Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

ixodes

macrumors 601
Original poster
Jan 11, 2012
4,429
3
Pacific Coast, USA
Here's an interesting graph and related article I came across:

iOSvsAndroid.png


"These figures show that Android's smartphone market share overtook the iPhone, 7 quarters after its release.

While this pattern is important, it is even more important to understand the reasons behind this. Most analysts look at smartphones and tablets exclusively from the perspective of the US market. "


source:http://goo.gl/otpF1


Enjoy :)
 

Technarchy

macrumors 604
May 21, 2012
6,753
4,927
Translation?

An army of junk phones and 3rd world specials can't compete with the metrics that are most important.

Profit, usage, customer satisfation, repeat customer, developer support.

Android is more than welcome to win the game of most crap phones sold. Apple isn't playing that game anyway.
 
Last edited:

adnbek

macrumors 68000
Oct 22, 2011
1,584
551
Montreal, Quebec
Translation?

That Android has flooded the market with many third rate products? Don't forget that the first graph doesn't not only include the top-tier Android phones but ALL Android devices, even the POS ones that sell simply because they're cheap.

----------

I would rather love a company which takes less money **from me**

Because Google, Samsung et al. are non-profit charity organizations? Riiiiight. :rolleyes:
 

Dmunjal

macrumors 68000
Jun 20, 2010
1,533
1,543
This is same as PC vs. Mac. The PC model is distributed across many vendors and is open which allows greater commodization. Same with Android. This model is GOOD for the customer.

The Apple model of being centralized and closed is BAD for the customer. Yes, the Apple model is more profitable but that only benefits the shareholder. You can argue that Apple is ahead on user experience and ease of use but as we saw with Windows, that advantage goes away over time.

As a customer, I like when there is competition and prices drop over time. I only hope Apple has learned the lesson of the PC wars and not make the same mistake again.
 

JerseyDoug

macrumors 6502
May 10, 2012
286
27
This is same as PC vs. Mac. The PC model is distributed across many vendors and is open which allows greater commodization. Same with Android. This model is GOOD for the customer.

The Apple model of being centralized and closed is BAD for the customer. Yes, the Apple model is more profitable but that only benefits the shareholder. You can argue that Apple is ahead on user experience and ease of use but as we saw with Windows, that advantage goes away over time.

As a customer, I like when there is competition and prices drop over time. I only hope Apple has learned the lesson of the PC wars and not make the same mistake again.

You are assuming the apple customer receives no value for the higher price. I would disagree with that. Personally, I think I got good value for the aPple products I have purchased over time. The only time I have to waste fixing cmputer issues is on wife's pc.

If apple weren't providing value in the long run, they couldn't maintain profitability. Only profitable companies can afford to innovate year after year.
 

Dmunjal

macrumors 68000
Jun 20, 2010
1,533
1,543
You are assuming the apple customer receives no value for the higher price. I would disagree with that. Personally, I think I got good value for the aPple products I have purchased over time. The only time I have to waste fixing cmputer issues is on wife's pc.

If apple weren't providing value in the long run, they couldn't maintain profitability. Only profitable companies can afford to innovate year after year.

Completely agree. In fact, Apple's model produces better products that can command higher prices during the early part of the innovation cycle. They actually "invent" the market.

The problem is that innovation invariably slows down as time passes until the next big thing. We've already seen this with each new iPhone and iOS release.

Then the commodity players (Google, Samsung, HTC, etc.) catch up and begin to chip away at the innovator's market share and profit margins.

This is capitalism at its finest.
 

Savor

Suspended
Jun 18, 2010
3,742
918
Check this article -

iPhone sales are slowing, deal with it

Apple shares closed down 4.32 percent today, keeping with a trend started during after-hours trading yesterday. The real question: Could matters have been much worse, if not for the big carrot that came with the little stick? Apple missed fiscal Q3 Wall Street analyst consensus for revenue and income, but announced a big dividend and promise of more to follow. Performance was by no means bad, just not as good as forecast and the dividend, $2.65 per share, is something for shareholders to smile about.

But behind the magic, I have to ask: Is Apple distracting shareholders and Wall Street analysts, making them look over there so they miss the trick going on over here? It's a question I can't answer but can only speculate about. Another quarter of results will reveal much. One thing is certain now: iPhone sales are slowing. There's no if about it, but why. Are people waiting for the new model or are Android rivals like Samsung pulling away more buyers?

The Big Miss

Analyst consensus for the quarter was around 29 million iPhones. Apple shipped 26 million, up 28 percent year over year but down 26 percent sequentially. Revenue declined 28 percent quarter-on-quarter. This is by no means the first sequential decline, but it's unusually severe, and the Street already expected as much as 19 percent Q2 to Q3.

During yesterday's earnings conference call, Apple CFO Peter Oppenheimer gave a simple explanation: "Our weekly iPhone sales continue to be impacted by rumors and speculation regarding new products", adding later: "Regarding iPhone, we’re reading the same rumors and speculation that you are about the new iPhone, and we think this has caused some pause in customers purchasing".

There you have it, iPhone 5 rumors. But if that's true now, why not a year ago? Fiscal third quarter 2011 led into release of iPhone 4S -- and lots of rumors about it -- and there was longer time between new models, meaning more pent-up demand. Yet iPhone shipments grew 183 percent year over year and 9 percent sequentially then.

Distilling Distribution

Something else: As distribution increases so should sales. At the end of the fiscal third quarter, Apple distributed iPhone through 250 carriers in 100 countries, up from 230 carriers in 100 countries the previous quarter and 186 carriers in 90 countries a year earlier (Q2 2011). Looked at differently, in Q3 2011, Apple shipped 20 million iPhones through 228 carriers and 26 million through 250 carriers a year later. But sequentially sales fell from 35 million, even as Apple added 20 carriers quarter on quarter.

iPhone's introduction in China helped lift second-quarter iPhone shipments but fell off dramatically during Q3. Apple generated a stunning $7.9 billion revenue in China during Q2 but only $5.7 billion three months later. "Virtually all of the $2.2 billion sequential revenue decline was due to the iPhone sales in Greater China and about half of that $2.2 billion is attributable to changes in the channel inventory", Apple CEO Tim Cook told financial analysts yesterday.

He then makes what strike me as contradictory statements:

As a reminder in the previous quarter in our fiscal Q2, we launched the iPhone 4S in China, in January, we added China Telecom as the second carrier in March, and as we proceed across the quarter we increased the channel inventory to accommodate sales, and to reach our target inventory of four weeks to six weeks. The remainder of the sequential revenue decline is mainly attributable to the normal seasonality after the very successful iPhone 4S launch.

Shouldn't sales continue to grow with addition of a new carrier and sustain or even increase three months or more later? If you look at other geographies, the pattern is more like this: Sales grow for at least several quarters after opening up new markets or channels of distribution. What's really going on in China? Is the top line of potential buyers who can afford iPhone already tapped out? I don't have an answer today.

Those Damn Americans

Some people will argue that smartphone adoption is slowing, at least in mature markets, as reason for iPhone's sequential declines. Using the United States as sample, that's not the case.

Sequential iPhone activations dropped by 14 percent at AT&T. Verizon reports actual sales -- 2.7 million, down 15.6 percent quarter on quarter. AT&T's number isn't as reliable since activations don't necessarily mean new sales. It's common for people to sell or hand down an existing iPhone when replacing it. Last I checked, these count as activations, too. This in some ways explains the gulf between the carriers -- iPhone accounts for about 73 percent of AT&T smartphone activations and 45 percent of Verizon smartphone sales.

So looking solely at Verizon, iPhone sales surged following release of iPhone 4S last year, but the overall number compared to all smartphones has consistently dropped since: 55 percent in Q1, 50 percent in Q2 and 45 percent in Q3 -- all while overall smartphone sales increased and Verizon added new 4G LTE models running Android.

The broader market is more revealing. Today, comScore released a fresh take on smartphone subscriber data for the three months ending in April. For starters, the smartphone market continues to grow gangbusters in the United States, with more feature phone owners moving up than ever. A year earlier, 38 percent of feature phone buyers bought a smartphone as their next handset; 47.5 percent in April 2012. More telling: Which smartphone platform they choose.

There's popular folklore spread by the Apple Fan Club of bloggers and journalists that Android users largely switch to iPhone. comScore's data disputes this: 54.2 percent of smartphone to smartphone buyers choose Android versus 33.5 percent for iPhone/iOS. The percentage going from feature phone to smartphone is greater: 61.5 percent Android compared to 25.2 percent for iPhone/iOS. The analyst firm doesn't reveal percentage based on starting platform, meaning how many Android smartphone owners go to iPhone or visa versa, just the destination. That's revealing enough.

The smartphone market is fast-changing and volatile. Much can change in three months or six. But, today, iPhone sales are slowing. Year-on-year growth is down compared to previous quarters and years, while sequential growth is way down in Apple's fiscal Q3. Perhaps some people hold out for iPhone 5. Perhaps many others don't see iPhone 3GS, 4 or 4S as compelling, with their 3.5-inch screens and no 4G LTE.

Consider this: The majority of new Androids sold right now run an older version of the operating system, while iPhones the newest iOS -- and still the Googles sell better. That says much about consumer priories, which is probably best for another post.
 

Azzin

macrumors 603
Jun 23, 2010
5,433
3,742
London, England.
Here in the UK, you could get a Galaxy S3 for FREE on a 2 year contract *from launch day*.

The reason I mention this, is that I don't ever recall that being the case for an iPhone (normally a couple of hundred £s from memory).

Does that indicate that the S3 is less desirable than the iPhone 4S was at launch, as they have to give them away to get contracts?

I'm using the S3 & the 4s as examples here, as I would class them as peers in that they are both flagship handsets for Samsung & Apple.

I don't really get involved in the whole Android/iOS thing, but sometimes its necessary to compare like for like.

Apple have 3 smartphones available currently (to buy new) that run iOS (3GS/4/4S), but there are obviously many more Android handsets (at hugely varying prices), which I think sometimes blurs/distorts the waters a little.

It would be interesting to see 4S sales figures from launch, directly compared to the S3 for however long that has been out (I have no idea what they are BTW), as I think that would show a fairer comparison (and I'm talking actual units "sold to customers" and not shipped to retailers).
 

willmtaylor

macrumors G4
Oct 31, 2009
10,314
8,198
Here(-ish)
Check this article -

That's a ridiculously skewed article. It glosses over the astounding numbers that show apple bucking overall global recession trends and still having the important increases (year-over-year). Sequential quarter comparisons are almost, though not entirely, irrelevant. I don't know who published that article as you provided no citation, but it smells like one writer (In a long, loooooong line of writers) who wants to be the one who calls "First!" for Apple's downfall.

----------

Here's an interesting graph and related article I came across:

Image

"These figures show that Android's smartphone market share overtook the iPhone, 7 quarters after its release.

source:http://goo.gl/otpF1

Ok....so 70+phones (many of which were/are free or almost free) managed to grab a higher market share than a premium line of 4-5 phones.

Congratulations???
 

mattopotamus

macrumors G5
Jun 12, 2012
14,737
6,108
I agree those charts are very misleading b.c you are talking about apple who releases 1 iphone a year vs android who releases a ton a year. If you want to compare apple's to apple's, compare just the 4S to the nexus or even a new model.
 

OllyW

Moderator
Staff member
Oct 11, 2005
17,196
6,800
The Black Country, England
Here in the UK, you could get a Galaxy S3 for FREE on a 2 year contract *from launch day*.

The reason I mention this, is that I don't ever recall that being the case for an iPhone (normally a couple of hundred £s from memory).

Does that indicate that the S3 is less desirable than the iPhone 4S was at launch, as they have to give them away to get contracts?

I'm using the S3 & the 4s as examples here, as I would class them as peers in that they are both flagship handsets for Samsung & Apple.

I don't really get involved in the whole Android/iOS thing, but sometimes its necessary to compare like for like.


The iPhone 4 and 4S were both available free on contract on their launch days.
 

cynics

macrumors G4
Jan 8, 2012
11,959
2,156
Of course Apple has higher profit, they have a 40% profit margin. It's incredible they can pull it off considering its a mass produced electronic device made in China (or where ever), not some rare hand crafted product.

I read an article that I can't find now mentioning the S3 was actually more expensive to produce vs the 4S but sold for less due to a reasonable profit margin. Obviously popularity drives this too, and as long as the iPhone is as popular as it is Apple will continually stick it too the consumer.

It's pretty apparent though just comparing the prices of the new iPad to the 4S. Logic dictates the more sophisticated iPad (enormous battery, huge retina display, processor, etc) should be more expensive. I couldn't see myself paying full price for an iPhone because of this, subsidized however I don't have an issue with. :)
 

kdarling

macrumors P6
Ok....so 70+phones (many of which were/are free or almost free) managed to grab a higher market share than a premium line of 4-5 phones.

The 3GS has been $0.99 since last November in the US, and reportedly is a top seller. The next level up is only $99 for the iPhone 4.

Overseas, the iPhone has been available for free or amost free in many countries. Heck, it didn't even catch on in Japan until it was free on contract.

However, it's true that outside of contracts, low priced Android phones outsell iPhones in many countries.
 
Last edited:

Azzin

macrumors 603
Jun 23, 2010
5,433
3,742
London, England.
The iPhone 4 and 4S were both available free on contract on their launch days.

Looking at that link, the only one to offer it for free was 3-but only on a £43 per month tariff.

3 are (and have been since launch) offering a free SIII on the £34 tariff.

To get the 4S on that same tariff, will still cost you £49 for the handset and we're what, 9 months on from the original release date of the 4S?

I still feel that like for like, the 4S is outselling the SIII.

If it wasn't as in demand as it clearly is, they would have to give it away for free....
 

Azzin

macrumors 603
Jun 23, 2010
5,433
3,742
London, England.
From my link...

Sorry, I should have been clearer.

The point I should have made was those cheaper tariffs offer very poor vale for money in terms of minutes/texts and to get the tariff you would most probably want would mean paying much more cash.

For example, in the UK currently you can get an S3 for free from 3, on a £34 per month tariff that gives you 2000 minutes, unlimited texts, 5000 3 to 3 minutes, unlimited data (with tethering included).

Now I don't think for one moment that the 4S was available for free on a tariff like that.

I haven't looked deeply into the tariffs you linked to, but I doubt very much that they would have given you the 4S for free (or only an extra £9 per month compared to the same tariff in it's SIM Only form).

So you can effectively get an S3 from 3 by paying an extra £108 per year (£216 over the 2 year contract) over the same tariff on a SIM Only deal.

I don't think that has happened/will happen with the 4S/new iPhone.
 

OllyW

Moderator
Staff member
Oct 11, 2005
17,196
6,800
The Black Country, England
Sorry, I should have been clearer.

The point I should have made was those cheaper tariffs offer very poor vale for money in terms of minutes/texts and to get the tariff you would most probably want would mean paying much more cash.

For example, in the UK currently you can get an S3 for free from 3, on a £34 per month tariff that gives you 2000 minutes, unlimited texts, 5000 3 to 3 minutes, unlimited data (with tethering included).

Now I don't think for one moment that the 4S was available for free on a tariff like that.

I haven't looked deeply into the tariffs you linked to, but I doubt very much that they would have given you the 4S for free (or only an extra £9 per month compared to the same tariff in it's SIM Only form).

So you can effectively get an S3 from 3 by paying an extra £108 per year (£216 over the 2 year contract) over the same tariff on a SIM Only deal.

I don't think that has happened/will happen with the 4S/new iPhone.

I was simply replying to your statement that an iPhone wasn't available for free on launch day in the UK when it clearly was. ;)

In comparison to that 3S deal, the iPhone 4S is only £49 on the same tariff so there isn't that big a difference between the two.
 

Azzin

macrumors 603
Jun 23, 2010
5,433
3,742
London, England.
I was simply replying to your statement that an iPhone wasn't available for free on launch day in the UK when it clearly was. ;)

In comparison to that 3S deal, the iPhone 4S is only £49 on the same tariff so there isn't that big a difference between the two.

Except the 4S is what, 9 months old now? ;)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.