backtop


Print 52 comment(s) - last by Master Kenobi.. on Nov 6 at 11:06 AM


Android's wide selection of smart phones available on many different carriers have earned it a big lead in the U.S. and second place in global shipments. The Linux distribution is closing in on global leader Nokia in total sales.

The Apple iPhone now leads the U.S. market for any single smart phone manufacturer. (Android is supported by multiple manufacturers)  (Source: Bruce on Games)
Android army looks unstoppable, posting unbelievable 1,309 percent year-to-year growth globally

Apple's iPhone is continuing to grow in sales, but the gap between it in and Google's Android in the United States is widening, as is Android's lead over Research in Motion (RIM).  That's the take home message of a new research report from Canalys.

Canalys caught a lot of attention as the first market research firm to report that Android (formally the "Open Handset Alliance" (OHA), the group of hardware providers that make smartphones powered by Google's Android OS) had passed Apple's iPhone in U.S. That report was later confirmed by the NPD Group.

The latest Canalys report says that Apple now has "the lead in U.S. smartphone market."  That means that it is the single best-selling smartphone on the market, whereas there are a number of individual smartphones that makeup the OHA.

Overall Android shipped 9.1 million units in Q3 2010, to take a commanding lead with 43.6 percent of the U.S. market.  Apple shipped 5.5 million units, with 26.2 percent of the market.  RIM was a hair behind, with 5.1 million units shipped and 24.2 percent of the market.

Microsoft's phone woes continued as it awaits the Windows Phone 7, which will land on Monday, November 8.  The company only managed to ship 600,000 Windows Mobile handsets, dropping it to a 3.0 percent market share.  

Recent HP-acquisition Palm was conspicuously absent from the list due to lack of sufficient sales.  Palm, like Microsoft, is betting on a new platform to revive its near-death sales.  Palm is preparing webOS 2.0 and recently announced its first new hardware since the Pre Plus.  Several other devices are also reportedly in the works.

Turning to global market, Canalys reports that worldwide smartphone shipments grew 95 percent from Q3 2009 with 80.9 million shipped units this last quarter.  Globally, Nokia leads with 33 percent of the global market, Apple holds 17 percent of the market, and RIM holds a 15 percent market share.  Android, grew 1,309 percent since Q3 2009.  It shipped 1.4 million units globally in Q3 2009, and 20.0 million units globally in Q4 2009.  The OS accounted for 25 percent of global smartphone shipments and now only trails Nokia.

The Canalys global smartphone report, combined with the recent IDC report on the total global phone market (including non-smartphones), paint a relatively complete picture when it comes to global sales.

Based on recent research into Apple's extreme profitability, it's evident that the Cupertino corporation doesn't need to outsell Google's platform to make boatloads of money.  It's equally evident that Android handsets are grossly outselling Apple's iPhone, even as the iPhone edges ahead of veteran player RIM.  Likewise RIM can take comfort in that it posted a large increase in volume -- even if it did fall behind Apple and Android.  And Nokia can take comfort in that it's still posting small growth and holding steady in market share.  Thus there's a bit of good news for everybody in this report -- except perhaps Microsoft and Palm.



Comments     Threshold


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

Sigh
By amanojaku on 11/1/2010 12:35:59 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Based on recent research into Apple's extreme profitability, it's evident that the Cupertino corporation doesn't need to outsell Google's platform to make boatloads of money.
It's a shame that Apple sells about half the volume of other manufacturers, yet manages to reap in nearly twice as much profit per phone when compared to the competition. And none of that due to better build quality, features, performance, or service.

Consumer - iSheep
Jobs - Therefore, iFleece




RE: Sigh
By kmmatney on 11/1/10, Rating: -1
RE: Sigh
By R3T4rd on 11/2/2010 3:53:01 AM , Rating: 2
If ur talking about Battery life for Apple Laptop...yes. Anything else from Apple is rather an explosive topic.


RE: Sigh
By retepallen on 11/2/2010 3:59:21 AM , Rating: 2
That was a baaaad joke. You're making me look sheepish.


RE: Sigh
By corduroygt on 11/1/10, Rating: -1
RE: Sigh
By Flunk on 11/1/2010 1:28:54 PM , Rating: 3
That's a silly generalization, there are a lot of other smartphone models. Some of which have much better build quality than the iPhone. Some of which break when you drop them once.


RE: Sigh
By R3T4rd on 11/2/2010 4:29:48 AM , Rating: 2
iPhone4 - Atenna issue and front and back glass shattering?

So you are telling me, if you hold your iPhone4 wrong and it looses its signal significantly, that it drops your call, that this is just a build quality? The most basic functionality of a "Phone" is to make calls. Wow, truly must be a feature then in your "definition" of build quality.

iPhone with glass front and back and is easily shattered? Even if you have a protective case it can still shatter. So, a perfectly nice plastic back, like most other phones, that don't shatter and break, is bad? Also, in light of this, you'd send your iPhone4 in every so often when the glass breaks? Good luck waiting weeks for your phone. Just my opinion but, I want a phone I can use daily and not have to send in for repairs waiting weeks to get it back only to send it in again. Therefore, in your words, plastic is cheap - it doesn't cose me $$$ because it doesn't break and Glass is expensive because it breaks all the time. So again, this must be a feature and part of the iPhone4 build quality.

There has been many articles on the web about iPhone4 issues. So either you are being really sarcastic - in which case I find none. Or you are another clueless consumer who drinks the Apple Koolaid or you are just another Troll. I can't even imagine the money you'll spend on maintenance on the iPhone or heck Apple Products. I guess that is the "Magical" essence of "Apple" when Steve Jobs keep gouging you for $$$.

Please, if you don't know what you are talking about, don't post. It makes you look stupid especially on a Tech Site.


RE: Sigh
By Donkey2008 on 11/2/2010 12:30:52 PM , Rating: 1
It is spelled "antenna". Does your Android have a dictionary app? I mean one that works with your model and doesn't crash every 15 seconds?


RE: Sigh
By R3T4rd on 11/3/2010 3:51:30 AM , Rating: 2
So i r misses typed "antenna" but you knoes what I ments. Didn't choo? LOL @ gramar troles. Silly Troles, I r not in skoolz any more.

And I r ownorz no Androidmedas.

*rolls eyes*....really. He posted that just to say I can't spell "atenna"? ROFL.


RE: Sigh
By rudy on 11/1/2010 5:26:55 PM , Rating: 3
This is the advantage of a completely closed system when you do get a win in you win big with huge profits. However the disadvantage is also here apple by themself simply cannot keep up with independant software and hardware developers each moving their own part of the device forward. Now android is kicking it in full gear and their hardware partners are competing with each other to produce the best phones. The system will always oscilate between the 2 business models as companies try to differentiate but as they do so lock themself into something that is slower to progress then move back.


RE: Sigh
By Donkey2008 on 11/2/2010 12:37:12 PM , Rating: 2
Thank you for a logical post. +1


RE: Sigh
By DukeN on 11/2/2010 10:13:40 AM , Rating: 2
And iphone users = iPhonies


thank god for competition!
By superPC on 11/1/2010 12:36:19 PM , Rating: 5
great now the market is really heating up. hopefully WP 7 would heat it up even more. in the end we all win!




RE: thank god for competition!
By Redwin on 11/1/2010 12:42:42 PM , Rating: 3
Agree! I don't particularly want a windows phone (i <3 android), but I really hope it succeeds, because a marketplace with 3 viable competitors is way better and more dynamic than a duopoly.


RE: thank god for competition!
By scrapsma54 on 11/1/2010 1:26:40 PM , Rating: 2
Heck as long as apple never allows apps that put the user in complete control over their phone down to the phone calls, they will never have the support android users have.


RE: thank god for competition!
By MozeeToby on 11/1/2010 4:09:55 PM , Rating: 2
I'm not sure you can call the current situation a duopoly, RIM still sells a lot of smartphones despite lagging behind the technology curve (and more importantly the cool factor) for several years now.


By Master Kenobi (blog) on 11/6/2010 11:06:56 AM , Rating: 2
Blackberry is focused almost exclusively in the corporate/enterprise arena though, and they tend to dominate that market sector due to superior compatibility with existing internal infrastructure and security features.


Girl???
By PCR on 11/1/2010 12:33:43 PM , Rating: 2
I want to know who the girl in the picture is?




RE: Girl???
By Chaser on 11/1/2010 1:39:37 PM , Rating: 2
Whoops. I took that shot of my girlfriend showing me my surprise birthday present. But please don't tell her I returned it for a Samsung Epic 4G.


RE: Girl???
By Denigrate on 11/1/2010 2:23:12 PM , Rating: 2
Swing and a miss!


RE: Girl???
By Mitch101 on 11/1/2010 2:54:03 PM , Rating: 3
The girl photo looks like a lot of photoshop to me so much that she doesnt look good to me.


hmmm
By AssBall on 11/1/2010 12:32:06 PM , Rating: 5
Apple iPhone? They might as well call it the Foxconn phone, and give them credit. Their shares are doing quite well.




Wrong picture?
By teko on 11/1/2010 1:53:56 PM , Rating: 3
Data seems to be more appropriate than Locutus.




RE: Wrong picture?
By The Raven on 11/1/2010 2:14:58 PM , Rating: 2
QFT. Locutus was/is a cyBORG!

The Motorola Borg... Now that would be cool.
Part smartphone, part pet!

Or better yet, the Motorola Tron... Part bionic and organic. They call it a psychotron!!


No story about the alarm clock DST bug?
By Iaiken on 11/1/2010 2:13:37 PM , Rating: 2
http://www.intomobile.com/2010/11/01/iphone-alarm-...

They've known about it for weeks and not only could they not get a fix out in time for EU DST, they still likely won't likely have a fix for when North American DST hits.

It is to lol.




By rudy on 11/1/2010 3:03:42 PM , Rating: 2
This is not a problem it is a feature which allows you to go to work late and obviously you do not know how to use your phone right.


Making sense of market share
By Tony Swash on 11/1/2010 6:20:14 PM , Rating: 1
It's a confusing time. Understanding market share and it's significance is hard. A company such as Apple can have a minority market share but take most of the profits, how is that done?. Should we count handsets or operating sytems? Should we include or exclude non-phone devices even if they run variants of a phone OS? Should we count iPad sales as part of the personal computer market?

A popular meme in market share discussions is that we are witnessing a repeat of the Apple - Windows battle in the 1990s with Apple losing yet again.

Back then Apple, the early innovator and builder of the first true desktop PC, saw its market share pushed back by the growth of the "open" Windows ecosystem. During the same period Apple also saw its profitability squeezed back and the company teetered on the brink of going bust while many developers stopped developing for the Mac.

Many people erroneously think the latter two phenomena - loss of profitability and loss of developers - was directly the result of the former - loss of market share.

Many people also erroneously believe that the loss of market share by Apple in the face of the Windows ecosystem was inevitable and thus believe that "open" always beats "closed".

Let's think about what the world in a few years might look like. Let's assume that Android takes a much bigger market share of phones, tablets and other devices than Apple.

Let's also assume that Apple will still be pursuing its policy of seeking the higher value added and premium end of various hardware markets, and thus would be at the upper end of the profit spectrum for hardware. One would also expect that Apple would continue its policy to try to drive down prices in content markets, with the possible exception of advertising.

Let's assume Apple is pushed back to just 10% market share across the board.

What might Apple's business look like under such circumstances?


Let's assume the following is a reasonable and possible scenario for the second decade of this century.

Apple has 10% of the global tablet market (a market by then numbered in the hundred of millions).

Apple has 10% of the global phone market (a market where what we now call smart phones are the norm and where total global sales would be perhaps a billion phones per year).

Apple has 10% of the global newspaper and magazine distribution market (in a world where most newspapers and magazines are digital).

Apple has 10% of the global e-book market.

Apple has 10% of the global digital advertising market.

Apple has 10% of the global film and TV distribution market market (in a world where most TV and films are distributed via the net).

Apple has 10% of the global music market.

Apple has 10% of the global desktop PC market (this market will be much smaller in the near future overall than today's desktop market and Mac sales have out grown the market for 18 quarters in a row, so reaching a 10% slice of a smaller cake is doable).

Apple has 10% of the global laptop PC market (this market will be a smaller overall than today's laptop market but less contracted than the desktop market).

Apple has 10% of the global app market (the Apple app market by then would be for an integrated OS ecosystem spanning all its devices, tablet, hand held, laptop and desktop with developers making Mac and iOS device variants easily).

Apple has 10% of the global tech retail market through its unmatched global chain of retail stores.

If Apple could achieve something like the above global business profile, a not impossible and probably likely scenario, we could reasonably project the following likely outcomes.

Apple would probably be the most profitable tech company in the world.

Apple would take a disproportionate proportion of the profits in each of the markets listed above, particularly those involving hardware.

Apple would be the largest tech company by revenue and turnover.

Apple would retain its current reputation as a premium brand and best of class.

Apple would be the only company making profits simultaneously in all the markets listed above.

Apple would be the only company offering a completely integrated and managed product and service stack experience to customers spanning all the markets above (hence its high valued added model).

Apple would be the only company almost totally controlling its production and distribution stack from silicon to software to retail. From the metal to the flesh so to speak.

Apple would have no debt and very large cash reserves (Apple currently has $51 billion in cash).

Apple could use such financial resources and it's unique control of the integrated product stack (from silicon to retail, media content, OS and hardware) to continue to innovate and mutate its products and services faster, or at least as fast, as its competitors.

In such a world Steve Jobs would be very happy because he will have the perfect tool to continue to make unsual products that disrupt the tech world. He just loves being the pirate.

In such a world Apple shareholders would be very happy as Apple would continue to retain a stellar stock performance and value.

In such a world developers for iOS and MacOSX (the two being just variants of the same OS sub-structure) would be very happy as creating and selling apps for the integrated Apple product and service stack would be easy and very lucrative.

In such a world the 300 million or so customers of Apple's product and services would be very happy indeed as they would experience all the advantages of an integrated device, service, app, and content eco system offering unparalleled synergy and a unique user experience.

Remind me again, why does market share matter?




RE: Making sense of market share
By nangryo on 11/1/2010 11:31:47 PM , Rating: 2
./sarcasm on

Because you say it isn't so?

./sarcasm off


Trends?
By clovell on 11/2/2010 2:22:51 PM , Rating: 2
'Year-to-Year' is highly misleading in this context.




Comparing an OS to a device
By Phynaz on 11/1/10, Rating: -1
RE: Comparing an OS to a device
By The Raven on 11/1/2010 2:23:26 PM , Rating: 5
By virtue of the fact that you can't change your OS on you phone: we are talking transitive values.

iPhone = iOS

iPhone v. Android = iOS v. Android


RE: Comparing an OS to a device
By Motley on 11/1/10, Rating: -1
RE: Comparing an OS to a device
By HighWing on 11/1/2010 5:42:58 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
If you want to compare OS's then you would need to add in the iPad, iPod Touches, and perhaps the iTV's.


Your reasoning is most likely why Apple does the same. However, those devices are not smartphones, and these reports are only interested in the sales of phone devices.

The other reason is because many hardware manufactures support different OS's. HTC sells win mobile devices, and so did Palm at one time. While Palm now has it's own OS, and HTC sells a large amount of Android phones. Given that it kind of makes a little more sense to compare the OS than the manufacture. But in Apple's case, they don't, and most likely never will, support another OS on the iPhone, nor will there ever be a different maker of the iPhone. So one can safely assume the iPhone IS the iOS. And again, we are only concerned with SmartPhones, so while the iPad, and iPod touch do run the iOS, they are NOT smartphones, and thus are not counted.


RE: Comparing an OS to a device
By roboray on 11/1/2010 6:05:54 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
If you want to compare OS's then you would need to add in the iPad, iPod Touches, and perhaps the iTV's.

I wasn't aware that iPads, iPod Touches and iTV's are smartphones, which is specifically what this article is disussing. Read the headline.


RE: Comparing an OS to a device
By Denigrate on 11/1/10, Rating: -1
RE: Comparing an OS to a device
By Gio6518 on 11/1/2010 2:49:30 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Since Apple makes no hardware, Steve just provides Foxconn with the iOS


Glad to see people starting to realize this, Apple is a software company, they might rewrite a modified bios for hardware components that they use in their products, but thats still software....

Apple is no different then say anyone, going on New Egg, then picking the parts you want, drop shipping it to the neighbor kid down the street, where he puts together, then ships it to the person you sold it too...


RE: Comparing an OS to a device
By Gio6518 on 11/1/2010 2:52:26 PM , Rating: 3
Heres the parts list of the iPhone for with the manufacturer that actually makes the components

http://cdn.slashgear.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/0...


RE: Comparing an OS to a device
By Murst on 11/1/2010 3:44:26 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Apple is no different then say anyone, going on New Egg, then picking the parts you want

Really? Could you show me a link to where I could buy the A4 processor? Last I checked, that was owned by Apple and they do not resell it to third parties. Samsung still manufactures the chip, but it is owned by Apple.

The relationship that Apple has with Samsung for the A4 processor is really no different than what AMD has with Global Foundries. Or are you saying that AMD is a software and not a hardware company?

Disclaimer: I don't own or plan on owning an iPhone (I'm a MS guy). But I also think that people should have a clue as to what they're talking about when posting... but I suppose that might be asking too much.


RE: Comparing an OS to a device
By Gio6518 on 11/1/2010 4:05:45 PM , Rating: 2
Global Foundries manufactured the CPU's didnt design them, and Apple slightly modified what was already created which is called the cortex A8 and paired with a PowerVR SGX 535 graphics processor, again not designed by Apple...

Apple A4 is based on the ARM processor architecture.[5] The first version released runs at 1 GHz and contains a Cortex-A8 CPU core paired with a PowerVR SGX 535 graphics processor, built on Samsung's 45 nm process
The Cortex-A8 core used in the A4 is thought to use performance enhancements developed by chip designer Intrinsity (which was subsequently acquired by Apple)[10] in collaboration with Samsung.[11] The resulting core, dubbed "Hummingbird", is able to run at far higher clock rates than other implementations while remaining fully compatible with the Cortex-A8 design provided by ARM.[12] Other performance improvements include additional L2 cache. The same Cortex-A8 CPU core used in the A4 is also used in Samsung's S5PC110A01 SoC


RE: Comparing an OS to a device
By Gio6518 on 11/1/2010 4:07:20 PM , Rating: 2
and global foundaries is the former manufacturing arm of AMD


RE: Comparing an OS to a device
By Murst on 11/1/2010 5:06:08 PM , Rating: 2
I assume that you've read the quote that you posted from wikipedia (if you copy and paste, you should at least cite the source).

If you re-read your quote, you will notice that the CPU contains performance enhancements that are developed by apple (a company that apple bought, which makes it apple now). Therefore, unless Apple decides to sell the CPU in its stores or sells it to other resellers, you can't buy it.

Again, you claimed that you can go to a store like Newegg (or something similar) and purchase all parts that Apple uses to create their hardware. I will ask you again to show me a link to where I could purchase a new A4 processor, with warranty and all, so that I could build my own iPhone.

Your wikipedia quote only proves the point I was making.


RE: Comparing an OS to a device
By Gio6518 on 11/1/2010 5:51:03 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
(if you copy and paste, you should at least cite the source).


since im not writing a paper for college its not relevant

quote:
you will notice that the CPU contains performance enhancements that are developed by apple (a company that apple bought, which makes it apple now).


yes it would be Apple now, but since you want to talk about citing, lets talk about paraphrasing, you wrote

quote:
contains performance enhancements that are developed by apple
where in reality says...

quote:
is thought to use performance enhancements developed by chip designer Intrinsity


and since its

quote:
in collaboration with Samsung


and used in the

quote:
The same Cortex-A8 CPU core used in the A4 is also used in Samsung's S5PC110A01 SoC


doesnt mean apple solely designed it, it means they went to samsung and asked if they could make a couple modifications for it.

quote:
Again, you claimed that you can go to a store like Newegg (or something similar) and purchase all parts that Apple uses to create their hardware. I will ask you again to show me a link to where I could purchase a new A4 processor, with warranty and all, so that I could build my own iPhone.


i refered to apple not specifically iphone, and if you were a manufacturer, you'd be able to purchase samsungs cortex a8 and build your own phone, without apples instructions (which would be software).

quote:
Your wikipedia quote only proves the point I was making.


Maybe in your eyes, apple buys components from companies then writes its own set of instructions, and tell the company to make a couple of enhancements (one that was used)

quote:
additional L2 cache


or changing ram amounts

quote:
two low-power 128 MB DDR SDRAM chips for a total of 256MB RAM. For the iPhone 4 there are two chips of 256 MB for a total of 512 MB.


which you would have to write instructions for (software), is a far cry from creating a whole arcitecture (which your statement makes it seem). Do you need a team of engineers to help you change the RAM in your PC, and possibly redesign it NO

again they didnt design the A4 they slightly modified the cortex A8, which they didnt create.

and to make you happy from wikipedia

As of 2007, about 98 percent of the more than one billion mobile phones sold each year use at least one ARM processor.[3] As of 2009, ARM processors account for approximately 90% of all embedded 32-bit RISC processors. ARM processors are used extensively in consumer electronics, including PDAs, mobile phones, digital media and music players, hand-held game consoles, calculators and computer peripherals such as hard drives and routers.


RE: Comparing an OS to a device
By Gio6518 on 11/1/2010 6:05:12 PM , Rating: 2
heres another citing for you

http://www.crunchgear.com/2010/06/08/apples-a4-ain...

quote:
I really don’t understand what the big deal is about the A4. ARM designed the chip, Apple customized it, and Samsung built it. How is that any different from any other phone or device manufacturer? The A4 variant (an unfortunate name considering the A* naming convention in ARM chips) is just an A8-based chip with a setup specific to the iPhone or iPad’s PCB layout and processing needs. Apple doesn’t have fairy dust to sprinkle on it to make it anything more than that.


RE: Comparing an OS to a device
By Murst on 11/1/2010 11:47:29 PM , Rating: 2
Do you even know what ARM is? It is an architecture. You treat it like it is some sort of a specific processor. ARM is an instruction set (again, architecture), no different than the x86. Saying that the processor that Apple uses in their iPhone is basically the same processor that is used in every other phone is like saying that the Core i7 from Intel is exactly the same as the AMD Phenom, because they use the same instruction set architecture.

ARM allows others to license their architecture, and make their own custom chips. That is exactly why there are so many different ARM chips - it allows a common architecture, yet you can build your OWN processor for your needs (you can buy processors directly from ARM I think, but that is not what Apple did with the A4). There are ARM chips in calculators, appliances, phones, computers, etc. These are not "basically the same chip", even though they share the ARM architecture.

Samsung is simply a manufacturer of the processor, because Apple doesn't have their own foundries to do that sort of stuff. However, they most certainly customized it and they own the rights to those customizations (patents), which makes the A4 Apple's.

You seem to have a massive misunderstanding of what ARM/Apple provides if you think that customizing a processor is the same thing as adding more RAM to a PC (and yes, even something as small as adding L2 cache means you must physically alter the processor to be able to address that memory - it is not "software").

At first, you stated that you can go to Newegg and buy the parts that Apple uses to build their hardware. Next you stated that you can hire a manufacturer to create a factory to produce the chips for you, and you act like the two are the same thing.


RE: Comparing an OS to a device
By priusone on 11/1/2010 8:43:00 PM , Rating: 2
Your Newegg analogy is flawed. If Newegg functioned like Apple, they would pick the hardware for you. Now, if you are referring to the building of a Hackintosh, then maybe.

Apple designs the OS, they pick the hardware and create the physical design. Microsoft is a 'Software Company', but they still make the Xbox 360. Do we see PS3, Xbox 360 and PC comparison sales? No, you see hardware sales among 'Consoles' but when it comes to software, they do include PC software sales when the games is available on it.


RE: Comparing an OS to a device
By Gio6518 on 11/1/2010 9:30:24 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Apple designs the OS, they pick the hardware and create the physical design


i stick by my analogy, they pick the hardware, like someone can do on new egg. wasnt referring to actually building anything apple, was just describing the process apple goes through.

but i do like your wording, especially this

quote:
If Newegg functioned like Apple, they would pick the hardware for you.


RE: Comparing an OS to a device
By Tony Swash on 11/2/2010 7:17:13 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Steve doesn't agree. Since Apple makes no hardware, Steve just provides Foxconn with the iOS, it does make sense to compare Android with iOS. The difference is choice. If you like thinking for yourself, and getting something that differentiates you from your fellow sheeple, you'll buy an Android device.


What a strange and silly view of the world.

These two buildings are identical because they made from the same sort of bricks. One is an ugly soulless prison and one is a beautiful luxury hotel. Because they are made from the same bricks they are the same. Obvious nonsense.

These two carpets are made from the same sort of wool. One has a pattern that looks like someone has vomited on it and one is a lovely enchanting design. They are both the same. Obvious nonsense.

These two pairs of trousers are the same because they are both just made with the same quality cotton. One pair makes you look like a clown and one pair makes you look like a cool dude. They are both the same. Obvious nonsense.

These two mp3 files are the same, both are just sound encoded in a digital format. One sounds like a cat dying in agony and one is Mozart. They are both the same. Obvious nonsense.

These two chairs are the same, both are made from wood from the same tree and have four legs, a seat and a backrest. One makes my back ache and the other I can sit in comfortably for hours. They are both the same. Obvious nonsense.


RE: Comparing an OS to a device
By Donkey2008 on 11/2/2010 12:44:34 PM , Rating: 2
"If you like thinking for yourself, and getting something that differentiates you from your fellow sheeple, you'll buy an Android device. "

I have seen enough Android fanboys shoving their phones into people's faces to show it off to know that they are not nearly as pretentious as Apple fanboys. Not at all.


RE: Comparing an OS to a device
By rudy on 11/1/2010 2:58:34 PM , Rating: 2
It is perfectly fair and correct. Apple wont let anyone use their os, and google does not make phones. The comparison is reasonable compare operating systems.

If what you are saying is true then apple must divide all of their phones up by phone. IE they cannot count 3gs sales with 4.

To me it is simple compare OS sales when you want. Compare manufacturer when you want, compare a hardware unit when you want. The stats for all of them exist.

If you want to get bitchy about it maybe it is not fair to count any android phone not sold on ATT?


RE: Comparing an OS to a device
By Motley on 11/1/10, Rating: 0
RE: Comparing an OS to a device
By rudy on 11/1/2010 5:20:34 PM , Rating: 5
No they clearly say they are comparing smart phones. Of which those are not.

What is wrong with you guys? Did someone unleash apples lawers on DT?


RE: Comparing an OS to a device
By bh192012 on 11/1/2010 7:36:20 PM , Rating: 2
There will be retail Android tablets soon, and I expect them to destroy iPad sales soon enough.


"Well, we didn't have anyone in line that got shot waiting for our system." -- Nintendo of America Vice President Perrin Kaplan














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki