Apple vs Android

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Lawrence D'Oliveiro, May 28, 2011.

  1. There’s a statistic I read somewhere which says that Apple makes more profit
    in the smartphone market than all the other handset vendors put together.
    This even though its share of the market is well short of 50%.

    This may very well be true, for now. But it’s clearly not a sustainable
    situation. Apple is being outflanked by Android products from all sides:
    from above and below its price points, from a range of form factors that it
    has publicly declared it will not consider (like 5" and 7" tablets), and
    from completely unlikely categories of devices it has not even thought of:
    you can get Android e-book readers, Android TVs, Android game consoles, even
    an Android washing machine.

    Apple was king of the smartphones for about two years; it will probably
    remain king of the tablets for one year.

    The next groundbreaking ultramobile device after that will quite likely not
    come from Apple.
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, May 28, 2011
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    victor Guest

    On 29/05/2011 1:18 a.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > There’s a statistic I read somewhere which says that Apple makes more profit
    > in the smartphone market than all the other handset vendors put together.
    > This even though its share of the market is well short of 50%.
    >
    > This may very well be true, for now. But it’s clearly not a sustainable
    > situation. Apple is being outflanked by Android products from all sides:
    > from above and below its price points, from a range of form factors that it
    > has publicly declared it will not consider (like 5" and 7" tablets), and
    > from completely unlikely categories of devices it has not even thought of:
    > you can get Android e-book readers, Android TVs, Android game consoles, even
    > an Android washing machine.
    >
    > Apple was king of the smartphones for about two years; it will probably
    > remain king of the tablets for one year.
    >
    > The next groundbreaking ultramobile device after that will quite likely not
    > come from Apple.


    That has always been a sustainable market situation for Apple, to create
    the best user experience and be known for it.
    Other people came up with laptops and mp3 players and phones.
    They don't have to break new ground, but they have an advantage in their
    control of the human interface hardware and software.
    Where Googles advantage will become apparent will probably be in voice
    control and voice search and translation, and Google Goggles,
    streetview, real time traffic routing, that sort of thing. Android is
    not about linux, its about Google.
     
    victor, May 28, 2011
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. In message <irru40$hl1$>, victor wrote:

    > That has always been a sustainable market situation for Apple, to create
    > the best user experience and be known for it.


    Only partially true. For example, the i-devices have an atrocious system for
    handling notifications; Android does it much smoother. And don’t forget the
    multitasking.

    > Other people came up with laptops and mp3 players and phones.
    > They don't have to break new ground, but they have an advantage in their
    > control of the human interface hardware and software.


    Only partially true, as I said.

    > Where Googles advantage will become apparent will probably be in voice
    > control and voice search and translation, and Google Goggles,
    > streetview, real time traffic routing, that sort of thing. Android is
    > not about linux, its about Google.


    Where do you think Google makes its money from, with Android?
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, May 29, 2011
    #3
  4. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    victor Guest

    On 29/05/2011 11:54 a.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > In message<irru40$hl1$>, victor wrote:
    >
    >> That has always been a sustainable market situation for Apple, to create
    >> the best user experience and be known for it.

    >
    > Only partially true. For example, the i-devices have an atrocious system for
    > handling notifications; Android does it much smoother. And don’t forget the
    > multitasking.
    >
    >> Other people came up with laptops and mp3 players and phones.
    >> They don't have to break new ground, but they have an advantage in their
    >> control of the human interface hardware and software.

    >
    > Only partially true, as I said.
    >
    >> Where Googles advantage will become apparent will probably be in voice
    >> control and voice search and translation, and Google Goggles,
    >> streetview, real time traffic routing, that sort of thing. Android is
    >> not about linux, its about Google.

    >
    > Where do you think Google makes its money from, with Android?


    Search ads, more clicks. give away an OS that accelerates the progress
    of location based search.

    I highly recommend you read "In the Plex" by Steven Levy
    I'm a big Google and Android fan, but I don't see any reason to bag
    Apple, they're a great pacemaker for Android.
     
    victor, May 29, 2011
    #4
  5. In message <irs8ju$mmj$>, victor wrote:

    > I'm a big Google and Android fan, but I don't see any reason to bag
    > Apple, they're a great pacemaker for Android.


    I’m not bagging Apple, just pointing out facts.

    They were able to move in and dominate the MP3 player market, in spite of
    not being the first, because the only existing players were using limited,
    proprietary systems.

    They were able to move in and dominate smartphones, for the same reason.

    They were able to move in and dominate tablets, because the only competition
    was running Windows, which is hopeless on a tablet.

    But now Android is here, and spreading everywhere like wildfire. So when
    somebody else invents a new device category, Apple will not be the 2nd or
    3rd entrant into the market, it will more likely be the 10th.
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, May 29, 2011
    #5
  6. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    victor Guest

    On 29/05/2011 2:18 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > In message<irs8ju$mmj$>, victor wrote:


    >
    > But now Android is here, and spreading everywhere like wildfire. So when
    > somebody else invents a new device category, Apple will not be the 2nd or
    > 3rd entrant into the market, it will more likely be the 10th.


    But as their track record demonstrates, they will still do a great job
    if and when they do enter the market.
    I don't see your point.
     
    victor, May 29, 2011
    #6
  7. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    victor Guest

    On 29/05/2011 1:18 a.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > There’s a statistic I read somewhere which says that Apple makes more profit
    > in the smartphone market than all the other handset vendors put together.
    > This even though its share of the market is well short of 50%.
    >
    > This may very well be true, for now. But it’s clearly not a sustainable
    > situation. Apple is being outflanked by Android products from all sides:
    > from above and below its price points, from a range of form factors that it
    > has publicly declared it will not consider (like 5" and 7" tablets), and
    > from completely unlikely categories of devices it has not even thought of:
    > you can get Android e-book readers, Android TVs, Android game consoles, even
    > an Android washing machine.
    >
    > Apple was king of the smartphones for about two years; it will probably
    > remain king of the tablets for one year.
    >
    > The next groundbreaking ultramobile device after that will quite likely not
    > come from Apple.


    The next groundbreaking development is already enabled in Android and
    not yet available on iOS.
    Any idea ?
     
    victor, May 29, 2011
    #7
  8. In message <irsbo4$shh$>, victor wrote:

    > On 29/05/2011 2:18 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >
    >> In message<irs8ju$mmj$>, victor wrote:
    >>
    >> But now Android is here, and spreading everywhere like wildfire. So when
    >> somebody else invents a new device category, Apple will not be the 2nd or
    >> 3rd entrant into the market, it will more likely be the 10th.

    >
    > But as their track record demonstrates, they will still do a great job
    > if and when they do enter the market.
    > I don't see your point.


    They are no longer able to do a better job than the competition, as I
    pointed out.
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, May 29, 2011
    #8
  9. In message <irscm2$toe$>, victor wrote:

    > The next groundbreaking development is already enabled in Android and
    > not yet available on iOS.
    > Any idea ?


    Look at history to get some clues.

    Look at the netbook, for example: as a new product category, it came as a
    complete surprise to both Intel and Microsoft. It was like a breath of fresh
    air, until between the two of them they managed to bring restrictions to
    bear to stop the category becoming too innovative, until eventually it
    stagnated and is now in decline.

    With the ARM-based devices, nobody is in a position to do this. There is no
    Intel ordering “you can’t use this chip in that form factor or with that
    configurationâ€; no Microsoft decreeing “you can’t make that enhancement to
    our softwareâ€; it is very much a free-for-all. Google does not “controlâ€
    Android; the only thing it really controls is the Android Market, and even
    that is very much an optional part of the Android experience—the competition
    is seeing to that.
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, May 29, 2011
    #9
  10. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Gordon Guest

    On 2011-05-28, victor <> wrote:
    > On 29/05/2011 1:18 a.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >> There?s a statistic I read somewhere which says that Apple makes more profit
    >> in the smartphone market than all the other handset vendors put together.
    >> This even though its share of the market is well short of 50%.
    >>
    >> This may very well be true, for now. But it?s clearly not a sustainable
    >> situation. Apple is being outflanked by Android products from all sides:
    >> from above and below its price points, from a range of form factors that it
    >> has publicly declared it will not consider (like 5" and 7" tablets), and
    >> from completely unlikely categories of devices it has not even thought of:
    >> you can get Android e-book readers, Android TVs, Android game consoles, even
    >> an Android washing machine.
    >>
    >> Apple was king of the smartphones for about two years; it will probably
    >> remain king of the tablets for one year.
    >>
    >> The next groundbreaking ultramobile device after that will quite likely not
    >> come from Apple.

    >
    > That has always been a sustainable market situation for Apple, to create
    > the best user experience and be known for it.


    Let us not forget about Marketing. Propoganda in feel good clothing.
     
    Gordon, May 29, 2011
    #10
  11. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    victor Guest

    On 29/05/2011 3:50 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > In message<irscm2$toe$>, victor wrote:
    >
    >> The next groundbreaking development is already enabled in Android and
    >> not yet available on iOS.
    >> Any idea ?

    >
    > Look at history to get some clues.
    >

    I asked you.
     
    victor, May 29, 2011
    #11
  12. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    victor Guest

    On 29/05/2011 6:00 p.m., whoisthis wrote:
    > In article<>,
    > Gordon<> wrote:
    >
    >> On 2011-05-28, victor<> wrote:


    >>>
    >>> That has always been a sustainable market situation for Apple, to create
    >>> the best user experience and be known for it.

    >>
    >> Let us not forget about Marketing. Propoganda in feel good clothing.

    >
    > an opinion which I am sure you believe. The truth is some what different.


    Why not admit it ?
    Apple are good at marketing and they have great products to sell
     
    victor, May 29, 2011
    #12
  13. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    victor Guest

    On 29/05/2011 3:50 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > In message<irscm2$toe$>, victor wrote:
    >
    >> The next groundbreaking development is already enabled in Android and
    >> not yet available on iOS.
    >> Any idea ?

    >
    > Look at history to get some clues.
    >
    > Look at the netbook, for example: as a new product category, it came as a
    > complete surprise to both Intel and Microsoft. It was like a breath of fresh
    > air, until between the two of them they managed to bring restrictions to
    > bear to stop the category becoming too innovative, until eventually it
    > stagnated and is now in decline.
    >
    > With the ARM-based devices, nobody is in a position to do this. There is no
    > Intel ordering “you can’t use this chip in that form factor or with that
    > configurationâ€; no Microsoft decreeing “you can’t make that enhancement to
    > our softwareâ€; it is very much a free-for-all. Google does not “controlâ€
    > Android; the only thing it really controls is the Android Market, and even
    > that is very much an optional part of the Android experience—the competition
    > is seeing to that.


    Even though the software is open-source, device manufacturers can not
    use Google's Android trademark unless Google certifies that the device
    complies with their Compatibility Definition Document (CDD). Devices
    must also meet this definition to be eligible to license Google's
    closed-source applications, including the Android Market.
    The hardware manufacturers don't seem to see Google as an adversary.
     
    victor, May 29, 2011
    #13
  14. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    David Empson Guest

    geoff <> wrote:

    > whoisthis wrote:
    > > In article <irt000$479$>, victor
    > > <> wrote:
    > >
    > >> On 29/05/2011 3:50 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > >>> In message<irscm2$toe$>, victor wrote:
    > >>>
    > >>>> The next groundbreaking development is already enabled in Android
    > >>>> and not yet available on iOS.
    > >>>> Any idea ?
    > >>>
    > >>> Look at history to get some clues.
    > >>>
    > >> I asked you.

    > >
    > > Yes lets look
    > > Sinclair Z88

    >
    > ZX80 and ZX81 that was ....


    No it wasn't. The Z88 was a later (1987/1988) battery powered portable
    computer with a built-in display.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Z88

    The ZX80 and ZX81 plugged into a TV and needed mains power, so in no way
    could they be regarded as "portable".

    --
    David Empson
     
    David Empson, May 30, 2011
    #14
  15. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    victor Guest

    On 30/05/2011 9:59 a.m., geoff wrote:
    > victor wrote:
    >
    >> I highly recommend you read "In the Plex" by Steven Levy
    >> I'm a big Google and Android fan, but I don't see any reason to bag
    >> Apple, they're a great pacemaker for Android.

    >
    > If Microsoft's business model galls Linix followers, surely Apple's is ten
    > times worse ?!!!
    >
    > geoff
    >
    >

    I don't think the people who buy Android powered phones are anti
    Microsoft, they may have even upgraded from Microsoft powered phones.
     
    victor, May 30, 2011
    #15
  16. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Msgr Scooter Guest

    On , , Mon, 30 May 2011 12:14:32 +1200, Re: Apple vs Android,
    (David Empson) wrote:

    >geoff <> wrote:
    >
    >> whoisthis wrote:
    >> > In article <irt000$479$>, victor
    >> > <> wrote:
    >> >
    >> >> On 29/05/2011 3:50 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >> >>> In message<irscm2$toe$>, victor wrote:
    >> >>>
    >> >>>> The next groundbreaking development is already enabled in Android
    >> >>>> and not yet available on iOS.
    >> >>>> Any idea ?
    >> >>>
    >> >>> Look at history to get some clues.
    >> >>>
    >> >> I asked you.
    >> >
    >> > Yes lets look
    >> > Sinclair Z88

    >>
    >> ZX80 and ZX81 that was ....

    >
    >No it wasn't. The Z88 was a later (1987/1988) battery powered portable
    >computer with a built-in display.
    >
    >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Z88
    >
    >The ZX80 and ZX81 plugged into a TV and needed mains power, so in no way
    >could they be regarded as "portable".


    From memory my ZX81 didn't run off the mains, it had a power adapter like a wall
    wart.

    --
    "The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor
    to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."
    Anatole France.
     
    Msgr Scooter, May 30, 2011
    #16
  17. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    victor Guest

    On 30/05/2011 6:02 p.m., whoisthis wrote:
    > In article<irv0nj$a8e$>, victor<>
    > wrote:
    >
    >> On 29/05/2011 9:00 p.m., whoisthis wrote:
    >>> In article<irt04u$479$>, victor<>
    >>> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> On 29/05/2011 6:00 p.m., whoisthis wrote:
    >>>>> In article<>,
    >>>>> Gordon<> wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> On 2011-05-28, victor<> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> That has always been a sustainable market situation for Apple, to create
    >>>>>>> the best user experience and be known for it.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Let us not forget about Marketing. Propoganda in feel good clothing.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> an opinion which I am sure you believe. The truth is some what different.
    >>>>
    >>>> Why not admit it ?
    >>>> Apple are good at marketing and they have great products to sell
    >>>
    >>> No, I would reverse that, they have great products and they are good at
    >>> marketing.

    >>
    >> Fucked if I can see the difference
    >> Please explain ?
    >>

    >
    > For a start the great products come FIRST.


    No its quite possible to be skilled in marketing and then apply that
    skill to selling a product.
     
    victor, May 30, 2011
    #17
  18. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    victor Guest

    On 30/05/2011 8:29 p.m., whoisthis wrote:
    > In article<irvjuf$5fh$>, victor<>
    > wrote:
    >
    >> On 30/05/2011 6:02 p.m., whoisthis wrote:
    >>> In article<irv0nj$a8e$>, victor<>
    >>> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> On 29/05/2011 9:00 p.m., whoisthis wrote:
    >>>>> In article<irt04u$479$>, victor<>
    >>>>> wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> On 29/05/2011 6:00 p.m., whoisthis wrote:
    >>>>>>> In article<>,
    >>>>>>> Gordon<> wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> On 2011-05-28, victor<> wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> That has always been a sustainable market situation for Apple, to
    >>>>>>>>> create
    >>>>>>>>> the best user experience and be known for it.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Let us not forget about Marketing. Propoganda in feel good clothing.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> an opinion which I am sure you believe. The truth is some what
    >>>>>>> different.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Why not admit it ?
    >>>>>> Apple are good at marketing and they have great products to sell
    >>>>>
    >>>>> No, I would reverse that, they have great products and they are good at
    >>>>> marketing.
    >>>>
    >>>> Fucked if I can see the difference
    >>>> Please explain ?
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> For a start the great products come FIRST.

    >>
    >> No its quite possible to be skilled in marketing and then apply that
    >> skill to selling a product.

    >
    > But that is NOT what Apple does.
    > Most of the hype Apple gets comes from elsewhere with all the "iPod
    > killers", "iPhone killers", "iPad killers"...... all free marketing for
    > Apple as everyone has already accepted the Apple products are the best.


    bullshit

    In their own words

    http://www.apple.com/jobs/us/corporate.html#marketing

    "Apple is known not only for its extraordinary products, but also for
    its outstanding marketing and advertising. Our world-class Marketing
    team comprises some of the smartest, most dedicated people on the
    planet. From graphic design to events to public relations, they ensure
    that all of our messaging lives up to the Apple standard of excellence."


    If you can find a cite from them that supports your absurd assertion,
    post it.
     
    victor, May 30, 2011
    #18
  19. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    David Empson Guest

    Msgr Scooter <aqc.zwoau@fshccqg.123> wrote:

    > On , , Mon, 30 May 2011 12:14:32 +1200, Re: Apple vs Android,
    > (David Empson) wrote:
    >
    > >geoff <> wrote:
    > >
    > >> whoisthis wrote:
    > >> > In article <irt000$479$>, victor
    > >> > <> wrote:
    > >> >
    > >> >> On 29/05/2011 3:50 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > >> >>> In message<irscm2$toe$>, victor wrote:
    > >> >>>
    > >> >>>> The next groundbreaking development is already enabled in Android
    > >> >>>> and not yet available on iOS.
    > >> >>>> Any idea ?
    > >> >>>
    > >> >>> Look at history to get some clues.
    > >> >>>
    > >> >> I asked you.
    > >> >
    > >> > Yes lets look
    > >> > Sinclair Z88
    > >>
    > >> ZX80 and ZX81 that was ....

    > >
    > >No it wasn't. The Z88 was a later (1987/1988) battery powered portable
    > >computer with a built-in display.
    > >
    > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Z88
    > >
    > >The ZX80 and ZX81 plugged into a TV and needed mains power, so in no way
    > >could they be regarded as "portable".

    >
    > From memory my ZX81 didn't run off the mains, it had a power adapter like
    > a wall wart.


    Agreed, but that's not relevant.

    Even if you argue that the ZX81 itself could be operated from a battery
    pack with the right connector, it wouldn't have been practical in 1981
    to operate a TV that way for very long, and the resulting system would
    certainly not be "ultraportable" as this subthread was talking about.

    If you got a miniature TV and put the whole shebang into some kind of
    case (with batteries), you would have a large luggable item, not
    something resembling later devices like the Psion, Newton or Palm.

    --
    David Empson
     
    David Empson, May 30, 2011
    #19
  20. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Msgr Scooter Guest

    On , , Mon, 30 May 2011 22:57:19 +1200, Re: Apple vs Android,
    (David Empson) wrote:

    >Msgr Scooter <aqc.zwoau@fshccqg.123> wrote:
    >
    >> On , , Mon, 30 May 2011 12:14:32 +1200, Re: Apple vs Android,
    >> (David Empson) wrote:
    >>
    >> >geoff <> wrote:
    >> >
    >> >> whoisthis wrote:
    >> >> > In article <irt000$479$>, victor
    >> >> > <> wrote:
    >> >> >
    >> >> >> On 29/05/2011 3:50 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >> >> >>> In message<irscm2$toe$>, victor wrote:
    >> >> >>>
    >> >> >>>> The next groundbreaking development is already enabled in Android
    >> >> >>>> and not yet available on iOS.
    >> >> >>>> Any idea ?
    >> >> >>>
    >> >> >>> Look at history to get some clues.
    >> >> >>>
    >> >> >> I asked you.
    >> >> >
    >> >> > Yes lets look
    >> >> > Sinclair Z88
    >> >>
    >> >> ZX80 and ZX81 that was ....
    >> >
    >> >No it wasn't. The Z88 was a later (1987/1988) battery powered portable
    >> >computer with a built-in display.
    >> >
    >> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Z88
    >> >
    >> >The ZX80 and ZX81 plugged into a TV and needed mains power, so in no way
    >> >could they be regarded as "portable".

    >>
    >> From memory my ZX81 didn't run off the mains, it had a power adapter like
    >> a wall wart.

    >
    >Agreed, but that's not relevant.


    I obviously read it differently, but I agree with your points.
    I was thinking of just the ZX81 rather than the ZX81 and the TV required.

    >Even if you argue that the ZX81 itself could be operated from a battery
    >pack with the right connector, it wouldn't have been practical in 1981
    >to operate a TV that way for very long, and the resulting system would
    >certainly not be "ultraportable" as this subthread was talking about.
    >
    >If you got a miniature TV and put the whole shebang into some kind of
    >case (with batteries), you would have a large luggable item, not
    >something resembling later devices like the Psion, Newton or Palm.


    --
    "The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor
    to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."
    Anatole France.
     
    Msgr Scooter, May 30, 2011
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Apple Driving Adobe To Android?

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Jun 5, 2010, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    284
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    Jun 5, 2010
  2. Ganesh J. Acharya

    Symbian, Android, Apple, or Microsoft

    Ganesh J. Acharya, Dec 24, 2010, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    912
    Ganesh J. Acharya
    Dec 27, 2010
  3. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Android, Android, Android

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, May 21, 2011, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    800
    Boots
    May 21, 2011
  4. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Apple Copies Android

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Jun 7, 2011, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    341
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    Jun 7, 2011
  5. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Apple Doesn’t Copy Android

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Jun 7, 2011, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    456
    Richard
    Jun 8, 2011
Loading...

Share This Page