Apple's Smartphone Market Share Slips as Huawei, Lenovo Make Gains

[tongxinshe]

Do I need to pull up a list of the things the iPhone couldn't do when it was first released?

A list of extra features or not, it’s not important whether it’s a real smartphone or not. The real requirements are:
1. A full-featured computer-level OS underneath.
2. A touch screen big enough, with intuitive gesture support, so that users can do the things in a similar way as they do on regular computers (e.g. via webpages designed for computer screen, view/edit documents at a similar efficiency as they do on normal computers.)
3. App market support so that users can easily add apps from their business providers (bank, brokerage, school, etc.)

I don't quite understand what you are saying. But I do know this:

Android has had the most market share for years... yet there are still apps that are iOS-first or iOS-only... from big developers and small developers.

I don't see any evidence of developers dropping iOS and start focusing on Android.

It should have already happened... but it didn't. Why? Because iOS makes too much money for developers.

Whether it was 70% Android vs 20% iOS... or 80% Android vs 10% iOS... only one of those platforms delivers the results.

And it's not the one with the most market share.

The only part you didn’t understand is that you are still only thinking about commercial developers, whose business is software development itself. As I said, they develop for most major platforms anyway. On the other hand, other developers whose core businesses are physical device development, or financial services, or special web services, etc., they don’t charge money for the apps, since the apps are simply convenience support for their real businesses.

Among these developers of the later category, a lot of small businesses haven’t developed their mobile apps, yet, but they will have to when smartphones are the norm. For these small businesses, if one mobile platform has a market share of 85%, they will not spend extra money in developing support apps for any other mobile platforms at all.

That “smartphones are the norm, no more feature phones sold” era is around the corner, by that time if Apple and Microsoft cannot make sure they make more than 20% market share combined, they will eventually be in the same situation as how Mac, SGI, etc. platforms were in the late 90’s and early 2000’s — die or dying, since they could lure in less and less customers.

----------

Why? Android UI customization, testing and QA costs, due to vastly greater market fragmentation issues. The big Android market share is currently making things worse in this area.

That’s why the Android domination will be easier to come true when there is no more giant Android players any more, so that the vast majority of Android phones will simply carry the Vanilla Android out of box.

 

[Michael Scrip]

The only part you didn’t understand is that you are still only thinking about commercial developers, whose business is software development itself. As I said, they develop for most major platforms anyway. On the other hand, other developers whose core businesses are physical device development, or financial services, or special web services, etc., they don’t charge money for the apps, since the apps are simply convenience support for their real businesses.

Among these developers of the later category, a lot of small businesses haven’t developed their mobile apps, yet, but they will have to when smartphones are the norm. For these small businesses, if one mobile platform has a market share of 85%, they will not spend extra money in developing support apps for any other mobile platforms at all.

That “smartphones are the norm, no more feature phones sold” era is around the corner, by that time if Apple and Microsoft cannot make sure they make more than 20% market share combined, they will eventually be in the same situation as how Mac, SGI, etc. platforms were in the late 90’s and early 2000’s — die or dying, since they could lure in less and less customers.

The only part you keep failing to understand is that "market share" only refers to shipment over the last 3 months.

(I wish people would put the word "quarterly" before they use "market share" in their comments. "Quarterly market share" has a completely different meaning than what you think it does.)

You keep saying "Apple needs a certain amount of market share" but I don't think you know what it means.

You still fail to understand the the concept of installed base. That's ALL the devices in use today... and that's what gets developers excited.

There are 500 million iOS devices in use today... and iOS users spend more money than users on any other platform.

Period.

That's why developers focus on iOS even though Android's "quarterly market share" is 85%.

There may be a billion Android devices in use today... but Android users do NOT spend a lot of money.

You must have missed this part of my last comment (or you chose to ignore it):

"Google Android users in total are spending around half as much on apps on more than twice the user base..."

Or to put it in simpler terms:

Android has TWICE as many users... but spends HALF as much.

If a developer could only develop for one platform... you would say they should go for the one with 85% market share instead of the one with 12% market share.

But that would be wrong... because you didn't look at installed base nor the revenue potential of each platform.

Android has more users... but iOS has more app revenue. Guess which one matters more to developers?

NOTE: These figures are what the mobile landscape looks like today. Next year there might be 2 billion Android devices out in the world... and only 700 million iOS devices.

So the developer situation might be different in the future.

BUT... you also need to look at other factors.

Are you an app developer in America? Is your app offered in English only?

Then who cares about "market share" or "installed base" in China and India? Or any non-English speaking country? That's where most of the growth is Android is happening anyway. That might not matter to certain developers.

My small local North Carolina bank only has an iOS app. They don't even offer an Android version.

Not everybody get hypnotized by Android's 85% market share... and neither should you.

 

[BaldiMac]

Sure it does. In fact, it's easy since the quantities involved are relatively small, allowing small increases to have a big effect.

Also, the IDC stats say that US sales declined YoY, so Apple is not likely to quote a YoY comparison.

If you are going to use the disputed stats to show that the disputed stats are correct, you are just talking in circles.

Anyway, it works out like this:

Between 2Q and 3Q 2014, Mac global sales rose 4.1m to 4.4m, an increase of about 300K between quarters.

There are plenty of sources showing roughly how Apple's sales are distributed around the world, so we can figure about how much of that 300K is required for the double digit increases that Apple claimed for the U.S., Canada, Mexico, the UK, Germany, France, Australia, China, India and the Middle-East.

View attachment 484015

It looks like a 300K increase (5% global) could indeed create double-digit quarterly increases in just the countries that Apple named.

Using YoY instead, the increases would've been much more for some regions, but that would not have allowed Apple to brag about so many. It would've looked bad to have to leave out the US, for example.

All you had to do is assume no growth at all outside of the countries with double digit growth! And that Mac units are distributed regionally the same as overall revenue. And that the double digit growth in all of those countries averaged just over 10%. Doesn't seem reasonable to me.

I think it is significantly more likely that most of Apple's top markets experienced double digit growth in a period when Macs grew 18% than in a period when they grew 5%.

 

[tongxinshe]

You must have missed this part of my last comment (or you chose to ignore it):

"Google Android users in total are spending around half as much on apps on more than twice the user base...”

I didn’t ignore that part of your comments, in fact I was trying to explain it to you why those developers who live on the income of selling softwares don’t matter to the recognition of whether a platform is less compatible than the others, or whether a platform has inferior software support than the others.

If a developer could only develop for one platform... you would say they should go for the one with 85% market share instead of the one with 12% market share.

But that would be wrong... because you didn't look at installed base nor the revenue potential of each platform.

Android has more users... but iOS has more app revenue. Guess which one matters more to developers?

See, you still don’t understand, you are still only looking at those developers who care about the “app revenue”! THEY MATTER MUCH LESS to the topic of how well a platform is supported.

Are you an app developer in America? Is your app offered in English only?

Then who cares about "market share" or "installed base" in China and India? Or any non-English speaking country? That's where most of the growth is Android is happening anyway. That might not matter to certain developers.

My small local North Carolina bank only has an iOS app. They don't even offer an Android version.

Not everybody get hypnotized by Android's 85% market share...

Now we are really to the topic!

For these developers, they only care about how to cover a “good enough” portion of their customers (of their real businesses, which is not app development). Sure, some of them will only develop iOS version, some of them will only develop Android version, some of them have to develop two or three (take Windows Phone version into consideration). For Apple and Microsoft, the real question is, how many percent of these businesses only develop Android versions, if those Android-exclusive businesses are of a big enough percentage, iPhone and Windows phone future sales will very unlikely to look good.

By the way, another interesting scenario, in the late 90’s when Windows fully took over the computer market, the last regional market that Mac looked still okay was also the US, where the majority of the businesses still kept their Mac-platform support. However, with the influence of the global trend, Mac’s US market share was rapidly going down as well.

As to your point of “quarterly market share” vs “install base share”, it doesn’t really matter over the long run, if the quarterly market share is kept for 3-5 years.

 

[Michael Scrip]

I didn’t ignore that part of your comments, in fact I was trying to explain it to you why those developers who live on the income of selling softwares don’t matter to the recognition of whether a platform is less compatible than the others, or whether a platform has inferior software support than the others.

See, you still don’t understand, you are still only looking at those developers who care about the “app revenue”! THEY MATTER MUCH LESS to the topic of how well a platform is supported.

iOS is VERY well supported. Apple provides software for all of its phones for a long time.

Accessory makers make tons of accessories for iPhones... some of which will never come to any Android phone.

I don't think support is one of the problems Apple has.

Now we are really to the topic!

For these developers, they only care about how to cover a “good enough” portion of their customers (of their real businesses, which is not app development). Sure, some of them will only develop iOS version, some of them will only develop Android version, some of them have to develop two or three (take Windows Phone version into consideration). For Apple and Microsoft, the real question is, how many percent of these businesses only develop Android versions, if those Android-exclusive businesses are of a big enough percentage, iPhone and Windows phone future sales will very unlikely to look good.

By the way, another interesting scenario, in the late 90’s when Windows fully took over the computer market, the last regional market that Mac looked still okay was also the US, where the majority of the businesses still kept their Mac-platform support. However, with the influence of the global trend, Mac’s US market share was rapidly going down as well.

As to your point of “quarterly market share” vs “install base share”, it doesn’t really matter over the long run, if the quarterly market share is kept for 3-5 years.

Windows is still "taking over the market"

Yet the Mac platform has plenty of support too.

Just because the Mac is the #2 platform doesn't mean it's bad news.

In any market with multiple players... there will always be someone at #1 and #2... and maybe at #3 and #4

The iPhone platform was NEVER #1 in smartphones... yet it gets lots of support.

 

[firewood]

...For these small businesses, if one mobile platform has a market share of 85%, they will not spend extra money in developing support apps for any other mobile platforms at all.

Bzzzt... Wrong. Those businesses won't develop apps first for customers who don't spend money. Look at the percentages that shoppers spend online from iOS devices, even in countries where Android devices currently dominate. Successful businesses follow money, not non-profitable market share.

Half of actual business sales might still come from iOS devices, even with a market share in the single digits.

There are lots of BMW repair shops in my area, even though Japanese cars have a vastly higher market share. Why? Because BMW owners pay ridiculous amounts to fix their cars.

 

[tongxinshe]

iOS is VERY well supported. Apple provides software for all of its phones for a long time.

Accessory makers make tons of accessories for iPhones... some of which will never come to any Android phone.

I don't think support is one of the problems Apple has.

I never said that is a problem Apple has AT PRESENT. I am talking about a very likely future (5 years from now) if Apple doesn’t seriously change its “profit margin has to be the #1 priority” philosophy.

Windows is still "taking over the market"

Yet the Mac platform has plenty of support too.

Yes, Mac has *reasonable* support now, thanks mostly to the holo effect from the iPhone development fever, and then to its much better market share in the recent years (which in turn was a combination of the holo effect and the dual-boot capability).

Yet, it’s still not very well supported — many brokers don’t have Mac version of their softwares, a lot of popular softwares in China and India don’t have Mac versions, either.

Anyhow, the real thing being reflected is not Mac’s support situation at present, but that at the late 90’s and early 2000’s, when Mac’s market share dropped under 2%.

Just because the Mac is the #2 platform doesn't mean it's bad news.

In any market with multiple players... there will always be someone at #1 and #2... and maybe at #3 and #4

First, the computer market is very different from most other markets, since without the wide support, it’s greatly considered as “useless” by regular customer.

Second, I never said being #2 or #3 means “to be dead”, all I said is — IF there is a commanding #1 (with >85% market share) in any almost-saturated computer market (NOTICE: smartphone market will fall into this category soon, in several years, when there is almost no featured phones on the market), the rest of the players will be in a VERY desperate struggling situation.

 

[tongxinshe]

Bzzzt... Wrong. Those businesses won't develop apps first for customers who don't spend money. Look at the percentages that shoppers spend online from iOS devices, even in countries where Android devices currently dominate. Successful businesses follow money, not non-profitable market share.

Your hypothesis could be true if Apple could always guarantee that 90% of the high-end customers (the top 10% family) are simply super-loyal to it. Unfortunately, the information technology industry could never follow any pattern like that. It’s not like the luxury businesses.

Half of actual business sales might still come from iOS devices, even with a market share in the single digits.

What a wishful thinking!

 

[Michael Scrip]

I never said that is a problem Apple has AT PRESENT. I am talking about a very likely future (5 years from now) if Apple doesn’t seriously change its “profit margin has to be the #1 priority” philosophy.

Apple will never be the volume seller of anything... and that's fine.

Apple makes expensive products.

There is a reason Apple's smartphones start at $500... and their laptops start at $900. It's what Apple does. They're not necessarily making profit margin their #1 priority... it's just a side-effect from selling expensive products.

Other companies sell Android smartphones for $100 and a Windows laptops for $300.

And how are those companies doing?

There are more than enough Apple products out in the world for developers to support. And in 5 years there will be even more.

Yes, Mac has *reasonable* support now, thanks mostly to the holo effect from the iPhone development fever, and then to its much better market share in the recent years (which in turn was a combination of the holo effect and the dual-boot capability).

Yet, it’s still not very well supported — many brokers don’t have Mac version of their softwares, a lot of popular softwares in China and India don’t have Mac versions, either.

Anyhow, the real thing being reflected is not Mac’s support situation at present, but that at the late 90’s and early 2000’s, when Mac’s market share dropped under 2%.

There are a billion Windows PCs out in the world... but only 80 million Macs.

Why would the Mac get ANY support at all?

Because it's still an attractive platform.

There are companies who base their entire business on making stuff for Macs.

First, the computer market is very different from most other markets, since without the wide support, it’s greatly considered as “useless” by regular customer.

Second, I never said being #2 or #3 means “to be dead”, all I said is — IF there is a commanding #1 (with >85% market share) in any almost-saturated computer market (NOTICE: smartphone market will fall into this category soon, in several years, when there is almost no featured phones on the market), the rest of the players will be in a VERY desperate struggling situation.

This is one of those times where the #2 can still be a vibrant successful platform.

It doesn't matter what the percentages are... or how "commanding" the #1 is.

You're right... "Android" has 85% quarterly market share. But have you ever stopped to think about what "Android" is made up of?

There are a billion "Android" devices out in the world. But what if half of those are garbage devices owned by people who never buy apps and accessories?

Suddenly... all that "Android" market share and installed base isn't too impressive.

 

[ssspinball]

When iPhone reaches the similar situation 10 years from now, what do you expect to happen to save it again like what saved Mac business? Be able to dual boot into Android? A holo effect from the iShoe?

That's easy: Quality products.

Why do you assume Apple's products will reduce in quality over time or that competitors will suddenly start producing matching quality products? They haven't been able to do that so far after decades of attempts!

The Mac, iPod, iPhone, iPad still haven't been matched in quality. Of course this is extremely subjective at a personal level, but look at what competitors list as the gold standard in those product areas and the majority will point at Apple.

Let the competitors fight for the lowest common denominator with the lowest possible margins and lowest quality products. They'll surely win over those that consider price alone when shopping. There are plenty of us that consider more than just price, which has been Apple's business model since their inception. Same as say BMW or any other industry where there is someone competing on more than price alone. It's bizarre to think that would suddenly change unless one doesn't understand Apple or business in general.

 

[firewood]

What a wishful thinking!

Nope. It's a fact. In Europe, where Android is far more popular than in the U.S., there are still more iOS developers: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/11014242/iOS-accounts-for-half-of-app-jobs-in-Europe.html

They follow the money.

 

[funkybudda]

Nope. It's a fact. In Europe, where Android is far more popular than in the U.S., there are still more iOS developers: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolo...-accounts-for-half-of-app-jobs-in-Europe.html

They follow the money.

http://www.developereconomics.com/reports/developer-economics-q3-2014/

KEY INSIGHTS

On a global level the platform wars are ending with iOS claiming the majority of the high-end device market and Android winning almost everywhere else. Windows Phone continues to gain developer mindshare steadily at 28%.

HTML5 is the most widely used at 42% of developers with Java, the native language on Android, the next most popular at 38%.

A surprisingly high 47% of iOS developers and 42% of Android developers are using something other than the native language on their platforms.

The majority of app businesses are not sustainable at current revenue levels. 50% of iOS developers and 64% of Android developers are below the ‘app poverty line” of $500 per app per month.

67% of mobile app developers primarily target consumers and 11% target professionals directly. The 16% of developers who target enterprises are twice as likely to be earning over $5k per app per month and almost 3 times as likely to earn more than $25k per app per month.

Games dominate app store revenues, yet most games developers struggle. 33% of developers make games but 57% of those games make less than $500 per month.

Third party tools are a critical part of successful app businesses. There’s a strong correlation between tool use and revenues, the more tools a developer uses, the more money they make.

The breakdown of developer segments that target each platform is determined by how well the platforms help them meet their goals. Adoption of iOS amongst Explorers and particularly Hobbyists is limited, while the opposite is true for Windows Phone.

 

[firewood]

KEY INSIGHTS
...
The majority of app businesses are not sustainable at current revenue levels. 50% of iOS developers and 64% of Android developers are below the ‘app poverty line” of $500 per app per month.

One key take-away here is that more EU Android developers are "below poverty line", even with Android's greater market share advantage in the EU. Increasing that market share advantage by another 10% isn't likely to suddenly put these developers above water. When mobile developer numbers start to wash out as the 2nd mobile "Gold Rush" ends, more Android developers will quit than iOS developers.

 

[PracticalMac]

App revenue is NOT directly related to market share.

Again... developers go where the money is... and it's still iOS.

If 80% vs 12% isn't enough to sway developers away from iOS... I don't see how 97% vs 2% will either.

Completely understand those facts.
And I know a sizable portion, likely more than half, of all Android OS devices are not revenue generators because the user does not use the device beyond its basic features.

But app developers do not need to sell apps to individuals to make money.

In fact, the trend is FREE Apps, and this is where iOS has a disadvantage.

Here is an example:
Like PC makers decades ago and today, they add additional software to the OS (Windows), give their computer a few extra goodies to attract customers.

Same with smartphones (SP) and tablets (T).
Mega-company "S" wants software goodies that make their phones more attractive, so they look around. Great software does not always come from in-house. They find something "cool" and buy it to install in their product.
"S" has appealing product, developer makes a nice sum.

Apple has yet to purchase an app from an outside app maker.

While I certainly agree iOS has the developers attention, the shear numbers of hardware makers and market share is very lucrative avenue as well.

 

[Michael Scrip]

Completely understand those facts.
And I know a sizable portion, likely more than half, of all Android OS devices are not revenue generators because the user does not use the device beyond its basic features.

But app developers do not need to sell apps to individuals to make money.

In fact, the trend is FREE Apps, and this is where iOS has a disadvantage.

Here is an example:
Like PC makers decades ago and today, they add additional software to the OS (Windows), give their computer a few extra goodies to attract customers.

Same with smartphones (SP) and tablets (T).
Mega-company "S" wants software goodies that make their phones more attractive, so they look around. Great software does not always come from in-house. They find something "cool" and buy it to install in their product.
"S" has appealing product, developer makes a nice sum.

Apple has yet to purchase an app from an outside app maker.

While I certainly agree iOS has the developers attention, the shear numbers of hardware makers and market share is very lucrative avenue as well.

Yeah... I guess if your app was lucky enough to be pre-installed on millions of Android devices... you might get a pretty big check.

I wonder what the pay rate for "bloatware" is?

Your app might retail for $1... but I'm pretty sure Samsung isn't paying $1 per copy on all 75 million Samsung Android phones that your app gets pre-installed on.

You raise a good point... but I haven't heard any success stories from 3rd party developers having their apps included on new phones. If it was really happening... we would have heard about it by now, right?

You're absolutely correct about Apple though... they do not pre-install 3rd party apps on their devices.

But you might get a boost from being featured in an iPhone commercial... or featured on the front page of the App Store.

 

[tongxinshe]

Apple will never be the volume seller of anything... and that's fine.

Apple makes expensive products.

There is a reason Apple's smartphones start at $500... and their laptops start at $900. It's what Apple does. They're not necessarily making profit margin their #1 priority... it's just a side-effect from selling expensive products.

Other companies sell Android smartphones for $100 and a Windows laptops for $300.

And how are those companies doing?

There are more than enough Apple products out in the world for developers to support. And in 5 years there will be even more.




There are a billion Windows PCs out in the world... but only 80 million Macs.

Why would the Mac get ANY support at all?

Because it's still an attractive platform.

There are companies who base their entire business on making stuff for Macs.



This is one of those times where the #2 can still be a vibrant successful platform.

It doesn't matter what the percentages are... or how "commanding" the #1 is.

You're right... "Android" has 85% quarterly market share. But have you ever stopped to think about what "Android" is made up of?

There are a billion "Android" devices out in the world. But what if half of those are garbage devices owned by people who never buy apps and accessories?

Suddenly... all that "Android" market share and installed base isn't too impressive.

You are still purely thinking about the commercial apps — apps that are developed by developers whose businesses are purely selling software. As I have explained several times above — “THEY DON’T MATTER!!!” What really affects the general public’s recognition of a platform’s level of support, or compatibility, is how many non-software companies develop apps for their own real businesses — banks, brokers, schools, video streaming businesses, restaurants, retail stores, speakers, autos, apparels, etc. etc.

----------

That's easy: Quality products.

Why do you assume Apple's products will reduce in quality over time or that competitors will suddenly start producing matching quality products? They haven't been able to do that so far after decades of attempts!

The Mac, iPod, iPhone, iPad still haven't been matched in quality. Of course this is extremely subjective at a personal level, but look at what competitors list as the gold standard in those product areas and the majority will point at Apple.

Let the competitors fight for the lowest common denominator with the lowest possible margins and lowest quality products. They'll surely win over those that consider price alone when shopping. There are plenty of us that consider more than just price, which has been Apple's business model since their inception. Same as say BMW or any other industry where there is someone competing on more than price alone. It's bizarre to think that would suddenly change unless one doesn't understand Apple or business in general.

Stop the metaphor between computers and cars, they are totally opposite products. Cars, after being bought, live on their own, even the parts and repairs, maintenance are mostly done by the original manufacturer/dealer. On the other hand, computers/smartphones/tablets are TOTALLY useless without a wide support from every businesses of the world.

 

[tongxinshe]

That's easy: Quality products.

Why do you assume Apple's products will reduce in quality over time or that competitors will suddenly start producing matching quality products? They haven't been able to do that so far after decades of attempts!

The Mac, iPod, iPhone, iPad still haven't been matched in quality. Of course this is extremely subjective at a personal level, but look at what competitors list as the gold standard in those product areas and the majority will point at Apple.

Let the competitors fight for the lowest common denominator with the lowest possible margins and lowest quality products. They'll surely win over those that consider price alone when shopping. There are plenty of us that consider more than just price, which has been Apple's business model since their inception. Same as say BMW or any other industry where there is someone competing on more than price alone. It's bizarre to think that would suddenly change unless one doesn't understand Apple or business in general.

When you talk about quality, for computer products, durability isn’t very important, hopefully that isn’t what you meant.

Before Mac switches to Intel CPU (which means dual-boot capability), and later gets the help from holo effect, why couldn't its “quality” save itself, even though Apple greatly dropped its price (from over $3000 to ~$1200 level)?

When a product category reaches an almost-mature stage, making products at a “good enough” quality no longer largely increase its cost.

----------

Nope. It's a fact. In Europe, where Android is far more popular than in the U.S., there are still more iOS developers: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolo...-accounts-for-half-of-app-jobs-in-Europe.html

They follow the money.

You are still, still, still talking about the commercial app developers. As I have explained several times above, they don’t matter, when the topic is about a platform’s overall social support level, or “compatibility”. It’s the non-software-professional businesses that really matter, because they will never develop another version if they’ve already got 85%+ of their customers covered.

 

[Michael Scrip]

You are still purely thinking about the commercial apps — apps that are developed by developers whose businesses are purely selling software. As I have explained several times above — “THEY DON’T MATTER!!!” What really affects the general public’s recognition of a platform’s level of support, or compatibility, is how many non-software companies develop apps for their own real businesses — banks, brokers, schools, video streaming businesses, restaurants, retail stores, speakers, autos, apparels, etc. etc.

Ummmm.... the iPhone has never had a majority share of the smartphone market at any given time. They started at 0%... hit a high of about 20% a couple years ago... and now they're at 10% quarterly market share.

But how many small businesses, restaurants, banks, etc don't have an iPhone app?

Why would any company... big or small... choose to support a smartphone with such low market share?

Look man... the iPhone is a popular platform and is VERY recognized by the public... with TONS of support from developers and 3rd party accessories... despite the existence of a billion "Android" devices around the world.

What are you suggesting... that Wells Fargo Bank, Old Navy, McDonalds or Netflix will stop developing their iPhone apps because "Android" has more market share?

Guess what... "Android" has had more market share for years! And yet... developers both big and small continue to make iPhone apps.

I guess that pokes a few holes in your "more market share = support" theory.

 

[AaronEdwards]

Apple will never be the volume seller of anything... and that's fine.

Apple makes expensive products.

There is a reason Apple's smartphones start at $500... and their laptops start at $900. It's what Apple does. They're not necessarily making profit margin their #1 priority... it's just a side-effect from selling expensive products.

Other companies sell Android smartphones for $100 and a Windows laptops for $300.

And how are those companies doing?

There are more than enough Apple products out in the world for developers to support. And in 5 years there will be even more.




There are a billion Windows PCs out in the world... but only 80 million Macs.

Why would the Mac get ANY support at all?

Because it's still an attractive platform.

There are companies who base their entire business on making stuff for Macs.



This is one of those times where the #2 can still be a vibrant successful platform.

It doesn't matter what the percentages are... or how "commanding" the #1 is.

You're right... "Android" has 85% quarterly market share. But have you ever stopped to think about what "Android" is made up of?

There are a billion "Android" devices out in the world. But what if half of those are garbage devices owned by people who never buy apps and accessories?

Suddenly... all that "Android" market share and installed base isn't too impressive.

You may want to take a look at the changes in Google Play's and Apple AppStore's shares of the total revenue generated by app stores. Hint: Google Play is gaining.

You may also want to look at the numbers for how much of the revenue created in the AppStore is generated by paid apps and how much is created by free apps including in-apps purchases. Hint: the share of paid app sales is dropping.

Sooner or later, I would assume that your argument will be that even though Google Play has a higher share of the total app sales revenue than the Apple AppStore, an iOS user spend more money than an Android user.

 

[Michael Scrip]

You may want to take a look at the changes in Google Play's and Apple AppStore's shares of the total revenue generated by app stores. Hint: Google Play is gaining.

You may also want to look at the numbers for how much of the revenue created in the AppStore is generated by paid apps and how much is created by free apps including in-apps purchases. Hint: the share of paid app sales is dropping.

Sooner or later, I would assume that your argument will be that even though Google Play has a higher share of the total app sales revenue than the Apple AppStore, an iOS user spend more money than an Android user.

There are a billion Android devices out in the world compared to 500 million iOS devices. Yet the iOS App store pays more money to developers.

They way I see that... iOS users do spend more money than Android users.

Someday when there are 3 billion Android devices in the world and only 800 million iOS devices... we might see a shift to Android generating more revenue.

But that doesn't mean iOS development will stop.

There would still be 800 million iOS devices to support... with owners who still like to spend money.

tongxinshe keeps going on and on about support waning for Apple's platforms... and that developers will lose interest in iOS.

I obviously don't agree.

iOS devices generate a lot of revenue from app sales, ad sales, etc... and there is an increasing amount of them added every day.

If 500 million iOS devices are enough to keep developers excited... why wouldn't 800 million iOS devices?

Or to put it succinctly... which developers will turn their back on iOS?

 

[AaronEdwards]

There are a billion Android devices out in the world compared to 500 million iOS devices. Yet the iOS App store pays more money to developers.

They way I see that... iOS users do spend more money than Android users.

Someday when there are 3 billion Android devices in the world and only 800 million iOS devices... we might see a shift to Android generating more revenue.

But that doesn't mean iOS development will stop.

There would still be 800 million iOS devices to support... with owners who still like to spend money.

tongxinshe keeps going on and on about support waning for Apple's platforms... and that developers will lose interest in iOS.

I obviously don't agree.

iOS devices generate a lot of revenue from app sales, ad sales, etc... and there is an increasing amount of them added every day.

If 500 million iOS devices are enough to keep developers excited... why wouldn't 800 million iOS devices?

Or to put it succinctly... which developers will turn their back on iOS?

Who said anything about developers turning their back on iOS? But iOS may very well become the second platform for development.

 

[firewood]

Who said anything about developers turning their back on iOS? But iOS may very well become the second platform for development.

iOS already was the 2nd (or non) platform for a huge percentage of new mobile developers a couple years back. Then they found out that those massive new device activation numbers that Google first announced didn't turn into big app revenues or app use. A lot then moved to iOS first for their next projects.

When the typical iOS user stops buying more apps and doing more shopping online than the average Android user, then it's time to worry about market share.

 

[Michael Scrip]

Who said anything about developers turning their back on iOS?

User "tongxinshe" has made multiple comments throughout this thread saying things like:

For these small businesses, if one mobile platform has a market share of 85%, they will not spend extra money in developing support apps for any other mobile platforms at all.​

... when the fever on the Apple brand calm down, most developers (especially the small ones and those only developing free supporting apps for their real businesses) will focus on Android versions, then over time, more and more developers will stop developing non-Android versions. ​

He seems to think that developers will someday lose interest in iOS... or not support iOS at all.

I obviously don't agree.

My point all along has been this:

Android has been in the lead for years. There are twice as many Android devices out in the world today... yet iOS is still a VERY attractive platform for developers big and small. It doesn't seem to matter what iOS' deficit is... they still have plenty of developers, users, downloads, accessory sales, etc. It's an extremely effective platform... with more iOS devices added every day.

Over 500 million iOS devices in the world... with users who tend to spend money.

A developer would have to be crazy to NOT support iOS. (which is why I don't think that will happen)

But iOS may very well become the second platform for development.

iOS second? Maybe. Someday.

I found this article from June 2014:

"Looking at 119 recent Y Combinator incubator participants and Google Ventures seed investments, of those offering apps, more than 90% had iOS apps, about half had both iOS and Android apps, and fewer than 10% only had Android apps. Among those with both, their iOS app typically launched several months ahead of their Android app."​

I wonder what that fewer than 10% know that the rest of them don't?

Are they seeing the writing on the wall for iOS development?


EDIT: We haven't even talked about Apple's new Swift programming language. I'll be interested to see how that affects this whole developer debate. If Swift turns out to be good and there are half a billion iOS devices out in the world... that might be the thing that keeps iOS relevant

.

 

[firewood]

EDIT: We haven't even talked about Apple's new Swift programming language. I'll be interested to see how that affects this whole developer debate. If Swift turns out to be good and there are half a billion iOS devices out in the world... that might be the thing that keeps iOS relevant
.

Swift is a great example. Although it has potential, it's currently not good, It's awful. (Apple revs the compiler and code stops working every couple weeks, code randomly runs slower every couple weeks, tons of experienced developers can't figure out how to call simple OS subroutines some weeks, etc.) Yet even though it's awful, Swift is already in the Top-20 on the TIOBE list of the most popular programming languages in the world (out of hundreds of languages). Why? Because developers want in on the iOS ecosystem, and Objective C was off-putting to lots. Swift "looks" easier (the jury is out on whether that's really true), so zillions of developers have jumped in. Even though Swift is (currently?) only useful for Apple OS's.

 

[tongxinshe]

User "tongxinshe" has made multiple comments throughout this thread saying things like:

For these small businesses, if one mobile platform has a market share of 85%, they will not spend extra money in developing support apps for any other mobile platforms at all.​

... when the fever on the Apple brand calm down, most developers (especially the small ones and those only developing free supporting apps for their real businesses) will focus on Android versions, then over time, more and more developers will stop developing non-Android versions. ​

He seems to think that developers will someday lose interest in iOS... or not support iOS at all.

I obviously don't agree.

My point all along has been this:

Android has been in the lead for years. There are twice as many Android devices out in the world today... yet iOS is still a VERY attractive platform for developers big and small. It doesn't seem to matter what iOS' deficit is... they still have plenty of developers, users, downloads, accessory sales, etc. It's an extremely effective platform... with more iOS devices added every day.

Over 500 million iOS devices in the world... with users who tend to spend money.

A developer would have to be crazy to NOT support iOS. (which is why I don't think that will happen)

Alas, I don’t know how many times I need to repeat the same thing for you to actually read the real meaning. You are still thinking about the commercial developers, who earns money on selling apps or ad spaces in the apps. I am talking about the developers who give their apps for free, as a support method for their real businesses.

----------

Ummmm.... the iPhone has never had a majority share of the smartphone market at any given time. They started at 0%... hit a high of about 20% a couple years ago... and now they're at 10% quarterly market share.

But how many small businesses, restaurants, banks, etc don't have an iPhone app?

Why would any company... big or small... choose to support a smartphone with such low market share?

Look man... the iPhone is a popular platform and is VERY recognized by the public... with TONS of support from developers and 3rd party accessories... despite the existence of a billion "Android" devices around the world.

What are you suggesting... that Wells Fargo Bank, Old Navy, McDonalds or Netflix will stop developing their iPhone apps because "Android" has more market share?

Guess what... "Android" has had more market share for years! And yet... developers both big and small continue to make iPhone apps.

I guess that pokes a few holes in your "more market share = support" theory.

All of the examples you gave are big businesses, and are all US businesses. iPhone’s market share in the US is around 40%.

You need to think about the businesses with less than 500 employees, or even less than 200 or even 100 employees. There are hundreds of thousands of those small businesses outside the US (and England), where iPhone’s market share is well below 10% now.