The Rumored iPhablets Expected In 2014 Will Not Save Apple's Bacon

[Graham]

Originally Posted by elcreative

And the sales of Reliant Robins should be directly compared to the sale of Ferraris... and my last point, "I don't expect any factual points to influence either side in the Apple/Android wars but I suppose we should be grateful to both sides for their entertainment value even if it is getting a bit jaded now... " gets confirmed...

Oh, don't be ridiculous. You'll note that I have been supporting Apple in this thread.

Any discussion of market share should include both the low end and high end of the market. Of course you don't compare Reliant Robins with Ferraris, but to suggest that Reliant Robins aren't part of the overall market is simply wrong.

Graham

[Graham]

Originally Posted by pl001

The "non-premium" phones are where most of the remaining market is. Phone fanboys of all types tend to dismiss these phones as junk and they would have been correct a couple years ago. But that is not the case today.

Exactly, and this is increasingly true of the tablet market as well. The main problems with the really low end tablets are screen resolution and battery life. However the screens are improving: we're now seeing 1024x600 capacitive 7" touch screens on dual core tablets running Android Jelly Bean for £35 in the UK. Still sub-par, but useable.

Battery life, I'm sure, is terrible, but even a device that runs for a few hours only is useful and short battery life is unlikely to deter those on limited budgets.

Graham

[elcreative]

Originally Posted by Graham

Oh, don't be ridiculous. You'll note that I have been supporting Apple in this thread.

Any discussion of market share should include both the low end and high end of the market. Of course you don't compare Reliant Robins with Ferraris, but to suggest that Reliant Robins aren't part of the overall market is simply wrong.

Graham

Never made any point about you being anti-Apple, just it's illogical comparing low (less or non-profitable) end market goods with high-end goods from company that doesn't DO low end goods - Apple is selling way more high-end smartphones and high end tablets than anyone if you look at the actual numbers... yes they are a failure in the budget phone market but that may have something to do with the fact that they aren't in that market... if you think comparing Apples and bananas is a meaningful exercise then fine, your privilege, but I just find comparing different things to be a rather pointless exercise except for those who like weird ways of handling figures to support their prejudices (and I don't mean you)...

And I don't particularly favour anyone one company except in as far as I find their products do what I want so I have a Nexus 7, iPad mini, iPad 4 and Note 3... all of which I'm happy with unlike the few budget tablets/phones that having tried, I sold on as the junk they were...

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by elcreative

and the above is totally rational and actually well thought out... as well as being as selective as IDC/Gartner but then you can always prove you're right with your own interpretations of statistics...

I haven't seen the statistics presented by IDC/Gartner, and I'm not going to buy the reports to see them. What we see are the charts made by other companies with the data from IDC/Gartner. Any selection is done by those who bought the data and used it to make the charts.

But lets talk about your choice of sources. If you look closely at the text you will see that this:

Over the next four years, Mac sales more than doubled again to 16.7 million in 2011, while the overall PC industry grew by just 16 percent.

doesn't match the chart that follows:

[Greg Anos]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

This sounds to me like a rant. The author considers that:
- separating tablets from PCs is wrong,
- not separating into market niches is wrong,
- separating media tablets from eink devices and devices based on x86 processors is wrong,
- not separating based on tier is wrong.

This sounds paranoid:


And this sounds delusional:

The Mp3 quote "everyone who bought a generic MP3 player did so only to not buy an iPod " is delusional.

I wanted a player with a user replacable battery and external (SD type) storage, neither of which the iPod has.

I can't get the user replacable battery, but I can get the SD chip reader. So when the player dies, I just pop out the chip and stick into a new player...

And I can have 4 of these for the price of a new iPod Nano...

[Graham]

Originally Posted by elcreative

Never made any point about you being anti-Apple

Of course you did. Your snarky:

Originally Posted by elcreative

and my last point, "I don't expect any factual points to influence either side in the Apple/Android wars but I suppose we should be grateful to both sides for their entertainment value even if it is getting a bit jaded now... " gets confirmed...

clearly paints me as either anti-Apple or anti-Android: and anti-Apple in the context of my comment.

Originally Posted by elcreative

just it's illogical comparing low (less or non-profitable) end market goods with high-end goods from company that doesn't DO low end goods

Which I totally agree with, but that wasn't the topic of the discussion at that point; nor is it relevant to a chart that indicates total market share. We were talking about developer interest in the iOS and Android platforms. Hence total market share is the topic, not comparisons between specific devices.

By all means make the point that developers are more likely to make sales to owners of high end devices, and so a high end presence will resist losing developers due to the erosion of market share better than a low end presence, but, as I said, the article is wrong to pretend that low end devices should not be considered to be part of the market share.

Graham

[elcreative]

Originally Posted by Graham

Of course you did. Your snarky:



clearly paints me as either anti-Apple or anti-Android: and anti-Apple in the context of my comment.



Which I totally agree with, but that wasn't the topic of the discussion at that point; nor is it relevant to a chart that indicates total market share. We were talking about developer interest in the iOS and Android platforms. Hence total market share is the topic, not comparisons between specific devices.

By all means make the point that developers are more likely to make sales to owners of high end devices, and so a high end presence will resist losing developers due to the erosion of market share better than a low end presence, but, as I said, the article is wrong to pretend that low end devices should not be considered to be part of the market share.

Graham

Well, I can only say that I am really sorry that you still read your own interpretations into my remarks when I specifically said that that was not my intent but since you believe I'm lying I will terminate my discussion with you forthwith. As the writer of my remarks, it is obvious that I can't possibly know what they meant...

[PatNY]

There’s a popular saying among lawyers: If the facts are on your side, pound the facts. If the law is on your side, pound the law. If neither is on your side, pound the table. Well, it seems to me Daniel Dilger at Apple Insider has simply done a little table pounding. Because the relevant facts or market trends are not on his side, he simply decided to question the motives, integrity and methodologies of the messengers.

Companies like Gartner make more money if their studies are impartial and scrupulously done. The idea that they should not include low-end tablets in a market share study of tablets is silly, and doing such a thing would probably cost them clients. A company like Rovio Mobile doesn’t care whether their next dollar for an Angry Birds sale comes from someone using a Hisense Sero tablet from Walmart or the priciest iPad Air. It’s all the same to them; the dollars are of equal worth.

Most things coming from an “insider” site that is heavily associated with a partial side should be taken with a heavy grain of salt – be it Apple Insider or Android Insider.

--Pat

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by PatNY

There’s a popular saying among lawyers: If the facts are on your side, pound the facts. If the law is on your side, pound the law. If neither is on your side, pound the table. Well, it seems to me Daniel Dilger at Apple Insider has simply done a little table pounding. Because the relevant facts or market trends are not on his side, he simply decided to question the motives, integrity and methodologies of the messengers.

There is also the fact that he can't read a chart.

[Penforhire]

Pat, it is just as common a refrain from some Android supporters that the apps are coming (or app parity is coming). Reminds me of the Starck motto in GoT ("Winter is coming"). It just isn't there yet.

You do not have to hunt too hard to find complaints about the Android versions of various top apps. The reason I stated is quite simple to understand. You want links? Here you go -- http://www.developer.com/daily_news/...-ios-apps.html or http://stevecheney.com/why-android-first-is-a-myth/ . Check out http://www.theguardian.com/technolog...s-apple-google for some interesting statistics.

I'm interested in stronger competition between them. Google needs to tighten up their hardware specifications for that to happen. But if there are too many Android apologists, as you sound like, then it won't happen and the gap in app quality will continue into the future. I am not an Apple-at-all-costs proponent. The new Nexus 5 phone is an awesome bit of kit for its price. I may yet switch to it myself.

edit - I knew there was an ArsT article on these issues -- http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2012/...od-tablet-app/ but I admit another year is such that it bears revisiting to see if still true.

[PatNY]

Originally Posted by Penforhire

Pat, it is just as common a refrain from some Android supporters that the apps are coming (or app parity is coming). Reminds me of the Starck motto in GoT ("Winter is coming"). It just isn't there yet.

What isn't there yet?

Numbers? Actually, the number of Android apps currently exceeds the numbers in Apple's store. Just a few years ago, iOS Apps numbered more than twice that of Android Apps. Now iOS is behind. Clearly the preference of late has been to develop first for Android.

Or are you talking just about quality? As I said, I don't think the quality is much different today for most users. Most of the major apps in the Play store today are of similar quality to their iOS counterparts. I personally don't notice a difference. I am speaking from personal experience, but many Apple loyalists simply just repeat what they've read and have no or limited experience with Android, having only used old versions such as Froyo or Gingerbread.

In the recent past, yes, there was a big gulf in app quality between the two platforms. But Android has grown up extremely fast. And that gap today is either insignificant or not there any more for most major apps.

You do not have to hunt too hard to find complaints about the Android versions of various top apps. The reason I stated is quite simple to understand. You want links? Here you go -- http://www.developer.com/daily_news/...-ios-apps.html or http://stevecheney.com/why-android-first-is-a-myth/ . Check out http://www.theguardian.com/technolog...s-apple-google for some interesting statistics.

Well, apparently you did have to hunt hard, because the only article you found that complains about Android app quality was published in April of 2012. Do you know how much Android and the Play store have changed since then? Immensely.

As for the other two articles, instead of just posting links, can you pick out a few salient points from them that support the points in your comment to which I originally replied?

I'm interested in stronger competition between them. Google needs to tighten up their hardware specifications for that to happen. But if there are too many Android apologists, as you sound like, then it won't happen and the gap in app quality will continue into the future. I am not an Apple-at-all-costs proponent. The new Nexus 5 phone is an awesome bit of kit for its price. I may yet switch to it myself.

I think we all want stronger competition. That's why I detest the patent wars which are the height of anti-competitive behavior. But it appears to me you are talking about the past. Google already has started to clamp down on the many manufacturers of Android devices and reigning in what they can do with their separate overlays, for example. They have already put in restrictions and implemented changes to make the Android experience more uniform and easier to produce. And, again, I disagree that there is big gap in app quality currently -- or one that is relevant to the vast majority of Android users. I actually think the overall app experience is better for Android users today than it is for iOS -- with more variety to choose from and more flexibility within apps without typical Apple restrictions. I think the Play store is also better designed for managing apps on a device than the iTunes store is.

As for calling me an apologist, please refrain from the personal insults. There are many in this thread I feel are Apple apologists, but I'm not going to go around calling names.

Finally, I'll ask again -- can you name a single major app that is significantly of poorer quality in Android than in iOS today? When I say major, I mean something like Netflix.

--Pat

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by Penforhire

Pat, it is just as common a refrain from some Android supporters that the apps are coming (or app parity is coming). Reminds me of the Starck motto in GoT ("Winter is coming"). It just isn't there yet.

You do not have to hunt too hard to find complaints about the Android versions of various top apps. The reason I stated is quite simple to understand. You want links? Here you go -- http://www.developer.com/daily_news/...-ios-apps.html or http://stevecheney.com/why-android-first-is-a-myth/ . Check out http://www.theguardian.com/technolog...s-apple-google for some interesting statistics.

I'm interested in stronger competition between them. Google needs to tighten up their hardware specifications for that to happen. But if there are too many Android apologists, as you sound like, then it won't happen and the gap in app quality will continue into the future. I am not an Apple-at-all-costs proponent. The new Nexus 5 phone is an awesome bit of kit for its price. I may yet switch to it myself.

edit - I knew there was an ArsT article on these issues -- http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2012/...od-tablet-app/ but I admit another year is such that it bears revisiting to see if still true.

The article in the first link is even older than the ArsT article.

The second article's main point is that the cost of developing for Android is 2-3 times higher than for iOS so developers would never go Android first.

The third article points out that there are apps that are not available on Android. But the apps in question are or have been iOS exclusive. And apparently some are happy to forfeit the App Store promotion that comes with having iOS exclusive titles for access to Android users.

One app in particular has created some agitation when it was reported that during an internal meeting the head of EA Labels said:
“Apple gave us a truckload of money to delay the Android version [of Plants vs Zombies 2],”

The website 9to5Mac posted the reply made by EA and commented on the situation:

“A comment from an internal meeting taken out of context has created an unfortunate misunderstanding,” says EA’s statement.

“Reports of a paid relationship between Apple and EA are factually inaccurate, and we apologise for any confusion.”

Gibeau’s comments were clearly taken out of context, and we tend to believe that Apple didn’t offer up any cash in exchange for Plants vs Zombies 2 landing on iOS before Android. But what did he really mean with his “truckload of money” comment? Perhaps EA knew it would receive favorable placement in the App Store as a much hyped iOS exclusive?

There are a lot of unanswered questions about how Apple goes about featuring and ranking apps on the App Store, but it’s big money for developers who often see enormous boost in revenue and downloads when featured on the store.

[forsooth]

Normal thought: Good chart reduce dissension.

Not so, it seems.

[Penforhire]

Pat, sorry if you were offended by the word apologist. I figured it had the same tone and meaning as your "...common refrain heard from many of the Apple faithful."

[frahse]

Originally Posted by forsooth

Normal thought: Good chart reduce dissension.

Not so, it seems.

Indeed.
It appears you are correct my good fellow.