Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Over 20% of Online Black Friday Sales Came From Mobile Devices

samzenpus posted about a year ago | from the palm-of-your-hand dept.

The Almighty Buck 201

cagraham writes "According to IBM's latest Data Benchmark report, 21.8% of all online Black Friday sales were made from mobile devices. Mobile traffic, meanwhile, accounted for 39.7% of all Black Friday traffic. Interestingly, iOS users accounted for 18.1% of online sales, while Android users accounted for just 3.5%. The data come from IBM's real-time monitoring over 800 U.S. online retailers. The report also notes that tablets generated less traffic than smartphones, but accounted for almost twice the number of sales. Overall, online sales for Black Friday grew 18.9% year-over-year."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

disparate (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45576379)

So when developers focus on iOS first (or only), refer back to reports like this.

Re:disparate (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45576515)

Sounds like to me that most Android users are simply too smart to shop on a tiny phone screen when they can shop on a large computer monitor.

Re:disparate (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45576551)

the mobile apps are formatted for the small screen negating any advantage of a computer.

Re:disparate (2, Insightful)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about a year ago | (#45576649)

the mobile apps are formatted for the small screen negating any advantage of a computer.

Until you get to the ordering screen, which they didn't take the time to create a mobile version of, and you can't fill out the entire form because the goddamn keyboard keeps popping up and covering the last few entries!

The Nexus 7 works pretty well (Humble Bundle's site takes a huge shit on it, otherwise I haven't had a problem), but I've all but given up trying to order stuff with my smartphone.

Re:disparate (2, Insightful)

BasilBrush (643681) | about a year ago | (#45576717)

Until you get to the ordering screen, which they didn't take the time to create a mobile version of, and you can't fill out the entire form because the goddamn keyboard keeps popping up and covering the last few entries!

The Nexus 7 works pretty well (Humble Bundle's site takes a huge shit on it, otherwise I haven't had a problem), but I've all but given up trying to order stuff with my smartphone.

Given this report, iOS users don't seem to have a problem.

Re:disparate (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about a year ago | (#45576775)

Until you get to the ordering screen, which they didn't take the time to create a mobile version of, and you can't fill out the entire form because the goddamn keyboard keeps popping up and covering the last few entries!

The Nexus 7 works pretty well (Humble Bundle's site takes a huge shit on it, otherwise I haven't had a problem), but I've all but given up trying to order stuff with my smartphone.

Given this report, iOS users don't seem to have a problem.

I can spoof an iPhone/iPad user agent with my Droid.

But I haven't, at least not for online shopping, so I can't tell you whether or not that would make an actionable difference in usability. If it does, that might help explain why a phone that does not have a majority share of the mobile market is seen as being the device in use by the majority share of online shoppers: Android users spoofing iOS user agents.

Personally, I'm still stuck on the question of why this matters at all.

Re:disparate (2, Interesting)

BasilBrush (643681) | about a year ago | (#45576977)

Or the more obvious explanation that the iOS keyboard popping up doesn't ever cover up form fields on a web-site. The current one is automatically scrolled into view, and any other part of the web-page can be scrolled into view by the user if needs be. Nothing is out of bounds because it's behind the keyboard.

Re:disparate (2)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about a year ago | (#45577099)

Or the more obvious explanation that the iOS keyboard popping up doesn't ever cover up form fields on a web-site.

That in no way explains how a device owned by about 30% of smartphone users was seen as being responsible for over 80% of online sales.

It especially does not offer any better explanation than "Android devices using iOS user agents."

Quite the opposite, really.

Re:disparate (0)

BasilBrush (643681) | about a year ago | (#45577233)

That in no way explains how a device owned by about 30% of smartphone users was seen as being responsible for over 80% of online sales.

The most obvious explanation for that is that most Androids are cheap devices, that are either used as dumb phones, or as tablets just gather dust on a shelf once people realise their web-browsing experience is terrible. Your experience of the keyboard covering form fields is just one aspect of that.

Re:disparate (-1, Flamebait)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about a year ago | (#45577479)

That in no way explains how a device owned by about 30% of smartphone users was seen as being responsible for over 80% of online sales.

The most obvious explanation

You keep using that term, but I do not think it means what you think it means.

Here's the gist up to this point:

AC - Mobile apps are formatted for mobile.

This Guy - Yea, but the keyboard on my Android phone fucks up on the ordering screen.

You (BB) - This report seems to indicate that iOS users don't have that issue.

TG - unquantifiable - Android phones can emulate iOS user agent, so that report could be flawed. Also, this whole debate matters not.

BB - explained by iPhone keyboard iz teh winz!

TG - That explains nothing.

BB - explained by Android fonez iz teh cheapxxors!

Which brings us to right here, right now.

Look, Wang-Chung, I'm not going to get into an iQueer vs AnFag flamewar with you, because I couldn't give less of a fuck. My point , as it has been, is this: A report showing that 80% of online purchases in a day originated from devices with iOS user agents DOES NOT FUCKING EQUATE to 80% of online purchases in a day originating from iPhones, BECAUSE Android phones (which make up 80% of the smartphone market) are capable of spoofing iOS user agents.

In summation, it's a stupid report, based on bad data, that tells us absolutely nothing useful. Now, would you please, please stop prattling on about the goddamn keyboard?

Re:disparate (4, Insightful)

paiute (550198) | about a year ago | (#45577251)

It especially does not offer any better explanation than "Android devices using iOS user agents."

Quite the opposite, really.

I'd like to know what percentage of Android users who are not Slashdot users even know that you can do this.

Re:disparate (0)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about a year ago | (#45577591)

It especially does not offer any better explanation than "Android devices using iOS user agents."

Quite the opposite, really.

I'd like to know what percentage of Android users who are not Slashdot users even know that you can do this.

I doubt it's quantifiable, but considering that 0.01% of the US population is still over 3,000,000 people, I'd venture a guess and say: lots.

Bad jokes aside, here's the research bit:

Per this Time article, [time.com] Android phones make up about 51% of the US mobile phone market. If we take the figures from Wikipedia, [wikipedia.org] there are about 327,578,000 active smartphones in the US. If we divide 327,578,000 by 51%, we get 167,064,780 Android phones currently active.

If even 5% of those Android users know how to switch user agents, that's still 8,353,239 people.

That's more than the entire population of my home state.

Re:disparate (1)

mlts (1038732) | about a year ago | (#45577379)

I learned that the hard way when Mastercard's additional password dialog popped up in a tiny little iframe and couldn't be completed. Result -- no order completion until I pulled out my N7 and did the job with that.

Re:disparate (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about a year ago | (#45577603)

Really, I think that's less an OS limitation than it is a matter of website coders not considering that someone would view the site with a (non-iOS) screen smaller than 7".

Re:disparate (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45576553)

Uh, yeah sure. I guess that's one wrong way of looking at it.

Re:disparate (2)

bob_super (3391281) | about a year ago | (#45576811)

Someone has some hype to fuel...

Tablets can have higher resolution than PC monitors, and be connected to the big-screen TV in the living room.

Are Android and ios really a good indication of "mobile"?
How much of this shopping actually came over 3/4G connections?

Re:disparate (0)

Joce640k (829181) | about a year ago | (#45577157)

Sounds like to me that most Android users are simply too smart to shop on a tiny phone screen when they can shop on a large computer monitor.

Maybe they used large screen devices called "tablets".

Android dominates the 'phone' market but I bet Apple still dominates 'tablets' (though maybe not for much longer).

Get offa my lawn! (5, Funny)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about a year ago | (#45576425)

I would never buy Christmas gifts over smartphone surfing. I guess I'm just old school and like the hustle and bustle of leisurely picking through products and buying at my nice, large computer screen.

Re:Get offa my lawn! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45576743)

Honestly, as fist-shaking-at-youth as you sound...

Me too.

I've got a 30" monitor. It's glorious for comparing a crapload of products and prices, something that isn't quite as awesome on a tiny phone or tablet.

Re:Get offa my lawn! (1)

NatasRevol (731260) | about a year ago | (#45576897)

Sure, if you're comparison shopping.

But if Aunt Jennie sends you a link to what Cousin Frankie wants exactly, no need to be in front of a computer. 30 seconds at a stop light and Xmas shopping is done for Frankie!

Re:Get offa my lawn! (2)

Daetrin (576516) | about a year ago | (#45576851)

I learned about a number of Black Friday and Cyber Monday sales through my Android phone. And in each case i then went and looked it up again on my PC for review before deciding whether or not to make a purchase.

Re:Get offa my lawn! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45576923)

Thus, you're part of the statistics.

I wonder if it's because web surfing is still better on iOS than Android.

Re:Get offa my lawn! (1)

Sporkinum (655143) | about a year ago | (#45577211)

I only used the PC, as I only have a work supplied blackberry, and I decided not to buy anything. I suppose I need to order a couple of gifts this week though.

Re:Get offa my lawn! (1)

Wookact (2804191) | about a year ago | (#45577595)

I actually purchased something for my girlfriend using my smart phone. Opened amazon app, did a search, found one with good reviews at a decent price that met the needed specs, and ordered it. It was actually easier on my phone because I got to do it while on a cigarette break from her family over thanksgiving. Bonus: I got it taken care of in like 5 minutes that was otherwise wasted at a family function.

I now wait for the obligatory "Dur slashdotters dont have girlfriends" comment.

Probably not accurate (5, Insightful)

synapse7 (1075571) | about a year ago | (#45576433)

Some of my android based tablets and phone are using browsers with a user agent that reports as an ipad, seems to help get an html5 website.

Re:Probably not accurate (5, Insightful)

605dave (722736) | about a year ago | (#45576543)

Yes, I'm sure that's a huge percentage of the traffic.

Re:Probably not accurate (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45576621)

Can't tell if you're serious, Dave.

Re:Probably not accurate (1)

H0p313ss (811249) | about a year ago | (#45576671)

Daisy, Daisy...

Re:Probably not accurate (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45576687)

Not sure if sarcastic. Many people, developers included, see ipad as synonymous with tablet. There are many android apps that masquerade as iOS apps because of never changed code between versions.

No actually it's correct..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45576661)

IOS did account for a huge chunk more of the money spent.

What they're not saying, is that the IOS users bought the very same items as the Android users.

Re:Probably not accurate (2)

vux984 (928602) | about a year ago | (#45577005)

Some of my android based tablets and phone are using browsers with a user agent that reports as an ipad

Can you clarify if that was something you set up yourself, or whether they are coming like that from the developer?

More Accurate Findings (1)

deathcow (455995) | about a year ago | (#45577435)

Scientists confirmed that when IOS and Android users purchased the same items, at the same store, the IOS users still accounted for 28% more revenue.

Android data (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45576435)

i assume the android data is a little slanted due to the fact you can change your client to a more useful desktop view....

Re: Android data (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45576631)

I assume android users are too poor and cheap to actually buy something. They probably give torrented pirated media as presents. Data wants to be freeeeeeee!

Re: Android data (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45576763)

I wouldn't say I'm poor or cheap, but rather I didn't see anything that I needed >.

Cyber Monday? (2)

michaelmalak (91262) | about a year ago | (#45576451)

Makes me wonder how much longer the term "Cyber Monday" will be relevant if we're all continuously plugged into Amazon anyway and don't need to be at a desktop/laptop.

Re:Cyber Monday? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45576521)

Was Cyber Monday ever relevant?
Do people really wait till Monday to peruse and shop at work?

Re:Cyber Monday? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45576697)

It was relevant about 15 years ago, but not today. Back from about the 90's to early 2000's, most users still did not have high speed at home, so they waited until Monday, when they came to work and then could look through all the hi-res pics and decide. It was pretty serious, I had customers where we had to block off all the commerical sites for the week, and others who used it as a bonus to working there.

But today....I don't see that at all. It is an outdated thing.

Re:Cyber Monday? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45576903)

Last week, Amazon had "Black Friday week" deals. They seem to have continued with a similar thing this week, as some of their "cyber monday" deals continue well past tonight (though that might just be a time zone thing)

I used to shop Black Friday in the stores before kids...waited in line for the door busters, that whole bit. I decided I wanted to buy a watch this year, so I have been checking out Amazon's deals, which come up every few hours...you can see *what* will be offered and the time, but not the price. This stinks because I have found myself up at all hours ready to pounce on a deal if the price is right.

Re:Cyber Monday? (1)

asmkm22 (1902712) | about a year ago | (#45576989)

Only as long as they keep offering discounts tied to that particular Monday.

Re:Cyber Monday? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45577197)

Ages. Consider that the terms Month-end, Quarter-end and Year-end are still responsible for periodic rushes in regular business while any idiot knows it is a totally pointless concept. Everyone makes each other crazy and stressed, no one gets any wiser because of it.
 

So you're saying (3, Informative)

msobkow (48369) | about a year ago | (#45576455)

So you're saying iOS users are suckers with too much money to burn. :P

Re:So you're saying (2)

BasilBrush (643681) | about a year ago | (#45576599)

There's such a thing as too much?

Re: So you're saying (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45576983)

Only for awhile. Then the geniuses at the Apple Store sell you overpriced cables and accessories.

Re:So you're saying (4, Insightful)

east coast (590680) | about a year ago | (#45576669)

Given the response to this article so far? I'd say that this is proof that Slashdotters are willing to argue over what technology is better than to just accept that people use different technology and move on with their own lives.

Slashdot thanks for taking the flamebait... that's their bread and butter.

Re:So you're saying (1, Interesting)

msobkow (48369) | about a year ago | (#45576727)

*sigh* iOS devices are more expensive to begin with. iOS users obviously have more money to spend than brains. It has nothing to do with the quality of the device, and everything to do with being willing to be gouged.

Re: So you're saying (3, Insightful)

Scowler (667000) | about a year ago | (#45576975)

iPhones aren't significantly different in price from top-end Android phones from Samsung, HTC, etc. I know the Nexus phones are always quoted as proof that iPhones are over-priced, but the Nexus phones are an anomaly when compared to other similar Android phones as well.

Re:So you're saying (2)

east coast (590680) | about a year ago | (#45577161)

iOS devices are more expensive to begin with.

Really? The last time I looked at Verizon's site both the high end HTC and Samsung models were going for the same as an iPhone 5s with contract. I could see your point if it was without contract even though the Samsung was only 50 dollars cheaper but let's be honest, the vast majority of smartphone users on Verizon are under a contract.

Even with all that included I guess by your metric if someone is driving a car that isn't a Nissan Versa they're just suckers getting gouged, eh? What do you drive? What kind of computer you got on the desk in front of you? I bet you overpaid for that too. We could go round all day on this but the truth of the matter is that most people spend more money taking the family to the movies than the price difference of a new iPhone versus a comparable Android without a contract.

In what universe? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45577329)

*sigh* iOS devices are more expensive to begin with.

Subsidized, an iPhone is the same price as any other smartphone: "free" for a shitty obsolete model, $100 for the midrange model, $200 or so for a high-end model.

Unsubsidized, maybe, but the kind of people who buy things on Black Friday/Cyber Monday (which is to say, Americans) don't buy unsubsidized phones.

Re:So you're saying (2)

wondersparrow (685210) | about a year ago | (#45576913)

"This just in, iOS users are more likely to spend more and buy $hit they don't need than Android users."

Re:So you're saying (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45577113)

So you're saying iOS users are suckers with too much money to burn. :P

Pretty sure they are just saying iOS users committed to more sales volume vs Android devices... What it does not say is the "value" in each transaction (meaning the price paid minus the cost of the good) to determine if the activity could reasonably be considered "burning money". Could be that iOS users showed more brick/mortar restraint and instead focused on online shopping due to the lower margins and generally "better" prices. Or maybe not. What i bet (from observed data) is that iOS users were relaxing and buying from their couch/airport lounge seat/etc. and Android users were in the stores using their mobiles for price comparison to vet a brick/mortar "deal" before purchasing, and saving the online shopping for cyber monday.

That's the real data folks (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45576461)

Chirp all you want about Android has more marketshare blah blah blah. When it comes to actual usage of people who spend money, iOS is ahead in every way, shape and form.

Re:That's the real data folks (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45576559)

Maybe not everyone wants an OS which expects and encourages buying more useless crap. This is a win for Android IMO.

Re:That's the real data folks (1)

danbob999 (2490674) | about a year ago | (#45576573)

Which should never be an argument if you are developing a free application. I guess this is why Android has the lead in the number of free applications, but iOS probably still lead in paid applications.
Also this survey is only in the USA. Apple products have far more market share in their home market than worldwide.

Re:That's the real data folks (1)

BasilBrush (643681) | about a year ago | (#45576685)

Which should never be an argument if you are developing a free application.

Depends if you are wanting to make a profit on the "free" app. Because of course most "free" apps are intended to make a profit. Either on advertising or in-app purchases.

Re:That's the real data folks (1)

danbob999 (2490674) | about a year ago | (#45577065)

Most non-crap free applications do not intent to directly make money from the application. They don't have ads or in-app purchase.
I don't have any ads or in-app purchase in my email, calendar, banking, music player or instant messaging application.

For adware, crapware and other *ware, however, I totally agree with you. Therefore if I were developing a crapware application trying to fool people into buying fake university diplomas or fake pills, I would target iOS first. I would also sell a "pro" version with ads disabled.

Re:That's the real data folks (1)

BasilBrush (643681) | about a year ago | (#45577319)

Most non-crap free applications do not intent to directly make money from the application.

I don't agree with your opinion.

I don't have any ads or in-app purchase in my email, calendar, banking, music player or instant messaging application.

Other than banking, those tend to be built in. And in the case of Google's versions, you pay by losing your privacy. The banking one is also commercial. It's part of the overall commercial package the bank offers.

Therefore if I were developing a crapware application trying to fool people into buying fake university diplomas or fake pills, I would target iOS first. I would also sell a "pro" version with ads disabled.

You could try, but you'd either never get through the app review process, or be subsequently de-listed when the complaints come in. No such danger for Android apps. You can get away with any kind of scam on Android.

Meanwhile developers offering non-free quality apps almost always develop for iOS first.

Re:That's the real data folks (1)

danbob999 (2490674) | about a year ago | (#45577583)

I wouldn't use an ad-supported calendar application if the built-in one wasn't good enough.
Most quality free applications are either developped by charity/for fun or are part of a larger commercial offering like my banking application.

On my PC Small utilities like file archiver, CD burner, FTP client, media player, email client and even developer tools (IDE, compiler, editor) are all free and without ads. In fact I don't use any ad-supported application on my PC. Why would it be different on my phone?

You could try, but you'd either never get through the app review process

Fake diplomas and pills was a little exagerated, but there are a lot of cappy applications in the App Store, like the thousands of fart applications.

Re:That's the real data folks (1)

angel'o'sphere (80593) | about a year ago | (#45577625)

crapware usually does not get aproved to the iTunes Appstore by Apple.

Re:That's the real data folks (1)

angel'o'sphere (80593) | about a year ago | (#45577611)

Perhaps in second and third world countries.
But in Europe many many people have Macs and iOS devices. In some countries people have more Macs than PCs. I have many friends in Paris, nearly no one has a PC or similar device, the very few who have PCs usually run Linux. Granted, not everyone has an iPhone or iPad, here the Andriod fraction is pretty high. However I doubt the iOS fraction is lower than in the USA, I would bet it is significant higher.

riots (1)

schneidafunk (795759) | about a year ago | (#45576483)

And in other news, rioting at stores decreased by 21%.

Re:riots (2)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about a year ago | (#45576739)

And in other news, rioting at stores decreased by 21%.

Which is a real bummer for me - my favorite part of Black Friday is Red Saturday, when I sit around watching videos and news reports of all the fights that broke out over Tickle-Me-Elmo, or whatever the duke-it-out toy is this year.

Damn iPhone, ruining my schadenfreude....

whence good old traditional values? (1)

Thud457 (234763) | about a year ago | (#45576785)

This disgusts me.
Walmart, and the other retailers, shouldn't be forcing their employees to come in and work in a madhouse like that on Thanksgiving day.
These people should be at home with their families, beating them up.

Re:whence good old traditional values? (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about a year ago | (#45577045)

This disgusts me.

Walmart, and the other retailers, shouldn't be forcing their employees to come in and work in a madhouse like that on Thanksgiving day.

These people should be at home with their families, beating them up.

Um... I was talking about Black Friday, not Turkey Thursday.

Regardless, I wholeheartedly agree.

Re:riots (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45576861)

And in other news, rioting at stores decreased by 21%.

There is zero correlation between the physical density between humans and their overall stupidity, thus this rings absolutely false.

What does this mean? (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45576501)

Please, Slashdot, help me understand this random factoid and how it can be twisted to various predetermined narratives. Are Android users to poor to shop? No, wait, is it that Apple users are caught up with continuous shopping to flee from the ever-fading glow of material gratification? Is the latest iPhone made with parts that outgas consumption-inducing pthalates? Help me; I must know how these isolated data confirm what we all already know.

Re:What does this mean? (1)

angel'o'sphere (80593) | about a year ago | (#45577439)

You are close to the point :)
Considering as some pointed out that I OS devices are usually more expensive than others, the iOS users need to spent much more time online shopping to down to the same price in $/h spent shopping. So if my iPad costed 4 times as much as your Andriod pad, I have to spent 4 times as much time online. Obviously that leads to more items bought as I find it difficult to resist all the nice stuff I find in shops.

Someone is saying Black Friday was up 20%?? (1)

Marrow (195242) | about a year ago | (#45576527)

I really really doubt that. More likely it was down about 20% in un-inflated dollars.

Up *online* (1)

Junta (36770) | about a year ago | (#45576679)

Combine this with some reports that in-store shopping was down (even if including the days prior) and it may suggest that more people are moving to shopping online than in-store, not that revenue overall is up.

Re:Someone is saying Black Friday was up 20%?? (1)

smaddox (928261) | about a year ago | (#45576931)

Inflation has been very low (and even negative at times) post the global financial crisis. Without some form of government intervention, it would have stayed negative, too, because deleveraging would have continued. However, with quantitative easing forcing short-term interest rates to the zero lower bound, private debt has started increasing again. And increasing private debt means increasing consumer spending.

Sure, Apple owners have the most money to blow? (1)

ReekRend (843787) | about a year ago | (#45576535)

Sure, Apple owners have the most money to blow?

Re:Sure, Apple owners have the most money to blow? (0)

BasilBrush (643681) | about a year ago | (#45576627)

And Android users are people who couldn't afford something better.

Re: Sure, Apple owners have the most money to blow (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45577135)

I had my iPod touch for several years before I bought my first Smartphone, a Samsung Galaxy Victory. I wanted OUT of the iOs app store.

Re:Sure, Apple owners have the most money to blow? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45577263)

More like not being so gullible and buying what they want when they want. Apple zealots have to do what others do when they do it to ensure they fit in with all the other sheeple.

User Agent Spoofing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45576555)

I, for one, did all my shopping on a desktop configured to use an iPhone user agent. It was the only mobile default programmed into the Firefox User Agent Switcher plugin.

Newegg was offering a 5% discount coupon for using their mobile site. I spoofed the user agent, then forgot it.

apple users have too much money to spend (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45576557)

News at 11.

Even worse: (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45576585)

Most of those android users were shopping for an iPhone or iPad to replace their peice of shit android.

IBM knows this how? (2)

sl4shd0rk (755837) | about a year ago | (#45576613)

IBM calls it "cloudbased analytics" in it's report but I find it a bit creepy that IBM has data from "800 US retail websites". I suppose just counting request headers on a reverse proxy could do it, but having data from Pinterest and Facebook, as well as how many push notifications retailers sent, seems beyond simple methods.

Re:IBM knows this how? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45576753)

reverse proxy could do it

Well, hopefully not, the actual *purchases* should be protected by SSL.

IBM sells a lot of software to these retailers and/or has agreements in place to provide some data for IBM to provide meaningful analytics.

CC in a phone? (2)

DogDude (805747) | about a year ago | (#45576691)

I never understood why people think it's a good idea to enter (or even worse, store) credit card info in a phone. That's the height of stupidity, in my opinion.

Re:CC in a phone? (2)

clonehappy (655530) | about a year ago | (#45576781)

Storing, absolutely. But why is it any less secure to enter the info into the browser of a phone than any other web browser in existence? You know, the people who have the technology to sniff an LTE or HSPA data connection are either not interested in something as mundane as your credit card number and/or they already have it.

No different from any other PC (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45576795)

I never understood why people think it's a good idea to enter (or even worse, store) credit card info in a phone. That's the height of stupidity, in my opinion.

It's no less secure than your PC. Actually, the average Joe's automatically-updated iPhone is probably more likely to be free of malware than his Windows PC.

Re:No different from any other PC (1)

Zumbs (1241138) | about a year ago | (#45576863)

I never understood why people think it's a good idea to enter (or even worse, store) credit card info in a phone. That's the height of stupidity, in my opinion.

It's no less secure than your PC. Actually, the average Joe's automatically-updated iPhone is probably more likely to be free of malware than his Windows PC.

It is also a lot easier to steal Joe's iPhone than it is to break into his apartment and run away with his desktop PC ;-)

Re:No different from any other PC (1)

mlts (1038732) | about a year ago | (#45577443)

It may be easier, but in general, newer devices prompt the user to set up some form of authentication.

The PC is harder to grab, but usually Joe doesn't have BitLocker or FileVault enabled, so slurping data consists of just booting from other media and copying off files in the home directory. With a Mac, Joe might have Find iPhone enabled, but if the computer doesn't have an Internet connection, the kill/lock signal wouldn't reach it.

The phone or tablet, if locked, will disable itself after a few guesses, or prompt for a password. More sophisticated users will have some mechanism where it takes photos of who is trying to access it as well as find its location. Other users will trigger an erase as soon as they realize that it is missing.

Re:No different from any other PC (1)

pr0fessor (1940368) | about a year ago | (#45577619)

You mean pick up Joe's iPhone {or android} after he drops it or forgets it on the table in a restaurant. He set up a password on it but it's not locked {he turned it off to watch a movie cause he doesn't really know how to use the phone} and everything auto logs in for you. {of course his PC is no better but he doesn't carry it around with him everyday and loose it all the time}

Re:CC in a phone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45576935)

I never understood why people think it's a good idea to enter (or even worse, store) credit card info in a phone. That's the height of stupidity, in my opinion.

A cell phone is a virtual gold mine of information, both financial and personal.

A credit card can easily be cancelled, charges cleared up, and even the credit rating remain unaffected.

Go ahead and try that "undo" magic trick on 90% of your personal text messages or picture collection from the average cell phone after it hits Google.

If you're that concerned about security or privacy, the height of stupidity is owning a cell phone. Period.

Re:CC in a phone? (1)

clonehappy (655530) | about a year ago | (#45577039)

I have a passcode on my phone. It doesn't allow data transfer off of the unit until that passcode is entered. After 10 incorrect attempts, bye-bye data.
 
That being said, even if they get to my pictures or personal text messages, there really isn't fuck all they can do with them. I don't take nude selfies, I don't deal in illegal materials, I rarely even have risque conversations with my girlfriend. Why not?
 
Because keeping anything you don't want the whole world to see on ANY internet connected device (PC or mobile) is the height of stupidity.

Re:CC in a phone? (2)

Junta (36770) | about a year ago | (#45577597)

You mean that data that is stamped onto a plastic card in the clear in the wallet that is probably right next to said cell phone if someone robs you? The little card that people hand over freely to low paid waitstaff at a restaurant who might disappear for 5-6 minutes with your card out of sight? The card that is inserted into dozens of public card readers that might have a skimmer on them over the course of a week? Face it, the entire state of CC numbers is insanity from a security perspective (a single 'secret' that must be shared with everyone who you want to pay that is as able to authenticate the transaction you provided it for as it is able to authenticate any transaction to anyone.).

Maybe you mean to say a phone is a prime target for phishing and/or malware, but I would fail to see how that situation would differ from a run of the mill desktop pc.

Newegg forces it for some... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45576693)

I've been needing a keyboard for a while, so when I saw one with the features I like drift into my price range, I bought it.
When I put the discount coupon code in, Newegg tells me ...only from the newegg mobile app...
Install the app. "Buy" the product. Punch in the code. Pay. Uninstall the app.
What a PITA.
So, when you read "from mobile devices", remember past performance does not imply future behaviour.

Apple has "premium" customers (1)

beatljuice (735526) | about a year ago | (#45576719)

Apple customers have always been a higher "ranking" customer. People who buy Apple products are people who are willing to pay a premium for luxury and/or convenience. Most of the people who get Android phones just get it free or cheap with their phone plan and don't really care about all the abilities of the phone.

Re:Apple has "premium" customers (1)

vux984 (928602) | about a year ago | (#45577035)

Its more accurate to say that apple only has 'premium' customers, while android customers (and android phones) run the complete range from bare bones to premium.

Re:Apple has "premium" customers (1)

beatljuice (735526) | about a year ago | (#45577239)

I think it's more than that. As I think the statistics show - people purchasing an Apple mobile product are looking for the "full digital experience" MUCH more often than the Android buyer. I think that even the "premium" Android buyer is less likely to shop online from their phone (or online at all for that matter) than an Apple buyer. By the way, I'm a "mediocre" ($200 paid up front, no contract for an HTC EVO 3D) Android phone user, and use my phone for a lot of digital stuff, but I've never bought anything from my phone accept software from Google Play, and even that I usually do from my desktop computer and "push" it to my phone.

There's prob a reason for this (1)

atomicxblue (1077017) | about a year ago | (#45576737)

People are probably using the mobile phones so they don't go over the data cap on their home internet.

Re:There's prob a reason for this (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45577511)

FYI: Americans don't have data caps on home internet.

Interestingly? (0)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about a year ago | (#45576789)

Interestingly, iOS users accounted for 18.1% of online sales, while Android users accounted for just 3.5%.

Must be that new meaning of "interestingly" I've been hearing about.

Shouldn't really compare the overall OS's (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45576837)

Not sure if relevant disclaimer: I work for Google/keep that in mind in case something below seems biased in that regard.

As someone who has been involved with web analytics for a long time now, I actually find it a bit disingenuous to lump Tablets into the mobile space. Behaviorally, they perform much closer to a Desktop (conversion rates, what they do on a website, etc). Thus what we be seeing here is the iPad's dominance in the tablet space/the sales that occur from it, being lumped in a contest between what should really be iPhone vs Android phones, and, if you want a real picture of how things net out, top tier Android devices vs iPhone.

My experience/anecdotes show that even when restricting to iPhone vs Android mobile devices iPhones still typically fare much better, which I've usually considered a byproduct of the feature discrepancy between a top flight iPhone and some of the lower end Androids. When comparing top tier Android devices and iPhones, it's generally a toss up. This isn't an attempt to make iPhones look crappy or anything-- they have huge volumes of what I'm declaring "top tier", and thus do the lion share of mobile purchasing, just trying to add some color based on what I personally see in the analytics space, which is quite a bit.

Sad that we know that much already (1)

realsilly (186931) | about a year ago | (#45576871)

So which company is reporting to whom about who did what on Cyber Monday or Black Friday, or any F---'in day? Is this how much every aspect of our lives is being tracked that in merely a few days we know this statistic at all, regardless of accuracy?

Augh....

Native Apps vs HTML5 (1)

Scowler (667000) | about a year ago | (#45576885)

How many of the mobile purchases were done in a standard browser versus native apps? I suspect the latter is responsible for a surprisingly large share.

Re:Native Apps vs HTML5 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45577283)

Well then it wouldn't be surprising, now would it?

Regional thing? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45577339)

Just curious but couldn't the disparity between iOS sales and Android sales have something to do with how Apple's most significant presence is in the US (since Black Friday is "the day after Thanksgiving" with Thanksgiving being a strictly American holiday).

Personally, I'm not sure why anyone would shop on a mobile device. If they're on the move, they might as well just get it where they are. If not, then why aren't they using a real computer?

Weird.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?