Print 10 comment(s) - last by Tony Swash.. on Jan 10 at 8:38 AM

This represents a 26 percent boost from 2013's total

This year is going to be a big one for mobile, as shipments on a wide-range of products are expected to increase (in some cases, significantly) compared to 2013, and it looks like Android will continue to hold a strong lead. 

According to 2014 predictions by technology research and advisory firm Gartner, devices running Google's Android mobile operating system will achieve 1.1 billion shipments in 2014. This represents a 26 percent boost from 2013's total.

Apple's operating systems (iOS for mobile and Mac OS for desktop) will see combined shipments of 344 million for 2014, which is a 28 percent jump from last year. This includes iPhones, iPads and Macs. 

While this is a nice boost for Apple, analysts say that Android has a strong lead due to its strong demand in emerging markets. Android devices tend to sell at various price points, often lower than that of Apple's iPhone and iPad, which makes them a better deal for markets that don't have subsidized pricing. 

When it comes to Microsoft's Windows OS, Gartner says 360 million new devices are expected to ship this year, up from 328 million last year. 

Sales of smartphones are expected to slow a bit this year, but tablets will see a significant jump of 47 percent this year to 263 million compared to 2013. 

Overall, Gartner says combined global shipments of all devices will achieve 2.48 billion units for 2014, up 7.6 percent from 2013.

According to TechCrunch, Android's global market share surpassed the 80 percent mark as of November 2013 while Apple's iOS was at 12.9 percent and Microsoft's Windows Phone had just 3.6 percent. 

Source: Reuters

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By Dorkyman on 1/7/2014 1:19:26 PM , Rating: 3
Why does Apple keep repeating the same mistakes? They create a market, then sit back and let someone else take the market share. It happened with Mac, then the iPhone, now the iPad. I worked at Apple in the 1980s, and saw what was about to happen to the Mac even back then. Perhaps Jobs intentionally didn't WANT to be the dominant player in the field, leaving the masses to be serviced by someone else.

RE: 12%?
By retrospooty on 1/7/2014 1:52:47 PM , Rating: 1
A egotistical culture of hubris.

RE: 12%?
By jimbojimbo on 1/7/2014 2:06:06 PM , Rating: 2
Well, considering all the problems Microsoft got into after they became the dominant force in the OS market, like getting in trouble for just having IE, maybe they learned. After all does every Mac in Europe come with options of what browser you want to use or do they just come with Safari?
Their plan has never been to dominate to but be a niche market and have the appearance of superiority.

RE: 12%?
By Bubbacub on 1/7/2014 2:24:59 PM , Rating: 2
thats like turning down a scholarship to go and study at harvard because you are afraid you might have to pay more tax if you get a good high paying job in a few years.

RE: 12%?
By amanojaku on 1/7/2014 2:23:26 PM , Rating: 3
You answered your own question. Apple never wanted to be the Ford of electronics, with a wide array of affordable products that appealed to many. It has always fancied itself to be Ferrari, selling a handful of products at a premium to a minority. Margins over market share, that has always been Jobs' goal. It's the reason NeXT went under, with its $10,000 workstations that were originally supposed to be $3,000.

This is the main reason why Apple consumers are so fanatical: they've joined an "exclusive" club and have to keep up appearances. Exclusive, meaning being willing to pay a ridiculous sum of money on something just because of its looks.

Take the new Mac Pro trash can, er, workstation. In a thread in another article here, a poster claimed that his desktop with a workstation GPU could outperform the new Mac Pro. He was wrong, but not by much: Macworld benched the Mac Pro and determined that it was only 8% faster than a similarly configured iMac.
It should be no surprise that the new 8-core Mac Pro is the fastest Mac we’ve tested, but it was only 8 percent faster overall than our previous champ, a CTO 2013 27-inch iMac. That custom system has a speedy quad-core 3.5GHz Core i7 processor, a 3TB Fusion Drive, 8GB of RAM, and Nvidia GeForce GTX 780M graphics.
The Mac Pro was $6,800 for its configuration; the iMac was $2,700. The Mac Pro isn't even upgradeable; the CPUs, GPUs, and SSDs are soldered onto the motherboard!

You can find the article on Macworld or BGR. DT's filters are being a pain.

RE: 12%?
By Bubbacub on 1/7/2014 2:26:44 PM , Rating: 2
The DT filters are seemingly not a pain for people wanting to post about how many thousands of dollars a month they make doing no work just by clicking on some bogus link.

RE: 12%?
By ilt24 on 1/7/2014 2:30:55 PM , Rating: 3
Perhaps Jobs intentionally didn't WANT to be the dominant player in the field, leaving the masses to be serviced by someone else.
I think it's more that Apple doesn't see the need to dominate unit market share, when they can dominate in profit. sticking to the high-end of the market as they are currently doing in Phones, Tablets and PCs.

RE: 12%?
By Tony Swash on 1/7/2014 5:53:18 PM , Rating: 2
Apple does not care about market share. They care about products and about customers, about making the best products they can for their customers and making a profit doing so. They care about building the best platform. They don’t care about the competition.

It turns out that by not caring about market share Apple have become the world’s most successful tech company, and the most profitable device maker, and if you measure a platform by it’s actual success as a platform (i.e. as something upon which other things stand) iOS has become the world’s most successful mobile platform.

Being the most successful computer OEM, device maker, retail company and digital goods seller are all byproducts of Apple’s strategy of not caring about market share or the competition and only focusing on making the best products that will delight customers and then selling them at a profit.

Apple’s simple but unusual strategy causes deep cognitive dissonance for many observers. Apple doesn’t care.

RE: 12%?
By FishTankX on 1/8/2014 12:55:51 PM , Rating: 2
I think the thing causing cognitive dissonance is customers willingness to pay huge amounts for the products. A disparity between perceived value and apple's customers perceived value of the products.

In China and other countries, there are no subsidies, so Iphones cost hunderds of dollars more (especially because of taxes), sometimes approaching the $1000 mark. (iPhone 5s chinese market price ~$800 vs ~$550 for Galaxy 4) and yet consumers pay.

It's the same cognitive dissonance that people suffer when they see people driving Ferraris. Perceived excess. I'm all about people being able to use what they want regardless of cost, that doesn't mean I view it as a good buy. That's the surprise.

RE: 12%?
By Tony Swash on 1/10/2014 8:38:02 AM , Rating: 1
So your view, in other words, is that Apple's business strategy is working. No shit Sherlock.

"A lot of people pay zero for the cellphone ... That's what it's worth." -- Apple Chief Operating Officer Timothy Cook
Related Articles

Latest Headlines
Inspiron Laptops & 2-in-1 PCs
September 25, 2016, 9:00 AM
The Samsung Galaxy S7
September 14, 2016, 6:00 AM
Apple Watch 2 – Coming September 7th
September 3, 2016, 6:30 AM
Apple says “See you on the 7th.”
September 1, 2016, 6:30 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki