That rumored cheap iPhone isn’t likely for you

There’s been a lot of talk lately about drastic changes Apple may be making to the iPhone, mostly in the name of staying competitive with their primary rival Android. While the central argument has some logical flaws (chiefly that Apple isn’t competing directly with any one operating system, they compete with other handset manufacturers), there is likely some truth to the rumored new iPhone handsets.

Apple has long stated that they have engineered the iPhone to be the perfect size for single hand operation, even with the larger (but no wider) iPhone 5 screen. Many pundits have stated that Apple is losing market share because they have so far refused to enter the ‘phablet’ market (phone/tablet hybrids sporting a screen between 5 and 8 inches). Before the smartphone era handset makers had struggled to make flagship phones smaller; being unencumbered offered value that a smaller form didn’t impinge. Enter the smartphone era sparked by the iPhone, reversing the trend because of the value offered by screen space. Larger screens offered easier interaction with touch screens, easier viewing of media and websites, and more visibility for those that want to make a social/technological statement (oh my god, Becky- look at  her phone! It’s so….BIG.) While the phablet market is a budding one, I’d wager that Apple will stick to their game plan of maximal utility from a uniform factor and not deviate from the screen size of the iPhone 5. A successful phone can only be so large before it becomes cumbersome, and a device that can’t be carried in a pocket is simply too large to be practical for all but a niche market.

Then there’s the rumor of Apple developing an entry-level, less expensive iPhone. It’s been rumored to cut corners that Apple generally doesn’t to contain costs, like regressing from the iPhone 5′s aluminum chassis to a composite plastic one. Originally I didn’t think this concept held any validity, as Apple has never adopted the strategy of offering a loss leader as Amazon does with the Kindle (or to a lesser extent Google does with the Android OS)- offering a product at low to no cost, expecting to generate profit from core businesses that are fed by customers channeled to it from the free/low cost product. While Apple could count on the profit generated by sales via the iTunes App Store, media sales through iTunes, accessories, and kickbacks from cellular providers that subsidize the price of the handsets to lure customers into a long term contract, they to date have not only collected revenue from those sources but also maintained a profit from the sale of the iPhone itself. This is only possible if your product is perceived as a quality good; Android handsets run the gamut from quality to entry level with prices to match. Even Google makes more profit from the iPhone than they do the far larger numbers of Android handsets in use.

So given these factors, what incentive does Apple have to delve into the entry level smartphone market? When you consider my home country’s smartphone market, very little; hence my (and many other’s) dismissal of the rumored cheaper iPhone. Sadly, like many Americans I tend to overlook the rest of the world, and this profoundly impacts the market strategy of a company like Apple looking to maintain their record growth and profits. The largest developing markets for smartphones aren’t in the Americas or Europe, they lie to the East. China is a booming market that Apple has been courting for a few years now, and they’ve had some success with their primary market strategy of premium product brand identity that has served them so well in their home country. While news of the Chinese technological market is news to most of us, it’s old news to technological strategists. India and the rest of Southeast Asia is the new gold rush, but old strategies may not work in these new business environments. Many of these countries lack cell providers willing or even able to offer subsidized handsets in exchange for long term contracts, and customers may be unwilling to accept them. In such markets you simply purchase your handset and pay as you go, and in markets such as this a $650 unsubsidized iPhone (the actual out of pocket cost of the cheapest iPhone 5) simply isn’t an option. For a company looking to enter a market, sometimes it’s best to conform to market standards rather than stoically stay the course. In such a situation a lower-cost iPhone makes perfect sense; while it may not generate the same profit as the handset does in my homeland’s market, it could very well do so in another or at least offer Apple a chance to gain a foothold in a rapidly developing market. One look at the history of consumer electronics shows the fate of those that move too slowly: the Zune was a fine digital audio device, but by the time it hit the market it was already passé. Apple cannot hope to maintain their meteoric growth in Western markets; we have already come close to smartphone saturation, with only the lower income demographics and niche markets left unplumbed (but already well targeted by inexpensive entry-level Android handsets). I’d go so far as to argue that catering to these markets is one of the reasons Android users as a whole have been found to use their devices less for non-telephone tasks like browsing and spend far less on apps and accessories; they simply have less use for smart devices and less money to spend. The market numbers are impressive when overall numbers of handsets are considered, but market share is meaningless if you aren’t generating adequate revenue from it.

So considering this, it is more than possible Apple may release a less expensive ‘new’ iPhone (rather than their entry-level strategy in existing markets of offering older models at a discounted price). Sadly for bargain hunters, these low cost iPhones may never be aimed at US or European consumers.

Read Full Post »

Love for Google inside the world of iOS

The big debate/argument/fanboy spat in the world of mobile devices is (and has been almost as long as there have been legitimate smart mobile devices) who has the better platform- Android or iOS. As I’ve opined before, there really is no universal right answer; most of the argument is the result of overzealous brand loyalty and/or dislike of the competing company.  Since Android is one of the many products of Google, logic would dictate that they and Apple should be blood enemies, no? Apple has made it no secret that they have been working to scour Google’s presence from their devices; Google Maps and the built-in YouTube App have been obvious examples of the corporate rivalry.

I’ve been a fan of many Google services longer than I’ve been an Apple covert. Their raison d’être- internet search- has been my go to resource for almost as long as I’ve been aware of the internet. Gmail is easily the best free email available, Picasa is a fantastic cross-platform answer for casual photographers, and the list just goes on and on. So if you’re an iOS devotee is the (real or imagined) conflict between Apple and Google limiting your access to Google’s services? Does Google keep their quality in house, as Microsoft does with Office versus Office for Mac?

The short answer is definitely not. While Google’s products aren’t a part of the default (and undelete-able) apps in iOS, the services you may have come to love and rely on are still there; often in a form that rivals (and in a couple instances surpasses) what Google has built into Android. After a short hiatus Google Maps is available in something other than web app form. Within moments of appearing in the iTunes App Store Google Maps almost immediately became one of the top free downloads and remains extremely popular thanks to the bad press that Apple’s in-house Maps App has received.

What of Google’s other services, though? Well, the flagship of internet search is still the default of iOS (and Google isn’t shy about paying an impressive sum to remain so). Gmail, Google Calendar, and your contacts are easy to sync to your iPhone (even with the recently-resolved issues iOS has had with Exchange). Not a fan of iOS’ default Mail App? No worries- Gmail has it’s own app for iOS that offers functionality that syncing alone lacks. While there’s no Picasa app for iOS (although there are third party apps to access your online library) Google+ does provide photo uploads similar to Photostream. Speaking of Google+, if you’re a user of Google’s answer to Facebook the iOS app is a great interface, offering Flipboard-like functionality that surpasses the dated feel of Facebook’s iOS app.

Almost every Google offering has an iOS app available- YouTube, the Google Play store, Latitude, Local, Translate, even Google Voice. Some have argued that the iOS version of Chrome is superior to the default Safari, even though they share the same webkit origins. Even Google’s DropBox competitor Google Drive is just a few clicks away.

If anything, Google has a strong incentive to duplicate their Android offerings on iOS. Reports have revealed that Google actually makes significantly more revenue from iOS users than their (much larger) Android user base. Google’s unstated market strategy doesn’t tie their efforts to their in-house mobile OS, either- they use Android as a loss leader to funnel users to their actual revenue engine: advertising and data mining.

So buck up, all you Google lovers out there. You can have the best of both worlds should you desire it: all of Google’s fantastic free services neatly wrapped in the warm embrace of iOS.

 

Read Full Post »

A discount iPhone?

We are in the dark period between hardware releases for Apple, so rumors abound as to what’s to be released in the near future. The speculation has been fanned by Apple’s recent financial reports- although Apple is awash in cash and has generated an astounding $13.07 billion in revenue in just the first quarter of the fiscal year, the sales figures didn’t match what financial pundits had predicted based on Apple’s meteoric rise in sales and revenue over the past few years. Consequently Apple’s stock price took a tumble (that was soon reversed) thanks to the pessimism. What’s a consumer to think? Has Apple really run out of mojo? Is this just a return to reality for a company that’s feasted off of meteoric sales fueled by practically creating two new product categories?

There are multiple factors in play concerning, and most are not readily evident. While the iPhone still reigns supreme in the US, it isn’t the industry leader around the world- Android has the lion’s portion of market share thanks to its breadth of pricing, handsets, and the slow release of the iPhone around the world. Apple has had some significant success in China, the world’s largest market for handsets, but they currently rank 6th in market share.

The iPhone won’t likely retain its market dominance in the US forever as competitors flood the market; Android has evolved at a blistering pace, and Microsoft is pushing their new mobile version of Windows 8 just as new names like Ubuntu and Firefox have been linked to mobile devices. What some don’t realize is that Apple has never been focused on market share- they place far more value on margin. Organizations like Amazon and Google sell their devices with almost no profit (and sometimes at a loss) to steer customers to their real profit centers- advertising and data mining for Google, the various Amazon stores for that entity. While Apple does generate a tidy profit from their media and app stores, they have never embraced the strategy of employing a loss leader (something that generates no or negative profit that brings more customers to the things that do).

The breadth of Android devices has been recognized as one if the reasons the platform has such a commanding portion of the handset market; devices range from iPhone equivalents like the Samsung Galaxy line to bargain models from makers like Huawei. While Apple does keep older models of iPhone in production to offer a broader range of prices, they have never sold a handset that was designed to appeal to bargain hunters (or a device that deviated from the established form factor). Some (including former Apple CEO John Sculley) have called for Apple to deviate from their business model to compete in the inexpensive handset demographic, even going so far as to insist that a cheaper version of the iPhone must be pending (with no actual evidence to support the claim). Others report on a rumored handset dubbed the iPhone Math that sports a 4.8 inch screen similar to some of Samsung’s phone/tablet (“phablet”?) hybrids.

Not only is such action not likely to happen, it would border on foolishness for Apple to do so. They have managed to generate more profit than all of their competitors combined by not focusing on market share and ceding certain segments of the market. While the sales figures from this past fiscal year weren’t explosive, they were still greater than the GDP of many countries- and this was in a quarter that was one week shorter than usual. Apple has only developed products to that offer significant value in each category, not devices solely to compete for money in that category. The Mac Mini is more than a cheaper version of the iMac; it has a different form factor and possible uses. The iPad Mini is less expensive than the full sized iPad, but the primary focus hasn’t been the price, it has been the utility offered by the smaller size of the device. The same can be said for the Shuffle, Apple’s cheapest iPod; it has a significantly different form (diminutive and lacking a screen) but is tailored for specific uses, not just to generate sales in those that can’t afford an iPod Nano or Touch. Creating an underpowered or under spec-ed device just to compete in a market segment they have never pursued for little more than market share is nonsense unless there were some way they could keep the profit margins they count on, and to date none of their competitors have been able to do so with far more time and emphasis on that demographic.

As for the super sized iPhone Math, the waters are less clear but still doubtful. I have no doubt there is a larger sized iPhone in product research (just perusing the research models revealed during the Apple v Samsung trials recently shows how broad the scope can be) but Apple tends to control every aspect of their consumer product line. The screen resolution of a larger device would pose problems for apps; it would either have to sport a non-retina display (unlikely considering the flack generated over the lack of retina in the iPad Mini) or would have to have a custom resolution- very unlikely given Apple’s insistence on uniformity in App Store apps. Another facet is Apple’s own in-house research; they have reported more than once that the screen of the iPhone and iPod Touch was specifically designed to allow one handed operation. The iPhone 5 allegedly is the largest factor that can still adhere to this purpose according to their engineers, any larger and Apple would have to ignore their own stated strategy. Then there’s the question of product identity; a massive iPhone becomes a potential competitor to the iPad Mini (which has allegedly already cannibalized sales from its full sized sibling).

While I’m far too low on the technosphere’s food chain to have precise insight on Apple’s product development, I’d still wager a week’s pay that a majority of the hand wringing and speculation on what they will (or should) do is just so much noise. The next big thing won’t be a big iPhone, it will likely be an entirely new category of device.

 

Read Full Post »

They aren’t sports teams

As I’ve stated before I used to revel in the role of electronic tinkerer. Building new PC towers was an easy and inexpensive way to gain a better, more powerful system while satisfying my craving for learning something new. I picked up a good deal of tricks from a high school friend and augmented it by devouring all the PC magazines and online articles I could get my hands on. My deep integration into all things PC naturally evolved into a sentimental attachment to my creations and the core of their electronic life- Windows. That’s right, I used to be an Apple hater. In hindsight I think it was just a subconscious way to justify the effort I put into each system (beyond the satisfaction of bringing a new PC to life by myself)- I was able to build something more powerful, with a faster processor, heftier graphics card; just pick your benchmark or component. Competitors by their very nature had to be inferior!

Since that time I was lured into the Apple fold bit by bit, gateway iPod to iPhone to Mac without a moment of regret. While I’ll admit to being an apologist on occasion (although to be honest the iPhone 4′s antenna and Apple Map’s oft discussed problems never impacted me) I’ve reflected often on the natural tendency for people to form cliques. What used to be a Mac versus PC argument (which still exists, albeit a bit more subdued than it used to be) has now become more of an iOS versus Android tussle.

Again, a caveat- I’ve teased a coworker or two about their Android handsets. It wasn’t maliciously done, but I can debate/argue with the best of them when I put my mind to it. That being said, it seems almost bizarre to me how we naturally form mental groups based on such personal choices as what kind of gadgets we prefer. I was an early adopter of the iPhone, and was already comfortably in the Apple fold by the time Android was a viable smartphone choice. Both handset operating systems had their growing pains, but both have matured into impressively powerful platforms with unique values to offer. Had I not opted for an iPhone I would have been just as enthusiastic about my first Nexus (and this blog may have had a different name).

Android truly does offer value that iOS never will. It’s open architecture provides flexibility and configurability so far unmatched (although new platforms from Ubuntu and Firefox may challenge that). Android offers unparalleled user control over its structure; users can change just about every aspect of the operating system’s interface. Google’s market strategy of seeking profit by supporting their core business of advertising and data mining allow them to give the OS away to handset manufacturers who can configure it to a massive range of different devices. iOS only recently became available on more than one type of device, but Android phones vary so much they could be broken down into subcategories, each providing unique value like low price, removable batteries, a physical keyboard, or pseudo-tablet size screen. Android owners have multiple app sources as well; legitimate (Google Play and Amazon’s app store) as well as not-so-legitimate. Then there’s one of the hidden facets of Android that some customers flock to- it simply isn’t Apple.

With all those selling points, why would anyone buy an iOS device? Glad you asked. iOS benefits from some of the very things it’s been criticized for, such as its “closed” architecture. Apple controls the product line from start to finish, and this affords them far greater influence over the quality of their operating system, components, and end user experience (just do a quick search for Android fragmentation if you’d like to see why unity is important). The physical construction has always been high quality, with more research on ergonomics and optimal functionality than the average consumer will ever be aware of. Rather than build a wide range of devices for all budgets, Apple keeps previous models of iPhone in production, selling the older model at a discount (yet still making a respectable profit margin thanks to existing production lines) allowing them to insure that no matter what your budget, you’ll get a quality device.

Thanks in part to the curated nature of the app store and part to the customer base Apple has cultivated the iOS App Store reigns supreme. iOS users are far more likely to purchase apps (dirty secret- Google makes more revenue from iOS users than it does out of the more numerous Android users!), and this cash flow influences development, feeding the store’s massive number of apps. Then there’s the rest of the iTunes Store, both free content and paid. Music, audiobooks, podcasts (both video and audio), movies, television shows, even education- nothing matches iTunes’ scope of media. Both operating systems can tie into third party providers like Netflix and Spotify, but iOS users have a much broader selection at their fingertips- you can even access Google Play (or any of Google’s products) if you really want to.

Then there is the staggering array of third party accessories. Literally any category you can think of, from the beautiful to the absurd, is out there for iOS devices. Third party developers have created new ways of using your device and better ways of doing what you were already using it for, spurred on by the unity of the platform. It’s far more profitable (not to mention easier) to develop for a product line that changes in slow increments rather than one that has almost countless forms simultaneously.

The unity of hardware and software have allowed Apple to develop a wide ranging product line, from iPod Touch to full sized iPad, offering stability  and interoperability that no competitor can match. iOS also acts as a valuable part of their product ecosystem; users can get far more utility from their devices if they use Apple products solely. As time passes iOS and OSX will cross pollinate and the defining line between them will blur (unlike Window’s clumsy attempt to force immediate integration of mobile and desktop operating systems via Windows 8). Google has no ecosystem to leverage; they began as system agnostic and even though they ventured into hardware with Android and the overlooked Chromebook they largely remain that way.

Given time I could probably provide countless more reasons why iOS was the perfect choice for me. The stability, clean and simple interface, quality of devices, interoperability, and breadth of support both software and hardware made my choice a simple one. My requirements won’t make everyone happy; those that haven’t lost their love of tinkering with the internals of their devices in particular (most of my Android-loving friends mention the modifications they’ve made to their handsets as one of the primary reasons they love them). Just bear in mind if someone wants to influence your choice of device, it’s not like choosing a sports team to follow; pick what best suits your needs.

Read Full Post »

A chat with an indie app developer

From my first gig as an reviewer for the now-defunct iPad N Gravy (no link; Safari warns that the site has been compromised by malware) to my current digs here at iPod to iPad I’ve seen a lot of indie apps. Many were games, but all were the product of someone (or a select few someones) with an intriguing idea, skill, and the drive to bring their concept to an app store. While I have professed my affection for indie apps (who doesn’t love an underdog?) I have to date little exposure to the brave souls that actually breathe life into the little icon on your smartphone’s screen.

I was recently contacted by Tam Hanna of Tammoggemon, the developer of TouchCalc, a powerful (and free) graphing calculator app for Android, BlackBerry, and eventually iOS. While I restrict my writing to products within the Apple envirosphere, he was kind enough to chat with me about what its like to be an independent app developer.

Not surprisingly, he followed a similar track to my best friend from high school, programmer Scott Lemmon (you’re still missed, Scott). He had some formal education, but was primarily self-taught through study of a field he found interesting; reaffirming something I’ve long stressed- no matter how complex something is, if you find it interesting you’ll pick it up far easier than you would have thought. Here’s a short excerpt of our discussion:

Is app design your first career or did you find yourself drawn to it?

 A: I have been hounding the mobile IT scene since 2004, so yes, one can say that it is my first and primary career.

Was there any one particular platform or operating system that first sparked you to start developing?

 A: Definitely Palm OS and OnBoardC. Hacking a mobile app on a mobile phone is just insanely cool – it is a pity that this isn’t possible anymore.

What are the differences or barriers developing for different mobile OS?

 A: This is a good and hard question. To developers who start coding for mobile for the first time, the legalese – think certification and such – can be quite a burden. But once you have the structure set up, this becomes easy. The next issue is the different API and languages. As you gain experience in IT, this becomes less and less of an issue as the fundamental concepts largely are the same across platforms.

Is the process of getting an app approved for the various Android outlets difficult?

 A: My experience with Samsung shows that the staff are rarely unhelpful or actively trying to hinder or annoy developers. Instead, they try to eliminate errors before your users find them; this can really save face. Of course, the clocks do tick a little different at Apple. After all, these boys get a lot of press out of being tough to developers.

 How long did it take you to release the current version of TouchCalc? 

 A: About a month from concept to the first beta. Samsung’s QA team was very helpful, but generally is known to be rather docile towards apps.

Are you working on any other projects, or are you focusing on honing TouchCalc? 

 A: The frequent update cycle promised does take a lot of resources inside of Tamoggemon. Nevertheless, we currently plan to port TouchCalc to Android, BB10 and – given feasibility – Symbian. We are also open to new product ideas, but currently have nothing open in that area.

In my correspondence with Tam I found him to be stereotypical of the geek culture I’ve grown up with- intelligent, motivated, and a generally good guy. I enjoyed the insight into the world of developing; I find it completely fascinating- it’s not very often that we get an insight into how the things we use every day come to be. If you have a non-iPhone handset, help support the passion of an indie developer and give TouchCalc a look!

Read Full Post »

It’s not all bad news for iOS 6 Maps

While the overall impressions for Apple’s new homegrown Maps app hasn’t been flattering, it’s not all doom and gloom for the vilified geolocation service.

Even before its release pundits had covered Apple’s efforts to cobble together their own mapping service. The incentive to do so is multifaceted; the wealth of data that comes from user’s activities alone would make the mapping service worthwhile. There’s also the alleged disagreement between Apple and Google as to who would have the most control over the interface, and the inability to build in turn by turn voice directions as Android‘s version has. While the acquired and leased data have been adequate for my uses here in the US, users have been very vocal of their displeasure of how inaccurate Maps has been, culminating in an open apology from Apple’s CEO Tim Cook.

AppleInsider brings some much needed good news for iOS 6 Maps in a recent article. While the data for the cloud service in most of the world has been of questionable accuracy at times, apparently the new Maps app has been warmly embraced by Chinese users. The app lacks spoken turn by turn navigation and the eye catching 3D flyover features, but makes up for this with its unparalleled accuracy. This competitive advantage is due to the scarcity of companies collecting mapping data in China (the article cites 11, with half of those only available to government institutions).

While I have no doubt that iOS 6 Maps will improve quickly, for the immediate future I’ve opted to rely on third party solutions for my navigation needs. The iTunes App Store even recently created a new category specifically for navigation apps in response to the perceived need. It is encouraging to see that given accurate data iOS 6 Maps can not only be usable, it can excel.

Read Full Post »

Cell providers steering customers away from the iPhone?

Numerous reports are surfacing today on the unwritten policy of the two larger cellular providers AT&T and Verizon to have associates steer in-store customers away from iPhones and to Android or Windows handsets. Activations of new phones on AT&T service seem to reflect this policy as iPhone sales have fallen from approximately 80% of all smartphones to between 50-60%.

There are numerous reasons for carriers to convince customers to purchase something other than an iPhone. The iPhone has closed architecture, and can’t be preloaded with proprietary software or front ends like some Android handsets. The margin on the iPhone is likely less than other handsets thanks to both Apple’s negotiating might and competitor’s willingness to take less to gain a foothold in the market. iPhones don’t support LTE yet, so those customers aren’t going to purchase the more expensive LTE data plans being offered (and needing more of it thanks to LTE’s blazing speed compared to 3G). iPhone users have also been shown to actually use their devices more than Android owners, spending far more time browsing and interacting with their network connection thus costing carriers more to provide service.

I’ve witnessed this gentle bullying secondhand. I’ve been called to help a friend who lost their iPhone and wanted a replacement, only to be strongarmed by an AT&T associate that insisted a Samsung handset was better. For some it may very well be, but for my friend it was a disaster- she lacks any technological aptitude and just couldn’t navigate Android’s inner workings like she could with the familiar iPhone. I instructed her to return the handset for something she was comfortable with, but the story didn’t have a completely happy ending- AT&T charged her a $30 restocking fee, and refused to issue refunds for the $35 case or microSD card they insisted she purchase with the handset.

Whether the inspiration is financial or in retaliation to a company they see as having too large of market share, there is a palpable push to steer customers away from the iPhone. Even before this bit of news I have advised family and friends to just go to our local Apple store instead of the carrier’s outlet; the customer service is vastly better and the level of support can’t be compared. For those that don’t have the luxury of an Apple store your best bet is to order the device directly from Apple.

Read Full Post »

Sync an Android device with a Mac

While iOS was designed to work hand in hand with OSX, those of you that prefer Android devices haven’t had as seamless an experience. What’s a tech aficionado to do without iTunes or iCloud to sync the data on your Mac to your handheld device?

TUAW (the Unofficial Apple Weblog) has a recent post with tips on how to do just this. While not as effortless as the iOS sync framework, there are workable solutions for just about any Android device. Check out the short video content of the post for the quick and dirty how-to.

Read Full Post »

Malware makes an appearance in the iTunes App Store

Having a well-vetted App Store is a competitive advantage for iOS devices, but that edge has taken a slight tarnish lately with a revelation from security firm Kaspersky Labs that an app made its way past Apple’s vetting process. The app Find and Call was advertised as a way to easily search through telephone directories for your friend’s numbers, but as an unwanted extra it sent spam text and email messages advertising the app to contacts in the user’s address book while uploading the iPhone’s Contacts information (including email addresses) to the developer’s servers.

The app was primarily aimed at Russian markets (the app description page was written in Russian) but was available to users worldwide. The developers claim that the unwanted behavior is a bug, but this claim is a shaky one considering the deliberate, targeted behavior of the app. While no immediate harm was done, the app did violate the iTunes App Store terms and annoyed more than a few recipients of the spam ads. The app was apparently in the wide for some time; it first appeared in iTunes June 13 and was taken down recently. The app was also released for Android and was removed from Google Play’s Android app market recently as well.

In an attempt to prevent this sort of malfeasance Apple has announced tighter access controls as a part of the upcoming iOS 6 release, as well as tighter policing of apps in iTunes.

Read Full Post »

Interpreting mobile market share

The Unofficial Apple Weblog (TUAW)  released a breakdown of an analysis on mobile device market share- essentially what percentage of users employ the various mobile operating systems.

Before looking at the figures I would have thought that Android, with their broader number of devices and manufacturers to choose from (as well as prices, multiple Android handsets can be had for free with a contract, where the iPhone 3GS was only recently reduced to free/99 cents with contract). According to CNET 43.7 percent of smartphone users have an Android handset, with 27.7 percent owning an iPhone (but these figures don’t include tablets, where Apple’s iPad has far outsold any competitors).

Surprisingly, the mobile web marketshare was very different that I had expected. Apple’s iOS garnered 65% of the market, far outstripping Android’s 20% (and that figure has actually grown from last month’s 62% iOS share). Other competitors ranked so poorly they really don’t even rate as a competitor- Windows Phone and Symbian scored only 1%, and Blackberry’s foundering platform ranked a measly 2%.

So what do these numbers mean? One easy answer is that Apple’s focus on user experience is paying off yet again; the market share is a clear indication that users are not only snapping up iOS devices as fast as they can be manufactured, they are actually using them. The online presence shows that iOS devices are being used for more than a telephone or media consumption device, owners are using their devices as web portals.

This is reflected by app purchases- sales of Android apps is a fraction (up to six times less) of Apple’s App Store. A comparison of multi platform apps showed that Android versions generated only 24% of the revenue generated by the iOS version. Even Google generates four times more advertising revenue via iOS than their own operating system.

Ultimately, these figures are indicative of adherence to strategy and vision. Apple made their devices to look good, be straightforward and reliable to use, and offer the best all around experience. Apple created their mobile platform as a compliment to their comprehensive product line of devices and services, with all devices working seamlessly together. The foundation had been laid long before thanks to the iPod and iTunes. The various iOS devices have acted as gateway products for sales of other, more expensive devices as well as multimedia. Android lacked this foundation; the handsets still act more as stand-alone devices rather than part of a larger ecosystem.  While Android has made significant improvements, it still faces some crucial hurdles- fragmentation (differing generations and versions of Android abound), difficulty in updating devices, poor app vetting (Google’s own app store has housed malware), differing quality devices from manufacturers, and a lack of a unified end user experience.

Regardless of the hurdles it faces, Android is still a force in the market. Apple lacks any other competition (at least until the Windows 8 handsets reach the market later this year), and the market needs Android to drive innovation. Android does offer some unique value to customers: its integration with Google services is fantastic, and some of its integrated functions have been judged better than comparable ones in iOS. Ultimately, developers are the lifeblood of a device ecosystem, and developers follow revenue. Over the long term, user profitability and lower app revenues could be a significant problem for Android.

Read Full Post »