iPhone rises, Android slips in US, UK Apple's iPhone is gaining market share in the US and UK, while smartphones based on Google's Android operating system – which continue to lead all smartphones in both markets – see their share slipping. According to the latest report from the market-watchers at Kantar Worldpanel ComTech, in the three months ending in July of …
Oh, I dunno. Something about paying a lot of money for the "ooh, shiny" Apple phone where the walled-garden of apps is in full effect.
No thanks...
When I buy a smart phone. It does *exactly* what I tell it to do, or no sale. Period. A rooted droid phone will do this. the iCrap (pun abso-friggen-lutely-intended) that comes out of Apple will not.
Frankly, I'm surprised Apple exists as a company. But, since stupid is not illegal and can't be fixed, and is incredibly profitable, that company exists. And there are a TON of stupid people in the world.
Apple was always the aspirational option for those who could afford and wanted to pay the extra, so Apple made more profits but sold fewer handsets.
Now that Samsung is a genuine competitor at the fashionable end of the market and its profits are starting to match it feels to me like older Apple phones are becoming available on contract deals that look attractive to people who wouldn't pay extra for Apple but who will pick it if it looks cheaper than the top tier of Android phones.
My guess is that the counterpoint to a market share increase is therefore that Apple have had to cut the price per unit on their currently available models.
JDX - you don't happen to work for Microsoft Advertising do you? I only ask, because your comment is their normal copy-pasted email response for any enquiry a developer makes as to why their in-app ad revenue has dropped (again)... pretty much verbatim!
I agree. Also note how it's just two countries - even if one platform is overall doing far better, there are bound to be fluctuations in some countries where it doesn't always do better. It's typical that reporters handpick the ones that make Apple look best.
There's also the problem that percentages are a poor comparison in a growing market - we need to look at absolute numbers. Android sales have likely still increased, and it can even be the case that the increase could be higher than iphone in absolute numbers, even if the market share has dropped (this did occur with Symbian at some points, e.g., around 2009).
I was also confused by "Still, the iPhone growth is surprising, considering that iPhone sales have historically stalled in the period leading up to the release of a new Cupertinian handset " - given that this is year-on-year comparison, and therefore the same excuse would have applied to last year too. We have this same excuse every year, how the next iphone will be the one to dominate, honest. We're still waiting. Meanwhile, the likes of Samsung have solid high sales all year round.
"Life in plastic, it's fantastic!"
Samsung phones feel cheap, look ugly and do not feel like they should cost as much as they do. In fact they probably have higher profit margins on them than the iPhone. Apple certainly puts more internal memory in their phones.
Look to HTC for how you make an Android phone. The HTC One has stereo speakers with good quality (about as good as you're going to get out of two tiny speakers), metal case, solidly made.
"Feel" is subjective.
I prefer plastic because I know it's superior for a phone. As a GS3 owner, I can tell you it is very solidly made. Perhaps a bit too solid. Much like if you built a car to not get a dent in a 60mph crash is lethal to those inside, building a phone too solidly can be hard on the rest of it, namely the screen. I don't drop my phone, so it hasn't been an issue yet. I preferred the HTC Incredible which was a bit softer. I have a friend that has literally thrown his Incredible against walls several times and it just bounces off. He would have killed an iPhone/HTC One within the first month, and his new GS4 might not last...we'll see.
Anyways, the real thing I wanted to reply to was the flat out lie:
"Apple certainly puts more internal memory in their phones."
The iPhone 5 had the exact same internal memory options as the older Galaxy S3, and less than the newer Galaxy S4. However, Apple charges twice as much for the increased memory options as Samsung does. They charge a full $100 for each of the upgrades. So, it's $200 for the 16GB model, $300 for 32GB, and an insane $400 for 64GB. Samsung had the exact same price for the 16GB Galaxy S3 of $200. Then from there it was $250 for 32GB, and $300 for 64GB.
Then, of course, the Samsung phones have Micro SD card slots that accept up to 64GB micro SD cards, which cost less than $50.
So, tell me again, who has less storage?
'Chev' ? What is a fuking chev? I would get the dictionary out except I can't be arsed. Don't get me wrong, I like Apple products, having an iPAD 4 I think it's brilliant, but to start categorising people as 'chevs' because they have an Android phone is ridiculous. You sound like a real arsehole to me, you know one that's been sat in the car for a bit too long, on a hot sunny day, under a fat person.
One could categorise Apple product owners as wire framed spectacled wearing Saab driving cunts shrink wrapped in a shitty looking turtle neck sweater with dandruff on the shoulders, but one wouldn't because one isn't a cock.
He's not calling you a Chev, he's referring to Chevy - Chevrolet - the car manufacturer. As in 'as a fashion statement they are right up there with Chevrolet', a brand not entirely known for its fashionability, except the Corvette (as noted by the poster)
Thanks for that. I was confused because it got me thinking about the Chevette, which was an old british Vauxhall car. Chevettes were not quite as flashy as a Corvette, but they were easier to park. My mate Simon had one with flush (rather than recessed) headlights, this was the epitome of style and made my mk4 cortina (with large eagle sticker on bonnet) look tacky.
Yes, forgot the Camaro.
I don't live in the US anymore. I had an IROC Z many years ago which while big and cumbersome, was ok. Far from a fashion statement though. The Vette (despite getting lost there for a while) has always been, well, a Vette. My favourite is the '57.
Self responding ...
Can I conclude that 50% of the readers here at The Reg. think that Chevys are a fashionable car?
Oh my, that really says something about the readership, and it's not pretty.
Perhaps my conclusion needs a few more data points?
Even if it is just a fluctuation, that's surely news because it destroys the overall narrative of Android doing now what Windows did a couple of decades ago?
It all sounds healthy regardless. I like Bernard's free market interpretation: Apple is managing to respond to competition.
"My guess is that the counterpoint to a market share increase is therefore that Apple have had to cut the price per unit on their currently available models."
"I like Bernard's free market interpretation: Apple is managing to respond to competition.”
Nope and nope.
Apple have never cut the price of the iPhone. What they have done *and have always done*, is kept older models available at lower cost.
The second point, Apple haven’t changed their business model to compete - especially not on price. The model has always been competitive on the basis in which they are interested in competing (which excludes price). I have written a comment about this pattern as it has been evident from those who have checked the data for some time now. In fact, sales for both Apple and Android are slowing as the smartphone market reaches saturation.
Android has made massive sales since smartphones have been available at price points only previously available to feature phone customers. When Android started doing fantastically well in comparison with the iPhone, iPhone sales weren’t slowing one bit, they were continuing to accelerate. But just not as fast as Android. This can be explained by the fact smartphones have until recently been the biggest growth market the world has ever seen.
But many Android phones have been bought by users who have no interest in a smart-phone per se. They would have bought a feature phone, but found a smartphone was available at the same price as they were planning on paying. This is why Android per user usage figures are so much lower than for iOS.
Additionally, it has always been the case a greater percentage of users of Android (and more users of Samsung Android devices) have wanted to switch to iOS than vice versa. There is plenty of data showing this.
The result was that it was inevitable that once the “flash" in-filling of the cheap feature phone market with smartphones had completed, iOS would start to take users off Android. This won't happen in every market, but it is happening in the more wealthy markets.
I have stated this very clearly, with full referencing to relevant reports, in past comments and have always a large number of down-votes for saying it!
Here is one such comment with references to the data:
http://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/1/2013/08/14/peak_apple_samsung_has_double_market_share_of_iphone/#c_1925461
The same thing was true of Symbian - although the share was falling in the late 2000s, the numbers were still increasing, in fact at a faster rate than iphones in absolute numbers.
And actually, I suspect that the same thing is all that's happening here with Android. Percentages are counter-intuitive - it could even be the case that Android has risen faster (in absolute numbers) than iphone, even if Apple's share increases whilst Android's falls!
"But many Android phones have been bought by users who have no interest in a smart-phone per se. They would have bought a feature phone"
But this is also true of people buying cheaper iphones - as you say yourself, Apple have already long been in the lower end of the market, by selling older models at lower price (I recently saw the ancient iphone 4 going for £15/month).
But yes, the smartphone "growth" has really only been that phones that used to be called "feature" are now called "smart" (and the distinction is completely arbitrary anyway) - it's not clear there has been really that much growth, or change in spending patterns.
"it could even be the case that Android has risen faster (in absolute numbers) than iphone, even if Apple's share increases whilst Android's falls!"
Yes that could definitely have been the case earlier in the cycle and can happen in a rapidly expanding market. It's very unlikely to be the case now though, if not impossible, because the market has reached maturity. There is still some expansion but it is a low percentage. From now on the smartphone replacement/upgrade cycle for exiting users is becoming an ever more significant metric.
'most of Android's success is fueled by cheaper phones, not top-end iPhone competitors'
The biggest chunk of Android market share is surely the Samsung Galaxy series. Though a bit cheaper than an iPhone, these are pretty comparable in terms of cost. They're certainly not entry-level, low-price kit.
You do know that you can get very cheap Samsung "Galaxy" phones - i.e. under £100 - try the Galaxy Y, or Galaxy Europa (not sure if they are still sold as i got one of each a couple of years back - one was £30 and one was £60)...
I can tell you for a fact that they are cheap tat... so not just Nokia selling low end phones with the same branding as their top end phones...
Facts - great aren't they...
Pretty much, I bought a Windws phone 7 (Lumia 710) because it was £130 on PAYG, which 18 months ago was a fantastic deal. Similarly priced androids were so underpowered to be practically unusable.
All I want from a phone is calls, texts, web browsing and a nice responsive UI and low cost. The lumia 710 was my first smartphone because it was the first one that ticked all the boxes.
I've always said that you'd have to be pretty nuts to buy an expensive windows phone while it's still lacking in features and app, it's really not a recent iphone or galaxy S III competitor, yet, but it's getting there.
"you'd have to be pretty nuts to buy an expensive windows phone while it's still lacking in features and app, it's really not a recent iphone or galaxy S III competitor!"
Disagree - the 1020 is in many ways better than either the iphone or the galaxy range. And the 925 is a pretty close match for 90% of people.
Nokia high end phones also have better microphones, cameras, screens, touch panels, maps and nav for a start...And they don't break easily when you drop them.
And what prey tell is the fucking wrong with buying a good phone cheaply and getting a good deal on a sim only contract. Please don't tell me you're a phone snob who publicly winces when someone gets a phone out other than an S4 or I5 ?
because if you're one of those people you're dick.
My god, get a grip, all I was saying was that people were buying the Nokias because they were at knock down prices.
Where did you get the idea that I could possibly be a phone snob?
I have had cheap phones and worked up to better quality and now have a Nexus 4 due to price drop and an HTC 8X again due to price drop, I wanted a value for money phone so bought one, previously my backup was a Nokia 520, again bought for same reason.
At least unlike some here I have something to say about the article rather than about people posting opinions....
Any? That's like saying people aren't switching to Android, they're switching to Samsung, or they aren't switching to IOS. How many average people even know what Android or IOS is?
I don't see why low cost is seen as a negative - surely if one company delivers a product people want at a lower cost than the competition, that's success. There are plenty of cheap Android and iphone phones anyway.
Nokia Lumia 620 - supplied by work.
despite being a bit of a tech-head geek, I also have a family, and simply could not sell getting an iPhone to the budget committee ('er indoors). And since the iPhone has come out, nothing anyone I know who has one has made me go "I MUST have an iPhone".
My (continued) grumble about WP8 is lack of apps (and for the poster above who said he wanted WP to have more apps *and* features, as far as I can see, it's the apps that provide the features).
And to all the Android fanbois out there ... 'er indoors has an HTC Wildfire, and trying to get it's text-to-speech and speech-to-text working ... well after 18 months they still aren't[1]. And don't get me started about the bluetooth.
[1]Most apps for TTS are really concerned about how many accents they can provide. Actually features - not so important.
"My (continued) grumble about WP8 is lack of apps" - Then get developing!
Microsoft is all too aware of the lack of apps for the WinPhone - which probably explains why the "summer break" rate of $19 for a year's developer subscription has been extended. The tools you need are all free, and I've found that if you go through local channels rather than their main forum, they are all too happy to help promote independently developed apps - since 2011, I've had nine game launches, at least two thirds of which have been given prime-spot promotion on the Marketplace.
It's currently a developer's market - if there's an app you're after, get out there and make it!
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
