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!

Android Passes Symbian As Most-Shipped Mobile Platform

Soulskill posted more than 3 years ago | from the is-it-trendy-yet dept.

Android 256

nk497 writes "Symbian is no longer the most-shipped mobile platform, with Android finally knocking Nokia's OS out of the number one position. Manufacturers shipped 32.9 million Android devices in Q4 of last year, compared to 31 million Symbian devices, according to Canalys. That gives Google a 33% share of the global mobile market, over 31% for Nokia's Symbian. 'It's gone from nowhere to number one in the space of two years, which is pretty impressive,' Canalys analyst Pete Cunningham said, predicting Android would double its growth rate this year."

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

Android users are fat from eating all those cakes (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35062716)

You know it true.

Not "most-shipped mobile platform" (0)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35062730)

"Smartphone" platform (or at least what is at this day considered one by pundits); S40 is the most-shipped mobile platform by a very wide margin.

The other news - Symbian is the first smarthpone platform which broke annual shipments of 100 million units. Because you know, it also has big growth / more than overall growth of mobile sales / the whole market is expanding (including one quite unusual - also in basically not having any Nokia presence - place finally allowed by carriers its share of growth in smartphones and their shipments there)

Plus, generally, I wouldn't mind a landscape analogous to browser marketshare in Ukraine [ranking.com.ua] or Russia [rankingru.com] ; but if you prefer a repeat of desktop OS situation... (that said, Nokia will probably adopt also Android relatively soon, and they should quickly catch up via their supply/etc. chains - similar to how Samsung is at the top despite late start - and so the new PC/MS-DOS/Wintel, in mobile world, will fully arrive ... hopefully without the pitfalls of MS / already Google could fix some aspects: for example some functions relying a bit too much, unnecesserily, on data access - good for Google, great for carriers, not so great for too many potential users, we don't need such things repeating)

Another big news - ZTE (yeah, ever heard of them?) is now in the top5 of mobile phone vendors - ahead of RIM, only behind Nokia, Samsung and LG.

Re:Not "most-shipped mobile platform" (0)

Microlith (54737) | more than 3 years ago | (#35062736)

Nokia will probably adopt also Android relatively soon

There's been zero veracity to any rumor or wet dream of blind Android supporters spouted to date.

Sad that the mobile space is so full of closed or NIH-riddled platforms.

Re:Not "most-shipped mobile platform" (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35062822)

Yes, of course ... I'm just saying, they might not have much choice at some relatively soon point (and also adopting - they serve way too large variety of segments to go mainly Android). Not quite to the point of how it once became much harder to get personal computer which wasn't PC/MS-DOS/Wintel, but...

Re:Not "most-shipped mobile platform" (1)

the linux geek (799780) | more than 3 years ago | (#35062848)

What do you mean they don't have any choice? Android has 30% market share. That's far from dominant.

Re:Not "most-shipped mobile platform" (1)

Skythe (921438) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063180)

Nokia has too much invested in their own technologies to adopt Android.

Re:Not "most-shipped mobile platform" (1)

worx101 (1799560) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063354)

People were saying the same thing about Apple and the PowerPC.

Re:Not "most-shipped mobile platform" (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063428)

Sunk cost Fallacy. Let's hope their execs are smarter than you.

Re:Not "most-shipped mobile platform" (-1, Troll)

the linux geek (799780) | more than 3 years ago | (#35062838)

I agree. I also have to question whether any of these Android fans have ever developed or used it. The API's suck, performance sucks, and almost any Android implementation shipped has bizarre shortcomings and bugs. I don't like Symbian, but I'd pick it over Android any day.

I develop for Android professionally, but replaced an Android phone (a Milestone) with a Samsung bada one (Samsung Wave) without ever looking back. I'd use an HTC HD2 without hesitation if the models with support for AT&T bands were remotely affordable.

Re:Not "most-shipped mobile platform" (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 3 years ago | (#35062982)

You must be a loon. Symbian sucks to develop for. Of course buying a locked down Milestone pretty much proves it.

Re:Not "most-shipped mobile platform" (2)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063268)

I take it you never touched Qt? (which is the officially promoted way for some time now; while supporting ~4 year old phones)

Re:Not "most-shipped mobile platform" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35063198)

I agree. I also have to question whether any of these Android fans have ever developed or used it.

No, no fan of Android has used Android. Ever. In the entire world.

It's a well-known fact that the closest to modern technology any Android fanboy has come is a 486 running linux, and that was only when he got invited to a Nokia fanboi party by mistake.

Compared to Android, S60 looks like a wet dream, with its buttery-smooth graphics, intuitive touch-based UI and centralised app market-place. How could anyone, ever, pick Android over S60??? I'm as lost as you are, Mr The Linux Geek.

Re:Not "most-shipped mobile platform" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35063620)

most of the vocal android fans are children. they define themselves as much by google as previous generations defined themselves by doc martins and air jordans or tommy hilfiger shirts and flannel.

in short, don't read blog comments. EVER.

Re:Not "most-shipped mobile platform" (1)

Idefix97 (725474) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063828)

I love my N8! Best choice aver. All the guys at work have Android phones and are dissing my N8, but they all had to admit it had awesome reception and speed. Hehehe.

Next up, Windows Phone 7 goes from nowhere to #1 (1)

Crazy Taco (1083423) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063996)

Hey, if Android could overtake Apple like that, I'm not going to bet against Microsoft... historically, they tend to always be behind Apple getting to the marketplace, but still somehow end up at the front of the line.

For now that is. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35062766)

Android may be the most shipped mobile OS, but it won't be for long. In fact, the Android version on a locked down Samsung can't run much that an Android 3.0 device can.

So, even though they have the same name, it isn't really the same OS. The onus on making these separate operating systems work is on the Android developer. They have to deal with Java (which has failed in the marketplace due to performance issues, and has an insane amount of CPU overhead.)

The car analogy is simple. A SMART car and a rig both have wheels. They have totally different tasks, and are really separate things. If one looked at Android the same way, it has relatively little to no market penetration, definitely not enough for app developers to spend the Q&A time trying to get their code working on hundreds of disparate devices. One overlooked device? "One star, forces closes on the Blahblah", and there goes the app's reputation.

Overall, Android is more of a flash in the pan than anything else. Once developers realize there is no future with the platform, they will focus on iOS or platforms that matter.

Re:For now that is. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35062872)

In fact, the Android version on a locked down Samsung can't run much that an Android 3.0 device can.

Citation needed.

Re:For now that is. (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 3 years ago | (#35062904)

Java has done great, and it has very little cpu overhead. Dalvik on the other hand is getting better but has some real drawbacks, but still not insane overhead.

Re:For now that is. (2)

mcrbids (148650) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063042)

Overall, Android is more of a flash in the pan than anything else. Once developers realize there is no future with the platform, they will focus on iOS or platforms that matter.

I'd be curious to see just how much money you'd be willing to wager that this is so...

Re:For now that is. (1)

exomondo (1725132) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063296)

no wonder you posted as AC.

big deal (0, Troll)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 3 years ago | (#35062790)

wake me up when android phones on vibrate pass sybian's market share.

For a second (0)

Dyinobal (1427207) | more than 3 years ago | (#35062842)

For a second, I thought it read as "Android passes Sybian for most shipped mobile platform" and I couldn't help but wonder, what this new android vibrator was, and since when did Sybian have a mobile version.

Re:For a second (1)

syousef (465911) | more than 3 years ago | (#35062970)

For a second, I thought it read as "Android passes Sybian for most shipped mobile platform" and I couldn't help but wonder, what this new android vibrator was, and since when did Sybian have a mobile version.

I'm pretty sure that if your phone starts vibrating that hard, you should throw it in the nearest lake MacGyver style since it's about to explode!!!

Android != Google (2)

drb226 (1938360) | more than 3 years ago | (#35062876)

That gives Android a 33% share of the global mobile market

Google has a heavy hand in Android, but doesn't necessarily "own" it. Quoth http://source.android.com/ [android.com]

We wanted to make sure that there was no central point of failure, so that no industry player can restrict or control the innovations of any other. That's why we created Android, and made its source code open.

"No industry player can restrict or control the innovations of any other" supposedly includes Google too.

Re:Android != Google (1)

im_thatoneguy (819432) | more than 3 years ago | (#35062928)

Android != "Android Powered by Google" which is what every phone and tablet ships with.

Android is technically open source but the vast majority is Google's build and app suite which includes non-open-source code.

Re:Android != Google (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063010)

Actually, the numbers from TFA apparently include the Chinese versions (two now, iirc); counting them together has its own problems of course.

Re:Android != Google (1)

PCM2 (4486) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063962)

Android != "Android Powered by Google" which is what every phone and tablet ships with. Android is technically open source but the vast majority is Google's build and app suite which includes non-open-source code.

That's not really true; I read about at least one Android phone (from Samsung?) where the default search provider was Bing. Each phone maker also has its own custom "skin" that adds a bunch of functionality on top of stock Android. Other than Google's Nexus phones, almost nobody uses a stock "powered by Google" build. Mine has messaging and contact management software written by Motorola, for example. It syncs Gmail contacts, but it does so through Motorola's own online services.

They really have it in for Nokia (2)

Gadget_Guy (627405) | more than 3 years ago | (#35062878)

Gee, they really have it in for Nokia. Symbian is "ailing" at slightly less than 2 million units less than the market leader. I bet Microsoft would like its mobile platform to be ailing by that much!

They are apparently a "struggling mobile firm", while at the same time it "retains solid market share" and sales of units are "still growing well". While nobody would argue that Nokia's marketshare hasn't slipped, it does seem to be too much damnation of what is "still the number one handset manufacturer".

Re:They really have it in for Nokia (1)

exomondo (1725132) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063320)

Gee, they really have it in for Nokia. Symbian is "ailing" at slightly less than 2 million units less than the market leader.

Pretty obvious they mean the rate at which Nokia's market share has dropped.

Re:They really have it in for Nokia (1)

artor3 (1344997) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063626)

The difference between Microsoft and Nokia is that MS exists outside the mobile market. Microsoft has plenty of income from Windows and Office, plus some from Xbox to keep them going. They can afford to lose money on Bing and Windows Phone and all the other markets they try to buy their way in to. Eventually, they'll find one they can succeed in, and it'll make the company that much more successful. Compare that to Nokia, which is steadily losing ground in its bread and butter. As their market share shrinks, they have less money to put into R&D, which means their likely to lose more market share in the future. They may be able to pull out of it, but they are in jeopardy. Microsoft, on the other hand, will still be perfectly healthy if (when?) the W7 Phone goes the way of the Kin or Zune.

Now, if Windows' market share fell to 2nd place, you could fairly state that Microsoft was in serious trouble.

What about phones getting replaced (1)

Pete Venkman (1659965) | more than 3 years ago | (#35062880)

I'd like to see the os breakdown of phones that are getting replaced this year.

resistance is futile? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35062922)

santa just bought me an adroid in december and i already can tether wifi to it if my laptop loses internet. Android has a riduculous amount of free apps and is relatively stable. plus they are going the microsoft route of letting any number of hardware vendors use the os, so they will soon have a huge dominant market share.

and the ironic part is that its linux

Re:resistance is futile? (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 3 years ago | (#35062992)

How is that Ironic?

Android is good (1)

xizanghummer (1987284) | more than 3 years ago | (#35062944)

ios is boring, I love the android system

Hmm... (2)

node 3 (115640) | more than 3 years ago | (#35062976)

FTA: "In the last quarter of 2010, manufacturers shipped 32.9 million Android devices"

Apple sold more iOS devices in their last quarter. 16.24 million iPhones, 7.33 million iPads, and over 9.25 million iPod touches (19.45 million iPods, over half of which were iPod touches, but they didn't give a breakdown). That's over 32.8 million iOS devices. I didn't include the 2 million Apple TVs.

Also, Apple's numbers are actual hard figures. Android sales figures are all based on estimates because there is no place to get proper numbers from. Samsung, for example, recently claimed to have sold 2 million Galaxy Tabs, but when pressed on it, stated that's how many are in stock at stores, not how many have been sold (elaborating that *actual* sales are much, much lower). This is from an analyst who has reported the highest numbers.

None of this is to say that Android is not doing great. It is. But reality is not quite what the headline states.

Re:Hmm... (2, Insightful)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063004)

Android has 350k+ activations a day. On smartphones iOS will be in second place, right were apple wants it. They want to be the up market trendy choice, they are all about image and high price. They want to be BMW, which means you will not see Toyota levels of sales.

Re:Hmm... (2)

exomondo (1725132) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063334)

They want to be the up market trendy choice, they are all about image and high price. They want to be BMW, which means you will not see Toyota levels of sales.

Apple devices are dirt cheap, these days the only people who don't have an iphone are those who don't want one. The ipad isn't exactly the highest priced tablet either, it's a pretty cheap device.

Re:Hmm... (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063442)

Go ask someone who lives outside the USA. Go ask some Indians for example.

Re:Hmm... (2)

exomondo (1725132) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063516)

Go ask someone who lives outside the USA. Go ask some Indians for example.

Don't make assumptions, i'm not american. I *am* someone who lives outside the USA.

Re:Hmm... (3, Informative)

Microlith (54737) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063468)

Apple devices are dirt cheap

No they aren't. It only looks like that because you can't buy them in the US without agreeing to a 2 year contract with enormous monthly fees.

Re:Hmm... (0)

exomondo (1725132) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063536)

No they aren't. It only looks like that because you can't buy them in the US without agreeing to a 2 year contract with enormous monthly fees.

Bullshit. Why do morons always assume people must only be talking about the US?

Re:Hmm... (1)

Microlith (54737) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063882)

Because everywhere else (except maybe Japan) you can buy an iPhone off contract and they cost a whole lot more.

Re:Hmm... (1)

exomondo (1725132) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063908)

A whole lot more than what?

Re:Hmm... (1)

mirix (1649853) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063906)

Generally when people make comments about situations/issues that generally only exist in the US, or misconceptions that are commonly held in the US, on a US based site, with a considerable amount of American users... people assume the aforementioned posters are in the US.

Re:Hmm... (0)

node 3 (115640) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063530)

Android has 350k+ activations a day.

There's no such thing like "x activations per day", unless you define the time period. It's just not reasonable to think such a number can actually be that predictable.

On smartphones iOS will be in second place, right were apple wants it. They want to be the up market trendy choice, they are all about image and high price. They want to be BMW, which means you will not see Toyota levels of sales.

Apple doesn't want "second place". They want whatever the most they can get is. Comparing Apple to BMW vs Toyota is not apt, as Android phones and iPhones are similarly priced, with the exception of sometimes highly discounted Android phones, and a few discount models. It's more like comparing Toyota (Apple) to Ford (Android) and sometimes Yugo (low end Android).

Re:Hmm... (0)

Zadaz (950521) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063642)

Exactly. Market share isn't everything. If it was Symbian wouldn't have reigned so long since it's quite a bit of a turd.

I'm also curious how the Apple haters resolve this with todays earlier story of Google hiring Android devs to pad the app store.

Re:Hmm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35063046)

The risk for Apple supporters at this point is that when you make posts like this you'll be seen as the little yappy dogs of the cell phone world. Everytime a new stat comes up you'll want to aggregate as much as information as you can to show that a different stat that backs up your zealous nature. I could guess that once the combined sales of Android devices surpasses all the iOS devices then you'll start pointing at sales of each device since the iPhone was released. My advice would be to cheer the technology on regardless of the OS, we all win at the end of the day with devices which will *hopefully* do exactly what we want.

Re:Hmm... (0)

node 3 (115640) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063252)

I'm only responding to the false implication made in the story. Android has not passed iOS as a platform.

Everytime a new stat comes up you'll want to aggregate as much as information as you can to show that a different stat that backs up your zealous nature.

iOS is ahead of Android, that's a fact. I don't see how the truth is some sign of zealotry.

On the contrary, each time Android reaches a milestone, while still lagging iOS, it gets touted here as "Android wins, Apple loses". There are plenty of people who have incorrectly stated that Android is outselling iOS for months now on Slashdot, due to stories like this which only really state that Android has reached another milestone on that road, not that it has actually passed iOS.

So, yeah, when people make their next claim, I'll point out that they still haven't reached the goal they are pretending to have. I'm simply injecting some truth and perspective. Just because you can guess the next claim that is going to be misinterpreted, which I will likely address, doesn't make it false.

Re:Hmm... (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063448)

It is outselling IOS smartphones. The only place they really compete.

Re:Hmm... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35063062)

How do you like the taste of Steve Jobs' cock?

Re:Hmm... (1)

iamhigh (1252742) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063082)

Well the article, that you quoted, is rife with contradicting lines, but nowhere did I see any mention of any device that wasn't a phone. So how is it that you can lump all the non-phone iOS stuff, and then claim that's apples to apples?

Re:Hmm... (5, Informative)

Grokmoo (1180039) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063124)

Despite the title, what this article is actually referring to is smartphone sales. That does not include iPods or iPads.

What I find interesting is that despite essentially doubling their iPhone sales since the middle of 2010, Apple is now already a distant second to Android in terms of sales and smartphone market share. This situation is especially remarkable when you consider where Android was 2 or even 1 year ago.

Re:Hmm... (0)

BrianRoach (614397) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063802)

If you look at the actual marketplace, this should come as no surprise. Carriers are basically giving away android phones. My boss just picked up a Samsung Vibrant for $30. Sure it'll never get a OS upgrade and it's got all kinda of crap installed on it from his carrier ... but it was $30.

Re:Hmm... (2)

earthsmurf (1965458) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063986)

Android is about to take over. This is just the very beginning. I believe Android will continue to dominate the global market for some time to come. The iPhone and App store is regulated too harshly and Apple just isn't cost effective. While Apple does have great style and innovative designs, people that don't have the money to shell out on their relatively expensive products will nab up Android phones. Android phones will also be moving away from cell phone companies with their own VOIP, like Google Voice or Skype. Google is against carriers in general (nexus) and wants to cut out the need for "minutes". Soon everything will be free VOIP and we'll only pay carriers for bigger data plans. Android is leading this idea, but Apple just isn't moving that way. Anyone agree or have anything to add?

Re:Hmm... (2)

mcrbids (148650) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063134)

Sure, reality isn't quite "what the headline states". But the reality is actually stronger than what's stated, not weaker!

Because companies far and wide are building their business on Android! LG is betting heavily on it. So is Samsung. Perhaps more importantly, so are the clone phones - companies too small to have names we'd recognize, but who make phones nonetheless.

Ever hear of "Huawei"? (How do you even pronounce it"?) Yet at the local store for the regional low-cost cell company, it sells for just $129. With a few rebates, the offer comes in at just $99 and includes the first month of service, bringing its real cost to under $50. (data plans w/call service come in around 50-75/month, a $15-$40 month premium over voice alone)

Yes, that's less than $50 for a relatively full-feature Smart Phone!

At this price, Android brings the Smart phone market within the reach of the folks who live from month to month and raid the napkins at the local McDonalds when they run out of money to buy toilet paper at the end of the month!

If you think Android's sales are great now, just wait until the unwashed masses of the poor discover that they, too, can have a high-tech fancy-pants smartphone!

Re:Hmm... (1)

thestudio_bob (894258) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063146)

And that's why we see the "shipped" instead of "sold". It's kind of like MS when they state how many that pushed into their supply channel. Again, not saying Android isn't doing well, but I would be even more impressed if these companies weren't so shady with their numbers.

Re:Hmm... (1)

a5an0 (1351957) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063238)

But Apple just had a resurgence of sales. While Android's sales have been constantly going up, Apple experiences lulls between major platform releases. Sure Apple sold almost as many IOS devices as Android did *this quarter*, but how about last quarter? Or before that?

Re:Hmm... (1)

R3d M3rcury (871886) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063374)

Samsung, for example, recently claimed to have sold 2 million Galaxy Tabs, but when pressed on it, stated that's how many are in stock at stores, not how many have been sold (elaborating that *actual* sales are much, much lower).

Guess what? Apple does the same thing with iPads.

I can buy iPads from Best Buy. Those shipped to Best Buy are counted in your 7.33 million iPads, as are the ones shipped to AT&T. Same with iPhones.

Y'know when they talk about "channel inventory"? That's what they're talking about.

Re:Hmm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35063504)

I guess that whole story about the iPhone just working and consumers only wanted a device that was simple and easy so they chose an iPhone is bullshit huh. Sounds to me like an iPhone was decent when there was nothing else around but now that people are actually comparing devices and features instead of following the sheep, they are picking a phone from other than Apple almost 2:1.

Re:Hmm... (1)

JAlexoi (1085785) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063560)

Ok... Lets forget the usual - RTFA. And get to the fact that Android is 90% phones(conservatively) and "There are lies, damn lies and statistics". You can basically turn any number to your advantage.

Re:Hmm... (1)

jrumney (197329) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063622)

FTA: "In the last quarter of 2010, manufacturers shipped 32.9 million Android devices"

Apple sold more iOS devices in their last quarter. ... That's over 32.8 million iOS devices.

So even according to the numbers you pulled out of your own arse, you are wrong!

Re: his own arse (1)

pastafazou (648001) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063988)

Uh, he actually stated right after the 32.8 million that he still needs to add the 2 million Apple TV's, which would put iOS at 34.8 million. You should probably finish reading people's posts before you start flaming them.

Re:Hmm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35063736)

My guess is you need to scrape off your ipad and itouch numbers please.

That's probably because you, like the article submitter, and the article itself, and the slashdot editor, maybe screwed up what Canalys actually counted. They likely counted smartphone activations, not devices shipped. I comment on this because I got in a useless discussion with someone about how devices are counted and these devices came up.

Canalys tends to count smartphone activations and extrapolates that as the number of new smartphones. Not total OS device count. Gartner tries to figure out total OS count (probably by doing more work and asking manufacturers). On the positive, Canalys numbers seem to hold up to scrutiny, while Gartner uses a lot of projections (their future projections last year with Android were 2 years off if you go by a report from them this year).

btw, both Canalys and Gartner stated or project Android would rule the US domestic by the end of Q4.

Someone with more time on their hands in the industry, who is getting paid, and has read the primary source, can verify if this is a smartphone versus overall device/mobile OS count. To put it another way, I would imagine Canalys doesn't count all those important Android tablets, which are the cheaper equivalent of the ipad and itouch you included to bolster and pad Apple's numbers.

Can we speculate about what Ballmer is thinking? (1)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 3 years ago | (#35062994)

I would be interested in speculation about what Microsoft's Ballmer thinks about this kind of news.

If I were him, I would find ways of commingling popular Microsoft services and software like Bing, Hotmail, IE, and the MS Office suite to only work on Windows 7. Then I'd sit down and watch cash from licensing flowing in.

It would be IE vs Netscape all over again.

Re:Can we speculate about what Ballmer is thinking (1)

binarylarry (1338699) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063106)

Bing? LOL
Hotmail? LOL
IE? LOLOLOL

Re:Can we speculate about what Ballmer is thinking (0)

jcr (53032) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063454)

Actually, I've found to my considerable surprise that Bing is a decent service. I don't see any particular advantage it offers over google, but if google suddenly vanished I could get by without it now.

-jcr

Re:Can we speculate about what Ballmer is thinking (3, Insightful)

Miamicanes (730264) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063174)

> It would be IE vs Netscape all over again

Except this time, Netscape is metaphorically Microsoft's product, and IE smells like fresh, hot gingerbread. Mmmmm!

Take away Google, and the streets will riot, Take away Bing, and... er... um... someone might eventually notice. Maybe.

Hotmail? Is that actually used for anything besides MSDN SSO credentials anymore?

IE? (rolling on the floor, gasping for breath amidst near-lethal amounts of laughter). People with *Windows Mobile* didn't even use Internet Explorer before Android came out. We used Opera, and paid for it, because Pocket IE sucked like a whore with braces. I'm sure Microsoft did a much better job with IE on WP7... but then again, a chimp with a Commodore 64 and a pirated copy of GEOS could probably improve upon PIE in its WM6.x incarnation.

MS Office Suite? Meh. Apps to view and edit word/excel docs are free and abundant. Outlook still can't do adhoc aliases properly, and Android can be induced to lie about its authentication capabilities so you won't have to indulge your company's IT department's wet dreams by entering a 16-digit passcode before it allows you to answer an incoming phone call.

Re:Can we speculate about what Ballmer is thinking (1)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063224)

You're assuming that everyone wants Bing, Hotmail, IE, and the MS Office suite. Only business people want Office and even then they don't really want the suite as they much the ability to open their documents. Most consumers don't care about it. As for the other things: They really don't care about Bing. They just want search. Until WP7's version of IE, it sucked so much no one used it. Hotmail? Seriously, I don't anyone who really uses it. Even then, they don't care about it as much as they care about email.

Re:Can we speculate about what Ballmer is thinking (1)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063350)

I am not that sure about Bing...you're right I guess. But for Microsoft Office, everyone I know uses the suite. The trouble is that the longer MS waits, the more irrelevant their products become.

In fact, one could argue that folks at Microsoft would be better served if they adopted Android, then changed the default search engine to Bing Search, Bing Maps and Travel, exploited its openness to push Microsoft services and apps down users' throats.

That would yield better results than their current strategy.

Marketing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35062998)

most shipped isn't most sold .....
also how many companies are now making android vs apple? How many companies takes it take to topple apple? If it is say 5 companies vs apple then i'll be impressed when they outsell 5 to 1.
Shipped isn't selling ...... just means someone has a warehouse full of androids

Not biased, i use both, just stating cause i hate these clever marketing terms like "shipping"

Re:Marketing (1)

Miseph (979059) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063684)

They aren't shipping them for free, and stores aren't buying them because they don't sell.

There is a difference between the numbers, sure, but you're saying that shipped and sold aren't very strongly correlated, but they really are.

Windows Mobile ... (1)

PPH (736903) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063022)

... would still be in last place even if they counted shipping out plus returns.

Nokia (1)

Citizen of Earth (569446) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063128)

When is Nokia going to come to its senses and switch to Android? Then, they'll be the biggest manufacturer with the most popular OS.

Re:Nokia (1)

Microlith (54737) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063344)

Then they're nobody, same as Samsung, Motorola, LG, etc.

Nokia doesn't want to be like them.

Re:Nokia (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063612)

Motorola - certainly, they'll hardly make anything, hardly have anything under their control. LG - sort of outside context, they almost might be seen as a "legislated" competition to ... Samsung. Which grows wildly. And invests in hard R&D and manufacturing of all the building blocks.
So, the OS might be common - but with strong control of other ingredients (used also by other manufacturers) they might very well be a powerhouse surpassing the significance of ... Intel (trying to find possibly the closest analogy)

(which of course is not really a route viable for Nokia)

Re:Nokia (2)

2Bits (167227) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063500)

No, Nokia should be focusing on Meego and come up with some real devices to run it. When N900 came out, it was the best. There were some problems with the OS and software, but it was way ahead of its competitors. Android was like a joke. But for almost two years, while Nokia is sleeping, everyone is leaping forward. How many releases of Android and how many generations of Android devices have we seen during this time?

Since I lost my N900 in a bar, I digged out my HTC Pro from the drawer and have been waiting for the successor of N900. I keep asking Nokia, what the fuck are you guys doing? Wake up. N900 and its successors could have been a boon for geeks, advanced users, the big cheeses, and all the business people. It's the real convergence: communication, life, entertainment, work, computing, all in the pocket.

I even wrote code on that device. My wife, who is in sales, said she could have run a real CRM on that thing, without having to carry a computer any more.

Nokia really needs to put its act together. They had the hardware, they hard the software, they had the distribution channel, customers are begging for it, I simply don't understand what the fuck are they doing.

Re:Nokia (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35063686)

go back to gizmodo with that sort of comment. you have no idea what you are talking about.

Re:Nokia (4, Interesting)

SpazmodeusG (1334705) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063740)

Hell no!

Nokias N900 has the X Terminal right there if you want it and you can get root access with a simple "root" command on the shell. Nokia fully supports it. The Windowing System is X. You can SSH to the phone via it's wifi and use it just like any remote X system. It's essentially a Linux PC with a great phone application in-built. It runs Skype perfectly. Almost every app on Linux can be ported to the N900 by a simple make and configure on the phone itself (yes you can put GCC straight onto the phone).

There's no way in hell i want Nokia to take the relatively locked-down Android path. They are doing the right thing as it is.

Nokia needs to just adopt Android (1)

AbRASiON (589899) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063132)

Seriously.
Nokia has a huge brand name and while I can't stand the bastards (I've delt with their support before) your average phone consumer loves a nokia phone, still huge brand recognition.

They need to maintain their brand name and release phones with Android on them, it should keep them relevant for the future.

Really? (1)

Turmoyl (958221) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063166)

If Symbian is so widespread, how is it that I've never handled nor seen a device that ran it?

Re:Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35063244)

You probably live in the USA where carriers don't offer it.

They like to abuse foreign phone manufacturers by giving them a list of ridiculous demands such as HTC Surround and Nokia X7 with crazy speaker configurations. Nokia ended up dumping the phone because they knew it had no chance of selling like that and AT&T won't take any other phone.

Re:Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35063324)

maybe you need to finally ditch that 1200 bps modem, upgrade to adsl and get out of that basement more often than once in a decade?

Re:Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35063392)

Because you live in North America where Nokia has less penetration than the rest of the world.

Re:Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35063410)

This comes up every time Nokia is mentioned on the internet. It is because America is different to the rest of the world. Nokia is dying outside the US. Inside it never really lived.

Re:Really? (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063670)

Part 3 of the latest State of the Mobile Web report [opera.com] from Opera has the answer. Look particularly close at "top handsets" in each of the top20 countries; how unusual some places are, when compared to more typical ones.

Commoditized mobile o/s (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35063200)

Google has done a great job of developing android. Their success owes largely to the os community. The community can rejoice in a successful development with mass appeal and consumer adoption, even if the business model behind it is ads base drive. It remain to be seen how the legal issue with Oracle works out but at the moment The OS movement is a critical success.

is it really news? (1)

metalmaster (1005171) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063228)

Heres a list of OS by manufacturer

  • Blackberry OS -- RIM
  • iOS -- Apple
  • Android -- Motorola, Samsung, Nokia(soon enough?), HTC, Hauwei, my Toaster(soon enough?)

If everyone jumps onboard the OS is going to dominate the market. Take Windows for example, any PC manufacturer can preload it on their machine's for sale. MacOS....not so much(Hackintoshs excluded)

Re:is it really news? (1)

sarhjinian (94086) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063382)

If everyone jumps onboard the OS is going to dominate the market

This assumes the PC market functions the same way as the cellphone market. That doesn't seem to be the case: the user expertise is generally lower, web (and web-based/derived) interfaces and modern development environments lower the barriers to cross-platform development and intraplatform fragmentation is a much larger problem (especially on Android), the device's useful lifetime is shorter and the cost to the consumer much lower.

Android could be the largest player in the market, but it will never dominate it the way Windows has dominated the PC market because it's a fundamentally different market.

Re:is it really news? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35063450)

*cough cough* tablets, pads, netbooks...

Re:is it really news? (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063522)

Seemingly short lifetimes of devices, in some places (most people throughout the world are on prepaid and own their phone) are in large part determined by addiction to "free" handsets during carrier contract renewals. The devices themselves are getting into "good enough" area.

Re:is it really news? (1)

metalmaster (1005171) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063658)

I recently looked into my Tmobile account to find that i have my upgrade available and to my surprise they offer a low-end android based phone. Granted, it's no Droid or Galaxy S model, but the barrier for entry has been broken. MetroPCS, a popular prepaid carrier in the area, rolled out a few Android-powered smartphones for the $100-200 price point. You can consider that to be a "free, with contract" phone on any other carrier.

Tmobile Comet(manufactured by Hauwei) -- http://mobile.engadget.com/2010/11/04/t-mobile-comet-review/ [engadget.com]
Huawei Acend -- http://www.metropcs.com/shop/PhoneDetails.aspx?ProductId=HW-M860(Phones) [metropcs.com]

I think it's the same phone rebranded, but the Tmobile review doesnt show a model number

Symbian needs more apps (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35063440)

I've stayed with Nokia for several years now. They make interesting stuff. But there are a few things that just seem behind.

Not only do you get lots of menus and configuration features where as other phones "just work", they seem to lack application development. Most apps that come out now have iPhone or Android versions. It can be quite a task to find a decent Sybian equivalent. For all of Nokia's promos of QT, it doesn't seem to be making huge head way in that department

Re:Symbian needs more apps (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35063914)

"It can be quite a task to find a decent Sybian equivalent"
sure it is...

It's all about the profit, not the number shipped (1)

Calibax (151875) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063456)

The number of Android phones shipped is impressive, but that's spread over a number of hardware companies. On the other hand, all the iOS phone sales have a direct revenue benefit to Apple. I guess it's the same for Nokia sales.

Because I'm lazy I haven't bothered to research how many Android phones each hardware company ships, but I'd be surprised if any have profits from their Android phones close the the profits Apple makes from the iPhone. I'm not aware of any direct revenue that Android contributes to Google although there may well be some indirect revenue.

The only place where Android versus iOS really matters is in the number of developers coding for each platform. If hardware sales are low then software sales will be low, and developers will move to other platforms. If Android fragments too much and developers end up supporting substantially different versions of a product this could have an impact also. If hardware manufacturers don't update their Android systems for at least a couple of years after a phone's introduction that could have an effect also. It's possible, perhaps likely, that Apple will have some advantage in both these last two areas because of the way they can control the full package - hardware, operating system, development tools, the apps store and product marketing.

Re:It's all about the profit, not the number shipp (1)

Lost Engineer (459920) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063540)

I'm not aware of any direct revenue that Android contributes to Google

A number of good apps are ad supported, ads being Google's biggest business. I wonder how many google ads the average android user sees in a day?

Re:It's all about the profit, not the number shipp (1)

toppavak (943659) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063972)

by what measure? In purely social and economic terms, I would argue that the exact inverse of your title is true: the more efficient a market is the closer prices will be to the marginal cost of a product. In the case of a tool / platform like a smartphone, this means that the greatest possible number of consumers will have access to valuable resource and therefore the high volume low margin product has the potential to generate significantly greater economic activity and social benefit than the low volume high margin luxury player in the marketplace. That's not to say that profit doesn't have value from certain perspectives, but from the consumer's standpoint it's all about maximum access and minimum profit to the manufacturer.

Three more days (1)

codepunk (167897) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063558)

The iPhone becomes available for preorder for Verizon customers starting at 3am eastern time on February 3rd.

Lets see how the sales jump in three days shall we.

Sample test (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35063576)

test

Re:Sample test (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35063614)

YOU HAVE FAILED.

I, for one... (1)

HotNeedleOfInquiry (598897) | more than 3 years ago | (#35063850)

Am glad that Android is a more popular mobile platform than a female masturbation device.

https://www.sybian.com
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?