It means that the iPhone will never be a mass market item, bought in billions smartphones running Android will, because Android's (relatively) open ecosystem allows local suppliers to meet local requirements through very low-cost customised offerings. For markets outside the US, particularly in developing countries, that's a big issue. It means that users have only a limited choice of handsets, and that pricing is set by Apple. That undoubtedly brings huge benefits – not least to Apple – but it also has a major downside. This is the fact that there is only one iPhone – that produced by Apple. One reason is because the US is Apple's home turf, so it has a natural advantage there that Android doesn't, since the latter is offered by many non-US handset manufacturers but the more important factor goes to the heart of Apple's problem. Indeed, I'd argue that Apple's decline elsewhere is likely to be even more rapid. That's just in the US, of course, but it's likely that the rest of the world will follow (for example, Android's share of page views is already increasing rapidly in the Nordic region). ![]() Apple accounted for 25.0 per cent of smartphone subscribers (up 0.8 percentage points), followed by Microsoft with 9.0 per cent and Palm with 3.9 per cent. After several months of strong growth, Google Android captured the #2 ranking among smartphone platforms in November with 26.0 per cent of U.S. owned smartphones during the three months ending in November, up 10 per cent from the preceding three-month period, as RIM led with 33.5 percent market share of smartphones. But what happened? This:Ħ1.5 million people in the U.S. By his logic, Apple should have been able to preserve its commanding lead over Google's “vapour”. Well, he would say that, wouldn't he? But his comments about first-mover advantage and the size of the ecosystem also applied to the iPhone when the first Android phones were appearing in the consumer smartphone marketplace. We’re very confident entering into a fight with anyone. And a huge user advantage from iTunes to the App Store. “Today they’re vapour” However, we’re not sitting still. Here's what Cook has to say on the subject: But more important, I think, is the fact that soon we will see versions of Android that are specifically designed for tablets. Whether that's really a "bizarre product" is another matter. That's probably true: the few Android tablets out there are indeed little more than scaled-up smartphones. If you do a side-by-side with an iPad, some enormous percentage are going to pick the iPad. It’s a “scaled-up smartphone” – that’s a bizarre product in our view. Or one that’s not even a real tablet experience. So you wind up having the size of a tablet that’s less than reasonable. The variety shipping today, the OS wasn’t designed for a tablet – but Google said this. From our point of view, customers aren’t interested in that.” – he made the following comments about Android tablets: After dismissing tablets running Windows – “They’re big, heavy and expensive. One person who definitely doesn't believe that is Apple's COO, Tim Cook. ![]() ![]() But despite that, there are good reasons to believe that 2011 will mark the start of the ascent of Android as king of the tablet world. The Apple iPad is a huge hit: 7.33 million of them were sold in the quarter ending in December. Why Android will win the tablet wars by Glyn Moody
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |