Live data from Hacker News

Why Android will win the tablet wars

h-online.com

21–30 of 35 posts

Re: Why Android will win the tablet wars

#21

Define "win", please. I'm quite sure Android will eventually dominate in terms of market share, much like Windows does to OS X. However, if you look in terms of customer satisfaction and profits generated in the markets they compete in, Apple tend to be so far in front, they subsume the rest of the competition put together. I'd wager that every company out there would love to "lose" the way Apple is/will.

Does anyone think Apple is actually satisfied with OS X's market share? Apple has competing interests in that it wants high margins and market share, but they did it before with the iPod. And I'd argue the iPad is an even better contender for iPod like dominance than the iPhone/OS X. Apple values control highly, but pretending it doesn't infuriate them that Windows is the leader (and Android is posed to be the phone…

Apple knows that most people buy computers in the budget segment. Apple doesn't sell computers in that segment.

They know what they'd have to do to gain significant marketshare: enter the budget segment, the "race to the bottom", and they won't even try. OS market share simply isn't as important to them as shipping quality products and making money is.

Re: Why Android will win the tablet wars

#22
Android tablets were up to 22% of the market last quarter... on what? Galaxy Tab? That's an absolutely incredible number with really no great product on the market.

Unless Apple has a trick up their sleeve for iPad2, Q2-Q4 of 2011 will likely split 75/25 for Android in the tablet space.

For all the grief I give Google, their dev model around Chrome and Android have been lessons to the industry. Why is no one paying attention?

Re: Why Android will win the tablet wars

#23

Android tablets were up to 22% of the market last quarter... on what? Galaxy Tab? That's an absolutely incredible number with really no great product on the market. Unless Apple has a trick up their sleeve for iPad2, Q2-Q4 of 2011 will likely split 75/25 for Android in the tablet space. For all the grief I give Google, their dev model around Chrome and Android have been lessons to the industry. Why is no one paying a…

To be fair, Android is really just a better implementation of the Symbian model (which was/is also crazy successful).

Re: Why Android will win the tablet wars

#24
post #6

I bought a Motorola Droid (Milestone) last year because it was only a little more than half the price of an Iphone (unsubsidized in europe spring of 2010 around 400€ vs. around 700€). Now the price of the Xoom is rumored to be around 800€... If there is no decent Android tablet that will be noteworthy cheaper than the Ipad it will be pretty hard to catch up any time soon.

This is my big problem with this whole class of analysis. It keeps coming back to the Mac example and not the more relevant iPod. The conference call gave a hint, Apple is spending $3B to prepay for supply of some new components. Which Android manufacturer can do that? Samsung probably has the best chance since they source a lot of components themselves (heck, they build some for Apple).

The current Android tablets are not significantly cheaper than the iPad (especially considering the smaller screens). Apple with the iPod started at a high rate and kept moving the price point down to make life very difficult for competitors. If Apple keeps the current iPad and makes it the new entry model at a lower price point (much like the iPhone), then the problems for other manufactures will be increased.

At this point, I really think HP will surprise a lot of people, but I don't seen the Android tablets (or Blackberry with its bizarre connectivity requirements) being major competitors until they resolve their pricing issues.

Re: Why Android will win the tablet wars

#25
"Apple simply cannot compete in these markets: its business model is based on charging a premium price for a premium product."

Apple purchases in large volume which allows it to have lower component pricing than almost all other manufacturers. That's why you haven't seen an Android based iPod touch-like device. That's why you haven't seen anybody do a tablet comparable to iPad in terms of hardware at the $499 pice point.

Apple's iPod is an integrated platform--arguably with less hardware variety--and it has 76% market share. Why hasn't this platform ceded control to Android yet, or "open" options? It isn't for lack of variety or other choices. Putting aside superior user interface, nobody can do a cheaper iPod. Let's see it.

If we're talking about a market for unlocked mobile, sub-$500 devices, then Apple hasn't been beaten in the last decade.

Re: Why Android will win the tablet wars

#26
I despise people who prognosticate with certainty. (I was going to say "love" but sarcasm is cheap. So I'll go with honesty.)

First of all, who cares? More Hyundais sell than Ferraris. Obviously Hyundai is better. Hyundai wins!

Second, let's see how Android does in the US after the Verizon launch -- if Android does as well relative to Apple on Verizon as it has done on AT&T well, that would be sad for Android, wouldn't it? (I'd _guess_ things will be less one-sided on both carriers -- but I wouldn't claim certainty.)

I'd love for Android to "win" in the sense of becoming as good or better than iOS and sustaining the lead, but if Apple gets eaten alive by competitors, all the "victors" will do is race to the bottom on price, quality, and user satisfaction.

Re: Why Android will win the tablet wars

#27
I think his argument can be fairly summarized as -

(1) The tablet platform war is like the smartphone platform war.

(2) In the smartphone platform war, Google has more marketshare than Apple because their operating system is on a greater variety of devices.

Both premises are invalid in that they naively omit the central role that carriers and subsidies play. In the phone world, Apple is playing a complex game where they squeeze as much money as possible from carriers. The iPhone isn't even available to millions of customers on dozens of large global carriers and is almost always (sometimes hidden by subsidies) much more expensive than a comparable Android device.

The tablet market may be much more like the mp3 market, where Apple was more sensitive to competitive pricing (they lowered pricing year after year), enabling them to maintain an overwhelming lead in market share which they leveraged to corner the market on many critical components.

Re: Why Android will win the tablet wars

#28

"Apple simply cannot compete in these markets: its business model is based on charging a premium price for a premium product." Apple purchases in large volume which allows it to have lower component pricing than almost all other manufacturers. That's why you haven't seen an Android based iPod touch-like device. That's why you haven't seen anybody do a tablet comparable to iPad in terms of hardware at the $499 pice po…

You haven't seen those devices because Apple's brand-name competitors are choosing to enter the high value markets first. Anything with a recurring data contract brings in far more money.

And Google itself would rather make the devices and the contracts cheaper, so that the users can spend more time online using Google products. They'd rather replace a kids iPod (inc. Touch) with an always net-enabled "phone" if possible.

But away from the headlines there's been generic, wifi-only Tegra2 tablets on the market for a couple of months now at half the iPad price. Not only does the Tegra2 beat iPad hardware, it's in line with the rumours for iPad 2 hardware. So the magical Apple hardware efficiency and price competitiveness doesn't really add up.

Note these generic tablets have plastic bodies, screens with poor viewing angles and non-tablet Android often without market access or official Tegra2-optimised Flash out of the box, so they're a tinkerer's delight rather than an iPad killer right now, but that's a separate issue from the power and cost of the hardware.

Re: Why Android will win the tablet wars

#29
post #17
post #11

Not a great article belabouring a pretty tired argument. > That's just in the US, of course, but it's likely that the rest of the world will f Except that the iPhone is on only one of four major US carriers (it hasn't shipped a single unit on Verizon yet). Also the economics are different elsewhere. In the US there isn't actually much handset subsidizatino. Most handsets, iPhone included, are $199. Some are $99. But…

What would be an interesting and insightful stat is to see what AT&T's handset breakdown is because you can expect that Verizon will follow a similar trend. Why would you expect that? AT&T not only was late to the Android party, they sacrificed the few meager offerings they had because the iPhone was their smartphone of choice. If you were drawn to an Android device, it was unlikely it was at AT&T because even once t…

AT&T was not in the Android game because they had the iPhone. Verizon was in the Android game because they didn't have the iPhone. The carriers will go where the consumer goes. If Verizon's customers stop buying Android in favor of the iPhone it's of no consequence to Verizon's.

IMHO the reasons Android sells are:

1. It's not the iPhone. A minority of Apple haters rail against the notion of a walled garden;

2. US specifically: their chosen carrier didn't have it. One thing about the US I haven't seen elsewhere is that family plans are fairly common;

3. Android competes in markets the iPhone doesn't, specifically low end.

You'll note that I didn't mention cost as a factor, other than buying lower end phones (which is obviously a significant market). To reiterate this point: all the top end phones in the US have $199 up front and this isn't a significant factor over 2 years of service so, if this is a factor, it ranks far below carrier choice (IMHO).

Personally I think the Verizon iPhone will probably add a net 10M iPhone users in the first half at least.

Re: Why Android will win the tablet wars

#30
post #29
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would be an interesting and insightful stat is to see what AT&T's handset breakdown is because you can expect that Verizon will follow a similar trend. Why would you expect that? AT&T not only was late to the Android party, they sacrificed the few meager offerings they had because the iPhone was their smartphone of choice. If you were drawn to an Android device, it was unlikely it was at AT&T because even once t…

AT&T was not in the Android game because they had the iPhone. Verizon was in the Android game because they didn't have the iPhone. The carriers will go where the consumer goes. If Verizon's customers stop buying Android in favor of the iPhone it's of no consequence to Verizon's. IMHO the reasons Android sells are: 1. It's not the iPhone. A minority of Apple haters rail against the notion of a walled garden; 2. US spe…

Are you a time traveler from the past?

You might have had a point a year ago. Now, sorry, your argument is tired and dated. People want something that can play a couple of games, access Facebook and Twitter, visit websites, etc. There is a lot of competition, and the iPhone is only one option.

It has no entitled right to that market, nor is it necessarily the superior option. For many users it is the inferior option, rhetoric and flag waving aside.

A lot of customers are deciding among the available smartphones and walking out of the store with a Galaxy S or some other high-end Android device (which overwhelmingly dominant Android sales, despite the continued notion that it's some sort of low-end platform). It does what they want.

And that competition is only getting fiercer. Gingerbread, plus the upcoming (meaning weeks) gauntlet of devices == Android is putting aside the training bra.

But again, let's revisit this in six months. I'm sure there will be some new angle.

Post reply on HN