Global smartphone market share and units sold figures from the Wall Street
Journal, 12 February 2011:
OS/Vendor Year Market Share Units Sold (millions)
--------- ---- ------------ ----------
Symbian/Nokia 2010 36.76% 111.6
2009 46.9% 80.9
LOSS 22% GAIN 30.7
Android/Google 2010 22.7% 67.3
2009 3.9% 6.8
GAIN 482% GAIN 60.5
BlackBerry/RIM 2010 16.0% 47.5
2009 19.9% 34.3
LOSS 20% GAIN 13.2
iOS/Apple 2010 15.7% 46.6
2009 14.4% 24.9
GAIN 9% GAIN 21.7
Windows/Msft 2010 4.2% 12.4
2009 8.7% 15.0
LOSS 52% LOSS 2.6
While all the smartphone vendors (except for Microsoft) saw gains in the
numbers of units sold, only Android and iOS saw gains in market share.
But iOS's 9% market share gain pales in comparison to Android's 482% gain.
More stunning is that most of these Android sales are new customers,
whereas a great many iOS sales are customers replacing another iOS device.
Another interesting piece of news is that geohot has apparently given up
on iPhone and is now hacking on Windows Mobile with Microsoft's blessing.
Apple may welcome this, but the abandonment of Apple by the jailbreak
community is likely to prove to be a Pyrrhic victory.
Windows Mobile today is where Windows 3.1 was; a pathetic joke that nobody
takes seriously. But then came Windows 95 which was a complete game
changer. It wasn't just Win95; it was also the mass desertion of Apple by
users and developers that Apple had pissed off one too many times.
History may repeat itself.
Prediction: the merger of Nokia and Microsoft smartphone efforts will be
followed by RIM merging into either the Nokia/Microsoft or Google axis.
BlackBerry does not need its own OS; and RIM's business model does not
require it. BlackBerry hardware and the BlackBerry OS are incidental to
RIM's business of selling BlackBerry service.
That will reduce the current field of five to three. iOS will not be in a
good position.
-- Mark --
http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.
Re: NUMBERS DO LIE: Android doesn't surge ahead of iPhone
poor Mark, can't win for loosing, the Verizon iPhone went on sale just a
few days ago, it's already sold 2 million units, so you obviously didn't
count that, and 44% of Droid users are switching to an iPhone in the
coming months.
Plus you didn't include the 80 million iOS based iPod Touches, 14
million iPads, or now over 1 million AppleTVs sol, so quit trying to lie
Mark.
the iOS will remain the dominant OS in this space for decades to come,
so quit being so bitter that Apple has won again despite your crying.
You can get up to speed with real programmers making real money on the
best hardware available right here:
Re: NUMBERS DO LIE: Android doesn't surge ahead of iPhone
On 2/13/11 2:10 AM, Oxford wrote:
> poor Mark, can't win for loosing, the Verizon iPhone went on sale just a
> few days ago, it's already sold 2 million units, so you obviously didn't
> count that, and 44% of Droid users are switching to an iPhone in the
> coming months.
>
> Plus you didn't include the 80 million iOS based iPod Touches, 14
> million iPads, or now over 1 million AppleTVs sol, so quit trying to lie
> Mark.
>
> the iOS will remain the dominant OS in this space for decades to come,
> so quit being so bitter that Apple has won again despite your crying.
>
> You can get up to speed with real programmers making real money on the
> best hardware available right here:
>
> http://developer.apple.com/technologies/ios/
>
> Enjoy!
Re: NUMBERS DON'T LIE: Android surges ahead of iPhone
On 2/12/2011 10:54 PM, Mark Crispin wrote:
> Global smartphone market share and units sold figures from the Wall
> Street Journal, 12 February 2011:
>
> OS/Vendor Year Market Share Units Sold (millions)
> --------- ---- ------------ ----------
>
> Symbian/Nokia 2010 36.76% 111.6
> 2009 46.9% 80.9
> LOSS 22% GAIN 30.7
>
> Android/Google 2010 22.7% 67.3
> 2009 3.9% 6.8
> GAIN 482% GAIN 60.5
>
> BlackBerry/RIM 2010 16.0% 47.5
> 2009 19.9% 34.3
> LOSS 20% GAIN 13.2
>
> iOS/Apple 2010 15.7% 46.6
> 2009 14.4% 24.9
> GAIN 9% GAIN 21.7
>
> Windows/Msft 2010 4.2% 12.4
> 2009 8.7% 15.0
> LOSS 52% LOSS 2.6
>
> While all the smartphone vendors (except for Microsoft) saw gains in the
> numbers of units sold, only Android and iOS saw gains in market share.
> But iOS's 9% market share gain pales in comparison to Android's 482% gain.
While it's true that in terms of units sold Android did exceptionally
well, the percentage gains are meaningless since Android started from
such a tiny percentage. Those numbers are also pre-Verizon iPhone. Apple
lost an enormous amount of unit sales to Android solely because they
were selling the iPhone in the U.S. on a carrier that so many users
avoided like the plague.
What's going to be interesting is the Nokia/Microsoft alliance. There is
a big market for a platform that has a common applications base between
phones/tablets and computers.
Re: NUMBERS DON'T LIE: Android surges ahead of iPhone
"KDT" <scarface_74@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:67d83c97-ba2d-43d7-9a26-4a0409de7e0f@r21g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
> And Apple cries all the way to the bank.....
Isn't unfortunate that Apples wealth does nothing to increase yours. How
amusing.
Re: NUMBERS DO LIE: Android doesn't surge ahead of iPhone
"Harryk" <payer3389@mypacks.net> wrote in message
news:isGdnWD0DvXuSsrQnZ2dnUVZ_oCdnZ2d@earthlink.co m...
> On 2/13/11 2:10 AM, Oxford wrote:
>> poor Mark, can't win for loosing, the Verizon iPhone went on sale just a
>> few days ago, it's already sold 2 million units, so you obviously didn't
>> count that, and 44% of Droid users are switching to an iPhone in the
>> coming months.
>>
>> Plus you didn't include the 80 million iOS based iPod Touches, 14
>> million iPads, or now over 1 million AppleTVs sol, so quit trying to lie
>> Mark.
>>
>> the iOS will remain the dominant OS in this space for decades to come,
>> so quit being so bitter that Apple has won again despite your crying.
>>
>> You can get up to speed with real programmers making real money on the
>> best hardware available right here:
>>
>> http://developer.apple.com/technologies/ios/
>>
>> Enjoy!
>
>
> Do you shower with Steve Jobs?
Re: NUMBERS DO LIE: Android doesn't surge ahead of iPhone
On 2/13/11 9:45 AM, Mocassin Joe wrote:
> "Harryk"<payer3389@mypacks.net> wrote in message
> news:isGdnWD0DvXuSsrQnZ2dnUVZ_oCdnZ2d@earthlink.co m...
>> On 2/13/11 2:10 AM, Oxford wrote:
>>> poor Mark, can't win for loosing, the Verizon iPhone went on sale just a
>>> few days ago, it's already sold 2 million units, so you obviously didn't
>>> count that, and 44% of Droid users are switching to an iPhone in the
>>> coming months.
>>>
>>> Plus you didn't include the 80 million iOS based iPod Touches, 14
>>> million iPads, or now over 1 million AppleTVs sol, so quit trying to lie
>>> Mark.
>>>
>>> the iOS will remain the dominant OS in this space for decades to come,
>>> so quit being so bitter that Apple has won again despite your crying.
>>>
>>> You can get up to speed with real programmers making real money on the
>>> best hardware available right here:
>>>
>>> http://developer.apple.com/technologies/ios/
>>>
>>> Enjoy!
>>
>>
>> Do you shower with Steve Jobs?
>
> He bends over to "pick up the soap".
>
>
I really don't understand the Apple fanboys. I have an Apple laptop and
an Apple desktop and an Android smartphone. I like them all just fine.
I've played with an iPhone a few times, and I don't see any qualitative
difference between it and my HTC phone. Of course, I don't live *on* or
*for* my cellphone. In the end, it's just a phone. In fact, I would be
well-pleased if the makers of these devices would concentrate more on
the phone aspect of these devices and less on the silly frills.
Re: NUMBERS DON'T LIE: Android surges ahead of iPhone
On Feb 13, 9:44*am, "Mocassin Joe" <Joemocasa...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "KDT" <scarface...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:67d83c97-ba2d-43d7-9a26-4a0409de7e0f@r21g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
>
> > And Apple cries all the way to the bank.....
>
> Isn't *unfortunate that Apples wealth does nothing to increase yours. *How
> amusing.
>
>
>
> >http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2010/10/...-50-of-profit/
>
> > Oh you thought *market share* mattered to a company more than profits?
>
> > How quaint.....
Nor does Android's market share do anything to increase yours or the
original poster's....
Re: NUMBERS DO LIE: Android doesn't surge ahead of iPhone
Harryk <payer3389@mypacks.net> wrote:
> > the iOS will remain the dominant OS in this space for decades to come,
> > so quit being so bitter that Apple has won again despite your crying.
> >
> > You can get up to speed with real programmers making real money on the
> > best hardware available right here:
> >
> > http://developer.apple.com/technologies/ios/
> >
> > Enjoy!
>
> Do you shower with Steve Jobs?
what is that supposed to mean? you have gay fantasies?
Re: NUMBERS DO LIE: Android doesn't surge ahead of iPhone
On 2/13/11 9:58 AM, Oxford wrote:
> Harryk<payer3389@mypacks.net> wrote:
>
>>> the iOS will remain the dominant OS in this space for decades to come,
>>> so quit being so bitter that Apple has won again despite your crying.
>>>
>>> You can get up to speed with real programmers making real money on the
>>> best hardware available right here:
>>>
>>> http://developer.apple.com/technologies/ios/
>>>
>>> Enjoy!
>>
>> Do you shower with Steve Jobs?
>
> what is that supposed to mean? you have gay fantasies?
No, but some of you fanboys seem to have sexual fantasies about your
iPhones.
Re: NUMBERS DON'T LIE: Android surges ahead of iPhone
"KDT" <scarface_74@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:009d8e4c-9fa7-4948-b6f7-f5d6b8a3cbb6@k15g2000prk.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 13, 9:44 am, "Mocassin Joe" <Joemocasa...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "KDT" <scarface...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:67d83c97-ba2d-43d7-9a26-4a0409de7e0f@r21g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
>
> > And Apple cries all the way to the bank.....
>
> Isn't unfortunate that Apples wealth does nothing to increase yours. How
> amusing.
>
>
>
> >http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2010/10/...-50-of-profit/
>
> > Oh you thought *market share* mattered to a company more than profits?
>
> > How quaint.....
>Nor does Android's market share do anything to increase yours or the
>original poster's....
Another pathetic failed attempt at role reversal! How quaint.....
I'm not waving the Android flag, fanboi.
Reading comprenhension is not your strong suit I see.
Re: NUMBERS DON'T LIE: Android surges ahead of iPhone
On Feb 13, 11:38*am, "Mocassin Joe" <Joemocasa...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "KDT" <scarface...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:009d8e4c-9fa7-4948-b6f7-f5d6b8a3cbb6@k15g2000prk.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 13, 9:44 am, "Mocassin Joe" <Joemocasa...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "KDT" <scarface...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:67d83c97-ba2d-43d7-9a26-4a0409de7e0f@r21g2000yqd.googlegroups.com....
>
> > > And Apple cries all the way to the bank.....
>
> > Isn't unfortunate that Apples wealth does nothing to increase yours. How
> > amusing.
>
> > >http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2010/10/...-50-of-profit/
>
> > > Oh you thought *market share* mattered to a company more than profits?
>
> > > How quaint.....
> >Nor does Android's market share do anything to increase yours or the
> >original poster's....
>
> Another pathetic failed attempt at role reversal! How quaint.....
>
> I'm not waving the Android flag, fanboi.
Yes, I'm a "fan" of facts and numbers. Both of which you are severely
lacking....
Re: NUMBERS DO LIE: Android doesn't surge ahead of iPhone
On 2/13/2011 9:50 AM, Harryk wrote:
> I really don't understand the Apple fanboys. I have an Apple laptop
> and an Apple desktop and an Android smartphone. I like them all just
> fine. I've played with an iPhone a few times, and I don't see any
> qualitative difference between it and my HTC phone. Of course, I don't
> live *on* or *for* my cellphone. In the end, it's just a phone. In
> fact, I would be well-pleased if the makers of these devices would
> concentrate more on the phone aspect of these devices and less on the
> silly frills.
Ditto. 'holy wars' over such _un-sexy_ devices as phones are
downright silly. The most important aspects of the phone to me are
ease of use while mobile, sound & reception quality, & battery life.
Everything else is superfluous, and the benefits of dumbed down www
browser functionality, and limited ergonomics, makes them practically
_useless_ to me. I'd rather see an emphasis on tethering improvements.
Re: NUMBERS DON'T LIE: Android surges ahead of iPhone
"KDT" <scarface_74@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:488b6146-7e0b-423c-b9ac-b50cfdfa5346@a28g2000vbo.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 13, 11:38 am, "Mocassin Joe" <Joemocasa...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "KDT" <scarface...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:009d8e4c-9fa7-4948-b6f7-f5d6b8a3cbb6@k15g2000prk.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 13, 9:44 am, "Mocassin Joe" <Joemocasa...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "KDT" <scarface...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:67d83c97-ba2d-43d7-9a26-4a0409de7e0f@r21g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > And Apple cries all the way to the bank.....
>
> >Isn't it unnfortunate that Apples wealth does nothing to increase yours.
> >How
> > amusing.
>
> > >http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2010/10/...-50-of-profit/
>
> > > Oh you thought *market share* mattered to a company more than profits?
>
> > > How quaint.....
> >Nor does Android's market share do anything to increase yours or the
> >original poster's....
>
> Another pathetic failed attempt at role reversal! How quaint.....
>
> I'm not waving the Android flag, fanboi.
>Yes, I'm a "fan" of facts and numbers. Both of which you are severely
>lacking....
You're wandering, Sonny. I didn't post any facts or numbers. I only made
the comment "Isn't it unnfortunate that Apples wealth does nothing to
increase yours. How amusing ".
You seem to be the one lacking "facts". Maybe it's those cheap drugs. And
we do both agree you're a "fan", fanboi. You must be your parents biggest
disappointment.
Are we done here now? You seem to be incapable of following a conversation.
The WSJ also says that there were 297M smartphones sold, whereas the
above sums up to 285M, which leaves 12M unaccounted for. Curious to
know what that missing ~5% is.
> While all the smartphone vendors (except for Microsoft) saw gains in the
> numbers of units sold, only Android and iOS saw gains in market share.
Is this statement only because of how the data was grouped? I've not
really been paying this too much attention, but I had been under the
understanding that Nokia fell off a cliff in 2010 (hence, their
recently announced deal with Microsoft).
> But iOS's 9% market share gain pales in comparison to Android's 482% gain..
Except that we also all know that percentage-change based metrics are
highly misleading when the basis point is extremely small. Android's
growth rate expressed as a percentage is non-linear and as such, to
tout it as significant is disingenuous.
Even so, is it really all that surprising that after a gestation
period that a "free" product was adopted by a healthy fraction of
what's essentially a potential customer base of "all manufacturers"
across "all markets"? The question really isn't the macro-effects of
short term business interests...but the fact that TANSTAAFL still
applies.
So sure, it is great for Android that they moved roughly 60M more
units than the year before, but for how much longer can Google's free
lunch carry these manufacturers? And past performance is not a
particularly reliable indicator of the future and as such, we don't
see anyone daring to predict that Android's going to have another 482%
gain in 2011. But if someone is willing to make just such a claim,
put me down for $100 IRL in the "ain't gunna happen" column.
> More stunning is that most of these Android sales are new customers,
> whereas a great many iOS sales are customers replacing another iOS device..
Interesting stat ... who said it and in exactly what context? For
example, is this "new to cellphones" or merely "new to SMARTphones"?
Afterall, feature phones still outsell smartphones by 4:1.
Some interesting stats info (including the 4:1, above) here:
<http://mobithinking.com/mobile-marketing-tools/latest-mobile-stats>
> Another interesting piece of news is that geohot has apparently given up
> on iPhone and is now hacking on Windows Mobile with Microsoft's blessing.
> Apple may welcome this, but the abandonment of Apple by the jailbreak
> community is likely to prove to be a Pyrrhic victory.
Interesting, sure ... but from a business case model, what was the
percentage uptick gain in sales & profits to Apple from having a
Jailbreaking community? Afterall, if it had no real gain, there is
no downside to its loss.
> Windows Mobile today is where Windows 3.1 was; a pathetic joke that nobody
> takes seriously. *But then came Windows 95 which was a complete game
> changer. *It wasn't just Win95; it was also the mass desertion of Appleby
> users and developers that Apple had pissed off one too many times.
>
> History may repeat itself.
It may, or people may have learned from history and will avoid
repeating it. What our personal opinion of this shouldn't matter if
we're unbiased observers (versus cheerleaders).
> Prediction: the merger of Nokia and Microsoft smartphone efforts will be
> followed by RIM merging into either the Nokia/Microsoft or Google axis.
> BlackBerry does not need its own OS; and RIM's business model does not
> require it. *BlackBerry hardware and the BlackBerry OS are incidental to
> RIM's business of selling BlackBerry service.
>
> That will reduce the current field of five to three. *iOS will not be in a
> good position.
A prediction, but by what date? 2525?
FWIW, Garner predicts that by 2011, over 85 percent of new handsets
will be able to access the mobile Web. However, it has also been
pointed out that a smartphone isn't a prerequisite for access:
current "mere" feature phones do it too (a common fallacy).
As such, even if the smartphone market collapses to only three major
contenders, with all of them combined only being 20% of the total
cellphone market, there's still the other 80% of the market, which is
plenty of non-interfering growth opportunity for all of them to grow
simply by converting feature cellphone customers into smartphone
customers.
Thus, I'd avoid any "Doom!" predictions for anyone for at least 2-3
years.
Re: NUMBERS DO LIE: Android doesn't surge ahead of iPhone
Harryk <payer3389@mypacks.net> wrote:
> > what is that supposed to mean? you have gay fantasies?
>
> No, but some of you fanboys seem to have sexual fantasies about your
> iPhones.
>
> It's just a phone.
No, the "Phone App" is just "1 App" of 300,000, the iPhone is far more
than a phone, so it sounds like you've never used one. It's really a
tiny Mac, so it's currently the most powerful consumer device humans
have ever created.
So you have a very limited 1990's view of what a smartphone does, it's
everything from checking skin cancer, playing games, checking prices and
creating full length movies... plus 300,000 more.
so get up to speed, you're still living a decade behind the Apple world.
Re: NUMBERS DO LIE: Android doesn't surge ahead of iPhone
On 2/13/11 2:06 PM, Oxford wrote:
> Harryk<payer3389@mypacks.net> wrote:
>
>>> what is that supposed to mean? you have gay fantasies?
>>
>> No, but some of you fanboys seem to have sexual fantasies about your
>> iPhones.
>>
>> It's just a phone.
>
> No, the "Phone App" is just "1 App" of 300,000, the iPhone is far more
> than a phone, so it sounds like you've never used one. It's really a
> tiny Mac, so it's currently the most powerful consumer device humans
> have ever created.
>
> So you have a very limited 1990's view of what a smartphone does, it's
> everything from checking skin cancer, playing games, checking prices and
> creating full length movies... plus 300,000 more.
>
> so get up to speed, you're still living a decade behind the Apple world.
Reads like you live for your iPhone. I suggest you find a woman. They're
far more than a phone, and far more fun, too.
Oh, an iPhone is hardly a substitute for my macbook pro or iMac.
I don't need an iPhone to tell me who has the best price on an expensive
item. I do a search on my real computers, the ones with the big screens
and real keyboards. If i am at the grocery store, I'm not really
interested if a nearby store has a dozen eggs for five cents less.
Why would I want to create a movie on a cell phone with a tiny screen?
Or, for that matter, watch a movie?
I interact with actual people in my real life. Playing games on a tiny
screen smartphone is not something I care to do.
Re: NUMBERS DO LIE: Android doesn't surge ahead of iPhone
On 2/13/2011 9:50 AM, Harryk wrote:
> On 2/13/11 9:45 AM, Mocassin Joe wrote:
>> "Harryk"<payer3389@mypacks.net> wrote in message
>> news:isGdnWD0DvXuSsrQnZ2dnUVZ_oCdnZ2d@earthlink.co m...
>>> On 2/13/11 2:10 AM, Oxford wrote:
>>>> poor Mark, can't win for loosing, the Verizon iPhone went on sale
>>>> just a
>>>> few days ago, it's already sold 2 million units, so you obviously
>>>> didn't
>>>> count that, and 44% of Droid users are switching to an iPhone in the
>>>> coming months.
>>>>
>>>> Plus you didn't include the 80 million iOS based iPod Touches, 14
>>>> million iPads, or now over 1 million AppleTVs sol, so quit trying to
>>>> lie
>>>> Mark.
>>>>
>>>> the iOS will remain the dominant OS in this space for decades to come,
>>>> so quit being so bitter that Apple has won again despite your crying.
>>>>
>>>> You can get up to speed with real programmers making real money on the
>>>> best hardware available right here:
>>>>
>>>> http://developer.apple.com/technologies/ios/
>>>>
>>>> Enjoy!
>>>
>>>
>>> Do you shower with Steve Jobs?
>>
>> He bends over to "pick up the soap".
>>
>>
>
> I really don't understand the Apple fanboys. I have an Apple laptop and
> an Apple desktop and an Android smartphone. I like them all just fine.
> I've played with an iPhone a few times, and I don't see any qualitative
> difference between it and my HTC phone. Of course, I don't live *on* or
> *for* my cellphone. In the end, it's just a phone. In fact, I would be
> well-pleased if the makers of these devices would concentrate more on
> the phone aspect of these devices and less on the silly frills.
It's not going to happen! In the first place, the silly frills
differentiate the product from the competition. All the cellular phones
work as phones! So your phone is as good as, but not better than, any
other phone. There's not much anybody can do to make any cell phone
better *as a phone*. Once you start adding "bells and whistles" you
have some hope of making a *useful difference*.
And some people do live "on or for their phones". My late step-mother
was a prime example. Had she lived long enough to have a cell phone,
she would have been on it sixteen hours a day! She almost did it
without one. Only the fact that the bathroom was not equipped with a
phone stopped her briefly!
Re: NUMBERS DO LIE: Android doesn't surge ahead of iPhone
In article <eLudnWQ9KZq8ssXQnZ2dnUVZ_jmdnZ2d@earthlink.com> , Harryk
<payer3389@mypacks.net> wrote:
> Reads like you live for your iPhone. I suggest you find a woman. They're
> far more than a phone, and far more fun, too.
some are, some aren't. an iphone will not nag you.
> Oh, an iPhone is hardly a substitute for my macbook pro or iMac.
nobody said it would be.
> I don't need an iPhone to tell me who has the best price on an expensive
> item. I do a search on my real computers, the ones with the big screens
> and real keyboards.
you take your macbook or imac everywhere you go?
> If i am at the grocery store, I'm not really
> interested if a nearby store has a dozen eggs for five cents less.
but you might want to know if the tv that's on sale can be purchased
for $100 less elsewhere.
> Why would I want to create a movie on a cell phone with a tiny screen?
> Or, for that matter, watch a movie?
people create and watch movies for all sorts of reasons. do you carry a
video camera and a cinema display wherever you go?
> I interact with actual people in my real life. Playing games on a tiny
> screen smartphone is not something I care to do.
even when sitting at the doctor's office, wondering why he's running 45
minutes late? or at the auto mechanic, waiting 2 hours for your car to
be done? there are numerous situations where having an iphone to pass
the time is very, very useful, whether it's games or whatever.
Re: NUMBERS DO LIE: Android doesn't surge ahead of iPhone
nospam wrote on [Sun, 13 Feb 2011 14:37:55 -0500]:
> In article <eLudnWQ9KZq8ssXQnZ2dnUVZ_jmdnZ2d@earthlink.com> , Harryk
> <payer3389@mypacks.net> wrote:
>
>> Reads like you live for your iPhone. I suggest you find a woman. They're
>> far more than a phone, and far more fun, too.
>
> some are, some aren't. an iphone will not nag you.
Don't have it hooked up to your calendar with reminders then?
>> Oh, an iPhone is hardly a substitute for my macbook pro or iMac.
>
> nobody said it would be.
Oxford.
>> I don't need an iPhone to tell me who has the best price on an expensive
>> item. I do a search on my real computers, the ones with the big screens
>> and real keyboards.
>
> you take your macbook or imac everywhere you go?
Any purchase worth making shouldn't be made in the store. That's just
where you buy it.
>> If i am at the grocery store, I'm not really
>> interested if a nearby store has a dozen eggs for five cents less.
>
> but you might want to know if the tv that's on sale can be purchased
> for $100 less elsewhere.
You should know that before you hit the front door
Re: NUMBERS DO LIE: Android doesn't surge ahead of iPhone
In article <slrnilgdbc.29e.nospam@ubuntu.nitsuj.net>, Justin
<nospam@insightbb.com> wrote:
> >> Reads like you live for your iPhone. I suggest you find a woman. They're
> >> far more than a phone, and far more fun, too.
> >
> > some are, some aren't. an iphone will not nag you.
>
> Don't have it hooked up to your calendar with reminders then?
there's a mute button on the iphone.
> >> Oh, an iPhone is hardly a substitute for my macbook pro or iMac.
> >
> > nobody said it would be.
>
> Oxford.
oxford says a lot of things, almost all of which are absurd and
detached from reality.
> >> I don't need an iPhone to tell me who has the best price on an expensive
> >> item. I do a search on my real computers, the ones with the big screens
> >> and real keyboards.
> >
> > you take your macbook or imac everywhere you go?
>
> Any purchase worth making shouldn't be made in the store. That's just
> where you buy it.
maybe so, but there are often times when you're in a store and see
something on sale that you have been thinking about buying and wonder
if that's really a good price or not.
> >> If i am at the grocery store, I'm not really
> >> interested if a nearby store has a dozen eggs for five cents less.
> >
> > but you might want to know if the tv that's on sale can be purchased
> > for $100 less elsewhere.
>
> You should know that before you hit the front door
Re: NUMBERS DO LIE: Android doesn't surge ahead of iPhone
On 2/13/11 2:37 PM, nospam wrote:
> In article<eLudnWQ9KZq8ssXQnZ2dnUVZ_jmdnZ2d@earthlink .com>, Harryk
> <payer3389@mypacks.net> wrote:
>
>> Reads like you live for your iPhone. I suggest you find a woman. They're
>> far more than a phone, and far more fun, too.
>
> some are, some aren't. an iphone will not nag you.
>
>> Oh, an iPhone is hardly a substitute for my macbook pro or iMac.
>
> nobody said it would be.
>
>> I don't need an iPhone to tell me who has the best price on an expensive
>> item. I do a search on my real computers, the ones with the big screens
>> and real keyboards.
>
> you take your macbook or imac everywhere you go?
Why would I want to do that?
>
>> If i am at the grocery store, I'm not really
>> interested if a nearby store has a dozen eggs for five cents less.
>
> but you might want to know if the tv that's on sale can be purchased
> for $100 less elsewhere.
I don't buy TV sets at the grocery store.
>
>> Why would I want to create a movie on a cell phone with a tiny screen?
>> Or, for that matter, watch a movie?
>
> people create and watch movies for all sorts of reasons. do you carry a
> video camera and a cinema display wherever you go?
Why would I want to do that?
>
>> I interact with actual people in my real life. Playing games on a tiny
>> screen smartphone is not something I care to do.
>
> even when sitting at the doctor's office, wondering why he's running 45
> minutes late? or at the auto mechanic, waiting 2 hours for your car to
> be done? there are numerous situations where having an iphone to pass
> the time is very, very useful, whether it's games or whatever.
I usually carry a paperback book or two in my briefcase for just those
occasions. I have my cell with me, so if I need to make a call, I can.
Passing the time playing with a phone is not my idea of intellectual
stimulation.
Re: NUMBERS DO LIE: Android doesn't surge ahead of iPhone
nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> Justin <nos...@insightbb.com> wrote:
> > [...]
> > >> I don't need an iPhone to tell me who has the best price on an expensive
> > >> item. I do a search on my real computers, the ones with the big screens
> > >> and real keyboards.
>
> > > you take your macbook or imac everywhere you go?
>
> > Any purchase worth making shouldn't be made in the store. That's just
> > where you buy it.
>
> maybe so, but there are often times when you're in a store and see
> something on sale that you have been thinking about buying and wonder
> if that's really a good price or not.
>
> > >> If i am at the grocery store, I'm not really
> > >> interested if a nearby store has a dozen eggs for five cents less.
>
> > > but you might want to know if the tv that's on sale can be purchased
> > > for $100 less elsewhere.
>
> > You should know that before you hit the front door
>
> but that isn't always the case.
This line of discussion has an interesting parallel when it comes to
debates on Photography groups over "Best Camera". Ultimately, the
conclusion is that the "Best" camera is the one that you have with
you ... and what this is revealing is that not all of our actions are
planned extensively in advance, but tend to be more Ad Hoc.
One of the revolutions in this Information Age with cellphones and the
like is that it has also transformed our ability to be (in a word)
spontaneous. Instead of planning a week's worth of meals, we can head
to the supermarket on the way home and make a phone call to our
family, to solicit preferences for Chicken vs Pork Chops, etc - - -
which when viewed from a slightly different (and more business-
centric) perspective is taking on one of the key characteristics of
"Just In Time" processing.
Re: NUMBERS DO LIE: Android doesn't surge ahead of iPhone
On 2/13/2011 2:21 PM, Harryk wrote:
> On 2/13/11 2:06 PM, Oxford wrote:
>> Harryk<payer3389@mypacks.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> what is that supposed to mean? you have gay fantasies?
>>>
>>> No, but some of you fanboys seem to have sexual fantasies about your
>>> iPhones.
>>>
>>> It's just a phone.
>>
>> No, the "Phone App" is just "1 App" of 300,000, the iPhone is far more
>> than a phone, so it sounds like you've never used one. It's really a
>> tiny Mac,
Isn't a "tiny Mac" somewhat of an oxymoron? If not, it definitely
qualifies as hyperbole...
>> so it's currently the most powerful consumer device humans
>> have ever created.
That's debateable without specifically defining what you mean by 'most
powerful consumer device'...
>> So you have a very limited 1990's view of what a smartphone does, it's
>> everything from checking skin cancer, playing games, checking prices
>> and
>> creating full length movies... plus 300,000 more.
This may count for "the most lateral flexibility" - but not the "most
powerful".
This kind of hyperbole sounds as silly as Bose's (B_adly O_verhyped
S_ound E_quipment) 'Wave radio' commercials.
>> so get up to speed, you're still living a decade behind the Apple
>> world.
Ooooh, Apple world sounds real nice! How does one get there? A unicorn?
---
(aside to HarryK)
> Reads like you live for your iPhone. I suggest you find a woman.
> They're far more than a phone, and far more fun, too.
Touche'!
> Oh, an iPhone is hardly a substitute for my macbook pro or iMac.
Bingo.
> I don't need an iPhone to tell me who has the best price on an
> expensive item. I do a search on my real computers, the ones with the
> big screens and real keyboards. If i am at the grocery store, I'm not
> really interested if a nearby store has a dozen eggs for five cents less.
>
> Why would I want to create a movie on a cell phone with a tiny screen?
> Or, for that matter, watch a movie?
Probably because the dumbed-down thumb-typin baboon mentality equates
video _clips_ with _entire movies_.
> I interact with actual people in my real life. Playing games on a tiny
> screen smartphone is not something I care to do.
People like this seem to have a fascination with exagerating >tiny
things<. Let's chip in and buy him a tweezer.
Good question- there are a few (non-Android) Linux phones out there, like
the Nokia N900, but I can't believe the "misc" category makes up 1-in-
20.
Part of the problem, IMO, is how (and who) is defining "smartphone."
There are plent of mid-to-low end phones that do web, email, Facebook,and
play media, so that's not a good definition. (I suspect for many people,
that's "smart" enough.) Almost any
phone can run "apps"- the lowest using a Java J2ME VM, so apps or an app
store isn't the determining factor.
In these cases, journalists like to use "runs one of the 'smartphone
OSes'" as the determining factor, so it means we've pre-defined the
members of the club, and can leave out those we don't feel "worthy" like
Samsung Bada, Nokia S40, etc.
> > While all the smartphone ven dors (except for Microsoft) saw gainsin
the
> > numbers of units sold, only Android and iOS saw gains in market share.
>
> Is this statement only because of how the data was grouped? I've not
> really been paying this too much attention, but I had been under the
> understanding that Nokia fell off a cliff in 2010 (hence, their
> recently announced deal with Microsoft).
Nokia didn't really fall off a cliff in units sold- just profits. Their
high-end biz was decimated by iOS and Android, and their low-end/emerging
markets biz (think featureless phones you'd have been embarrassed to be
seen with 5 years ago, let alone today) has been taken by Asian
manufacturers, leaving them slashing wholesale prices on everything
they're making. "Sure we lose money on every phone sold, but we'll make
it up with volume!"
> > But iOS's 9% market share gain pales in comparison to Android's 482%
gain.
>
> Except that we also all know that percentage-change based metrics are
> highly misleading when the basis point is extremely small. Android's
> growth rate expressed as a percentage is non-linear and as such, to
> tout it as significant is disingenuous.
Absolutely. I think Mark was needling the Oxfords of the group, though-
Ox used to post such figures about iOS in its nacent stages.
> Even so, is it really all that surprising that after a gestation
> period that a "free" product was adopted by a healthy fraction of
> what's essentially a potential customer base of "all manufacturers"
> across "all markets"? The question really isn't the macro-effects of
> short term business interests...but the fact that TANSTAAFL still
> applies.
Oh, I don't know- if it was crap no one would buy it, so OEMs would avoid
it. These are mostly manufacturers who aren't willing or able to write
their own, so what are their alternatives? Prior to Android most of
these guys were paying $10 a phone to MS for the mediocre WinMo OS-
Android has proven more popular and saves them $10 a phone. If Google
started charging for it (or what proprietary parts of it they could)
tomorrow, I suspect the OEMs would gladly pay vs. having to write or buy
something else.
> So sure, it is great for Android that they moved roughly 60M more
> units than the year before, but for how much longer can Google's free
> lunch carry these manufacturers? And past performance is not a
> particularly reliable indicator of the future and as such, we don't
> see anyone daring to predict that Android's going to have another 482%
> gain in 2011. But if someone is willing to make just such a claim,
> put me down for $100 IRL in the "ain't gunna happen" column.
That gain won't happe, but there's no reason to think Android will stop
growing. Even then, though, that doesn't matter to the OEMs. HTC or
Samsung wants to sell HTCs and Samsungs- not evagelise Android. This was
the same issue WinMo always had- OEMs tinkered with it to differentiate
themselves, diluting the OS "brand." Pick up any HTC Android phone ina
store, and you don't see Android- you see an HTC UI (that ironically,
they used to hide WinMo with before they started building Android
devices.)
> > More stunning is that most of these Android sales are new customers,
> > whereas a great many iOS sales are customers replacing another iOS
device.
>
> Interesting stat ... who said it and in exactly what context? For
> example, is this "new to cellphones" or merely "new to SMARTphones"?
> Afterall, feature phones still outsell smartphones by 4:1.
I took it to mean "new to Android." Not surprising since it's still
relatively new. I'd wager over 99% of WP7 buyers are buying their first
WP7 device as well!
> FWIW, Garner predicts that by 2011, over 85 percent of new handsets
> will be able to access the mobile Web. However, it has also been
> pointed out that a smartphone isn't a prerequisite for access:
> current "mere" feature phones do it too (a common fallacy).
I'm surprised it isn't over 85% already! It's hard to find a phone ona
US carrier without at least a crummy WAP browser.
> As such, even if the smartphone market collapses to only three major
> contenders, with all of them combined only being 20% of the total
> cellphone market, there's still the other 80% of the market, which is
> plenty of non-interfering growth opportunity for all of them to grow
> simply by converting feature cellphone customers into smartphone
> customers.
Given US carriers propensity for forcing expensive data plans on
smartphones, I think there's a real growth potential for "dumb"
smartphones that email, surf and Facebook.
> Thus, I'd avoid any "Doom!" predictions for anyone for at least 2-3
> years.
Agreed. We're still in the early "shakeout" days of smartphones, akinto
the early (1970s) personal computer days, when guessing who'd be the
survivors in a race between Apple, Commodore, Atari, Texas Instruments,
Tandy, etc.
Re: NUMBERS DO LIE: Android doesn't surge ahead of iPhone
At 13 Feb 2011 14:37:55 -0500 nospam wrote:
> In article <eLudnWQ9KZq8ssXQnZ2dnUVZ_jmdnZ2d@earthlink.com> , Harryk
> <payer3389@mypacks.net> wrote:
>
> > Reads like you live for your iPhone. I suggest you find a woman.
They're
> > far more than a phone, and far more fun, too.
>
> some are, some aren't. an iphone will not nag you.
"This download is over 20MB and requires WiFi"
"Enter your iTunes password"
"Battery has less than 20% remaining!"
Yeah, the iPhone can nag you! But it's easier to "dismiss."
Re: NUMBERS DO LIE: Android doesn't surge ahead of iPhone
In article <TOCdnf5Xi65b3MXQnZ2dnUVZ_gKdnZ2d@earthlink.com> , Harryk
<payer3389@mypacks.net> wrote:
> >> I don't need an iPhone to tell me who has the best price on an expensive
> >> item. I do a search on my real computers, the ones with the big screens
> >> and real keyboards.
> >
> > you take your macbook or imac everywhere you go?
>
> Why would I want to do that?
to do the searches you said you would be doing on a 'real computer'
with 'big screens and real keyboards.'
> >> If i am at the grocery store, I'm not really
> >> interested if a nearby store has a dozen eggs for five cents less.
> >
> > but you might want to know if the tv that's on sale can be purchased
> > for $100 less elsewhere.
>
> I don't buy TV sets at the grocery store.
nobody said you did.
> >> Why would I want to create a movie on a cell phone with a tiny screen?
> >> Or, for that matter, watch a movie?
> >
> > people create and watch movies for all sorts of reasons. do you carry a
> > video camera and a cinema display wherever you go?
>
> Why would I want to do that?
you said you don't want to create or watch movies on a tiny screen, so
obviously you would prefer to do it on a large screen. amusingly
enough, some dedicated video cameras have *smaller* displays than the
iphone.
or do you not watch movies? ever?
granted not everyone creates them but many people do, as well as taking
still photos, and carrying a second (or third) camera in addition to
the one in the phone is a pain. it may not be nikon/canon quality, but
it's good enough for a lot of things.
> >> I interact with actual people in my real life. Playing games on a tiny
> >> screen smartphone is not something I care to do.
> >
> > even when sitting at the doctor's office, wondering why he's running 45
> > minutes late? or at the auto mechanic, waiting 2 hours for your car to
> > be done? there are numerous situations where having an iphone to pass
> > the time is very, very useful, whether it's games or whatever.
>
> I usually carry a paperback book or two in my briefcase for just those
> occasions. I have my cell with me, so if I need to make a call, I can.
> Passing the time playing with a phone is not my idea of intellectual
> stimulation.
but it might be for other people. everyone has their own ways to pass
the time. who are you to say how others should do that?
Re: NUMBERS DO LIE: Android doesn't surge ahead of iPhone
In article <ij9i5g$neg$1@news.eternal-september.org>, Todd Allcock
<elecconnec@AnoOspamL.com> wrote:
> > > Reads like you live for your iPhone. I suggest you find a woman.
> > > They're far more than a phone, and far more fun, too.
> >
> > some are, some aren't. an iphone will not nag you.
>
> "This download is over 20MB and requires WiFi"
> "Enter your iTunes password"
> "Battery has less than 20% remaining!"
>
> Yeah, the iPhone can nag you! But it's easier to "dismiss."
yes it can nag but it's not the same. it's nowhere near as annoying
or repetitive, it's easy to put it in silent mode and it won't lay a
guilt trip on you when you ignore it.
NUMBERS DON'T LIE: Android surges ahead of iPhone 
Linear Mode
