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

How Android gets to 100% market share

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 75 posts

Re: How Android gets to 100% market share

#31

Post by mathgeek »

vlan0 wrote: post #28
patwolf wrote: post #24

My grandfather was a Ford man. He would only ever buy a Ford, even during periods when other manufacturers were making vastly superior vehicles. I used to think such loyalty was a silly generational thing. My generation was a fickle consumer. We would research and decide on a purchase based purely on merit. That's how I was with phones. When iPhone was the most compelling phone, I would buy an iPhone. When there was…

I find a lot of those brand loyalist tend to be foolish in many ways. They make decisions based on emotion, rather than analytical thought. I worked in retail for a good part of a decade, and I was dumbfounded by the number of people who would never buy another product from X manufacture based on a single poor experience with one product. It's simply an emotional response to their unpleasant experience which results…

Keep in mind that many people spend a lot of analytical time on other aspects of their adult life: work, vacations, insurance, children (including paying for college), home maintenance, etc. Sometimes smartphone and entertainment fall into the group of things just not worth spending your limited thinking time on.

Re: How Android gets to 100% market share

#32

Post by PKop »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #30
forgettableuser wrote: post #23

This author has a pretty cynical view that the only reason people use iPhone is because of vendor lock-in, like from iMessage. This disregards the fact that many iPhone customers are still first time buyers with no lock in hanging over their head. And also Apple has an extremely high customer satisfaction rate keeping customers coming back. Customers buy iPhones because they like the experience and ecosystem, not sol…

I don't think there are any more first-time buyers of phones left in the world. Really. Its not a thing any more. Also no first-time shoe buyers, or food buyers. Except maybe the very young trickling into the market.

First time iPhone buyers, coming from Android, for example.

Re: How Android gets to 100% market share

#33

Post by agumonkey »

patwolf wrote: post #24

My grandfather was a Ford man. He would only ever buy a Ford, even during periods when other manufacturers were making vastly superior vehicles. I used to think such loyalty was a silly generational thing. My generation was a fickle consumer. We would research and decide on a purchase based purely on merit. That's how I was with phones. When iPhone was the most compelling phone, I would buy an iPhone. When there was…

It's a form a wisdom. At first you try to maximize every variables, later on you realize that meh, that part (car, phone, foo) is alright as it is, let's do something else. Instead of amplifying the market turmoils, you try to act as a capacitor, smoothing out the noise.

Re: How Android gets to 100% market share

#34

Post by SeanDav »

forgettableuser wrote: post #23

This author has a pretty cynical view that the only reason people use iPhone is because of vendor lock-in, like from iMessage. This disregards the fact that many iPhone customers are still first time buyers with no lock in hanging over their head. And also Apple has an extremely high customer satisfaction rate keeping customers coming back. Customers buy iPhones because they like the experience and ecosystem, not sol…

First time buyers generally base their choices on the opinions and views of more experienced people, often within their circle of friends, family and acquaintances. It is quite conceivable that a first time buyer is making their choice because of the vendor lock-in of their peers.

Re: How Android gets to 100% market share

#35

Post by forgettableuser »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #30
forgettableuser wrote: post #23

This author has a pretty cynical view that the only reason people use iPhone is because of vendor lock-in, like from iMessage. This disregards the fact that many iPhone customers are still first time buyers with no lock in hanging over their head. And also Apple has an extremely high customer satisfaction rate keeping customers coming back. Customers buy iPhones because they like the experience and ecosystem, not sol…

I don't think there are any more first-time buyers of phones left in the world. Really. Its not a thing any more. Also no first-time shoe buyers, or food buyers. Except maybe the very young trickling into the market.

I meant first time Apple buyers which includes both people who've never had phones and people who've switched. Apple's first time customer base is still significant.

Re: How Android gets to 100% market share

#36

Post by chimeracoder »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #30
forgettableuser wrote: post #23

This author has a pretty cynical view that the only reason people use iPhone is because of vendor lock-in, like from iMessage. This disregards the fact that many iPhone customers are still first time buyers with no lock in hanging over their head. And also Apple has an extremely high customer satisfaction rate keeping customers coming back. Customers buy iPhones because they like the experience and ecosystem, not sol…

I don't think there are any more first-time buyers of phones left in the world. Really. Its not a thing any more. Also no first-time shoe buyers, or food buyers. Except maybe the very young trickling into the market.

> I don't think there are any more first-time buyers of phones left in the world

I might believe you if you said the US, but given how low iPhone penetration is outside the US, combined with how many new people use the Internet for the first time each day in India alone (100,000,000 per year, most of that being accessed over a mobile device), it's clear that smartphones haven't hit 100% potential market penetration the way "food" has.

Re: How Android gets to 100% market share

#37

Post by Touche »

vlan0 wrote: post #28
patwolf wrote: post #24

My grandfather was a Ford man. He would only ever buy a Ford, even during periods when other manufacturers were making vastly superior vehicles. I used to think such loyalty was a silly generational thing. My generation was a fickle consumer. We would research and decide on a purchase based purely on merit. That's how I was with phones. When iPhone was the most compelling phone, I would buy an iPhone. When there was…

I find a lot of those brand loyalist tend to be foolish in many ways. They make decisions based on emotion, rather than analytical thought. I worked in retail for a good part of a decade, and I was dumbfounded by the number of people who would never buy another product from X manufacture based on a single poor experience with one product. It's simply an emotional response to their unpleasant experience which results…

Or making the statistically correct purchasing decision is not the most important thing in their life.

Re: How Android gets to 100% market share

#38

Post by Amir6 »

If something works and as long as it is not such a crucial part of your life and its a matter of life and death, you can (in many cases) always go with what has worked previously. One other argument can be the cost benefit analysis of the research itself. The time and energy (which ultimately translates to money in some sense) you put on research may not be worth the feature(s) one option offers over the other. You may never use that feature or in case of price, how much you may have to more for the brand you are loyal to may be less expensive than the risk you take by going with an option which you yourself have not tested first hand.

Re: How Android gets to 100% market share

#40

Post by allengeorge »

vlan0 wrote: post #28
patwolf wrote: post #24

My grandfather was a Ford man. He would only ever buy a Ford, even during periods when other manufacturers were making vastly superior vehicles. I used to think such loyalty was a silly generational thing. My generation was a fickle consumer. We would research and decide on a purchase based purely on merit. That's how I was with phones. When iPhone was the most compelling phone, I would buy an iPhone. When there was…

I find a lot of those brand loyalist tend to be foolish in many ways. They make decisions based on emotion, rather than analytical thought. I worked in retail for a good part of a decade, and I was dumbfounded by the number of people who would never buy another product from X manufacture based on a single poor experience with one product. It's simply an emotional response to their unpleasant experience which results…

Maybe it's because they value their time/money more than giving the manufacturer another chance? It's a hassle to have to deal with a defective product. If you're lucky, you catch the defect early and can return it (though shipping is a hassle). If you're unlucky, you'll do the repair-dance: all the shipping hassles plus not having the use of the product for however long it takes to be fixed.

Yeah. Life is too short to deal with those kinds of problems.

Post reply on HN