backtop


Print 44 comment(s) - last by TakinYourPoint.. on Jan 2 at 6:32 PM


  (Source: deviantart.net)
Apple took second place with 28.7 percent market share

The latest comScore report shows that Android is still dominating U.S. mobile subscriber market share ahead of Apple's iOS.

The report, which measures mobile market share for the U.S. during a three month period ending November 2011, provides an average among over 30,000 U.S. mobile subscribers.

According to comScore, 234 million Americans age 13 and over used mobile devices in the three month period, and 91.4 million of them are smartphone owners. Android-based devices took the lead position with 46.9 percent share in the smartphone market. Apple took second place with 28.7 percent, followed by RIM (16.6 percent), Microsoft (5.2 percent) and Symbian (1.5 percent).

Samsung, which creates mobile Android-based devices, was the handset leader during the three month timeframe with 25.6 percent market share. This was a 0.3 increase from the previous three month period ending August 2011. LG followed with 20.5 percent, Motorola had 13.7 percent, Apple had 11.2 percent and RIM fell in last place with 6.5 percent.

The results hardly seem surprising, since a report from earlier this month stated that Android claims nearly half of the U.S. smartphone market. Also, Android dominated comScore's report ending August 2011 with 43.8 percent market share, leaving Apple in second place with 27.3 percent.

Another unsurprising factor about comScore's report is that RIM has lost market share since the three month period ending August 2011, sliding from 19.7 percent to 16.6 percent in top smartphone platforms and also falling from 7.1 percent to 6.5 percent top mobile OEMs. More than likely, its tumble is due to RIM's October data outage that lasted four days and spanned the U.S., Canada, Europe, South America, Asia, Africa and the Middle East.

Source: comScore



Comments     Threshold


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

Holds on. Really?
By mcnabney on 12/30/2011 11:10:13 AM , Rating: 2
Android - 46.9%
Apple - 28.7%

That isn't 'holding on'. The iSheep continue to believe they are in any way in charge of this market - as this article reinforces. A better headline would be "Android continues to dominate the mobile handset market" or perhaps "iPhone4S does little to improve Apple's distant #2 market position".




RE: Holds on. Really?
By Pirks on 12/30/2011 11:20:31 AM , Rating: 5
Market share does not matter for iPhone and Mac, only profits matter. However market share DOES matter for iPod. Don't ask me why.

Sincerely yours,

Tony Swash.


RE: Holds on. Really?
By Tony Swash on 12/30/11, Rating: -1
RE: Holds on. Really?
By Mitch101 on 12/30/2011 12:12:53 PM , Rating: 3
Microsoft admits to Trojans while Apple staff are trained to ignore infections.

Apple Enacts 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'-Policy for Mac Malware
http://www.osnews.com/story/24766/Apple_Enacts_Don...

Apple Store employees as saying that the infection rate of Macs brought into the Apple store has gone up considerably. More interestingly though, Apple's official policy states that Apple Store employees are not allowed to talk about infections to anyone


RE: Holds on. Really?
By ltcommanderdata on 12/30/2011 12:33:33 PM , Rating: 2
The thing about that article is that it's very much a snapshot in time. The Apple Store employees in the article say the rise in infection rate is almost exclusively MacDefender. If I'm not mistaken, the scam company behind MacDefender has been shut down. Apple also has explicit articles on malware and MacDefender so they are hardly hiding the issue, for example:

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4651
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4650

An update on the article for the current malware situation on Mac would be useful.

https://www.threatpost.ca/en_us/blogs/apple-revamp...

Charlie Miller has already said Lion addressed his previous complaints on lacking a full ALSR implementation and sandboxing and that Lion is now comparable to Windows in security. Apple does seem to be at least a little more conscious of security than before.


RE: Holds on. Really?
By Tony Swash on 12/30/11, Rating: -1
RE: Holds on. Really?
By Pirks on 12/30/2011 7:08:08 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
I always love it when Windows apologists and/or iPhobes squirm about trying to construct an optical illusion to prove that Apple and Macs somehow have a poor security record
I don't see any difference with iFanatics like you who pretend that Windows is full of security holes. If that were the case then all my relatives who I assembled a bunch of cheapo $300 WinPCs for would have had a ton of viruses and trojans by now, but they still don't have any, why? Because Windows IS secure these days, because they don't use XP without service packs like iFanatics do, because they don't open spam attachments like iFanatics do.

In short, problems with Windows security are caused by dumb people who use their computers. If you are an iFanatic this means you are dumb, therefore you will have XP without service packs on some ancient PC, and you will open all the spam attachments you get, and you will always blame Windows, not yourself. I've met a ton of people like these on forums here and there, they all speak like you Tony - Windows is nightmare, it's a virus hole blah blah.

And then I ask them what they run and it's same sh!t again and again - older PC with XP from 2001, and a shiny new Mac nearby, oh god this new Mac is SO much better, they scream. Of course it is, you moron, but have you tried new PC that costs same $2000 like your new shiny Mac? Of course not. So what are you comparing it with? You comparing your new BMW with your 10-year old Ford Taurus?

This kind of logic won't fly on this site Tony, you have to switch gears and use other arguments. Pretending that Windows STILL has same bunch of security holes like it did 10 years ago only shows that you are either a dumb iFanatic or maybe you pretend to be one.


RE: Holds on. Really?
By Tony Swash on 12/31/11, Rating: -1
RE: Holds on. Really?
By Pirks on 12/31/2011 6:49:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
PC users are more stupid than Mac users and that's why Windows gets all the security problems?
No, PC users are much more numerous and Mac users are very rare bunch, non-present outside of a few well-developed wealthy countries like US and Wester Europe and such. Therefore you have gazillions of PC users with a LOT of dumb people among them, which causes malware attacks. And you have a few Mac users with just a few dumb heads among them, hence no malware attacks. No users - no attacks. Got it now?
quote:
Meanwhile in the real world the people who buy computers know perfectly well on which platform security problems are ubiquitous and on which platform they are vanishingly rare.
More like "Meanwhile in the real world the people who buy computers know perfectly well which platform is super popular and hence has all sorts of malware, and which platform is so invisible and almost non-existent that even malware authors don't bother writing anything for it, hence no securityy issues."


RE: Holds on. Really?
By Cheesew1z69 on 1/1/2012 2:20:38 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
As I said feel free to continue in general with the delusional arguments.
From you, that's rich.


RE: Holds on. Really?
By spread on 12/31/2011 1:27:53 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
But feel free to continue with the delusional arguments


"Apple saved me." - Tony Swash

How's that for delusional? Crazy old man.


RE: Holds on. Really?
By themaster08 on 12/30/2011 12:17:01 PM , Rating: 4
Beware the counterfeit MacDefender - it contains a Trojan
(OS X only).


RE: Holds on. Really?
By spread on 12/31/2011 1:26:09 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Beware the counterfeit Tony Swash - it contains a Trojan (Windows only).


Like that trojan on Apples's iTunes store last month eh? Morons can't even screen applications properly in their little walled garden meanwhile Microsoft is batting off every single malware maker at once and succeeding. But it looks pretty. Awwwww.... so pretty.


RE: Holds on. Really?
By Mitch101 on 12/30/2011 12:08:06 PM , Rating: 2
Market share matters because market share has an influence on the number of Apps that can be sold. Last I checked Apple doesn't sell Android apps.


RE: Holds on. Really?
By Tony Swash on 12/30/11, Rating: 0
RE: Holds on. Really?
By Pirks on 12/30/2011 6:51:48 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
why the iOS platform should have a such a dramatic lead in generating developer income
Because it's just the early days of mobile, just the dawn. Remember that at the dawn of personal computers the Apple platform dominated too, by their uniformity, high profits and lack of choice. Then fragmented ubercheap and truly universal Windows came along and Apple bit the dust. Now history repeats itself - again Apple got new market with a new uniform expensive platform without any choice whatsoever and again ubercheap universal and very fragmented Android came by and took the market just like Windows did 20 years ago. Watch the history repeating itself Tony, this is gonna be fun!


RE: Holds on. Really?
By Tony Swash on 12/30/11, Rating: 0
RE: Holds on. Really?
By Pirks on 12/30/2011 8:19:40 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Do mean like what happened with the iPod
Well, you can't have apps on music player so then you can't play the "more apps is better" game with iPod. But you can play it with Mac, iPhone, iPad and Windows. Which is what I'm doing.
quote:
why, given that the Android market space is now bigger than the iOS market, do developers make nearly four times as much money from the iOS space?
For the same reasons developers made less money with Windows than with Apple back in those early PC days. This did not prevent Windows from winning in the end though.
quote:
on the whole it is a poor way to analyse the world
Yeah, sure, if you hate this particular piece of history which shows Apple's downfall you can ignore it when analyzing the world. However smart people always learn from history, you should know this. Even Apple learned a lot from its real bad past history. You'll never admit this but it's a fact. Jobs has changed a lot since his early days in 1980s, why? Because he LEARNED FROM HISTORY.
quote:
Things seem to be different now but working out how they are different requires nuanced and new thinking
Hey, you also should try new thinking if you want to stop pretending that history does not exist and that parallels with the past do not ever happen. I see this parallel already - another platform is quickly eclipsing the Apple's one in mind share and market share, this happened in the past and this happens again right in front of our eyes. Your own prejudices against this "bad" (for Apple) piece of history do not change the fact that now things are very similar to those in 1990s. You just afraid to admit this because you are afraid of this particular "bad" piece of history.


RE: Holds on. Really?
By Gio6518 on 12/30/2011 10:13:07 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Your own prejudices against this "bad" (for Apple) piece of history do not change the fact that now things are very similar to those in 1990s. You just afraid to admit this because you are afraid of this particular "bad" piece of history.


Of course it's going to repeat, no one can dominate all areas of their product, thats what almost killed Apple in the 90's, just as that tight fisted control killed other products like Toshiba with HD-DVD or Sony with Betamax, I guess Apple stiil haven't grabbed a clue and changed their business practices...

quote:
For the same reasons developers made less money with Windows than with Apple back in those early PC days. This did not prevent Windows from winning in the end though.


Exactly, you can't make more more in the end by marketing to the few, lets say the 20% of Apple people how many of those 20% are going to buy the app...with Android you have almost 3x the people to market the app too...probabaly 4-5x more people in the near future to which they would make far more by sheer volume (Business 101). If indeed they actualy make more money on iOS, then why are developers feverishly porting their once exclusive iOS apps to Android, and Android Market almost at the same number of available apps...Simple marketshare.


RE: Holds on. Really?
By TakinYourPoints on 12/31/11, Rating: 0
RE: Holds on. Really?
By TakinYourPoints on 1/2/2012 6:22:44 PM , Rating: 2
TYP crits downvotes with facts: http://blog.flurry.com/bid/79061/App-Developers-Be...

So many mad people here. Don't blame me for better dev support on iOS than Android, it isn't my fault they think it's not worth putting all their effort into.


RE: Holds on. Really?
By Tony Swash on 12/31/11, Rating: 0
RE: Holds on. Really?
By Pirks on 12/31/2011 6:54:12 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
why in so many metrics does iOS seem to trounce Android
Hey, you didn't forget that Mac OS was ALSO trouncing Windows back in those early PC days, did you? ;)


RE: Holds on. Really?
By spread on 12/31/2011 1:42:26 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Do mean like what happened with the iPod....uuhh....wait a minute....


The iPod doesn't matter from here on in because it's fading away into obscurity. These devices have limited uses and therefore a limited life. Everything a dedicated music player used to do, a tablet and a phone can do in the same form factors.

quote:
Seriously though your response does not answer my actual question which is why, given that the Android market space is now bigger than the iOS market, do developers make nearly four times as much money from the iOS space?


That's a good question. Why are developers making money on a shiny toy sold to every idiot with a credit card and his cat?

Hmmm... difficult question. Very complex.

quote:
Trying to crowbar the conditions and structure of the desktop PC market of the 1990s into the mobile device market of the early 21st century just does not work. Things seem to be different now but working out how they are different requires nuanced and new thinking.


You're not smart enough to use "nuanced". Let's stick to the basic language shall we?

The argument is very much the same. iOS will get decimated just like before. It's a numbers game and Android has the numbers, maybe not in profit but if you look at every other industry the most profitable companies are the ones with a whole variety of products and sales volumes. Look at the auto makers. Ferrari might be a luxury car but Toytoa makes sacks of money. Not that I'm comparing Apple's products to Ferrari. They look like Ferrari but under the hood the engine and transmission are made by Ford.

I think we've seen Apple peak in the mobile market which is why they must be moving to television and entertainment now. Just like they've abandoned computers, they will abandon the mobile market while they still can.


RE: Holds on. Really?
By Tony Swash on 12/31/2011 7:08:21 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The iPod doesn't matter from here on in because it's fading away into obscurity. These devices have limited uses and therefore a limited life. Everything a dedicated music player used to do, a tablet and a phone can do in the same form factors


I agree that the stand alone iPod is fading in significance although it's worth noting that all iOS devices come with an iPod built in so it's not so much died as mutated and merged with other things. And the iPod Touch remains a very useful and popular entry level device to get people (particularly kids) into the iOS ecosystem. I also agree - responding to pirks - that apps didn't play a role in the success of the iPod.

But all that does not address the point my flippant remark did allude to which was this: once Apple had shown that the iPod could be such a big and successful business and given that the iPod contained no unique features (other than the OS and the patented clickwheel) the whole of the rest of the electronics industry failed, utterly, over an entire decade to even remotely dent it's dominance. Why? For most of that decade we were promised over and over again that an iPod killer was around the corner, someone would put together something to undercut and steal the market lead from Apple. It never happened. Why? It was claimed on many occasions that Apple's 'closed' iPod design would inevitably be overtaken, in a rerun of the Mac versus Windows contest, by devices created by the 'open' electronic industry. It didn't happen. Why?

An interesting question and more so if it turns out that the tablet market, for example, is more like the music player market rather than the handset market.


RE: Holds on. Really?
By spread on 12/31/2011 11:36:08 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
iPod Touch remains a very useful and popular entry level device to get people (particularly kids) into the iOS ecosystem.


Because once you're in you can't leave. It's hard to change platforms like iTunes that have all sorts of proprietary bull that only play nice with their devices and even then, don't always play nice.

As far as kids, kids like what's popular. Android is becoming popular. Sure it's not the best OS, it's pretty messy and fragmented thanks to the phone makers but it's open and becoming more useful. It's even being used in specialized audio players like what Cowon is using. Looks like a phone, feel like a phone, but it's a high end mp3 player with a good DAC and ridiculous battery life.

quote:
once Apple had shown that the iPod could be such a big and successful business and given that the iPod contained no unique features (other than the OS and the patented clickwheel) the whole of the rest of the electronics industry failed, utterly, over an entire decade to even remotely dent it's dominance. Why?


I'll tell you why, Steve Jobs. With an almost cult like following the man at the top can try several times to get something onto the market. Look at the previous Apple TV device. First one was a failure, second one is a failure now they're trying again in 2012 with something TV related again. Other more corporate companies would have long abandoned it after 3 months. Like HP? Stupid fuckers who bought Palm and then ruined it.

Apple seems to have a more long term vision which is why they win over companies with short term vision and short term "planning". Their finances and cash hoarding are a perfect example.

Android will win because Android gives people freedom and choice, and it already is. Profitable or not it will squeeze this controlling company out of the market.


RE: Holds on. Really?
By Tony Swash on 12/31/2011 2:22:12 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
it's pretty messy and fragmented thanks to the phone makers but it's open


That pretty much sums up it up. It's crappy but open. I have yet to hear an explanation of how 'being open' translates into single tangible advantage for the end user.


RE: Holds on. Really?
By Pirks on 12/31/2011 7:10:03 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I have yet to hear an explanation of how 'being open' translates into single tangible advantage for the end user
It's magic, man. People just prefer to buy open platforms like Windows over closed ones like Mac or open Android over closed iPhone, because they like it being open and free, and hence more popular as well, i.e. more of my friends got Android and Windows so I'll get the same. I guess that's why. Got any other hypothesis to explain this?


RE: Holds on. Really?
By spread on 1/1/2012 5:21:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I have yet to hear an explanation of how 'being open' translates into single tangible advantage for the end user.


I get to install what I want when I want. I get to modify my device how I want and when I want without having Apple mess up my device with their control freak policies.

Also you can have many cool apps when you have an open system that insecure Apple wouldn't dare allow. Like Flash, tethering apps and so on. It's MY choice what I want to install.

It's freedom vs a fascist control. Which do you think is better?


RE: Holds on. Really?
By Tony Swash on 1/1/2012 7:46:50 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I get to install what I want when I want. I get to modify my device how I want and when I want without having Apple mess up my device with their control freak policies


As I understand it the Android world is full of pre-installed carrier apps that cannot be removed with out using the sort of technical work arounds that are exactly equivalent to jail breaking an iPhone. Plus you get the added Android bonus of not getting your OS updated to the latest version unless you are very lucky.

Really this whole 'I demand an open device' is pretty silly and of interest to a marginal number of people. As far as I can see the main difference between Android phones and iPhones is that the former are mostly just used as phones (hence Androids pathetic scores on the various usage metrics such as photos on Flicker, web browsing, app purchasing, etc) whilst iPhones are actually used as computing platforms. Presumably it's because Android is a fractured, chaotic platform space full of out of date OS versions, a bewildering array of strange hardware configurations and malware. Plus you cannot get proper peripherals for Android phones because they are not iOS compatible.

quote:
Also you can have many cool apps when you have an open system that insecure Apple wouldn't dare allow. Like Flash, tethering apps and so on. It's MY choice what I want to install.


Even Adobe have given up trying to develop a version of Flash for mobile that isn't crap, Flash is just a device de-optimiser. You are welcome to it. In a couple of years mobile Flash will be forgotten and Flash on the web will be in the terminal stages of it's life. It's a dead end technology going nowhere except in to the dustbin.

By the way you mention apps you can get that Apple won't allow and then you name two and say 'and so on'.

Care to share with us what other apps fall in to that category? The reason I ask is because as far as I can see Android has a far less rich app library that iOS. Android tablets have an astonishingly poor app library.

quote:
It's freedom vs a fascist control. Which do you think is better?


What a silly thing to say. Do you know what fascism is? iOS devices not only do not constrain their users but they actually empower them. The biggest constraint on the consumers of technology devices is not this or that system of management, or OS environment, it's bad design, it's devices built by committees, its devices that you actually need a manual to read to understand how they work. Have you seen the 'manual' for the iPad? It's a single card with a photo of an iPad and an arrow pointing at the 'on' switch. And you only ever have to use that switch once.


RE: Holds on. Really?
By TakinYourPoints on 1/2/2012 6:32:53 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It's freedom vs a fascist control. Which do you think is better?


In practice, those poor Android users get slower hardware, fewer apps, more malware, more ads, and a hardware ecosystem built around handset makers and cell carriers pushing more frequent hardware upgrades because almost all phones don't get support for major OS updates.

But hey, you can tweak your homescreen.

Ah, freedom!


RE: Holds on. Really?
By ltcommanderdata on 12/30/2011 11:58:18 AM , Rating: 2
It's undisputable that Android has the largest market share. But the most relevant question to developers and service providers is who are the most active users since this has a more direct bearing on their profitability and sustainability. The results here are quite interesting.

http://blog.flurry.com/bid/79061/App-Developers-Be...

Analysis by Flurry shows that despite the ever increasing Android market share, developer interest in making Android apps has actually decreased since the beginning of 2011. One reason Flurry has found is that the same cross-platform app generates only $0.24 on Android for every dollar that is made on iOS. Eric Schmidt points out that Android's huge market share lead will eventually force developers to be more aggressive in their Android support, but when developers are already making 4x as much money with their iOS apps despite Android's nearly 2x market share lead over iOS, pure market share may not be developers' primary motivation.

http://gizmodo.com/5843461/google-tells-senate-tha...

If it wasn't already clear, iOS users' being more active has been confirmed by Google themselves. In sworn testimony to Congress, Google revealed that 2/3rds of their mobile search traffic comes from iOS. In other words, in their own bread and butter search business, for mobile users, iOS represents 2x as much traffic as Android despite Android's nearly 2x market share.

It would be interesting if comScore tried to do a breakdown on marketshare in the low, mid, and high-end smartphone markets. It may well be that a lot of Android's market share growth is coming from the low-end market where people don't use their device as much or spend as much money. This would explain the poor utilization that Google is seeing in mobile search or developers are seeing in revenue despite Android's raw market share dominance.


RE: Holds on. Really?
By mcnabney on 12/30/2011 1:42:45 PM , Rating: 2
The difference is that Apple users will spend a LOT more money in the App store. Add in that apps generally cost MORE in iOS than for Android and you can see the developers problem. They can make more per sale in iOS. Support is also simpler since there is quite a bit more hardware uniformity versus the 100+ device SKUs in Android. I have about 50 apps on my Android device and I have paid for 13 of them. So my total software cost is probably $50 total. The Apple users I know easily have spent hundreds on apps (more apps than me and paying for almost every one of them). Volume of Android users will eventually change the math, as will the shift to advertisement-supported apps (where willingness to spend money becomes less beneficial). Once RIM and WP7 are gone Android should mature.


RE: Holds on. Really?
By Alexvrb on 12/30/2011 7:40:41 PM , Rating: 2
I think Android has had plenty of time to mature. Not sure what you're implying there. Also if WP and BB are out of the picture, that will be a bad thing for everyone, as the reduced platform competition will hinder advances on the software side. Even the now-defunct WebOS phones had an impact on other phone software, forcing others to look at the things that Palm's WebOS did better, and integrate some of that into their own product. What proud Palm (and later HP) SHOULD have done was license their OS out to every major phone maker out there. Too late now...


RE: Holds on. Really?
By TakinYourPoints on 12/31/2011 3:10:56 AM , Rating: 2
Agreed, especially when it comes to Windows Phone 7. I need something to recommend to people who don't want an iPhone, and it sure as hell isn't Android.

More competition is always better.


RE: Holds on. Really?
By TakinYourPoints on 12/30/2011 8:49:15 PM , Rating: 1
Exactly, iOS development flourishes while Android's continues to flatline. iOS is far more profitable, which is why big game and productivity app developers focus on it so much more than on Android.

There's also the fact that Android isn't getting enterprise deployment while iOS is because it is fundamentally insecure in comparison due to the lower number of ActiveSync security policies it supports (7 versus iOS's 39). Forget games and cooking apps that so many people will write off, this also means far more business software being written for iOS.

Looking at Microsoft, the largest software company in the world, they have focused on iOS development since 2008 while largely ignoring Android. They currently have 17 iPhone apps and 9 iPad apps, the last releases being a Skydrive app and an Xbox Live app. Office for iOS is currently in development. The best Android gets are things like a Bing app.

The risk/reward currently seems to be against MS developing for Android, and this is even with them collecting license fees on those devices. Similar logic trickles down from large developers like id, all the way down to small time developers. There is just more money in iOS, despite there being more Android handsets sold. Combine that with the fragmented OS and hardware ecosystem Android has and the effort isn't worth it for a surprising number of developers.


RE: Holds on. Really?
By TakinYourPoints on 12/30/2011 8:54:20 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It would be interesting if comScore tried to do a breakdown on marketshare in the low, mid, and high-end smartphone markets. It may well be that a lot of Android's market share growth is coming from the low-end market where people don't use their device as much or spend as much money. This would explain the poor utilization that Google is seeing in mobile search or developers are seeing in revenue despite Android's raw market share dominance.


I suspect that this is the case, it is the best explanation for the huge difference in app revenue and internet traffic.

Either way, the Android vs iOS rivilry is irrelevant given that both are increasing sales in an expanding market. The casualties are RIM (RIP), Symbian (who cares), and Windows Phone 7 (sadly). Marketshare for all three are contracting at the expense of Google and Apple.


"I f***ing cannot play Halo 2 multiplayer. I cannot do it." -- Bungie Technical Lead Chris Butcher














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