Android and Apple OS shares show mountain MS must climb Microsoft’s Windows Phone mobile operating system was loaded on 2.4 per cent of the smartphones that shipped around the world during the third quarter of 2012. Even if the new version, Windows Phone 8, isn’t a major success, it should still lift the OS past Symbian. Nokia’s other, older mobile OS was to found on 2.6 per cent …
Fairly pointless using Q3 as a benchmark of how popular (or not) Windows Phone was. It was just after Microsoft dropped the bombshell that WP7 devices wouldn't get WP8. So nobody is really going to buy a phone on contract for two years knowing it will not get much in the way of updates after 6 months.
Because many iphones and Android phones dont get their updates. And seeing as phone cycles are about 1-2 year contracts, it isnt all that bad. When companies are syncing everything, and MS is consolidating all its houses(OSes , services, storage, contacts etc...) under a common environment. Its making life much easier for individuals as well as IT companies.
But its working so well - that there are some privacy issues that are coming up: I mean I keep some things separate for a reason and now Live messenager,Facebook, and soon Skype will be syncing all my contacts. Im already getting confused when someone leaves me a FB message and it pops up under Live messenger.
So thats MY complaint.: the sync works well - but I think they need to put in more hubs to exclude contacts from being mixed in the information hubs.
The royalty (if they are getting it).means nothing
Every phone not running a MS OS is running someone else browser (with the ad revenue), selling apps that MS gets 0 centson (and drives MS developers to other platforms) for and push MS even more back in the public mind when they think of computing.
MS has to work very hard just to become a bit player in this market - and make no mistake - mobile is the future.
having had WP7 foisted on my, by an evangelical IT department (who have now canned it, for the reasons I shall list), I have actually grown used to it. And to be fair, it pretty much does the job with a couple of glaring exceptions:
1) can't record calls (although I have since learned that iOS can't either, and it's a limitation of the OS architecture no being able to run a background app while the phone is active)
2) no bluetooth file transfer
The fact that WP7 won't be upgraded to WP8 is a massive slap in the face. It's clear that MS regard WP7 as a stopgap, like WP6.5 was to WinCE, so there is a sense of being lumbered with WP7.
However, the biggest killer, is the total lack of apps. I refer people to a lack of BBC apps for WP7 for a start. There have been a few occasions when I've notice useful business apps that aren't available for WP7. It's this app-free feature which (IMHO) is going to do for WP8.
From what I hear, you'll be getting all of the features that the older hardware supports, just like is done on Apple. It's just that MS are being honest and clear by calling it "7.8" instead of "8", whilst Apple pretend it's the latest version of the OS but disable features.
(Same point when people moan that old Android phones don't get upgraded after a certain point.)
Lack of applications is indeed a problem. It's unfair that Apple has always been catered for first, when it's never been the number one platform. It's ridiculous that even Android is still lacking support from some places, despite the overwhelming lead it has over everything else. (Though personally I'd rather that companies simply provided decent websites that worked on mobile devices, rather than using closed proprietary exes that only work on some kind of devices, a solution even worse than the Flash it was meant to replace.)
> From what I hear, you'll be getting all of the features that the older hardware supports, just like is done on Apple. It's just that MS are being honest and clear by calling it "7.8" instead of "8",
Then you heard wrong - you probably believed a RICHTO post. The only thing actually announced for 7.8 is some minor start page UI cosmetic issues, such as extra colours and additional sizes for tiles, to have it match TIFKAM.
> It's unfair that Apple has always been catered for first, when it's never been the number one platform
You misread an article on how developers decide which platform to develop for and then complain about this based on your misunderstanding.
I don't know the details on what's in 7.8 - are there features being held back, which would run on the older phones?
"You misread an article on how developers decide which platform to develop for and then complain about this based on your misunderstanding."
My comment wasn't based on any article. Though now you mention it - the recent article claimed that developers did pick market share as the number one reason to develop for a platform (and presumably then picked iphone first due to a delusion on which was actually most popular).
> Though now you mention it - the recent article claimed that developers did pick market share as the number one reason to develop for a platform (and presumably then picked iphone first due to a delusion on which was actually most popular).
Yes, that was the one you misread and continue to show your misunderstanding of it.
The developers said that what was important was "_A_ large userbase" which you misread as 'the largest userbase'. Android has _a_ large userbase. Apple has _a_ large userbase.
I am afraid that it is only _your_ delusion about what was said.
"It's unfair that Apple has always been catered for first, when it's never been the number one platform"
Life's unfair as well!
Developers are going to develop for the platform that make them (the most) money. If that platform is iOS or W8 then so be it. Android may be the number one platform in terms of deployment, but if there isn't any money in it, why bother?
Ah yes, the money argument - reeks of the old "But Linux users don't pay for anything" stigma.
The flaw in this argument is free apps - indeed, it's free software that I was primarily talking about. The kind of apps that are given away for a service or website, so there's no money being made, and it's either to advertise a company, website or service, or to provide for your readers or customers. Either way, nothing to do with what people are paying.
I wouldn't mind if Apple had more of the expensive apps, because I'm not interested in those - I much prefer Android where you get it all for free. I'm talking about the free apps you see for websites/services, some of which still seem to be Apple-only.
1- yes you can get a free phone recorder. Though expected right to privacy laws may differ in states - the attorneys should know this.
2- No, just use a cloud storage instead - there are many that your company or an individual can use.
3- The upgrade has a few features I like, but thats mostly for hardware - and contracts are 1-2 years so the cycle isnt too poor : seriously compared to Android and IOS ?!
Ive looked looked up BBC apps: the only question is WHICH of the many are you talking about? I agree there are a few that arent there, but most are and many are jumping on the wp8 bandwagon that I never thought would. Box is which kind of amazed me.
Maybe if you asked your IT department they'd tell you the exact things I am.
Oh look, no link. I bet you're one of these thickies who thinks "voice recorder" is the same as "phone recorder".
The feature the OP was talking about was the ability to record phone calls made on the WP7 device. (Something you could get an app for in Windows Phone 6.5). Would be invaluable for conference calling.
It's misleading to put "Android and Apple" on the same level as done in the headline, and so often done by the media - it's Android that dominates above all else, as the article notes with the stats later in the article. Apple being second place doesn't mean that much, when it's also so far behind like everyone else anyway.
It is a shame Nokia ditched number one Symbian, if the WP strategy doesn't work out - whatever platform you prefer, I think it's healthier to have more competition, and as much as I love Android, it is a bit worrying if the choice becomes only that, or Apple as the alternative.
The article doesn't mention Nokia's new low end smartphone platform, Asha: this sold 6 million in Q3 IIRC, a figure higher than Symbian and WP. (I do hope the media or these "analysts" in general aren't going to filter out the Asha sales, just to make Nokia look worse than they are. It may be low end, but we don't discount low end Android or WP phones; and the original iphone got counted as a smartphone even though it could run apps - Asha meanwhile does apps, Internet, large fullsize touchscreens, and loads of other features just like any other smartphone.)
Though if we're playing games of "WP's share is even lower than", we should note the sales figures are *higher* than iphone in its first few quarters, and the media were already praising that as an amazing success ("one million after 76 days" etc). I don't recall the media saying it was doing badly, and talking about the mountain it had to climb. Which is it?
It's a descendant of S40, not Symbian - some info at http://www.allaboutsymbian.com/flow/item/15790_Nokias_Asha_Touch_now_official.php . (True, it's arguably not "brand new", but previously had yet to be classified as a "smartphone", and indeed most S40 phones still aren't, only the new full-touch Asha ones.)
This post has been deleted by its author
> filter out the Asha sales, just to make Nokia look worse than they are.
I suspect it is Nokia, or Microsoft via Elop, that is 'filtering out' Asha. They call it a featurephone so that it doesn't make WP sales look worse than they are.
> note the sales figures are *higher* than iphone in its first few quarters
Microsoft had WinCE PC Phones, WM phones, WP7 phones and now WP8. It is somewhat past the 'first few quarters'. WP7 itself is over two years old.
Yes, I never understood why companies like Nokia and Samsung downplayed their own products with the "feature phone" designation (though recently Nokia did annouce that Asha was now a smartphone - not sure if they've counted this in their quarterly reports though).
Apple had plenty of earlier platforms in the mobile market too (ipods, Newton), I'm not sure that changes anything when WP is a new OS. My point wasn't about "first few quarters" being significant, I was just referring to the time when it happened, I couldn't have well said "2007-2010". And even if we do say that MS have been rather crap in the past, it's still only the first year for Nokia with WP.
It wasn't until a year ago with the iphone 4/4S that Apple's sales actually became a significant player.
Not necessarily. That shows Mobile Devices, not smartphones. iPADs are probably the top consumer of websites for mobile devices at the moment.
I would doubt many people do 'normal' browsing on smartphones very often. Android tablets, although making up good ground with some fantastic devices, can't yet match the prevalence of 10" iPads, especially outside of Asia.
Well indeed, but that is even more reason why it's a poor indicator of actual installed userbase.
(And if we're including large 10" devices as "mobile", the line becomes even more blurred - what about Windows ultra-portable laptops/netbooks?)
I'd also be curious to see a citation for the claim about most "mobile" (non-Windows) browsing being on ipads. I'd say people are accessing websites all the time on mobile devices, whilst the minority of ipad owners keep them at home. Plus I thought the split was pretty close on non-phone tablets, 60/40 at best.
Actually if you look at this page for data on mobile Browser/operating system market share, you will see that Apple is way ahead although Android has grown steadily. For some reason Apple users are more active in terms of internet use. I'm sure someone will have a salacious/abusive explanation for that ;-)
http://www.netmarketshare.com/search-engine-market-share.aspx?qprid=4&qpcustomd=1
It's for all mobile devices. It's a transactional health & lifestyle website and represents a good cross-section of society -- definitely not technical.
As I understand it, when it comes to tablets there's one massive player, Apple. The others aren't anywhere near as popular.
I've checked the figures I gave and the iOS figures are 50/50 iPad/iPhone (judging by the resolutions), e.g. around 30% each.
Android large screens are about 8.5% (spread across about 15 screen resolutions).
Is there something wrong with these results?
Clarification: when I say "market share" I mean market share - number of devices sold, or in use. I don't mean share of Internet usage, which is rather different.
But even telling Internet usage share is notoriously hard, with different trackers showing different things - I've seen others showing Android on top, or even Nokia until recently (e.g., http://www.allaboutsymbian.com/flow/item/15620_Series_40_overtakes_Symbian_wo.php ).
Just regarding what the other guy posted: Well, one of my sites gets most of its traffic from the US. A large proportion of this is "mobile traffic", despite the fact it isn't designed for (or related to) mobile phones. The majority of it is iOS, but this is split between iPad and iPhone (52% and 48% respectively). I could only do a manual device count for Android (as a wider range of phones are used vs Apple's "one" iPhone), but Android phone numbers are about the same (or a bit more than) iPhones. I was a bit surprised, really, as I thought due to the target market (a lot of over 50s, grandparents) it would be more iPhones (as it more resembles a simple-to-use feature phone, compared to Android).
All in all, this is meaningless though, it just reflects a few particular demographics and not all.
For the record: I am definitely not an Apple "fanboy" (both my tablet and phone run Android).
The trouble with weblogs is that they record what the browser is telling them.
Since the screen on my phone is a good resolution & I mainly do my surfing on wi-fi I request the desktop site, which makes the browser tell the webserver that it is a desktop browser. I would therefore not count in the stats for mobile browsing.
I am sure I am not alone.
I've got a windows phone, love it. Brilliant phone, brilliant interface, great apps. The map works. So far, no security issues. Syncs with my computer well (particularly the calendar). Don't need plastic surgery on my hand to avoid shorting the antenna. Looking forward to Windows Phone 7.8. Probably get a Windows 8 phone eventually.
Damn, sounding like am apple fan, sorry
The Register - Independent news and views for the tech community. Part of Situation Publishing
Join our daily or weekly newsletters, subscribe to a specific section or set News alerts
SUBSCRIBE
