Stupid comparison, Apple don't compete in the bargain basement sub £100 sector where millions of cheap and nasty little Android phones are sold.
It's impossible to decide the success of a company by comparing it to a percentage figure which isn't really relevant.
It's like saying Ferrari or Rolls Royce are struggling because they sell far fewer cars than Vauxhall or Ford...
Again, if you'd read my post, you'd see I'd acknowledged that and directed you turn your criticisms to Apple's business model instead. They chose this model despite competing in the same arena as Android.
It's the exact same scenario as Mac OS vs. Windows and we all know how that ended up.
But Ferrari and Rolls Royce have a problem if their own sales decrease, and people decide that they can get their thrills from a more mainstream maker.
Now I'm not saying Ford and the like have had huge successes with their attempts at making supercars, but if they did - then it's a problem.
Apple isn't threatened by cheap Android phones for the most part, but if someone picks up, say, a Moto G or a Nokia 530 or another cheap but still very good, phone and thinks 'And I'm paying £500/600/700+ for what exactly?' then Apple has a problem, no?
I am sure that's happening. Indeed, these low end phones are going to be affecting more than just Apple, but many manufacturers are seeking to produce cheaper, but still high performance, devices and try to turn a decent profit from them.
Apple clearly wanted to use the 5c to open up its market, and that didn't really work out - although I will say that I've seen quite a few people with a 5c in the last few months, so perhaps they're not dead yet.
Maybe Apple can keep chasing the affluent users, or those who will go without food to buy the latest iPhone (not literally, I hope!) but sooner or later, I think everyone will start to wonder why any flagship phone can cost £500 or more.
Maybe Apple can keep chasing the affluent users, or those who will go without food to buy the latest iPhone (not literally, I hope!) but sooner or later, I think everyone will start to wonder why any flagship phone can cost £500 or more.
Exactly, last year i thought shall i buy an iPhone 5 or should i buy the reduced price Nexus 4 and go to the Canary Islands for a week.
I think the future is definitely in the "lower cost flagship". It seems to be a new segment of the market that has opened up, in between true mid-range handsets and the top flagships.
Google set the trend with the Nexus 4 and later the Moto G, and it seems like one that could definitely pick up steam. It's interesting that the Moto G is already Motorola's most successful smartphone ever.
With Android One just kicking off, it's going to be hard to compete in the low end, and with these new 2nd tier flagships coming out on Android, Apple is in real danger of being priced out of the market. I expect demand for the surplus of 5Cs will only increase as time goes on. They have already been criticised for the 6 and 6 Plus pricing.
As others are saying, consumers are quickly realising that they can get the same experience at far less cost on Android with seemingly no drawbacks, and that is a dangerous thing for Apple to fight against.
I like the comparison of the iPhone 6 to the nexus 4 but people are a bit deluded if they think the iPhone sales of the 6 are poor or Apple are struggling. It's likely to be the fastest selling iPhone of all time, in fact the fastest selling device Apple have ever released.
Also the 5s has been the best selling smartphone in the world for most of 2014 and I think the iPhone 6 / 6 plus will easily be the best selling smart phones in the world for the next 6 months.
Android is bound to keep improving market share as you can get so many bargain basement phones running Android and things like the Android One which is released as an affordable phone in places like India.
If anything it's almost too successful as Apple is too reliant on one produce line for most of their profits. I doubt Tim Cook will be losing any sleep though.
If anything it's almost too successful as Apple is too reliant on one produce line for most of their profits. I doubt Tim Cook will be losing any sleep though.
Where do Apple get their profit from?
It will likely be iPhone derived - but those profits will likely be coming from iTunes and the iOS App Store. Whilst the iPhone itself is profitable, surely the revenue stream from their related services will dwarf their iPhone profits?
And whilst Android may have 80% market compared to the 13% of Apple, it is the Apple App store that generates considerably more revenue.
They are struggling, the numbers speak for themselves. And before anyone brings the "well Android has 100s of devices", blame Apple's business model for that.
Apple has cash yes, they had a good 2 years of unchallenged dominance from 2007 to around late 2009 with the iPhone. But those days are gone, and I highly doubt Google isn't making serious amounts of cash from Android.
As for the rest of your post, no, I'm not going to waste my time trying to work out what your personal preferences are, frankly they aren't really relevant to this discussion. If you've chosen the iPhone and are comfortable with it, then that's your choice and nobody is questioning that. Some people are just better suited to less advanced platforms.
And again, if I'm spending money on something, I want the best I can get for that money. Personally, no I would not be content with an iPhone 6, but that's just me. It doesn't make me a "spoiled brat" and I have no qualms accepting the fact that some people are happy to pay more for less. But I'm not.
Android isn't profitable at all for Google when you take into account how much they pay to subsidise it. In fact Google makes more money from iOS than it does from Android and so continues to develop great apps for the platform. Without iOS Google would be in big trouble and likely wouldn't have the cash to be able to continually subsidise Android.
My interpretation is exactly as the survey says, not rocket science. You placed a spin on it. I'm pretty sure the post is using it in the same way, blind loyalty.
Of course you do see it that way, no bearing on reality as usual. You simply reinvent posts to whatever is convinient to you. However as I said you have got to recognise true innovation so not all wasted.
That's the whole point.
People presumably answered that "they couldn't imagine getting a different phone", and that was labelled as "blind loyalty".
Clearly there will be a reason people can't imagine getting a different phone, or are loyal, and that reason is highly likely down to them having had positive past experiences.
They are struggling, the numbers speak for themselves. And before anyone brings the "well Android has 100s of devices", blame Apple's business model for that.
..The iPad Mini, iPhone 5, iPhone 5C, 6 and 6 Plus are all reactionary measures to try and combat Android....
Nope, a simple evolution as I suggested years ago to squeeze as the maximum profit possible.
I also hear that the rather too simple IOS has is now getting desktop mode in Safari.
The amount of RAM is still a mystery likely being even more needed for desktop mode.
I can't quite believe they will have kept the necessary extra Ram back for next September.
Nope, a simple evolution as I suggested years ago to squeeze as the maximum profit possible.
I also hear that the rather too simple IOS has is now getting desktop mode in Safari.
The amount of RAM is still a mystery likely being even more needed for desktop mode.
I can't quite believe they will have kept the necessary extra Ram back for next September.
In the 1980s, Robert Crandall, then head of the American Airlines, cleverly calculated that if you removed just one olive from every salad served to passengers, nobody would notice and the airline would save $100,000 a year.
Now consider if you upscale this to electronic components, plastic, screens etc you can penny pinch a whole lot more. Apple are very good at this hence why they have such large profit margins. The bean counters win and the consumers are none the wiser (or at least the ones who don't know any better are none the wiser).
IAnd again, if I'm spending money on something, I want the best I can get for that money. Personally, no I would not be content with an iPhone 6, but that's just me. It doesn't make me a "spoiled brat" and I have no qualms accepting the fact that some people are happy to pay more for less. But I'm not.
In your opinion.
I am not familiar with Android. However whenever renewal time comes I do look at options with an open mind. Yes, the Android OS does things that the iPhone doesn't. But, with my freedom of choice and as, of yesterday, the Android still doesn't do things that the iPhone which is important to me and use on a daily basis.
Is the iPhone less capable, technically than Android. I neither know (or care) I just want a phone that I can use as a tool for MY lifestyle.
I agree the price of the iPhone plans are ludicrous. But there are ways around that.
It will likely be iPhone derived - but those profits will likely be coming from iTunes and the iOS App Store. Whilst the iPhone itself is profitable, surely the revenue stream from their related services will dwarf their iPhone profits?
..Android isn't profitable at all for Google when you take into account how much they pay to subsidise it....
I'd suggest it is very profitable. When you consider that only 10% in India have a smartphone, the likes of the Android One will add a billion plus people to web advertising reach.
Its worth noting that the very same customers, the smartphone will be their only PC.
And apparently, it is only really those of us in the west who bought those small smartphones.
Subsidies are a bit misleading though when you think that an ARM quad core chipset, at $4 retails for a tenth of what Intels Atom's once did. I imagine you could build a 5c for $20., easy when you think that several Indian smartphones now sell at $30.
I'd suggest it is very profitable. When you consider that only 10% in India have a smartphone, the likes of the Android One will add a billion plus people to web advertising reach.
Its worth noting that the very same customers, the smartphone will be their only PC.
And apparently, it is only really those of us in the west who bought those small smartphones.
Subsidies are a bit misleading though when you think that an ARM quad core chipset, at $4 retails for a tenth of what Intels Atom's once did. I imagine you could build a 5c for $20., easy when you think that several Indian smartphones now sell at $30.
No, Android isn't profitable for Google. Maybe for the manufacturers but many of them outside of Samsung make little money; in fact Samsung itself is starting to miss profit targets.
Android was put out there by Google to try and make sure they didn't lose control of mobile to Apple, and of the channel that they use to make their profits: advertising. However, the fact is that they make much more money from iOS than Android and it is therefore, perversely, in their interests for iOS to succeed and grow as much as possible (even at the expense of Android).
That's why comparing sales of Android and iOS devices is meaningless. Apple is predominantely a hardware/software manufacturer and isn't competing in the vast majority of the Android market as it simply can't make money from it. Google has to compete there as they have a completely different model built on selling advertising, not selling hardware. Lose control of the advertising channels and they are in big trouble.
P.S. according to this it costs much more than $20 to manufacture an iPhone 5c - around $156 in fact:
However, the fact is that they make much more money from iOS than Android and it is therefore, perversely, in their interests for iOS to succeed and grow as much as possible (even at the expense of Android).
From your own link:
Google doesn’t reveal revenue figures for its operating system
So not sure where you're getting that assertion from
"Other than serving as a platform for its search engine, wireless is not a big part of Google's business. Only about 2% of its enterprise value is estimated to come from mobile.Therefore, Google might be rooting for Apple to succeed, too, as iOS is responsible for the majority of web traffic generated and has more than a 2:1 advantage over Android.
Foolish conclusion
Although Google doesn't profit much off of Android, it does make money from ads generated from searches on iOS, the platform for the bulk of mobile web traffic today. Recent developments in Cupertino and China should help fellow tech giant Apple succeed.
Investors in both companies can make some money as a result."
"Other than serving as a platform for its search engine, wireless is not a big part of Google's business. Only about 2% of its enterprise value is estimated to come from mobile.Therefore, Google might be rooting for Apple to succeed, too, as iOS is responsible for the majority of web traffic generated and has more than a 2:1 advantage over Android.
Foolish conclusion
Although Google doesn't profit much off of Android, it does make money from ads generated from searches on iOS, the platform for the bulk of mobile web traffic today. Recent developments in Cupertino and China should help fellow tech giant Apple succeed.
Investors in both companies can make some money as a result."
So no actual break down of revenue from each platform then? Thats what I thought.
So no actual break down of revenue from each platform then? Thats what I thought.
No, as you say it is not possible to obtain that. However, it seems be the accepted view of the technology press and I have no reason to doubt it.
The only company that seems to profit from Android is Samsung. Google itself apparently doesn't (caveat - according to the press!), and neither do any of the other manufacturers of Android phones.
"Other than serving as a platform for its search engine, wireless is not a big part of Google's business. Only about 2% of its enterprise value is estimated to come from mobile.Therefore, Google might be rooting for Apple to succeed, too, as iOS is responsible for the majority of web traffic generated and has more than a 2:1 advantage over Android.
Foolish conclusion
Although Google doesn't profit much off of Android, it does make money from ads generated from searches on iOS, the platform for the bulk of mobile web traffic today. Recent developments in Cupertino and China should help fellow tech giant Apple succeed.
Investors in both companies can make some money as a result."
Bit in bold.
That was the case and now isn't. I think it was last month I saw android had surpassed iOS in the web traffic stats. It was less than half a percent but it will continue to grow.
Comments
Again, if you'd read my post, you'd see I'd acknowledged that and directed you turn your criticisms to Apple's business model instead. They chose this model despite competing in the same arena as Android.
It's the exact same scenario as Mac OS vs. Windows and we all know how that ended up.
Now I'm not saying Ford and the like have had huge successes with their attempts at making supercars, but if they did - then it's a problem.
Apple isn't threatened by cheap Android phones for the most part, but if someone picks up, say, a Moto G or a Nokia 530 or another cheap but still very good, phone and thinks 'And I'm paying £500/600/700+ for what exactly?' then Apple has a problem, no?
I am sure that's happening. Indeed, these low end phones are going to be affecting more than just Apple, but many manufacturers are seeking to produce cheaper, but still high performance, devices and try to turn a decent profit from them.
Apple clearly wanted to use the 5c to open up its market, and that didn't really work out - although I will say that I've seen quite a few people with a 5c in the last few months, so perhaps they're not dead yet.
Maybe Apple can keep chasing the affluent users, or those who will go without food to buy the latest iPhone (not literally, I hope!) but sooner or later, I think everyone will start to wonder why any flagship phone can cost £500 or more.
Exactly, last year i thought shall i buy an iPhone 5 or should i buy the reduced price Nexus 4 and go to the Canary Islands for a week.
I know i made the right choice.
Google set the trend with the Nexus 4 and later the Moto G, and it seems like one that could definitely pick up steam. It's interesting that the Moto G is already Motorola's most successful smartphone ever.
With Android One just kicking off, it's going to be hard to compete in the low end, and with these new 2nd tier flagships coming out on Android, Apple is in real danger of being priced out of the market. I expect demand for the surplus of 5Cs will only increase as time goes on. They have already been criticised for the 6 and 6 Plus pricing.
As others are saying, consumers are quickly realising that they can get the same experience at far less cost on Android with seemingly no drawbacks, and that is a dangerous thing for Apple to fight against.
Also the 5s has been the best selling smartphone in the world for most of 2014 and I think the iPhone 6 / 6 plus will easily be the best selling smart phones in the world for the next 6 months.
Android is bound to keep improving market share as you can get so many bargain basement phones running Android and things like the Android One which is released as an affordable phone in places like India.
If anything it's almost too successful as Apple is too reliant on one produce line for most of their profits. I doubt Tim Cook will be losing any sleep though.
Where do Apple get their profit from?
It will likely be iPhone derived - but those profits will likely be coming from iTunes and the iOS App Store. Whilst the iPhone itself is profitable, surely the revenue stream from their related services will dwarf their iPhone profits?
And whilst Android may have 80% market compared to the 13% of Apple, it is the Apple App store that generates considerably more revenue.
Android isn't profitable at all for Google when you take into account how much they pay to subsidise it. In fact Google makes more money from iOS than it does from Android and so continues to develop great apps for the platform. Without iOS Google would be in big trouble and likely wouldn't have the cash to be able to continually subsidise Android.
http://www.radiofreemobile.com/google-method-in-the-madness/
Apple has cornered the part of the market that is actually profitable, just as they did with computers.
That's the whole point.
People presumably answered that "they couldn't imagine getting a different phone", and that was labelled as "blind loyalty".
Clearly there will be a reason people can't imagine getting a different phone, or are loyal, and that reason is highly likely down to them having had positive past experiences.
There isn't anything "blind" about that.
Apple are struggling? Are you drunk?
I also hear that the rather too simple IOS has is now getting desktop mode in Safari.
The amount of RAM is still a mystery likely being even more needed for desktop mode.
I can't quite believe they will have kept the necessary extra Ram back for next September.
Still ain't struggling like people say they are .
In the 1980s, Robert Crandall, then head of the American Airlines, cleverly calculated that if you removed just one olive from every salad served to passengers, nobody would notice and the airline would save $100,000 a year.
Now consider if you upscale this to electronic components, plastic, screens etc you can penny pinch a whole lot more. Apple are very good at this hence why they have such large profit margins. The bean counters win and the consumers are none the wiser (or at least the ones who don't know any better are none the wiser).
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/story?id=88166
Or people are getting stupidly expensive contracts that they can't really afford.
Nope
http://www.macrumors.com/2013/07/23/apple-reports-q3-2013-quarterly-results-6-9-billion-profit-on-35-3-billion-in-revenue/
Its worth noting that the very same customers, the smartphone will be their only PC.
And apparently, it is only really those of us in the west who bought those small smartphones.
Subsidies are a bit misleading though when you think that an ARM quad core chipset, at $4 retails for a tenth of what Intels Atom's once did. I imagine you could build a 5c for $20., easy when you think that several Indian smartphones now sell at $30.
No, Android isn't profitable for Google. Maybe for the manufacturers but many of them outside of Samsung make little money; in fact Samsung itself is starting to miss profit targets.
Android was put out there by Google to try and make sure they didn't lose control of mobile to Apple, and of the channel that they use to make their profits: advertising. However, the fact is that they make much more money from iOS than Android and it is therefore, perversely, in their interests for iOS to succeed and grow as much as possible (even at the expense of Android).
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/technology/does-android-dream-of-profit/article17389553/
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/12/11/android-is-no-cash-cow-for-google.aspx
That's why comparing sales of Android and iOS devices is meaningless. Apple is predominantely a hardware/software manufacturer and isn't competing in the vast majority of the Android market as it simply can't make money from it. Google has to compete there as they have a completely different model built on selling advertising, not selling hardware. Lose control of the advertising channels and they are in big trouble.
P.S. according to this it costs much more than $20 to manufacture an iPhone 5c - around $156 in fact:
http://blogs.wsj.com/tech-europe/2013/09/30/how-much-does-it-cost-to-make-an-iphone/
From your own link:
So not sure where you're getting that assertion from
It was from my second link - and it was the thrust of the other articles too:
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/12/11/android-is-no-cash-cow-for-google.aspx
"Other than serving as a platform for its search engine, wireless is not a big part of Google's business. Only about 2% of its enterprise value is estimated to come from mobile.Therefore, Google might be rooting for Apple to succeed, too, as iOS is responsible for the majority of web traffic generated and has more than a 2:1 advantage over Android.
Foolish conclusion
Although Google doesn't profit much off of Android, it does make money from ads generated from searches on iOS, the platform for the bulk of mobile web traffic today. Recent developments in Cupertino and China should help fellow tech giant Apple succeed.
Investors in both companies can make some money as a result."
So no actual break down of revenue from each platform then? Thats what I thought.
No, as you say it is not possible to obtain that. However, it seems be the accepted view of the technology press and I have no reason to doubt it.
The only company that seems to profit from Android is Samsung. Google itself apparently doesn't (caveat - according to the press!), and neither do any of the other manufacturers of Android phones.
And more credit card debt (myself included).
Bit in bold.
That was the case and now isn't. I think it was last month I saw android had surpassed iOS in the web traffic stats. It was less than half a percent but it will continue to grow.
Edit:- link
http://m.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2358655/android-web-usage-surpasses-ios-for-the-first-time