Apples to Apples: Will History Repeat Itself as Android Gains on the iPhone? 55 comments
-
Font Size:
-
Print
- TweetThis
I opened one of the first computer stores, Microdigital in Liverpool, in 1978. So I was in a good position to see the rise of Apple (AAPL) to dominate the personal computer (PC) market. I even visited Apple in Cupertino in California and was offered the UK distributorship. So this put me in the front row as they built up to own the market, then threw it all away.
Apple computers were well made, came with excellent documentation and were easy to use. All of which was not necessarily true of the competition. Apples were also expensive but were worth the extra. They became a bit of a cult, a fashion item, as well.
The big strength of Apple computers was that the software and the hardware came from the same company, so they worked. The resultant dominance in the early 80s was such that other PCs might as well not have existed. Apple had a virtual monopoly. Then along came Microsoft’s (MSFT) MSDOS and changed the rules. Here was a standardized operating system (and consequential applications) that would run on machines from many hardware manufacturers. So the hardware manufacturers had to compete against each other on price and features. And it was war.
The result of this war was the survival of the fittest, rapid evolution that improved the breed. And Apple was left well behind looking underpowered and overpriced; they could not even vaguely get near competing with the MSDOS machines. So Apple’s market share collapsed and they fell back to serving niche markets such as pre-publishing. In just a couple of years they went from near monopoly to sideshow.
And history could very well be repeating itself. Substitute Personal Computer with Smartphone. And substitute MSDOS with Android. Otherwise it is the same. Apple dominates the consumer smartphone market with the iPhone. The hardware and the software come from the same company and it works. It is a fashion item, a bit of a cult. Android, however, is available to all hardware manufacturers. Most of them are developing models that use it. So they will have to compete against each other on price and features. It will be war with rapid evolution improving the breed. Already the Samsung (SSNLF.PK) i7500 looks better featured than an iPhone.
Some may think that the tens of thousands of applications on the App Store make the iPhone entrenched. But remember that these were put together in a little over a year, so Android can do the same in a year. Just as Apple’s dominance of PC application software was quickly overcome when the MSDOS computers arrived on the scene in big numbers.
Of course Steve Jobs and Apple, having been there before, may have the answer this time. They need to entrench their position, which they are doing by going to multiple air time providers in each territory and by going to new territories. But Android will be doing all this too. They need to very rapidly advance their hardware technology. There is plenty of room to do this; the iPhone has a rubbish camera and no OLED screen, for instance. And the iPhone operating system has lots of room for improvement. But Android will be doing all this too.
Apple are moving on from the iPhone with a tablet device and probably a home console. Maybe this is their strategy. Don’t compete, move on.
The one saving grace that Apple has here is its brilliant marketing. In fact, to me, Apple is a marketing company first and a technology company second. Compare and contrast that with Google (GOOG) who has a trail of great products that have failed due to poor, almost non existent, marketing. But Android is different because it doesn’t need Google marketing, it will be marketed by all the handset manufacturers and air time providers. Companies like Vodafone (VOD) , Sony (SNE) Ericsson, Sprint Nextel (S), Samsung, Motorola (MOT), LG (LGERF.PK), Toshiba (TOSBF.PK) and Garmin (GRMN). Formidable, isn’t it?
Now for the gaming perspective. The iPhone and App Store have produced the biggest flowering of gaming creativity in history. In terms of range of products they have left every other platform behind. However the business model employed here is easily copied. So we are moving into a new age where the iPhone game publishers will maximize their profitability by going multi format. Develop for Android, iPhone, PSP, DS and possibly PC simultaneously and reap the marketing benefits. It makes sense.
Related Articles
|
-
The Seeking Alpha 100
See allThe top 100 stock
market authors
selected for publication
Seeking Alpha 100 » -
Fastest Climbers
Authors with the largestSee all
increase in followers
in the last 7 days
Fastest Climbers » -
Top Commenters
Top commenters,See all
as ranked by their peers
Top Commenters » -
Top Instabloggers
The 100 most active
Instabloggers.-
1
David Fry
-
2
TraderMark
-
3
Don Dion
-
4
Cliff Wachtel
-
5
Mike Havrilla
Top Instabloggers » -
1
-
Top StockTalkers
TopSee all
StockTalkers.
Top StockTalkers »
This article has 55 comments:
First, the iPhone camera is not rubbish. Limited it may be, but it does take very nice pictures in the right conditions. If it were so terrible, it would probably not be the second most popular camera - of all types - on Flickr. Furthermore, the app choices for picture processing make it a very interesting camera with which to be creative, and cover up some of the technical limitations. Nonetheless, if you have no ability to consider the conditions of a shot, perhaps it's your photography skills and not the camera that are rubbish.
Second, iPhone may have been a 'fashion item' or 'cult' object 2 years ago, but again no longer. 60 million devices in use make it a powerful, flexible force that can be all things to all users thanks to the customization that apps provide. As an affirmation of the platform's value, compare used iPhone prices with prices of other handheld devices at gazelle.com. iPhone OS devices will be reused in higher percentages than any other device. This fact, plus the fact that Apple is now selling the better part of 10 million (iPhone plus iPod touch) per quarter, make the math impossible to ignore. Can you really argue your way out of the 60 million vs. less than 5 million paradox?
Third, you make it sound as if it's an aggressive strategy that has all those handset manufacturers converting to Android. Wrong. Those companies are moving out of desperation. A few of them won't even be in this industry in 2 years, and half will be gone in 5. Just watch. That's how much iPhone has changed expectations and the playing field.
I think if Android had made a major push in 2007 or 2008, perhaps they could gain a significant position, but the horse has left the barn. It will grow to some middling platform that is not terribly profitable for anyone involved, and will have just enough device sales to keep it modestly interesting for the top few sellers.
Finally, the observation that Apple is now in a position to repeat its previous behavior - snatching defeat from the jaws of victory - is now the argument du jour used by bloggers who are predicting Android success. Technical details aside, how many credit card numbers and customer accounts did Apple have in 1985? How many does it have now?
(Hint - it's 100 million and growing by 5% per quarter). That's the power of the platform, and that's a big part of why they will not lose again.
Rename this blog "Seeking FUD?"
.........................
OMG... its the iPhone killer.... ..... Yeah, thats it. Maybe all these android phones together will act as some competition...
But that is like comparing a Corvette to ..... er ...... every other sports car out there and saying how they are in the minority.
"Figures don't lie..... but liers can figure." :-)
Just a thought.
en
Nothing more to say other than that this was an excellent post. I love it when people provide the historical perspective!
The commentators above me are clearly consumers of the Apple fad - which shows you how powerful this companies marketing machine has become. Regardless of what happens to Apple, increased competition in this industry will only create better mobile devices for all of us!
Remember the fuss over a missing 4G prototype iPhone in China? Why do you think Foxconn was relentless in trying to find the phone and caused a poor engineer to commit suicide when they couldn't find it?
Just wait until early next year for the new iPhone. Competition is good and i'm glad to see somebody can put pressure on Apple.
Prior to the release of said iPhone in 2007 which btw was doomed to fail by OH so many VASTLY more knowledgeable players in the ANAL ist world than I.......If my memory serves me correctly...? I seem to remember AAPL had released patent drawings on the rumored device.... (I printed them out and have them to this day).... The drawings posted showed said device with only 3 to 4 buttons with a HUGE screen......
WELL making a long story short ANAL ists laughed it off....and the #1 complaint of a yet to be released device was... GET THIS!!!! The screen will SMUDGE and be covered with finger prints YADA YADA YADA!!!!
Well, I look back now and emphatically say to them FU!!!
You know WHY I say FU!!!???? It’s because NOW all those playing catch up, have or WANT huge touch screens with minimal buttons....and the same user experience. Go Figure....?????
All those NAYSAYER'S are now scrambling to create the very device they once scoffed @...... And people still have the audacity to criticize the device they are attempting to COPY!!!!
iJah420 is now done with this rant.
4 the record...
My mother on my advice got in @ $92 & my buddy listened to me and got in @ $42.... What the hell do I know? I don't have the self proclaimed title of tech analysts. So what the hell would I know?
AAPL has significant upside when you look past all the ANAL ist BS. AAPL Long.
Droid? Time will tell... Hot @ first only to become a fragmented mess, leading into acquisition upon acquisition. I.e. T-Moble with Microdog's acquisition of Danger!!! Yeah that's what I say.... Danger Will Robinson!!!!!! Danger Dr. Smith the Droid is COMING!!! And it ain't in a good way for a tightly knit user experience.
This is NOTHING like what is going on now. People want an APPLE device, which plays all their music, syncs to their computers, etc... iPod has evolved into iPhone. Apple has all the mobile device clout. No other company has made anything iconic since the Walkman. Google doesn't figure into that at all. People expect to get Google services on the net, not to carry a google device, which it isn't anyway, it's a MOTOROLA device. They couldn't even make decent Mac clones when they had a license. Just look at the device. Designed by Motorola? And it cost MORE than the iPhone? Seriously? You have to be kidding me.
Your account of the rise of MSDOS is a bit off. Apple did not have anything like a virtual monopoly. They never had a 90% market share, not even 50%.
Why should we substitute MSDOS with Andriod? Why not with Windows Mobile, or even better, with Symbian? Both are available on smartphones from multiple manufacturers, and both are losing market share. Furthermore, Symbian is now open source and free just like Android. So availability on phones from many manufacturers is not necessarily a recipe for success. Not to mention that both of these existed way before the iPhone. In fact, the only smartphone manufacturer that has been able to hold it's market share even after the release of the iPhone is Research in Motion, which like Apple makes the hardware and the software. So this business model in smartphones seems to be superior.
As for the rubbish camera! You probably have not used the iPhone. It's camera produces superior quality pictures to many smartphone cameras with higher megapixel specs.
If there were a company that is a marketing company first and a technology company second, I don't know how Microsoft slipped your mind. The amount of press they buy, the pre-announcements of upcoming technologies, and the money they spend is notorious. Apple's marketing budget for a company it's size is not anything to brag about. If you mean they know how to successfully spend that money, I agree you are right. But Apple is a technology company first. Their software, hardware, and industrial design are arguably ahead of competitors in using technology to provide solutions that work better and are enjoyable to use.
The iPhone, just as with Andriod based phones is available from multiple carriers in many countries. And those who have not signed any distribution contracts are very eager to do so. So there is no barrier there.
It is amusing that you finally say:
"In terms of range of products they have left every other platform behind. However the business model employed here is easily copied."
This business model is one that ties the software, ecosystem and the hardware to the same company. The only way Google can copy this is to make their own smartphone. I am sure you have heard the rumors, but I don't think there is a chance of that happening.
As for developing for several devices simultaneously, it is not as easy as you think. It's very expensive and code maintenance is a challenge. If it were easy, developers would not have abandoned the Macintosh in the 90s. Most developers find it more cost effective to limit their efforts to the dominant platform. That is the relevant lesson from the MSDOS days.
Add'l point 1: Doesn't mobile Adobe Flash and other open source linux web development tools allow for easier porting of applications across multiple platforms?
Add'l point 2: "Archaic" as they may be, don't some users want a physical keyboard? Could multiple vendors working on handsets give us a better chance that a yet to be created form factor could be "better" than what's available today?
Today, Apple is a leader because they make a quality product. It is easy to switch mobile phones and carriers. My investment in Apps is small (who cares if I have to throw away a $1 app). So the barrier to switch platforms is zero. Therefore, if Android is BETTER than Apple, people will switch. If it is NOT better, there won't be any switching. Market share is meaningless. However, I can see Android eating away at Windows Mobile and Symbian, but not iPhone. If Apple stumbles, they'll lose.
That's completely changed now. Dell and HP don't do much supply chain management for notebook systems, or even build them. They just do the design. The game now is design, software, and marketing--exactly what Apple is good at.
That's the game for smartphones, too--design, software, marketing, and in Apple's case a unique marketing ecosystem. Apple won't be left out of an innovative manufacturing and supply chain scene this time. The competition will be held on Apple's playing field, so while I'm sure there will be multiple players, Apple will do well.
For example:
'In terms of range of products they(Apple) have left every other platform behind. However the business model employed here is easily copied.' Lets see, what exactly is their business model?
Utilise your core strengths in software - 'OSX' and high quality hardware design, manufacturing skills, legendary ease-of-use, beautiful product design, integration, and sheer chutzpah in offering a product so different to anything else on the market. Add in the marketing which actually is small potatoes in terms of overall development costs, build the first online app store to offer decent terms to developers, with lots of goodies for the consumer which is essentially free at the point of entry and what do you get?
Clue... something that is almost impossible to clone without the same level of investment at every stage of the product's life.
You make it sound as simple as sourcing all the bits to produce the same effect for another company.
Your mistake, repeatedly, is to think that all these aspects of a products development are the same for anybody else and that Joe Public will be content with something almost as good as the original.
If it were that simple there would be more than one Apple in the world and we know the answer to that... its just not possible and especially not in the short timeframe available to Apple's competitors.
I don't own an iPhone(I'm waiting for more competitive contract terms here in the UK which will surely follow now that we will soon have three distributors) but have sampled every so-called smartphone available and also handled the Droid. None comes anywhere near the iPhone for all round user satisfaction.... and it seems that the vast majority of it's users think the same. This is the distinguishing factor and it remains to be seen whether the legion of Android phones will get close to the high standard of Apples 3 year old design.
Meanwhile.... Apple is hard at work on the next iteration whilst the rest of the phone world plays catch-up.
No, the next few years will not be like the computer wars - not even close.
1. Apple had a dominant position with Apple II computers but never provided a means of transitioning those customers to Macs, which never had a dominant marketshare. That was a serious, strategic blunder which Microsoft avoided with DOS to Windows. But now Apple has a seamless universe with Mac, iPods and iPhones. They all overlap with software, development platforms, peripherals, media and iTunes. No one else has that synergy.
2. Macs were way overpriced 1984 but Apple has shown every intention of keeping their iPods and iPhones priced competitively. Even the new Droid actually sells for $299 and you have to send in for a $100 rebate.
3. Apple retail and internet. Back in 1984, Apple had no way to showcase their wares in a positive light to the average consumer. Remember the crappy Apple displays in Sears? Now with Apple stores and the internet, anyone can see Apple stuff in action. In particular, Apple retail is positioned in high-dollar, strategic locals.
4. In 1984 IT departments made most of the big PC purchaces (because they were so expensive) and they were all brainwashed by IBM. In the mobile space, Joe Consumer makes the most influential decisions, especially Joe Consumer under age 25 who isn't even under the dictates of an IT dept.
5. In 1984, Microsoft was completely "open" to hardware OEMs but keep the OS under lock and key. Google, however, is allowing the OEMs to customize the OS, look and feel, apps, etc. which has the strong potential of completely fragmenting the Android market.
6. In 1984, Apple was begging MS to create software for the Mac in order to avoid the chicken and egg syndrome, but now, Apple has one of the best and largest development ecosystems in place for any mobile player.
7. Speaking of MS, in 1984, Apple gave away strategic parts of the OS when it let MS in on the development of Mac Apps. By the mid 90s, Apple was almost completely at the mercy of MS for Office apps, and Adobe for creative apps. But now, Apple is keeping tight control of strategic apps on the iPhone even while the iPhone is opening up opportunities to more developers than Apple could ever have dreamed of in 1984.
8. In 1984, Apple made great money on Macs, but not much else. In fact, urban legend has it that Microsoft often made more off of each Mac than Apple did. But with the iPhone, Apple has figured out how to monetize every aspect of the mobile space: the hardware, the software, the "made for iPhone" peripherals program, the telco subscriptions, the sale of movies, music, TV shows and even a cut of the retail when they sell something at their own Apple stores/internet store. NOBODY, AND I MEAN NOBODY ELSE has figured this out! Not MS, not Google, not RIM, not Nokia, and not Palm, Verizon, Moto, or anyone.
IBM legitimized personal computers in business, and by the time Apple realized IBM was not the threat, Microsoft, it's corporate pal, had licensed the Mac operating system and with it the keys to the kingdom, i.e. subsequent Mac GUI development. This is somewhat similar to Google waking up recently to the fact that Microsoft isn't the real threat to them, but their pal Apple. MS will be Borlandized (or Ashton Tate-ized, if you prefer) sometime in the coming decade, made a division of some other rising company while the two great computer giants, Apple and Google, fight it out.
Gotta hand it to you, Bruce: you don't understand game consoles, computers, OR evolution. All the "war" accomplished was making the term "PC" synonymous with "cheap plastic junk that crashes all the time". No INNOVATION. None.
1. Will Android platform get fragmented like what happened to UNIX. If it does, Apple will win, otherwise Google will trump Apple.
2. What side will Nokia choose eventually, If Nokia embrace the Android, Apple will be dead, otherwise, it is hard to say who will win
Nokia will never choose iPhone because Apple won't allow it, right?
It doesn't matter Apple is the current leader or not (by the way, how long Apple has been the leader? not long). It is a consumer business, it is a flaky tough business. Everything can change overnight. Today's king can be tomorrow's serf,
In the late 1990s, nokia came from nowhere and took the No.1 position from Motorola for just one or two years. People who cheers iPhone today will do the same to Droid a year later if Droid offer more value and experience. Of course, I exclude these die hard Apple fans.
Fundamentally, Apple does not change a bit after 30 years. If it does change, it won't be Apple. Apple is still as greedy as 30 years ago -- keep the whole pie for itself, and let all other players to have the leftover
The only problem is that all the other players are not happy with the situations, who will? The further trouble is that there is one big guy called Google who want a BIG piece of pie, I admire the courage of Apple to fight against the whole industry, but sometime, hero died in an ugly way.
The future of Apple is not in the control of Apple's hands, it is depending on how Google plays the Android. If Google can unite all the carriers (including AT&T) and hardware manufacturers, As Mr. Gates once said " It doesn't matter any more ... your arguable better technology, you current market share, your leading App store, your iTunes, etc. etc. ".
You can create an industry, but you can't fight against an industry once you are in.
On Nov 03 10:05 PM Geddy wrote:
> For me, it has to be a trade-off between device and carrier. I don't
> care how fancy or practical your device is, if it's on an inferior
> carrier it doesn't work. All I see on ever blog is consumers love
> the iPhone but hate the current carrier.
How long will it take the 'rest of us (them!)' to match half the performance (power and battery life) in that monster?
2011 headline:
Apple Dominates and Introduces Massively Impactful Mobile Computing to the World
Manufacturers are desperate, after two years, to copy the iPhone, none have come close - even to version one. They're also desperately copying OSX, and iPods, and iMacs, and MacBook Airs, and Macbook Pros, and the App Store, and iTunes...
Apple is leading by as much as 5 years, and what comes out of PA Semi will send them further ahead too.
The vertical integration of Apple is being copied, even by Microsoft, because the latter's model is so utterly devalued by customers today.
And on the topic of Android, they should include this one for size (highly recommended):
www.roughlydrafted.com.../
Why does anything have to be a "killer" and not a worthy competitor? The sad thing is that Google and Palm and Motorola have had almost three years to work and have a a working competitor to aim at and the Droid is the best they can do? The Droid is a "me too" and not even good at that, with a newer technology screen and camera. THAT'S IT!
Google has done NOTHING to advance the devices or the market and that's sad. If the iPhone fails it means BAD times are once again ahead for innovation. Do you think for a minute Windows7 would be today had it not been for Vista and Mac? We need competition, I hope the iPhone gets some, but the Droid isn't it.
Sorry!
One thing you will never do is argue facts & logics with a zelot.
Try it with a religious zelot
Try it with a political zelot
Try it with an Apple zelot
Apple will never lose its zelots, hence its market share.
It's not worth arguing with these people over Apple, Steve Jobs is Jesus and has come to save the world.
Just buy a phone that works for you and don't worry about why Apple will never make a mistake or suffer any bad press anymore.
Silly, silly post.
And you spell it 'zealot' not 'zelot'.
On Nov 04 09:39 AM Whoa Nelly wrote:
> The Droid is not even available for sale to the general public yet
> and already all the Applezelots are declaring the device and the
> platform DOA with not a single sale to anyone!!!
>
> One thing you will never do is argue facts & logics with a zelot.
This is coupled with a strong management team that goes well beyond Steve Jobs and they now have a retail component that allows them to even more tightly control their message.
Of all of the companies you mentioned only Garmin looks like a company that I would even consider investing in. The financial clout that Apple can bring to the table cannot be minimized. Only Google has a similar position but, by your admission, they are leaving the marketing up to the phone makers. This looks to me like bringing a knife to a gun fight.
For Apple the iPhone is one of a stable of well selling products. For many of these companies, like Palm, these new phones are the equivalent of a Hail Mary pass to try to make it big in the smartphone market.
Something WILL eventually replace the iPhone, but given the financial strength of Apple and its superb marketing, I doubt very seriously that it is going to be Android.
"In fact, to me, Apple is a marketing company first and a technology company second."
This is just silly.
Your position only makes sense if you start as you have with your conclusion and dive very deep for any supporting ideas that can be massaged separated from reality to look better than a dead fish.
Apple just as they have done in iTunes, iPod and now iPhone have revolutionary technology ready to roll out as soon as the competition is preparing something to try an compete. You don't roll out ALL your innovation at once and have only a fraction get recognized! Instead you roll out a complete system where NO would be competitor can touch you. Fortunately Apple is years ahead of the competition and skates to where the puck is going to be while competitors like Microsoft skate to where it was three years ago. Stupid is as stupid writes. You sir have completely missed the infrastructure ecosystem that makes all Apple products simply untouchable.
Deep thinker your not and no doubt you have been living in your limited conceptual understanding ever since you failed to find any way to sell your exclusive distribution of Apple computers thirty years ago. Clearly your conceptual thinking hasn't improved since then.
Stupid is as stupid does. Apple is not doing stupid. Small minds of course will swallow your article as they always have. Fortunately the innate human desires being satisfied by Apples ecosystem doesn't allow one off their hook creating the oft quoted statement that "Once you go Mac (Apple) you never go back!". Disagree? Tell me what percentage of Mac users ever change to Windows or anything else, right approximately ZERO. When it comes to how many leave the iPod ecosystem once they have an iPod, right ZERO! Same thing for iPhones nobody is willing to let go of their applications and usability. Compare your arguments with the past eight years of the iPod where the features were far more limited and the ecosystem just starting to grow. Jobs and co are not thinking NOW they are twenty moves down the road far beyond where any shallow and stupid thinkers are today. Thats why Apple rolls out the next great thing each time some idiot like Ballmer mouths off shooting his puck at where the net appeared to be three years ago. Deep thinkers like Ballmer and are a Jobs delight. They have the good sense to laugh privately because deep thinkers can be hired even by the lower primates with money but to put together their whole system is likely beyond their conceptual much less practical abilities.
Once your in the Apple ecosystem you simply don't WANT to get out and in fact would fight to STAY in. Now Apple is readying to add another leg to their many legged stool to keep all the brighter or at least self aware people in their ecosystem. We all know what we want when we lose it few know it before they have it and it's rare that any know what others want before it is conceived of. Jobs knows what you will want after each of his next twenty moves and has alternate paths for each eventuality. Thats what makes his job fun. Thats why he only hires the cream of the crop and they rarely leave this creative environment that is so satisfying.
Apples ecosystem is the elephant in the room that the dull and stupid don't see but the part that everyone recognizes they are unwilling to give up at any cost once they're in it. A few stray temporarily because they have no insight into themselves nor anything technology related but people like YOU Bruce are rare as are the truly ignorant.
It's not a fad when your product has the highest customer experience rating on the planet, no matter who conducts the survey! When you go to a mall with an Apple store, look around. The other stores are dead...Apple is buzzing with sales and excitement. It's not the hype, it's the stuff which feels and works intuitively (and easily) like nothing else does.
The app store makes the iPhone an all in one computer that fits in your pocket.
"And exactly how am I supposed to move my thousands of hours of music and photos and videos from my iPhone to an Android phone?"
Personnally I can't possibly understand why anyone other than an Apple investor who doesn't use their products would ever see this as a good thing.
Comments like this are what lead people to believe Apple is a marketing company. You've been led to believe that being forced to stay with Apple (even if you would choose to do so regardless) is a good thing. I'll just never understand.
You could seamlessly get music from any PC onto any MP3 player and back again, yet somehow being prevented from uploading music from your iPod onto your work computer or your friend's laptop became a good thing. Apple can't keep doing this forever. People are sheep but only to a certain extent.
Only CGP, jpan and a few others show a semblance of additional balance and insight. I said with the first iPhone that Apple might not understand the mobile industry (far more dynamic and innovative than PCs and music players, with the added factor of cellco hegemony) and could take years to catch up on 'mobile' technology (just as Palm and RIM before it struggled for years with GSM and 3G), and don't yet yet see reason to change this view.
Apple has eclipsed RIM (now stalled and probably set for imminent decline), but has no obvious ammunition to ward of Android. App Store is a distraction -- very important to iPhone as a handheld computer (its strength), but irrelevant to Apple or mobile industry in revenue terms, and potentially easy to replicate if the small group of key App developers port elsewhere (already happening seriously, I think).
Most of the comments seem to assume iPhone has won and is dominant, seemingly oblivious to facts that the opine has <20% smartphone market share (Nokia still far bigger, and MS/RIM nearby), sub-2% handset share (ever heard of the world beyond the US, and it's not all undeveloped?), and the real giants and kingmakers are the cellcos (and, nowadays, possibly also internet giants like Facebook, Twitter...and, oh yes, Google).
There are some hints that the iPhone 4 may be released soon, within a few months (rather than middle of next year), but not yet convinced nor yet expecting fireworks. If it happened, it could be a wise move for Apple, especially if it shows a lot more hardware and OS progress than did 3G to 3GS -- iPhone's are pretty poor hardware-wise, and telephony is mediocre, so rational consumers might be far better off getting an iPod Touch (the only thing holding up iPod sales these days) featuring most of the handheld computer pluses, and save 90% of the lifetime cost and 24-month lock-ins of 3GS....
By the way, I do have an iPhone, and very impressed with it as a handheld computer (where it deserves plaudits), but it sucks at the phone and hardware levels, and is murdered by the stunted O/S and control freakier, and is evolving far too slowly. Unless Apple pulls a few rabbits from its hat soon, the successor will be an Android, possibly third-gen, post-Droid, when vendors start to really differentiate the hardware and interfaces (and I'll have a Touch, to retain all that Apple's doing best). King of amazing how far Android has progressed in twelve months, and shows Apple up very badly in how little the iPhone has evolved in 2.5 years...mobile is currently a journey, not a destination...
To go from zero market share to any sliver represents a gain. Is that really so hard to accept?
The evolution of Android has only just begun. It's far too premature to declare a "winner" (if one is so compelled) one way or the other. Why not embrace competition, for the sake of the innovation of your own patently biased product of choice if for no other reason?
what came first ?
the apple iphone or its great apps ?
truth is; (by now)
google went the right way, a open operational system.
guess why they did it instead of pieace of hardware ?
yep.. you got the point.. in the OS world they will have people working for them. and if the geeks and professional developers do fall in love for google OS just like they did for apples iphone, damn.. then apple is in trouble, because they will start developing and porting all its apps for android.
both apple and google have a big advantage over microsoft(windows mobile) and symbian, called FETISHISM.
for some wierd fucking reason(acctually, for the same reason you root for the losing team when watching any game), all uber geeks out there, love google, love apple.
if android peaks up(it becomes trendy) YES. IT DOES POSES A THREAT TO APPLE.
all apple fanboys here, I am sorry, but that is the fact.
another advantage is the hardware.
its notourious, how ANY SMARTPHONE. is superior in resources to iphone. iphone doesnt have decent camera, doest have flash, its slow, extremely limited, though, its fashion, trendy and has tons of apps.. so we go back to the egg/chicken question..
#1 can other co. make their phones a trendy ? - yes, motorola and its razor have already proved that.
#2 if android apps peak up.. - yes again. apple is f** up!
#3 the most ridiculous argument i read here was: iphone will never be out-trended. HAHAHA COME ON, DO ME A FAVOR. so, basically, you are assuming IPHONE, IS THE ULTIMATE DEVICE. nothing else will ever come to replace it.
haha ohh boy.. ok ok, keep believing this.
LAT BUT NOT LEAST: right now, forget the iphone, or any other phone, focus on WIMAX vs LTE and the CARRIERS.
they are where you are going to make money.
with that said.
good luck to all.
android-fan-boys
apple-fan-boys
and money-fan-boys (i am located on this bandwagon)
1. What will happen when a Droid user is on a call with her boss or a very important client and need to check something on the company's web site. As I understand it, she will have to terminate the call in order to get the information, as Verizon's CDMA network cannot handle voice and data simultaneously. Will her boss be pleased? Will the client stick with her? In both cases, her own choice led to the difficulty. (The one person I know who bought a Pre is ready to ditch it and get another phone--probably an iPhone--for this very reason.)
2. What will happen when the first virus strikes Android phones? "Open source" could equate to "virus heaven." Combine that with little or no control of applications and there may be a major disaster just waiting to happen. It could make the problems with the Sidekick look benign.
3. What will happen if the Android phones start crashing because of poorly-designed apps, as well as malware? The Treo was plagued by "problem" applications that could crash the phone, even if they weren't "viruses." ("Multitasking" in the sense that Android uses it could make the probability of crashing higher.)
4. One reason that Verizon seems to have the "better" network may be that they don't have to support the data load that ATT does. Will their system stand up to a much greater data load?
Based on hype factor alone (which may, but won't necessarily turn into a market changing event), this could significantly change the market- but not in a Apple vs. Google way.
Yesterday, the market consisted of Apple and everyone else. Today, the market consists of Apple, Android, and everyone else. This affects the "everyone else" category much more than it affects Apple.
Anyway, Thanks Bruce for the historical look back. It does seem similar in some ways, doesn't it? While history repeats, it's never quite the same river again. My guess is that Apple is facing a big risk of its commitment to supply hardware with it's brand on it costing it some business here. Android is open while MSDOS was not. But the world has changed. Google isn't IBM. There was no Apache or GPL licensed code in the 80's. We shall see.
1) design a lifestyle product - iPhone has done this
2) design the relationship between mobile device, home computer, internet where by the user is "syncronized". Apple has done this, and for most parts Google has done this.
there are other points, such as ability to customize the device for your own tastes and needs (eg business/enterprise or personal use)...
the lifestyle product always wins, the difficulty is to maintain that desire. Apple does it better than the rest. And I myself hope that it continues. Within the last 6 months I've converted to a complete Apple world... and my life became easier for some reason. This lifestyle set of products actually made my lifestyle even easier... Its what people want.