Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google Android Captures #1 Position in U.S. Smartphone Market

comscore.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 110 posts

Re: Google Android Captures #1 Position in U.S. Smartphone Market

#61

Post by YooLi »

whatusername wrote: post #38
YooLi wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's because all Android has done is blurred the line between smart phone and feature phone. It's Android phones now that are the free and BOGO phones and that's exactly what Google wants--a base out there that they cannot be excluded from for their primary business, advertising. ex.: http://macdailynews.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/110303_andro...

Dear US writers: $0 Upfront is not a "free" phone. $50 Upfront is not a "Cheap" phone. I can get a "Free" iPhone 4 32GB on any carrier I like in Australia. // This doesn't mean that Android isn't undercutting apple on price -- but that $0 / $50 / $200 upfront are not meaningful in any way

Dear non-US writers: This article is specifically about US smartphones.

"Google Android Captures #1 Position in U.S. Smartphone Market"

Re: Google Android Captures #1 Position in U.S. Smartphone Market

#62

Post by nl »

samirmm wrote: post #25

Interesting sidebar in the comscore report: In the continuously contentious debate as to whether the future of mobile apps are downloaded or browser-based, we see a gain in both, but native apps seems to have had a marginal edge in gain. Would be cool to see this data over a longer window. Used browser; 36.2%; 37.0%; 0.8 Used downloaded apps; 33.7%; 35.3%; 1.6

I wonder how much of the gain in app usage can be attributed to the new version of the Android market, which I think shipped during this time period. We'd have to see app usage by platform stats for that though I guess.

Re: Google Android Captures #1 Position in U.S. Smartphone Market

#63

Post by ugh »

YooLi wrote: post #61
whatusername wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dear US writers: $0 Upfront is not a "free" phone. $50 Upfront is not a "Cheap" phone. I can get a "Free" iPhone 4 32GB on any carrier I like in Australia. // This doesn't mean that Android isn't undercutting apple on price -- but that $0 / $50 / $200 upfront are not meaningful in any way

Dear non-US writers: This article is specifically about US smartphones. "Google Android Captures #1 Position in U.S. Smartphone Market"

0$ phones are also not magically “free” in the US. You pay it with your monthly bills down the line. The subsidized price is never a meaningful metric for comparison, it is in itself not a reasonable metric for comparisons.

I have always been puzzled by this attitude which seems to be rampant with Americans. Don’t you notice something’s up when somebody offers you something for “free”?

Re: Google Android Captures #1 Position in U.S. Smartphone Market

#64

Post by ugh »

megablast wrote: post #46
whatusername wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dear US writers: $0 Upfront is not a "free" phone. $50 Upfront is not a "Cheap" phone. I can get a "Free" iPhone 4 32GB on any carrier I like in Australia. // This doesn't mean that Android isn't undercutting apple on price -- but that $0 / $50 / $200 upfront are not meaningful in any way

The only sense I can make of people who continuously write this point, is that they will always be making some monthly payment for their phone. Therefore, they do not count that monthly payment, and only look at the upfront fee.

The monthly bills are different depending on the phone. Finding out the real price of the phone is not as easy as just looking at the subsidized price.

Re: Google Android Captures #1 Position in U.S. Smartphone Market

#65

Post by michaelbuckbee »

keyle wrote: post #55
mjfern wrote: post #2

These data spell significant trouble for Microsoft in the smartphone market. Despite launching Windows Phone 7 (WP7) with great fanfare in November 2010, Microsoft's market share in smartphones has in fact declined 1.7% from October 2010 through January 2011.

They weren't many phones supporting WP7 until recently. I think you will see that number grow slowly. They're a bit late to the party. I think it's a better OS than Android in my view. That said, the only people I know with WP7 are .NET developers ;)

The fact that .NET developers are the ones buying WP7 phones might be a positive sign for the platform. WP7 needs apps.

Re: Google Android Captures #1 Position in U.S. Smartphone Market

#67

Post by jonknee »

rbanffy wrote: post #36
bane wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google "makes" advertising though, the more eyeballs it can get in front of, the better for its model.

If that were their only idea, they would be happy with Apple building Safari into iPhones.

Until Apple switches the search box to Bing... Google's no slouch.

Re: Google Android Captures #1 Position in U.S. Smartphone Market

#68

Post by kaffiene »

michaelbuckbee wrote: post #65
keyle wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They weren't many phones supporting WP7 until recently. I think you will see that number grow slowly. They're a bit late to the party. I think it's a better OS than Android in my view. That said, the only people I know with WP7 are .NET developers ;)

The fact that .NET developers are the ones buying WP7 phones might be a positive sign for the platform. WP7 needs apps.

.NET apps need customers to buy them, too.

Re: Google Android Captures #1 Position in U.S. Smartphone Market

#69

Post by nl »

YooLi wrote: post #61
whatusername wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dear US writers: $0 Upfront is not a "free" phone. $50 Upfront is not a "Cheap" phone. I can get a "Free" iPhone 4 32GB on any carrier I like in Australia. // This doesn't mean that Android isn't undercutting apple on price -- but that $0 / $50 / $200 upfront are not meaningful in any way

Dear non-US writers: This article is specifically about US smartphones. "Google Android Captures #1 Position in U.S. Smartphone Market"

Dear YooLi: That comment specifically addressed the misleading, US only, practice of advertising phones as free when they are no such thing.

That goes to the heart of this discussion. In the US, the iPhone is marketed as a premium product apparently because it isn't available "FREE". In fact, the total-cost-of-contact is pretty close between say an iPhone and an Android phone with similar specs.

Obviously price (and price perceptions) affect market share.

Re: Google Android Captures #1 Position in U.S. Smartphone Market

#70

Post by kaffiene »

moultano wrote: post #26
lispm wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? Apple makes much of the profit. A report claims that Apple makes with 4% global market share 50% of the profits: http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/11/01/31/apples_4_mobil... Google does not even really sell a phone. Google sells you, the user.

The point of the grandparent's post was this: > that their position is not so unassailable that they can continue looking for new ways to drive away partners and developers without consequences I think most everyone wants more competition to keep any single company from being abusive, but your response to this is essentially "Apple is still #1!" I don't understand what you are saying here. Is it that you think Apple…

You are looking for a rational argument where it's pretty obvious that what the poster you're replying to is saying is "I like the taste of the Apple koolade"

Every discussion of Android vs iOS phones ends this way: "No matter what milestone has just achieved, iOS/Apple is better because of X!"

It's tedious.

Post reply on HN