended saturation to prop up their Ad model.

Interesting to hear stirrings of Apple iterating faster.

Apple already pwn the market profit-wise. But do they need to fend of a competitive OS which aims to saturate?

Or can they live side by side? And nudge out Windows phone together?

This makes me happy since Apple made Samsung miss out on sales last holiday season.

Samsung made itself miss out.

Reasoning required.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com