| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |
| Apple survey: people choose Android because of carrier, screen |
| By Thom Holwerda on 2012-08-14 22:17:47 |
| You wouldn't believe it, but something actually, truly interesting came out of the Apple vs. Samsung lawsuit yesterday. Apple had conducted a survey to find out why, exactly, consumers opted to go with Android instead of the iPhone. The results are fascinating - not only do they seem to invalidate Apple's claims, they provide an unusual insight into consumer behaviour. The gist? People choose Android not because it's an iPhone copy - they choose it because of Android's unique characteristics. |
|
| RE[3]: Comment by Tony Swash |
| By kwan_e on 2012-08-15 11:21:08 |
|
> You don't like those questions because you don't like what the answers would reveal. The only answers those questions "reveal" are the ones you've already implied in the "question", making them meaningless. THAT is why I don't like those questions. They're loaded and rhetorical and not worth serious answers. Just like those hypothetical questions I've suggested might come from a communist propaganda machine. |
 - Score: 3 |
| RE[5]: About Apple not being able to deliver |
| By dagw on 2012-08-15 11:31:46 |
|
> Samsung only sells one phone. All of Apple's phones have the same basic form factor. Samsung on the other hand offer 4 base form factors for their smart phones (small, small and waterproof, medium and large). The difference between the Xcover and the Note is far more significant than just the fact that the Note has a faster CPU and higher resolution screen. The same can hardly be said for the difference between the 3gs and 4s. In addition to this Samsung also has a large Array of simpler non-smart phones, starting from less than $30 brand new and off contract, if you're into that sort of thing. |
| - Score: 3 |
| RE[4]: About Apple not being able to deliver |
| By moondevil on 2012-08-15 11:56:31 |
|
> Apple only sells one phone. Sure you can get that phone with a better or worse screen, faster or slower CPU and more or less storage, but they are, for all intents and purposes, the same phone. From my point of view as a developer, they surely are not the same! |
| - Score: 3 |
| People choose Android because |
| By tuma324 on 2012-08-15 12:03:54 |
|
It's better, and they like it better. Plain and simple. |
| - Score: 3 |
| RE[4]: Comment by Tony Swash |
| By Tony Swash on 2012-08-15 12:15:38 |
|
> > You don't like those questions because you don't like what the answers would reveal. The only answers those questions "reveal" are the ones you've already implied in the "question", making them meaningless. THAT is why I don't like those questions. They're loaded and rhetorical and not worth serious answers. Just like those hypothetical questions I've suggested might come from a communist propaganda machine. I am not sure how to pose the issues raised by the questions I posed but which you felt were loaded. The point of raising all these issues is to point to important phenomena that seem to indicate that the device market is behaving unlike the PC market used to. Let's retry. Why is the pattern of revenue and profit taking so different in the device market compared to PC market even though in terms of platform market share we are at a point similar to where the PC market was in the mid 80s when already the PC revenues and profits were much, much greater in total than Apple's? Why is the iOS developer space so much more profitable and dynamic than the Android developer space even though platform market share is at a point similar to where the PC market was in the mid 80s when software development on PCs was already moving far ahead of Apple's in terms of revenues, dynamism etc? The same question could be posed in relation to peripherals by the way. What are the implications for platform coherence and strategic direction resulting from the differences in the way Google and Microsoft operate as managers of the OS? This relates to the issue of slow roll out of OS updates which matter a great deal more at this stage of the mobile device market development compared to, say, the PC when XP was launched and probably matters much more in the mobile space in general (given the crucial role of integrated services in adding value to mobile devices). Generally I feel the wish fulfilment mirage that the mobile device market is going to pan out just like PC market did (Apple marginalised, left behind etc, 'Open Beats Closed', etc) obscures the fascinating unfolding drama of something entirely new and revolutionary. Frankly too many commentators sound like the old main frame and mini computer guys back in 1980 dismissing the PC as 'nothing new'. |
| - Score: 1 |
| RE[5]: Comment by Tony Swash |
| By Thom_Holwerda on 2012-08-15 12:25:53 |
|
It's because this is not a vendor vs. vendor war, but a platform vs. platform war. If iOS gets marginalised, this will undoubtedly harm Apple in indirect ways - as playing second fiddle when it comes to developers and partners. This is not the case *now*, but if this trend continues, it *will* be a problem a few years from now. The collective force of all Android vendors and Google moving the platform forward simply cannot be matched by Apple. This is EXACTLY what happened in the PC market. It wasn't until the PC market was vastly oversaturated - the last few years - that Apple could stage its comeback. Many people point to Apple's share of PC market profits *right now* as an indication Apple will do fine as a 5-10% player in mobile, but these people conveniently forget that for the 15 years before that, Apple was on the verge of bankruptcy and making virtually no money in the PC space. The iPod saved Apple's PC business - not the PC business itself. This means that in order for Apple with a marginalised mobile market share to survive, it will need the next great thing. While there's always the possibility it will have that next great thing lined up, history has taught us that companies rise and fall; after the iPod, iPhone, and iPad, there's a very real chance Apple will not have the next great thing ready to go. We're not talking about today or even tomorrow (what Apple fans usually focus on) - we're talking about 5-10 years from now. Apple is competing in the court room because it knows it can't keep up with the android platform via market competition. This is so bloody obvious it's quite telling you're not seeing it. Edited 2012-08-15 12:28 UTC |
| - Score: 6 |
| RE[2]: Not convinced |
| By puenktchen on 2012-08-15 12:30:20 |
|
> > If Android phones were all $200 then you wouldn't see as many people buying them for these reasons. When you say $200 you don't actually mean $200 right? You probably mean 200$ + 600$ in hidden costs. Still, you can get unlocked Android phones which are just good enough(tm) for just 100€ in germany, no contract needed, and that includes 19% vat (I'm thinking of the Huawei Ascend Y200). The Iphone 3GS starts at 340€. As Samsung Galaxy S3 with 32 GB costs 600€, a Iphone 4gs with 32 GB 740€. Not as drastic, but still quite a difference. If they had included the option "because it was cheaper", I'd guess 95% would have ticked it. |
| - Score: 3 |
| RE[2]: handset subsidies ending in Australia |
| By dagw on 2012-08-15 12:37:00 |
|
> Stopping subsidies will slow down sales of all phones True, but it will probably slow down the sale of high end phones more. Sure the sales of the Galaxy SIII and HTC One X will probably slow down as much as the sale of the iPhone4, but there are also lots of Android phones that cost less than $300 unsubsidized, and the sale of those phones would probably pick up in such a scenario. |
| - Score: 4 |
| RE: Comment by ilovebeer |
| By Drunkula on 2012-08-15 12:41:39 |
| WTF? Why would they survey people who bought Iphones to ask why they purchased an Android? Nonsense, dude. |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE: About Apple not being able to deliver |
| By dsmogor on 2012-08-15 12:45:52 |
|
This is overly US centric view and in fact where Galaxy found its initial success is the rest of the world. There's a reason SGSII got into the US half a year after everywhere else. Galaxy S won hearts of the consumers bc Samsung struck the right balance about highendness, price and software customization, form factor, focusing on things that mattered and not overly compromising on those that turned out didn't (like the shell). It was simply a really good device. SGSII has blown everybody else (in Android world) by providing exceptional HW , very polished SW (thanks to extensive Samsung optimizations to Gingerbread among others). Easy hack-ability wasn't without an impact (1mo hackers can spread the word) too. The 3rd most important device is the Ace, that has set the new standards for low - middle end space (taking it over from HTC Wildfire). The success Samsung enjoys now is fully deserved by the hard work they have put into their devices plus huge marketing dollars in excellent carrier relationships (they have basically replaced Nokia here). |
| - Score: 4 |
| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |