Strong holiday sales leave Android with 39 percent share of tablet market (http://phandroid.com/2012/01/26/strong-holiday-sales-leave-android-with-39-percent-share-of-tablet-market/)
In the fourth quarter of 2011 tablet shipments worldwide peaked at 26.8 million, a 150 percent increase from just one year prior. Perhaps no single entity was the greater beneficiary of the continued shift towards tablet computing than was Google. Android-based slates jumped from a 29 percent share of the market in 2010 to a 39.1 percent share for Q4 2012, accounting for 10.5 million of all tablets sold. The numbers represent the great diversity of tablet computers now available, but there is still only one king in this castle. While the iPad saw a decline of roughly 10 percent, sales of the Apple device still took an overwhelming majority of the market with 57.6 percent. Total sales for the iPad in Q4 amounted to 15.4 million.

While increased awareness and marketing as well as quality contributed to Android’s growth, the number of new Android tablets introduced last year made an increase in market share for Google’s OS inevitable. We’ve seen the trend before with Android smartphones as they played catch up with the iPhone and eventually surpassed the device to hold the worldwide market. Will we see the same for tablets?I'm going to say yes to that question.

Android spans from the ridiculously crappy low end up to the high end (even higher than the iPad if you include Windows/Android dual-boot systems). The iPad is high end only. So, it is inevitable that Android tablets will overtake the iPad. If the trend follows the phone trend, it won't be long either. Sure, the iPad 3 is coming and it will have huge sales. But there are a slew of Android tablets coming as well that are going to give it a run for it's money on the high end as well as a bunch of pretty nice low-cost alternatives.

This is a stupid comparison. It is comparing a product from one company(ipad) to a multiple product lines produced by multiple companies(android).

This is a stupid comparison. It is comparing a product from one company(ipad) to a multiple product lines produced by multiple companies(android).

It's is not a stupid comparison because the OS market share drives app development. And that's what people care about more than the hardware. It is analogous to Mac vs. Windows. There's lots of hardware for both, but the reason there is more software for Windows is because there are more Windows computers.

Android spans from the ridiculously crappy low end up to the high end (even higher than the iPad if you include Windows/Android dual-boot systems). The iPad is high end only.




would you compare sales of

Chevy Volt, Camaro
Ford Focus, Mustang
BMW 128, 135, 138, 335
Mercedes
Bugatti Veyron (http://www.bugatti.com/en/veyron-16.4.html)
Koenigsegg (http://www.koenigsegg.com/)
Dodge - Caliber, Avenger, Charger

sure they are cars ...... but in wildly different classes

would you compare sales of

Chevy Volt, Camaro
Ford Focus, Mustang
BMW 128, 135, 138, 335
Mercedes
Bugatti Veyron (http://www.bugatti.com/en/veyron-16.4.html)
Koenigsegg (http://www.koenigsegg.com/)
Dodge - Caliber, Avenger, Charger

sure they are cars ...... but in wildly different classes

No, but you would compare 87 octane cars vs 89, 91, and diesel cars to determine what kind of fuels to carry at a filling station.

It's is not a stupid comparison because the OS market share drives app development. And that's what people care about more than the hardware. It is analogous to Mac vs. Windows. There's lots of hardware for both, but the reason there is more software for Windows is because there are more Windows computers.

I think you're right about that to some extent, and I think that's a fair point. It isn't a facially fair comparison when it comes to who is doing better / having more success, but it is an important comparison when it comes to prospects for the respective operating systems and for developers. There are other things that matter as well in that regard though.

Even after cumulative Android device sales surpass those of iOS devices (which it doesn't appear has happened yet - as of the latest quarter Google reports 250 million Android devices whereas Apple reports 315 million iOS devices), the iOS platform will likely remain a more attractive platform, all things considered, for professional developers (though, generally speaking, most developers will continue to want to develop for both platforms). There are a number of reasons for that, but the most important one is that the iOS platform is where the money is.

The last report I saw from Flurry indicated that developers reported that they were starting 3X as many new iOS projects as new Android projects (that was for the last quarter of 2011), and that that ratio was actually up from the beginning of 2011. Further, Flurry suggested that developers make about 4 times as much money from iOS versions of apps as they make from Android versions of the same apps. All the other metrics I've read (e.g. browser use by operating system) point to the same reality - iPhone owners use their devices more, they download more apps, and they buy more apps (even though there are huge numbers of quality free apps available on iOS just as there are on Android, and there constantly are free-for-a-day offers of apps that are otherwise paid, just as I would guess there are for Android). iOS remains a more attractive platform for developers, and that isn't going to change soon.

I've been giving the iOS / Android questions a lot of thought lately as part of my bigger picture considerations regarding where I want to be positioned long term when it comes to these big tech companies (e.g. Microsoft, Apple, Google, Amazon, Facebook, Samsung). Stock valuations aside (i.e. whether the current stock price seems cheap or expensive or fair to me), here is my big picture concern with Google as relates to Android. Google left / made Android open, which is part of what allowed it grow to what it is now. Google had great resources and ubiquitous connections with potential customers, and Android was a sufficiently-credible operating system, so in a market where handset makers needed a ready made, more powerful and more flexible, mobile operating system - and in a market where there really wasn't much competition in that regard other then Apple's iOS (which they couldn't use) - it's little surprise that it took off like it did. Making it open and available to lots of handset makers was what allowed it to grow so fast. Those handset makers flooded the market with options, trying to get into the game and get a piece of the pie for themselves before it was too late, with varying degrees of individual success but with considerable aggregate success.

Now, Google has this popular mobile operating system. The handset makers did the work for Google in making it such. But, to what end for Google? They have this thing, but how do they make lots of money off it? The model they used to allow it to become so popular limits their ability to make money off of it, but had they not done it that way it wouldn't be so big. I think they aren't making as much money off of advertising through mobile devices as they would like to - or, at least, as they probably feel they should now considering what Android has become. Google's cost-per-click metric is down, and for Google that's a bit troubling - to the point that in their last conference call they basically said, hey, we don't want to talk about it, don't ask us any more about that, we want to talk about other stuff. Google's stock price got hammered after that earnings release and that conference call, as well it should have. The decline in CPC is likely due, in part, to some searches and advertising opportunities moving to mobile devices. It can't make as much money per volume selling advertising across mobile platforms as it can selling it across traditional platforms. That's the reality that is becoming clear.

So what does Google do to better monetize this big thing - Android - that it has? Frankly, I think that's part of why it's trying to buy Motorola. It wants to get a bigger piece of the action and the most direct route to get there is to make more Android devices itself. But here's the problem with that: the 'you maintain the software and build the ecosystem and we'll build the devices' partnership that has driven the success of Android (in unit terms) doesn't work quite as well when the entity in control of the operating system and much of the ecosystem - the entity that is supposed to be a partner of the equipment manufacturers - also tries to be a competitor of the equipment manufacturers. Why should they continue to work so hard to build the popularity of the Android platform for Google, when they have to fear that Google might look for ways to favor itself going forward when it comes to the equipment?

One reason they would continue to would be that they don't have much in the way of other options. But that is changing, particularly with Microsoft on the verge of making a big push in the mobile operating system space and with Windows 8 not too far off. Now, it may be too little to late for Microsoft, but I think Google is going to get push back from the equipment makers (e.g. Samsung, HTC, LG). They're looking to, and I believe will continue to, diversify when it comes to the mobile operating systems their equipment uses. They don't want to find themselves left with a smaller piece of the Android pie that they themselves are responsible for making. If my memory serves, Acer's last earnings presentation indicated that they were already shifting they're focus away from Android and toward Windows with regard to tablets. (I'll look for that presentation if someone wants to see it.)

The Android market is increasingly becoming the Samsung (equipment) market. Many of the other players are seeing things slowing down. HTC's growth has slowed. Motorola's not been doing well - it's struggled to make any money in mobile devices and the Xoom's market performance was nothing short of pitiful. More so than an iOS - Android fight, the smartphone market is becoming largely an Apple - Samsung fight. Their the ones making most of the money (with Apple making the large majority of it). As I'm sure many are aware, Nokia has already largely committed its future fate to that of Windows Mobile.

The point being, I think Google is making a strategic mistake. They may well emerge none the worse for wear, but the real possibility exists that they lose some support from the equipment manufacturers and open the door for other operating systems to make gains in the non-iOS mobile operating system space. I won't predict what's going to happen here, as there are too many moving parts to feel strongly about it - I'll just have to continue to pay close attention to what's going on in this regard, and to listen to what the people that matter - the Samsungs and HTCs - have to say. If you have thoughts, please share them - this is an issue that, as an investor, I'm particularly interested in.

To the original issue - tablet market share. I think the Amazon Kindle Fire has been very successful when it comes to unit sales. That's not a surprise, and it's a big part of why Android tablet share has increased. Amazon is giving them away at a loss in order to have that content sales conduit in the hands of as many people as possible. Beyond the the Amazon and Samsung offerings though, there aren't any Android Tablets that matter yet. I happen to think that Asus is making the best non-Apple tablet right now, but even it hasn't had much market success. The tablet market right now is Apple and the Kindle Fire, and to a lesser extent the Samsung tablets.

Other tablets will emerge to matter at some point though, though the iPad will continue to dominate the market for a long time. The bigger picture story is the success of this new form factor in general - whether the device be an iPad or from another maker. It's been amazing - the pace of adoption is remarkable. The tablet has killed the netbook market and is already cutting into the PC market. I had originally predicted that tablet sales would outpace desktop computer sales globally by 2015, but I now think that will happen by 2014. In this past quarter - and this is truly incredible - iPad sales alone (i.e. not including any other tablets) outpaced desktop PC sales in the U.S. It will take a while longer for tablets to overtake all desktops globally (and even in the U.S. for more than a quarter and counting Mac desktops), but it will happen in the not too distant future.

Good lord! You're normally the most verbose person on the forum, but that's the worst I've seen from you. I gave up ~1/100 of the way through it.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

All I know is that I love my Xoom. Especially since the ICS update.

I'm still waiting to pull the trigger. Right now I'm eying the Transformer Prime TF700T (the one with the 1920x1200 screen). It probably won't be out until June or later. Of course, we'll see what comes out of MWC. Samsung is expected to have some pretty hot tablets coming soon. I'd really love the ASUS Padfone, but I doubt that it will be coming to Verizon.

No, but you would compare 87 octane cars vs 89, 91, and diesel cars to determine what kind of fuels to carry at a filling station.



I read your comparison as including crappy low end Droid products - aka Chevy Chevette's to high end iPads and Droids aka Corvettes


there is no comparison ......... IMHO is it a car / tablet YES - but different classes .........

are you referring to Aps

my oldest daughter has a Kindle Fire


it was pretty nice ........

I think you're right about that to some extent, and I think that's a fair point. It isn't a facially fair comparison when it comes to who is doing better / having more success, but it is an important comparison when it comes to prospects for the respective operating systems and for developers. There are other things that matter as well in that regard though.



Android Market Fragmentation Sucks (http://keyeslabs.com/joomla/blogs/i-think-im-becoming-an-android/175-android-market-fragmentation-sucks)

it appears to me, the Droid market is fragmented [not claiming any expertise here] ..... manufacturers do not provide and update when a new Droid OS comes out .... so devices are scattered across 2.x, Honeycomb, and the new ICS

case in point the NEW Razer runs Gingerbread ?

But within hours of being unveiled on October 18th, the RAZR felt like yesterday’s news. That’s because Google and Samsung trumped it by announcing the Galaxy Nexus, a similar phone that’s the first to run Android 4.0, a promising upgrade also known as Ice Cream Sandwich. The RAZR will ship with Android 2.3 Gingerbread, a version that dates from last year.

Read more: Android’s Fragmentation Mess–and How to Fix It | Techland | TIME.com (http://techland.time.com/2011/11/10/the-android-fragmentation-mess-and-how-to-fix-it/#ixzz1lKNvhX00)


people make claims that Droids are more 'OPEN' but it seems to me they are similarly restricted by the Telecoms carries as the iPhone


if you really want to get anywhere you have to ROOT the device

It's is not a stupid comparison because the OS market share drives app development. And that's what people care about more than the hardware. It is analogous to Mac vs. Windows. There's lots of hardware for both, but the reason there is more software for Windows is because there are more Windows computers.
I'd make the comparison to the Beta / VHS wars from the 70's. Beta was made exclusively by Sony, while a whole slew of companies made VHS players. The both performed the same function (played and recorded programs), but they were mutually exclusive formats.

I'd make the comparison to the Beta / VHS wars from the 70's. Beta was made exclusively by Sony, while a whole slew of companies made VHS players. The both performed the same function (played and recorded programs), but they were mutually exclusive formats.

An excellent example! :yay:

I read your comparison as including crappy low end Droid products - aka Chevy Chevette's to high end iPads and Droids aka Corvettes


there is no comparison ......... IMHO is it a car / tablet YES - but different classes .........

are you referring to Aps

I never compared tablet vs. tablet. I merely said that Android tablets were taking over the market (that was at one time completely dominated by the iPad) and the reason for that was because there are a lot of different Android tablets filling all kinds of niches. The iPad, on the other hand, fills one niche. I never said that all those Android tablets were better than the iPad (I even called them "rediculously crappy" :wink:). IMO, some of them are better than the iPad, but that's personal preference.

I never said that all those Android tablets were better than the iPad (I even called them "rediculously crappy" :wink:). IMO, some of them are better than the iPad, but that's personal preference.




lol ....... well I expect someone will make a Droid with a better experience than a iOS Device