iPhone 5

[TheL8Elvis]

I read somewhere that Android users were more likely to use mobile web vs. Apple users. IIRC, the vast majority of bandwidth consumed by Apple users is via WiFi. One theory proposed for why was how the different OS prompts you to find WiFi networks.

As of May, global pageviews for Android and iOS are exactly the same, at around 23-24% share.

http://mobithinking.com/mobile-marketing-tools/latest-mobile-stats/b

Yes, that's my point - exactly the same browsing share, but with android having a 3-1 market share advantage.

This link tells a bit of a different story, though:
http://www.netmarketshare.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qprid=1&qpcustomb=1

 

[carlitos]

Actually it's pretty much the same story. You linked US-only numbers, and you included tablets. On the link that I posted above, you can see Apple far and away leading North America web pageviews via mobile devices. Adding iPads and focusing on the US would increase that share.

 

[chulbert]

Actually it's pretty much the same story. You linked US-only numbers, and you included tablets. On the link that I posted above, you can see Apple far and away leading North America web pageviews via mobile devices. Adding iPads and focusing on the US would increase that share.

You are correct that the volume of Android smartphone browsing is comparable to the volume of iPhone browsing; however, given a 3-1 unit share advantage for Android, the data still strongly supports the point that iPhone users browse the web vastly more than Android smartphone users.

 

[carlitos]

Broadly, your point is correct, but not based on the data you're replying to. You are conflating US and global figures, which seems to be the pattern in this discussion. There isn't a 3-1 unit share advantage for Android in the USA. That's the global figure. USA, it's probably 50% to 30%, or not even 2:1.

 

[chulbert]

Broadly, your point is correct, but not based on the data you're replying to. You are conflating US and global figures, which seems to be the pattern in this discussion. There isn't a 3-1 unit share advantage for Android in the USA. That's the global figure. USA, it's probably 50% to 30%, or not even 2:1.

I'm talking about your data.

 

[carlitos]

I'm talking about your data.

Ah. Gotcha.

There's another factor, of which I was just reminded while traveling in Canada. In the US, unlimited data plans and cheap pricing per gig is more common than elsewhere. I have had unlimited data plans for 3 years plus. So American iPhone users can use more data without worrying about it. And again, they use a lot more WiFi too. Which jacks up the percent of bandwidth used by iOS.

 

[chulbert]

There's another factor, of which I was just reminded while traveling in Canada. In the US, unlimited data plans and cheap pricing per gig is more common than elsewhere. I have had unlimited data plans for 3 years plus. So American iPhone users can use more data without worrying about it. And again, they use a lot more WiFi too. Which jacks up the percent of bandwidth used by iOS.

I'm not sure I'm following your point. Are you refuting the premise that iPhone users browse more than Android users? Android has a unit share advantage even in the United States and would take advantage of the same unlimited plans as iPhones.

 

[carlitos]

I'm not sure I'm following your point. Are you refuting the premise that iPhone users browse more than Android users? Android has a unit share advantage even in the United States and would take advantage of the same unlimited plans as iPhones.

No, I'm pointing out that, in the US, where iOS has a higher market share vs. Android, the huge market size of internet-happy iOS users is disproportionately jacking up the global web usage share of iOS. I'm completely agreeing that iOS users use more internet.

More succinctly, you can't judge the market share of iOS vs. Android by looking at usage numbers like pageviews.

 

[chulbert]

No, I'm pointing out that, in the US, where iOS has a higher market share vs. Android, the huge market size of internet-happy iOS users is disproportionately jacking up the global web usage share of iOS. I'm completely agreeing that iOS users use more internet.

Wouldn't those unlimited plans similarly jack up the Android numbers, where it enjoys a 5-3 unit share advantage over iPhone? I just don't see an explanation that favors iPhone usage numbers.

More succinctly, you can't judge the market share of iOS vs. Android by looking at usage numbers like pageviews.

It depends on what number you're trying to nail down. For example, the data out there suggests there's a lot of Android smartphones out there used for barely anything more than making calls so you might be interested in differentiating between smartphone owners and smartphone users. Usage data, app download data, and app purchases are useful information when you want to know who uses their smartphone as a smartphone.

 

[carlitos]

Interesting. I'll have to think about it.

 

[quadraginta]

<snip>

It depends on what number you're trying to nail down. For example, the data out there suggests there's a lot of Android smartphones out there used for barely anything more than making calls so you might be interested in differentiating between smartphone owners and smartphone users. Usage data, app download data, and app purchases are useful information when you want to know who uses their smartphone as a smartphone.

I'm not sure why this distinction is useful or important.

If people are choosing to buy smartphones as opposed to a less expensive alternative (whatever the difference between a 'smartphone' and a 'feature phone' may be), whether or not they use all of the device's capabilities to their full potential, it is still a smartphone which they are choosing to buy instead of a less expensive alternative.

Isn't that what is being discussed in this thread, how many of which kind of smartphone people are buying?

I think TheL8Elvis is right about one thing. What people are doing with them probably deserves its own thread, since it isn't very relevant to this one.

 

[This is The End]

I understand they are technically smartphones. But in actual usage, based on ad revenue, mobile browser tracking, etc, they appear to be practically no different than featurephones.

Why would it matter what features the end user chooses to use on the phone?

They can use it just for an alarm clock if they want to.

 

[SonOfLaertes]

I consider gadgets to be my major vice, and keep a very close and keen eye on the latest tech developments, so I make a point of looking out for mobile phones in the wild to see who is using what.

There are 10 people who work in our offices on a permanent basis, and every single one of them has an iPhone 4 or 4S. Of the 8 or so people who work in our Sister Offices at the other end of the corridor, 6 of them have iPhones, again the 4/4S. One person has the Galaxy S3, and he is the other owner of the two S3's I have seen in the wild. I'd guess that about 70% of the people I see in and out of our office during the day own an iPhone.

All my close friends, and the vast majority of my friends own iPhones. If I look at my FB friends, I'd say about 80% of them own iPhones.

I can't speak for the rest of the world, but everywhere I've ever been in the UK I see more people with iPhones than any other kind.

I have the iPhone 5 myself, and I am extremely happy with it. It's just large enough while being comfortable to use, slim and light and extremely fast and smooth.

Jeez, do I really want to dip my toes in this thread? Many of the posts sound like someone defending their own mother.

The above has been my experience as well - just about everyone I know or know of has an iPhone of some vintage. Reading through this head-scratchingly contentious thread I can only assume that Samsung phones are hugely popular "somewhere else". Possibly they are ubiquitous in China, Korea, Europe, etc. Possibly there are concentrations of buying patterns in the US as well.

I don't really care which phone is leading in sales - but I must admit to some surprise at the fact that the Samsung phones hold a big lead. This would seem to be counter-intuitive from daily life.

I guess what I am saying is that I would be curious to see if the sales numbers (which appear to be some elusive moving target) are skewed by heavy regional buying patterns - ie, almost everyone in Chine is buying Samsung phones.

 

[chulbert]

I'm not sure why this distinction is useful or important.

If people are choosing to buy smartphones as opposed to a less expensive alternative (whatever the difference between a 'smartphone' and a 'feature phone' may be), whether or not they use all of the device's capabilities to their full potential, it is still a smartphone which they are choosing to buy instead of a less expensive alternative.

Isn't that what is being discussed in this thread, how many of which kind of smartphone people are buying?

I think TheL8Elvis is right about one thing. What people are doing with them probably deserves its own thread, since it isn't very relevant to this one.

Why would it matter what features the end user chooses to use on the phone?

They can use it just for an alarm clock if they want to.

It matters a great deal to some people, like software developers. If you want to look at the potential market of smartphone users then you need to refine the raw unit sales numbers using the usage numbers. It's the reason iOS is still the first choice platform for new development.

But I'll let this tangent lie to avoid further derail.

 

[quadraginta]

It matters a great deal to some people, like software developers. If you want to look at the potential market of smartphone users then you need to refine the raw unit sales numbers using the usage numbers. It's the reason iOS is still the first choice platform for new development.

But I'll let this tangent lie to avoid further derail.

Perhaps I should have been more explicit. (Always important in discussions of this nature, where some people seem inclined to seize on the least opportunity to misinterpret.)

"I'm not sure why this distinction is useful or important as far as the subject of this discussion is concerned."

Oh, wait. I did make that point. It was several sentences down, so I can understand how difficult it would be to catch.

"Isn't that what is being discussed in this thread, how many of which kind of smartphone people are buying?"

Certainly there are many areas of data which can be more or less significant to different interests for different reasons. My question was about why this particular metric was significant to the topic at hand, i.e. whether or not people are buying more iPhones or more Samsungs.

Yes, what they subsequently choose to use them for is of vital interest to some developers and advertisers, but by that point the purchase choice has already been made.

I'm not disputing anything. I'm wondering why it was brought up in this context in the first place.

 

[chulbert]

Perhaps I should have been more explicit. (Always important in discussions of this nature, where some people seem inclined to seize on the least opportunity to misinterpret.)

"I'm not sure why this distinction is useful or important as far as the subject of this discussion is concerned."

Oh, wait. I did make that point. It was several sentences down, so I can understand how difficult it would be to catch.

"Isn't that what is being discussed in this thread, how many of which kind of smartphone people are buying?"

Certainly there are many areas of data which can be more or less significant to different interests for different reasons. My question was about why this particular metric was significant to the topic at hand, i.e. whether or not people are buying more iPhones or more Samsungs.

Yes, what they subsequently choose to use them for is of vital interest to some developers and advertisers, but by that point the purchase choice has already been made.

I'm not disputing anything. I'm wondering why it was brought up in this context in the first place.

Given that the "subject of this discussion" didn't start out as the subject of this discussion, your snarky self-righteousness seems misplaced and boring. But carry on.

 

[quadraginta]

Given that the "subject of this discussion" didn't start out as the subject of this discussion, your snarky self-righteousness seems misplaced and boring. But carry on.

"Snarky self-righteousness"?

Exaggerate much?

I'm guessing you resort to this ad hom because you don't have any explanation as to why the this metric is significant to the discussion at hand.

This started when TheL8Elvis was questioning comparative sales volumes on the basis that a smartphone wasn't really a smartphone if it wasn't used appropriately, and therefore shouldn't count ... somehow.

Are you defending this position? 'Cause that's the torch you picked up.

 

[chulbert]

"Snarky self-righteousness"?

Exaggerate much?

I do not.

I'm guessing you resort to this ad hom because you don't have any explanation as to why the this metric is significant to the discussion at hand.

There's nothing ad hom about the observation that someone's attitude is not warranted and their admonition against shifting the subject is misplaced when the subject to which they cling was itself a shift from a previous discussion. Additionally, in a comment to someone else.

This started when TheL8Elvis was questioning comparative sales volumes on the basis that a smartphone wasn't really a smartphone if it wasn't used appropriately, and therefore shouldn't count ... somehow.

Are you defending this position? 'Cause that's the torch you picked up.

I would not claim they should not count in a discussion of unit share; I would claim that unit share is not an interesting or useful metric in light of the fact that usage data suggests there are many, many Android smartphones used as feature phones. Unit share does not accurately reflect the popularity or health of the platforms when they aren't used as intended.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

"Snarky self-righteousness"?

Exaggerate much?

I'm guessing you resort to this ad hom because you don't have any explanation as to why the this metric is significant to the discussion at hand.

This started when TheL8Elvis was questioning comparative sales volumes on the basis that a smartphone wasn't really a smartphone if it wasn't used appropriately, and therefore shouldn't count ... somehow.

Are you defending this position? 'Cause that's the torch you picked up.

My point was a large portion of those 'smartphone sales' won't be easily monetized because they won't really be used any differently than a 'dumbphone' or 'featurephone'.

Do you disagree ?

And it was in the context of : There is more to being in a good position in the smartphone market than simply sheer numbers/volume of sales.

Do you disagree ?

 

[quadraginta]

I do not.



There's nothing ad hom about the observation that someone's attitude is not warranted and their admonition against shifting the subject is misplaced when the subject to which they cling was itself a shift from a previous discussion. Additionally, in a comment to someone else.



I would not claim they should not count in a discussion of unit share; I would claim that unit share is not an interesting or useful metric in light of the fact that usage data suggests there are many, many Android smartphones used as feature phones. Unit share does not accurately reflect the popularity or health of the platforms when they aren't used as intended.

I think that is a "no", but it's hard to tease out of all those qualifiers.