If you look at sales the ratio of Android devices in poor countries is significantly higher than the US. But, for the vast majority of US developers it's pointless to count those people.
If you look at actual US sales, both iOS and Android are on the rise mostly by eating BlackBerry's lunch. Android is still almost 2x the size of iOS but again there far more popular on the cheap handset market and are harder to target due to the fragmented market.
And of course, looking toward the market saturation point, every survey I've seen shows that the Android-> iOS switch rate is significantly higher than the iOS -> Android switch rate. If that changes, Apple should watch out.
Another interesting statistic, from Opera, was their report that iPad produced more ad revenue than all of Android.
that commercial is a terrible piece of advertising. I would have gotten a samsung for testing because its the best android phone (as far as i can tell as an iphone user) but i won't anymore. Telling your potential customers that they are idiots isn't a good strategy. I'll buy a nexus, htc, or motorola instead.
Apple was accused of calling their own customers idiots with their 'Genius' ads (which they quickly discontinued). I'm assuming you will also be boycotting Apple?
I agree that most of Android phones are crappy. Mostly because of Android customizations, old versions of Android and boring-looking hardware. But Nexus 4 is on par with iPhone 5 (while being 2 times cheaper).
I meant on par in overall user experience, not that they are equivalent in every feature. iPhone has shitty maps, no NFC, worse CPU/GPU (I think), no expandable notifications, etc.
I don't know how two devices, one of which can connect to a data network 5-10x faster than the other, can be considered "on par in overall user experience".
And as Taligent noted, as always the PowerVR GPU in the iPhone absolutely without question smokes every crappy Mali GPU in every Android phone ever.
Because on average, LTE does not improve UX that much. For example for me, the UX improvement would be zero (I don't have LTE coverage). It also uses more battery. And for me, 3G is fast enough (about 2Mbit/s where I live).
I don't think that 2x faster GPU improves UX a lot for the average user. Accurate maps are more important IMHO.
> I don't think that 2x faster GPU improves UX a lot for the average user.
I think that statement says more about Android fans than it does about "the average users". Who needs a fluid UI and responsiveness that can't be beat? That hardly affects the U-->X<-- which stands for experience let's not forget.
The way iOS works benefits heavily from an overpowered GPU because it was designed with hardware acceleration as a core consideration from the ground up. Android device manufacturers tend to spend that component funding where it counts in Android, bumping up the RAM to reduce slowdowns instead.
> And for me, 3G is fast enough (about 2Mbit/s where I live).
It's true, 640k of memory ought to be enough for anybody.
> Accurate maps are more important IMHO.
Good thing I have accurate maps then. Possibly the most overblown issue in history, the Apple Maps are actually fine. Weaker in most areas but stronger than I expected at launch, and good enough that I don't miss Google Maps.
If you think they're "inaccurate" then you're doing more tech-news reading than actual investigating. They're plenty accurate. Considering you have the world to work with, obviously this doesn't apply everywhere. However, neither does the conventional wisdom that Google maps is better. In certain areas that Google has neglected, Apple maps is already better right out of the gate.
Engadget complained that the glass back easily cracked and that the camera was average. And we know from Anandtech benchmarks that the CPU/GPU is about half that of the iPhone 5.
Yep, 75% of the market loves to buy crappy devices with crappy OSs. The fact that high end Android devices are popular and sell well (SGSIII? Samsung's profits being damn impressive next to Apple's?) is just a weird inconvenient fact.
Can you make your mind what you are talking about? Unless 75% of the market is taken by those high-end devices (which are two models really: SGSIII and Nexus).
If you want inconvenient facts: many of those Android phones are really just dumb phones (or used as such) with Android. Some with very old versions of Android.
Why should they be high end devices? Do you define what devices people should use, what qualifies as high end and how people should use them?
Sorry, but I just don't get the argument - if people want a smart phone, any Android phone is a smart phone. If they didn't they would be still buying Nokia true dumb phones. If people want a lower cost smartphone - like those in 3rd world - why would you have a problem with that? Also why aren't people buying cheap RIM phones or cheap Windows Phones if cheap is all they are into?
Older versions? Why would that have anything to do with SmartPhone sales numbers? It is just asinine to look at this from a negative or Apple Salesman attitude.
Fact is simple - people are continuing to buy Androids for many reasons - choice, preference, cost whatever. If Android is enabling the poorer sect of the world to get connected/enabled/smart at a cost they can afford - that's a good thing.
"Yep, 75% of the market loves to buy crappy devices with crappy OSs"
No, 70% of the market doesn't care and merely what the blingest device for the lowest cost with the highest amount of minutes and texts, data is barely an afterthought. Samsung offering sales commissions doesn't hurt either, or is that 'just a weird inconvenient fact'?
no, but 40-50% are buying crappy devices with crappy OSs. The high end devices running 4+ are not 75% of the market. they are <30% of the market. only 28.5% of android is on 4+ [1]
If we accept the framework that all people are idiots, which I certainly often find myself thinking, then it's probably great to be Android in that world. You know? Whether or not people are dumb (which is obviously a gross exaggeration of people's perception of Android... but let's be serious, you know that) does not change the numbers.
He is invested in the issue, if not with time and money, then with emotion. People can become very stubborn and blind when they are invested in an issue, probably because they are adverse to risk and some variation buyers remorse.
Google is the false messiah. They don't care about innovation or creating great products. They don't care about user experience. they don't care about you. All Google cares about is serving you crappy ads.
You sound exactly like these people standing in line for iPhones in the Samsung commercial.