The downside to fragmentation (1 Viewer)

[ManW_TheUncool]

I get the feeling most folks w/ a 7" tablet would still very much prefer to surf the web on a computer instead, and if you're the type who'd choose Android over iPad, I imagine you're either very often near a computer (when near WiFi access) anyway *OR* websurfing just isn't high on your list for using a 7" tablet -- I'd also add that the iPad Mini's form factor probably has a notable edge here though not sure how much for most folks.

Also, not all the Android tablets out there are pleasant to use afterall, which would naturally impact such stats.

And have to remember that websurfing does not include web access thru apps... unless I'm mistaken. Also, do their numbers include mobile sites? I gotta think people are a good deal more likely to defer to apps and mobile sites for web access at 7" than 10"...

_Man_

 

[Sam Posten]

Not sure but good points!

 

[Sam Posten]

One other possibility:
http://www.quirksmode.org/blog/archives/2012/12/why_android_use.html
Could people really be paying the extra expense for data plans with a smartphone and not realize they are paying that amount whether they use it or not, up to their limit??? Are the sales guys that good at upselling from a dumb phone? Are people really that ignorant?

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

Well, we were talking tablets before. I doubt most people really do much surfing at all on smartphones, except maybe those w/ the GN2 or similarly large phablets... FWIW, it's been ~4 weeks since my wife got her GN2, but she really hasn't done much surfing nor used much of her data plan in general so far -- she hasn't used WiFi data much either. I definitely use my iPad3's data plan far more even though I consciously limit myself to stay w/in the 1GB/month plan I have. Of course, most of the sizable data usages are probably going to streaming/uploading video (and maybe audio to lessor degree) anyway. If you rarely ever stream or upload video (or audio) on your phone, you likely won't be using quite that much data anyway... Will be interesting to see what my mother does w/ her iPad Mini and the 1GB/month plan I put on it -- she's never had much of any internet access before... _Man_

 

[Sam Posten]

Well, the thread predates tablets. =) I guarantee you plenty of people surf like crazy on smartphones. And the plans are the same on every device. And the data doesn't break down between Wifi and cellular surfing.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

Oh, no doubt there are plenty who do surf a lot, but most probably do not really use a traditional (mobile) browser for all that much of their data consumption. Even on the iPhone, I suspect way more data is consumed via the YouTube app than mobile Safari... maybe even the FB app consumes more data than mobile Safari. I also wonder if the quoted Android browser includes all the various flavors out there, not just the one that comes w/ the device... whereas most iOS users just stick w/ Safari... FWIW, my son hasn't done much web browsing on his Nexus 7 either. He uses it mostly for games so far... and did likewise on my iPad3 before that... although he's warming up to Facebook and such a little bit more now that he has his own mobile device for access... I also saved one chunk of maps data of the NYC area in Google Maps for his offline use -- the current Android version can save an offline map just large enough (circa 85MB) to cover the entire NYC metro area from Edison to Middletown to the next town beyond Stamford to all of Nassau County (in LI), etc. Too bad the offline maps do not (yet?) include all the details needed for navigating thru mass transit although they do indicate locations of subway stations and such... Anyway, RE: the previous response about data plan usage on smartphones, I was mainly just responding to the article's point about people buying them and then not using their data plans... _Man_

 

[Sam Posten]

This guy has rejected Android after a dozen attempts and has found joy in the Nexus 4. http://www.24100.net/2013/01/an-iphone-lovers-confession-i-switched-to-the-nexus-4-completely/ Lots of caveats in there. Loves the customizability of course.

 

[Sam Posten]

Gold, Jerry, GOLD! http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2013/01/sport_app.html?postId=114875291

 

[Sam Posten]

Analyzing twitter account followers? AYflippingKM? http://www.cultofandroid.com/22246/how-apple-is-losing-to-android-internationally-report/?utm_medium=twit&utm_campaign=spread-us

 

[Hanson]

Based on nothing but speculation, the raft of foreign language third party keyboards may have something to do with the disparity. And while yes, counting Twitter followers is an unconventional methodology, it comes roughly to the same conclusions about market share reached by more conventional methods.

 

[Sam Posten]

The growth of Android installed base has not significantly spurred additional development interest according to this: http://www.wired.com/gamelife/2013/02/android-vs-iphone-games/

 

[Hanson]

So they release a quick iOS port to Android months to years after the original and they didn't make as much money? Duh!

 

[Sam Posten]

OK, so where are the big Android exclusives then? Or those that go from Android to other platforms?

 

[Hanson]

That's the problem -- no one knows, because no one has done it. They rely on their own self-fulfilling prophecy to dictate what they will develop. I forget where I read it, but there was a statistic that over 90% of app revenues come from a very small number of publishers. So just in general, app makers aren't making that much money. The ones that do, like Rovio, release simultaneously and score really big. They can promote the game once for both platforms instead of having to stagger releases and launch twice. Look at how Samsung blew up by having the same phone on all carriers. Meanwhile, HTC can only manage one carrier at a time, which makes it impossible to promote their devices. So you're not Rovio, and you don't have the resources to bear to release simultaneously. I understand that. But most of these houses started with iOS and are comfortable with it. But it will happen that the newer developers will get on the Android train, just because of install base. Once that one small developer breaks through, more will follow. It's still early in the game for Android. iOS was still the most popular mobile OS as recently as 2011. The surge took everyone by surprise and it was shockingly fast. Let's not throw dirt on Android gaming so quickly. I mean, they were throwing dirt on Android after the 4S was released.

 

[Sam Posten]

I... I don't even know where to begin there Hanson. No-where out there are small independent teams who decide to take a chance on Android as their platform of choice to get started on, fired by passion and fueled by the desire to see the platform explode? Nowhere that the gamers on Android can get behind and say "we love this platform, let's support guys who make stuff like this!"? Go look at the Touch Arcade Forums. Go look at the best sellers lists on the iTunes page. There's plenty of small fish making big splashes on iOS. It isn't all EA and Rovio, not by a long shot. they may not be making millions but they are getting sales for sure.

 

[Hanson]

Even with big development companies, a failure or two can result in bankruptcy. So developers are sticking with what they know, and they know iOS. Your scenario is going to happen, it's just not happening now. But once it does, it will trigger others to follow. Google Pay will generate more revenue than the App Store sometime this year, so it's not there's no money to be made on Android. I do wonder if the inability to charge separately and extra for the tablet version is a deciding factor. With iOS, the phone version is .99 and the "HD" tablet version is $2.99. You can't really do this on Android.

 

[Sam Posten]

Sure, it's all an illusion that iOS gets more/faster updates than Android, Giz. Whatever....

http://gizmodo.com/5987508/why-android-updates-are-so-slow

Derp.

 

[Sam Posten]

Interesting take on 'fixing' fragmentation:
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/05/how-google-updated-android-without-releasing-version-4-3/

 

[Sam Posten]

You can pooh-pooh profit share all you want, but it's clear now that it's Samsung alone who is "winning" android.

http://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/samsung-collected-95-percent-of-q1-2013-android-profits/

Globally, it’s estimated the Android industry made $5.3 billion profit in the first quarter of this year, while the profit estimates for Android phones shipped by Samsung comes in at $5.1 billion for the same period. The exact figure quoted is 94.7 percent profit share, and that’s not including tablets either.

According to Strategy Analytics’ chart, in a (very) distant second place is LG, with 2.5 percent profit share, while all the other Android phone manufacturers – think about it, that’s everyone from Sony and HTC to Huawei, Acer and ZTE – are lumped into an Others category, which totals 2.7 percent.

 

[RobertR]

Once again, Sam talks like a stockholder, not a consumer.