From the list of issues and fanboi howling on Apple support sites, iPhone 6 will lose quite a few people.
Choose choice. Choose Android.
Seventy five per cent of smartphones sold in the last three months were running Android, according to IDC, though the iPhone 5 could well be to blame. The figure comes from the company's Worldwide Quarterly Mobile Phone Tracker, and covers July-September inclusive, so Apple's decision to launch a new iPhone on September 21 has …
My phone is subjected to my 9-month-old son, who likes to wave his arms while holding things. And kindof forgets to hold onto said things in mid-wave.
Android has yet to produce something that matches the iPhone's build quality. I don't much care for Apple, so that leaves Nokia. Guess that makes me part of that 3.4 million exclusive club...
We should have a top 10 list and a drinking game for lame fanboy arguments.
Put the whole "build quality" argument at #3 perhaps.
BTW, "Android" doesn't produce anything. Hardware vendors produce things. It's kind of like PCs. You're showing your total lack of technical understanding or even familiarity with Android devices here.
iOS/Android drinking game revision 1
Fandroid said "iOS 6 maps" - drink
Fanboi says "fragmentation" - drink
Fandroid says "holding it wrong" - drink
Fanboi says "build quality" - drink
Fandroid says "walled garden" - drink
Fanboi says "malware" - drink
Fandroid says "overpriced/underspecced" - drink
Fanboi says "better apps" - drink
Fandroid says "lack of innovation" - drink
Fanboi says "just works" - drink
Fandroid says "crapple" - drink
Fanboi says "Fandroid" - drink
Fandroid says "Fanboi" - drink
*Hic*!
Exactly! However, I used to quite like my old reliable '86 Ford Taurus, barely had any problems with it. Compare it with a colleague of mine to have changed 3 hdds over 5 years, while I had to change none over the same time period in the low-end Toshiba, not tainted with any Windows though and running only GNU/Linux.
(There is no Ford mascot here)
You have no idea...
My baby does the same, Which is the reason I replaced a busted iPhone with a Motorola Defy.
The Defy has survived being thrown on a stone floor for 2 years now, while my poor iPhone crapped out after 1 month.
With any phone, even the mil-spec Defy, there's some luck involved, but trust me, the iPhone was built to be thin, while the Moto phone was just built to be sturdy and waterproof.
No, I don't work for Moto, but I did feel the need to refute that poorly conceived statement
"Android has yet to produce something that matches the iPhone's build quality."
I wave holding my phone in the air trying to pull in the 3G signal (I live rural) when I sneezed. Phone took a nosedive onto tarmac road from above-head-height. I panicked as it was kind of new. Damage? Back popped open so I spent a while looking along the side of the road for the battery. Top left corner somewhat dinged, and the slidey part doesn't quite meet up. That was in April. I'm writing this on said phone now. I has worked okay since then.
It is an Xperia Mini Pro, built by SonyEricsson (not Android!).
Would I rather just enjoy riding the village bike,
or do my insecurities force me to look for a social status upgrade by virtue of iOwnership, so Apple gets to ride me?
As for Android being easy, true enough.
Cheap? I wouldn't mind. But while the Note 2 can be called an innovative and productive village bike, the price isn't that low...
Of course Apple will be happy with 15%, because it's the TOP 15%, i.e. where all the money and profit is. That's their business model, don't you know? They could release cheaper products and gain the mass market, but why bother? You don't catch Audi or BMW making cheap run-arounds to compete with kia do you? duh.
N.B. I don't own Apple products for that very reason, but then again I drive a Ford and not a Merc, so I'm probably not their target market.
I'm not saying it's the top 15% in terms of the people buying them, or even the quality of the products. But it is the top 15% in terms of the price charged and profit made on each device (not to mention the itunes cut). Apple own that end of the market, that's what they aimed for, and that's what they got. It's a business model. Google has a different business model for Android. Both models work.
Top 15%? Remember also used to be "there isn't a tablet market, there's an iPad market" etc.
Listen to a BBC business podcast today where someone was saying that the reason the US auto industry got into its current state was that Japanese manufacturers came in at the bottom of the market and the US manufacturers withdrew from that marked happy to lose low margin business and keep there dominance in the top and middle ranges. Slowly the Japanese manufacturers moved upwards and the US manufacturers didn't compete as hard as they could have because they were still holding onto the higher end with its better margins. Then eventually Japanese brands addressed the top end with Lexus etc and the US manufacturers had lost.
Apple may be happy thinking that they own the top of the market but while they may do now its not a given. Couple of years ago android phones were portrayed as cheap and underpowered ... hasn't taken long for them to catch up and perhaps in some areas overtake iPhone.
The reason that the US auto industry got into trouble was, at bottom, lack of R&D and poor quality control. I remember an NYT review from years ago that said "If you want to know why a VW Golf costs so much more than the US equivalent, try sitting in one for five minutes".
Apple's problem is different; there is only so much you can do with a handheld computer, and the competition will catch up. You can only optimise browsers and GPUs so far. But it is hard to turn a high margin business into a low margin business. The traditional US solution - find cheap assemblers - ends up with quality control problems, whether in Mexico or China.
The steady decline of the AAPL share price from its ridiculous high does suggest that a few brokers and traders have looked long and hard at their new toys and thought "hmmm..."
"Couple of years ago android phones were portrayed as cheap and underpowered ... hasn't taken long for them to catch up and perhaps in some areas overtake iPhone."
They were portrayed that way, but it was always a myth - the iphone had to play catch up for years to other platforms (3G, copy/paste, maps, even apps!) If Android was ever behind, this could only have been in the very early days - when other platforms (like Symbian) were way ahead of iphone anyway.
No. Your silly overpriced consumer gadget is not a surrogate for a car that everyone here knows you will NEVER be able to afford. It's simply not something you can lord over the rest of us.
Plus, we're just not ignorant enough here.
We realize that it's just a Ford with a different nameplate on the outside.
Did you read the N.B part of my OP? no, nevermind. Perhaps apple could address this by inventing a cheaper brand? Like VW own Skoda, Seat, VW, Audi, Lamborghini, and Bugatti. Maybe they need a cheap and cheerful brand to gain the low end without sacrificing the high.. Opple? Banana? bphone? Just the same phones made with slower processors, low res screens, and made of cheap plastic.
And let's not forget - still more than what the iphone platform sold in 6 months, back in 2007. Remember when "one million in 76 days" was hailed as an amazing success? And that was with vast amounts of media hype and free advertising. Yet the ignored Symbian sold 10s of millions back then, and still sells more than that figure now with zero advertising, poor distribution in most countries, hardly any new models, and one year after it was officially ditched by Nokia. As does Windows Phone, despite WP being regarded as a "flop", whilst the iphone platform was hailed as an amazing success even in 2007, despite the poorer pathetic sales figures.
Also a shame that the article doesn't mention Nokia's new low end smartphone platform, Asha - IIRC, sold over 6 million in its first quarter!
They appear to have halved their market by switching to WP7, if 2 million of those WP7 devices are from Nokia.
So it would appear that half their customers jumped ship, a third are hanging on to Symbian, and only a sixth have gone for WP7.
That would tend to imply that the vast majority of their customers liked the system, rather than the brand, which bodes extremely badly for the future for Nokia. Windows phone really seems to be an alternative to an iPhone, rather than a replacement for Symbian. Android is the obvious move for a Symbian user who has decided it is time to move on.
WP8 would have to be a major success for Nokia to recover even to the point just before they killed their own platforms. This is made harder by the fact that whereas Symbian was their exclusive, almost as much as iOS is Apple's, but the WP8 market is shared with Samsung, HTC, etc. These other manufacturers also have no interest in WP8 being a success, because they are already part of the Android 75%, though if it is, they want their share of the pie. (And that is assuming Sumsung don't run with Tizen and make a go of it.)
I think even if it just beats iOS in market share (where's the flying pig icon?), Nokia will still have lost a lot of ground.
Of course Microsoft don't care. It is win-win for them. They get royalties from Android (I don't think they did from Symbian). So even if Symbian's share moves to Android is a financial win. And they might even be able to buy the remains of Nokia for some nice patents (or even buy them from Nokia before it goes back to making wellington boots or something.)
It is also interesting that the BlackBerry share is about the same as the sum of Symbian and WP7.
While it may be a great marketing ploy to tell consumers that Android is "free" and "open", the truth is much more muddy. The vast majority of Android users will have indirectly paid Google when they bought their phone, all for the privilege of being given access to the Google Play Store, and so they can be in the wonderful position to be oblivioisly giving Google a 30% cut of all app purchases and DRM-lock-in to Google Play, neutering much of the interoperable nature of Android.
While Apple indeed are evil, the insidious nature of Google's evil is much more dangerous with so many users blissfully unaware of it.
Android, the operating system is free, you can get it here and use it on any device you like, as many times as you like without paying a penny to anyone.
Android the brand is owned by Google and if you want to use the trademarked name and Google's proprietary applications then yes, you have to pay Google to do so.
As for paying 30% to Google. When Android was first released back in 2008, only a small amount of that 30% went into Google's pocket as a "maintenance cost" for running the then Android Market. The rest of it was given to the carrier who's network the phone was on at the time of purchase as an incentive to get carriers supporting Android.
I'm not sure if that still happens but I haven't heard anything to say otherwise since and it is still hinted at in the Developer Distribution Agreement:
"Authorised Operator: A mobile network operator who is authorized to receive a distribution fee for Products that are sold to users of Devices on its network."
Of course None of Google's stuff is 'free' since Google is a corporation in the business of making money.
Google just gets its money in other places rather than from Consumers like you and me.
You are aware, how all corporations are collecting as much data about everybody as they possibly can, to mine that data, sell that data etc?
Well, Google is the company, who directly offers you something in exchange for your data. They actually recognize that the consumer should receive something for their data being used to make money on. Since Google's software works well for me, I call it a good trade.
Neither Apple nor Microsoft think so, they just want to stuff us up with toll booths at every possible corner, and get our data for free in the process.
It's interesting that in the USA iOS increased market share in the past 12 months and Android decreases. The UK was the only area where both iOS and Android increased market share whereas in every other market Android increased and iOS decreased market share.
Blackberry and Symbian are dying (indeed one has to question wether RIM will survive long enough to release 10) and Windows Phone has yet to gain a foothold.