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!

Illustrating the Socioeconomic Divide With iOS and Android

Soulskill posted about 6 months ago | from the your-phone-is-your-class-marker dept.

Android 161

An anonymous reader writes: "Android has a huge market share advantage over iOS these days, but it hasn't had as much success at following the money. iOS continues to win over many app developers and businesses who want to maximize their earnings. Now, an article at Slate goes over some of the statistics demonstrating this trend. A map of geo-located Tweets show that in Manhattan, a generally affluent area, most of the Tweets come from iPhones. Meanwhile, in nearby Newark, which is a poorer area, most Tweets come from Android devices. In other tests, traffic data shows 87% of visits to e-commerce websites from tablets come from iPads, and the average value of an order from an iPad is $155, compared to $110 from Android tablets. (Android fairs a bit better on phones). Android shows a huge market share advantage in poorer countries, as well. Not all devs and business are just chasing the money, though. Twitter developer Cennydd Bowles said, 'I do hope, given tech's rhetoric about changing the world and disrupting outdated hierarchies, that we don't really think only those with revenue potential are worth our attention. A designer has a duty to be empathetic; to understand and embrace people not like him/herself. A group owning different devices to the design elite is not a valid reason to neglect their needs.'"

cancel ×

161 comments

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

People with money (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46665595)

can afford to be apple fanboys, for a while at least.

Re:People with money (0)

Moblaster (521614) | about 6 months ago | (#46665633)

Studies have shown that most people who hate apple fanboys are themselves closeted apple fanboys who are subconsciously terrified to confront that fact.

Re:People with money (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46665831)

And people who can't become Fandroids? Got it!
 
Either way, you're just a fucking fanboy.

Re:People with money (0)

Hal_Porter (817932) | about 6 months ago | (#46666109)

People with money can afford to be coke addicts, for a while at least. Give 'em a month or so and both sets of people will be 'borrowing' from the relatives to feed their addiction.

Re:People with money (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46666575)

I prefer Windows Phone 8 over everything available. Being in IT for almost 20 years has seen me take on some strange preferences. I prefer Windows Phone as I said, I thought BeOS was gorgeous and still miss it (yes, I know about Hailku and ZevenOS), I use Linux on my desktops at home and at work, I download no apps because I don't need anything save the phone dialer and a texting app. Call me weird, but it is what it is. If you've never tried Windows Phone 8, I highly recommend it. It's not popular, but it's solid, original, and fun.

Re:People with money (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46666969)

If you've never tried Windows Phone 8, I highly recommend it. It's not popular, but it's solid, original, and fun.

I have a Windows 8 phone (Lumia 625) , and can confirm you got one out of four right, shillboy.

Seriously people, if you're reading this, don't believe a word this guy says. WP8 is full of irritations - like the battery guage is wildly inaccurate and you'll end up with your phone shuting down with low battery half an hour ater it was reading almost full. The calender app is ridiculously limited and confusing, as are most of the standard apps. The Here GPS tool shuts down randomly while you're using it, nasty if you're driving somewhere and need directions. I could go on, but really, don't belive the promo posts here.

The thing's barely a smartphone and the only reason they're selling at all is beacuse the corps get them for free on the standard business mobile plans.

Re:People with money (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46667099)

You must have a crap device. I've had several Windows Phones and never had an issue with any of them.

Re:People with money (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46667105)

They handed those things out like confetti in our office, and they're almost univesally disliked. Most people want to go back to the old candy-bar Nokias.

Re:People with money (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46666673)

People with money

Samsung’s Galaxy S4 and Note 3 are the best selling Android phones in the world at the moment. Both are cheaper off contract than the iPhone 5S, but not by a huge amount, and both are older models now being discounted. The 5S is price-comparable with Apple's equivalent and is likely to be the best-seller when it's widely available.

So the demoraphic isn't showing that only rich people can afford iPhones.

It's more likely that the wealthy areas are more socially conservative and tend to stick with what they know. iPhones have maintained a consistent interface longer than Android, and compared to Android, have a kind of unchanging retro appeal which is well suited to the "if it aint broke" school of middle-class conservatism.

TLDR iPhones have become the Toyota Camry of phones, a solid, unfrightening, and familiar choice for people who don't want to make risky choices.

Re:People with money (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46667795)

That may be the case for an particular model...

However - if you take all the cheaper models together, they have a far bigger chunk of the market. Example: I can buy an Alcatel Onetouch with Android 4.1 for €50 over here. It works fine, and is cheap enough to be affordable for a large group of people.

So - no. I do not think you will see much Galaxy S4 and Note 3 models in "poor" area's. However - there are a LOT of cheaper models running very recent versions of Android. So - yes indeed, the "People with money" remark is still valid!

Assertion of the day. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46665603)

A designer has a duty to be empathetic; to understand and embrace people not like him/herself.

Surely that depends who's writing the cheques.

Re:Assertion of the day. (2)

AlphaWolf_HK (692722) | about 6 months ago | (#46665795)

I was just about to respond to that myself, though differently.

I believe in being empathetic, but I don't believe anybody has any kind of duty or moral obligation to be.

I think the worst form of greed is expecting somebody else to be more generous than you yourself are willing or able to be. Asking is one thing, but expecting or demanding is another.

Re:Assertion of the day. (1)

sjames (1099) | about 6 months ago | (#46665847)

I would say everyone has a duty to be. I'll agree with your second statement.

Re:Assertion of the day. (0)

plopez (54068) | about 6 months ago | (#46666407)

The designer only has a duty to the Corporation, blessed may it be, otherwise the blessing the Holy and True Free Market Capitalism will not be bestowed upon him. Any sense of obligation beyond that is Heresy and Saint Rand will surely become wroth with him.

You make it up in volume (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46665605)

This is a false dilemma.

Av rev per app, Android $1,125 and iOS $4,000 ... (3, Informative)

perpenso (1613749) | about 6 months ago | (#46666495)

You make it up in volume. This is a false dilemma.

Actually you do not get enough volume to make it up, at least as of August 2013. According to http://www.forbes.com/sites/tr... [forbes.com]

Number of downloads per app, Android 60,000 and iOS 40,000.
Average revenue per download, Android $0.01875 and iOS $0.10.
Average revenue per app, Android $1,125 and iOS $4,000.

I stopped reading after ... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46665615)

... "Manhattan, a generally affluent area."

Re:I stopped reading after ... (2)

breeze95 (880714) | about 6 months ago | (#46666931)

... "Manhattan, a generally affluent area."

Manhattan is generally an affluent area. What's the problem with the statement?

Funny (5, Funny)

nospam007 (722110) | about 6 months ago | (#46665621)

"the average value of an order from an iPad is $155, compared to $110 from Android tablets."

The funny thing is, that often it's for the exact same thing both of them bought.
Sites check the user-agent and rich guys (IOS) are shown a higher price for the same objects, as it has been noticed quite a few times.
So if you want a bargain, you need a user-agent-changer for your iPad to mimic a poor people's OS.

Re:Funny (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46665925)

Actually, apps I found that were ad supported are available without ads on iOS for a couple bucks. Maybe it's swinging more towards center now but it's one of the reasons I moved from Android to iOS.
 
So I pay a few bucks more? It's worth it. It'd be different if I were living paycheck to paycheck but aside from iTunes albums I put more on the table as a tip at Red Robin than I pay for apps for my iPhones most months.
 
I see people who'll poison themselves with premium cigarettes who act like they're getting away with something by not paying for apps.
 
Oh well, I don't lose sleep over it.

Amazing Insight (4, Insightful)

Ralph Wiggam (22354) | about 6 months ago | (#46665625)

People with lower incomes buy less expensive devices and spend less money? Who could have ever guessed? Brilliant work by Slate.

Re:Amazing Insight (0)

St.Creed (853824) | about 6 months ago | (#46665667)

Actually, it's in direct contrast to other research that said most people with iPhones had a lower income than most people with Android phones: those who can afford it the least sometimes tend to buy the most expensive stuff based. But that was a few years ago - perhaps it has changed in the mean time.

Re:Amazing Insight (1)

Jmc23 (2353706) | about 6 months ago | (#46665721)

No, it is not.

Whether you live in an affluent neighbourhood and/or spend lots of money may be correlated with Income but ...

Re:Amazing Insight (2)

sessamoid (165542) | about 6 months ago | (#46665723)

Actually, it's in direct contrast to other research that said most people with iPhones had a lower income than most people with Android phones: those who can afford it the least sometimes tend to buy the most expensive stuff based. But that was a few years ago - perhaps it has changed in the mean time.

Gonna have call BS on this one. I need to see a link for this assertion.

Re:Amazing Insight (0)

Mr0bvious (968303) | about 6 months ago | (#46666501)

I think this has some basis, but probably varies between different cultures and social groups.

Here in Australia I see this all the time (so it's only anecdotal evidence) it's very obvious that the low tier middle income earners and also the 'dole' receivers seem to always have the latest and greatest electronic devices, spend lots on entertainment etc. Whereas those with higher incomes tend to be somewhat more thrifty with their spending.

I assume this is not a coincidence - I think it's due to the same motivating forces that encourage people to seek and work towards higher incomes place higher value on their money and therefore tend to be more thrifty. Obviously there is always the other motivators such as wanting to appear and feel equally or more wealthy than those who are more wealthy.

It's probably also influenced by the fact that the more wealthy set their sights on larger big ticket items and are more willing to forgo the trinkets as they aim for the items that the less wealthy see as 'out-of-their-reach' (think houses, college degrees, early retirement, etc).

I myself forgo trinkets (new phones, the latest big screen TV, latest model car) and am more than happy to keep and use my existing gear since I have no need to feel or show my wealth. I know MANY people who have and earn a significantly lower income than I yet their priorities seem to lean more towards having and showing off their latest gadgets (which from my point of view do the same task equally as well as the previous trinket they just replaced).

I don't discount though that this may just be what I have experienced and other cultures and social groups may be quite different, but I'd *assume* it's the same throughout the majority of the western world.

Re:Amazing Insight (1)

jp10558 (748604) | about 6 months ago | (#46667165)

I suppose it vary significantly, and may be me justifying liking new things, but here goes:
Your longer term big ticket items suggested are not necessarily more valuable than smaller items (though I don't know how "small" a car really is in comparison).

My thought process is as follows - There is significant uncertainty in whether a house or given college degree or early retirement is going to be worth the time or money, especially years on.

Houses just crashed a few years ago, and for lots of people it was a losing proposition. College degree costs vs jobs and actual increased income seem to be on a similar bubble path right now. Early retirement may not be desirable due to enjoying your job...

Your "trinket" items are also perhaps subject to significant potential disputes as to the worth of them. If all you want is a cell phone, any $30 e-bay flip phone is fine. But I would argue there is a significant value to be had in having a smartphone. It's not worth it for everyone, but a smartphone can do tasks the flip phone just can't. Newer smartphones don't get as big a bump, but there are apps that each successive phone can run that some older class of phones just can't. Go back 4 years on Android, and you might have gotten a 2.2 OS. There are many apps that are 2.3+ with functions in them that are 4+. This may be of no value to you, but I would argue there is a non "trinket" value to be had here.

The latest Big Screen TV may (and there are variables) use less energy due to being LED backlit vs Plasma or LCD. It might have a better integrated set of tools like Netflix and Amazon. It might play 4K media instead of 1080p or 720p. These are actual upgrades, though again, it superficially may look like it's doing the same thing. At the most superficial level a we all should still have CRTs. That's a potentially valid position, but I don't think we can say having a newer TV is a waste of money.

The latest model car is potentially the weakest "toy". I have a 2012 Legacy and am seriously thinking of upgrading to a 2015. Why? 1) CVT so better MPG by ~3MPG. 2) crash avoidance system. 3) Adaptive cruise control. 4) Built in back up camera. 5) Cross traffic sensors.

Now, this is a special bunch of upgrades in a particular model, and not there for every new model year. But each year, some car is coming out with non-trivial improvements to safety, fuel economy, and features. Buying new cars isn't an investment - you'll get no argument from me that it's a money loosing proposition. But no more so than buying vegetables at a grocery store and making a stir fry at home vs a value menu meal from McDonalds. That is to say, newer devices can have real benefits.

Now I agree if we're talking fashion, jewelry, the latest Madden release(but only for one year back, then there's the value of still having multiplayer over the net)...

I also think about inflation. Many smaller gadgets will last and function for years, they don't lose their value as fast as the cost goes up. Most consumer electronics don't follow this pattern, but many appliances seem to (Kitchen appliances such as Bosch Mixers etc), as do tools etc.

For many new "toys" it's buy it now and have it, or hope I can buy it later... Things I own would only go away if something catastrophic happened, and I'd still have lost the money I could have had instead - and money that's likely loosing purchasing power the longer I hold it.

Anyway I've rambled on, it's late, and we might actually agree.

Re:Amazing Insight (3, Informative)

metlin (258108) | about 6 months ago | (#46667329)

In economics, it's called the Veblen Effect, where a highly priced good is valued more because of the socioeconomic status that it confers.

So, you will see people paying a lot of money for an otherwise overpriced luxury good.

Re:Amazing Insight (1)

Enry (630) | about 6 months ago | (#46666099)

Android phones haven't been inexpensive until fairly recently. I wanted to test T-Moble without spending a lot of money or porting my phone over, so I got a fairly decent Android 4.3 phone for $150. It doesn't have a removable battery or SD card expansion, but for what I wanted it was perfect and I've decided to keep it and give it to my daughter in a year or so when she's old enough to have one.

Re:Amazing Insight (1)

rolfwind (528248) | about 6 months ago | (#46666049)

I would say it's a variety of factors. I got relatives this $99 Aldi tablet because they are almost completely computer illiterate so anything beyond email was a bonus. I'm not that near and dear to them as to afford them ipads.

I expected the hardware to be completely half-assed, but for the price it was surprisingly good, to the point that I could put Netflix on it and it would play videos. The problem was not the hardware. Granted, the screen was anything close to beautiful unlike recent iPads (or even old ones), the battery wasn't huge, but sufficient for 90 minutes of netflix. The CPU was okay.

The problem was the experience was abysmal. Had some anti-virus preinstalled that slowed shit down. Skype kept forgetting it's password. A ton of apps listed in searches in the Google Play store weren't compatible with my device despite being for a tablet (don't know why). My relative came back to me with their tablets nearly unusuable, one had a browser with over 50 tabs open. It became no longer a matter of just closing the app, or closing tabs (more and more would spawn, wasn't malware or bad websites, just previous tabs and the close button became unresponsive on them). A lot of the built-in apps were always on and sucking the life out of its battery. Apple got a lot of bitching for it's limitations but they got a lot of it right. (Still, I think some limitations should only be defaults able to be turned off by the power user).

I didn't give them a Google Store name/password simply out of their own protection. So they can never buy an app and have to come to me, but they honestly are just happy with what they have so it's unlikely.

So it's not just a money factor. I think anyone can afford .99 apps and the like. When you have people who don't know what computers do, they are likely to hunt down the cheapest options (or be given the cheapest options by others) and buy them and never go past that.

There are no iPad limitations (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 6 months ago | (#46667447)

Still, I think some limitations should only be defaults able to be turned off by the power user

They are - millions of people jailbreak iOS devices. Then they have full control and can adjust anything.

Anything less and it's way too easy to social engineer people to do things like enable side-loading and download content from a shady website...

The thing I really don't like about Android is that it's trying to continue the PC era which was an utter disaster for the non-technical population of the world. They deserve to benefit from technology without fear, not be reliant on a technically ept subset of the population.

The technically inclined people will always be able to do what they want with a device they physically control. They need to give up said control for devices that other people own and use.

Exactly... the idea is wrong too. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46666071)

Be more empathetic to the lower end Android users by writing software for their shitty devices?

No, how about being empathetic to them by pushing for a higher minimum wage, fixing the education system, etc. so they can afford something a tad better whether Android or not?

No kidding (3, Insightful)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | about 6 months ago | (#46666209)

I mean yes, there are expensive Android devices. You can have a nice, premium, phone or tablet if you wish. I loves me my Galaxy Note 3 but it certainly costs a lot, more than an iPhone even. However there are also cheap Android devices. You can get a smart phone for $100 or less (talking full price here, not subsidized). So Android phones are an option on most budgets.

Until recently, all you could get with Apple was the standard iPhone which is like $600-700 full price. Even the new "c" model is $550 full price. That puts them out of range of most people who want prepaid phone plans, which is often what people with lower incomes go for.

Well those people are also likely to spend less on apps. After all, if your finances are such that you wish to buy an economical phone, you probably don't want to ruin it with spending a ton of money on software.

So ya, that will push the average down on Android phones. Personally, I see that as a big positive to Android. There's something to be said for a thing that can be available to a wide segment of the population. Exclusivity to the affluent isn't something I consider to be positive.

Re:No kidding (1)

tepples (727027) | about 6 months ago | (#46667073)

However there are also cheap Android devices. You can get a smart phone for $100 or less (talking full price here, not subsidized). So Android phones are an option on most budgets.

Plus how much a year for the data plan? A lot of these prepaid carriers refuse to activate a smartphone on an occasional-use voice-only plan. People end up having to carry two phones: a smartphone to run apps on (with Wi-Fi data and no cellular service) and a dumbphone to make and receive calls on.

Re:No kidding (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46667243)

Wow, really? The USA really does suck when it comes to phones.

Re:Amazing Insight (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | about 6 months ago | (#46667469)

Not every hypothesis needs to be shocking to be reportable. Sure, lots of people could have guessed, but how many people actually proved it?

check your apple privilege (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46665635)

if you develops apps for iOS first, you are part of the problem.

Re:check your apple privilege (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46665859)

iOS is easier to bring something up on quickly.

Re:check your apple privilege (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46665861)

Android. ANDROid. Why not Gyndroid? This is problematic. Every time you use\develop for that evil platform the Patriarchy's War on Women and non-white males wins another battle. If you care about social justice, then you will not use anything tainted by Google.

Re:check your apple privilege (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46666107)

Not to mention the obvious phallic symbolism of the Android logo, standing erect and solid like the triumphant penis of a rapist after his midnight prowl, green with womb envy and intent to destroy in the name of masculinity. Contrast that with the Feminine flows and curves of the artistic iOS which Google has tried in the past to appropriate as their own.

Re:check your apple privilege (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46666471)

Go back to reddit you fucking neckbeard coward.

This just in: (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46665649)

Rich people have nice things.

Google's ANdroid Playstore (1, Troll)

FudRucker (866063) | about 6 months ago | (#46665671)

is full of half-assed quality adware, this is based on personal experience with an android tablet i bought recently, for example there was no app for taking screenshots, so i search the Play Store for screenshot apps, instead of finding a couple to choose from i find dozens of them and most require i root/unlock my tablet in order to function, i think i will wait until i can get a more open build of arm tablet so i can install Debian on it or just throw in the towel on electronic gadets and live like an Amish farmer

Re:Google's ANdroid Playstore (1)

Jmc23 (2353706) | about 6 months ago | (#46665763)

Well,something is off about your story. Unless you bought a really cheap tablet without ICS then you didn't buy it recently.

Unless of course you're one of those people that would rather do a websearch than consult the manual you get.

Re:Google's ANdroid Playstore (1)

noh8rz10 (2716597) | about 6 months ago | (#46667591)

i don't have time to consult the manual. i have a girlfriend.

Screenshots are built into Android (3, Informative)

dwheeler (321049) | about 6 months ago | (#46665767)

There's no "app" for screenshots because it's built into Android itself, and has been since 4.0 (which was released many years ago). It's volume down + power button. Just Google for "Android screenshot".

Re:Screenshots are built into Android (1)

FudRucker (866063) | about 6 months ago | (#46665823)

just tried it, does not work on mine, Jellybean-4.1.1

Re:Screenshots are built into Android (1)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about 6 months ago | (#46666585)

What about power+home, if you have a physical Home button?

Re:Screenshots are built into Android (0)

aristotle-dude (626586) | about 6 months ago | (#46665903)

There's no "app" for screenshots because it's built into Android itself, and has been since 4.0 (which was released many years ago). It's volume down + power button. Just Google for "Android screenshot".

And? You have been able to do a screenshot on the iPhone/iPod Touch since version 1.0 using the power button + home button.

Re:Screenshots are built into Android (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46666027)

And what? He is offering a tip to the OP. He is not attacking your precious iPhone.

Re:Google's ANdroid Playstore (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46665893)

Press and hold the Volume down button + power button to take a screenshot in Android, you fucking idiot. LOL

Re:Google's ANdroid Playstore (0)

rolfwind (528248) | about 6 months ago | (#46666073)

From what I have seen on the cheaper android stuff, it's like Microsoft vs Apple all over again from the 90s.

Just from the POV of cheaper hardware but at the tradeoff of bloatware/computer monitoring/antivirus and the like vs a walled garden.

Misleading map (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46665697)

Many of the commenters on the Slate article point out that the map is drawn in such a way that the red (iPhone) tweets are drawn on top of the green (Android) ones. That creates a misleading picture.

The real news here is the death of windows phone (0)

tuppe666 (904118) | about 6 months ago | (#46665761)

I you look at the picture is the Moto G took 6% of the UK market in three months. What it does not say it that the phones it replaced where the cheap Windows phones which upto then had been carving a tiny niche in the market before then. No wonder Windows has become free and Nokia have started selling android.

The fact that Apple fanatics are clinging to past glories is not news. Show me a value phone...or even a watch. Otherwise just watch your market share continue to shrink.

Re:The real news here is the death of windows phon (1)

Karlt1 (231423) | about 6 months ago | (#46665811)

The fact that Apple fanatics are clinging to past glories is not news. Show me a value phone...or even a watch. Otherwise just watch your market share continue to shrink.

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets... [arstechnica.com]

Apple is so 1%... (0)

mi (197448) | about 6 months ago | (#46665777)

In other words, Apple is for the 1%...

And sign me up for that... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46665805)

As I work in technology more, the more I want to remove technology from certain people's hands. Have you seen the comments on CNN or BBC news stories? Heck, even reviews for software in various app stores? If you work in software, how does it make you feel that you're partly responsible for putting easy to use software in those people's hands?

iPhone is for people (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46665815)

with more money than sense.

Re:iPhone is for people (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46666033)

Says the man who comes from the land of SUVs, 70 inch TVs, 1300 cable channels and Sam's Club...
 
Some people really have no perspective.

i literally have 50+ iphones (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46665817)

So what does that say about me?

Re:i literally have 50+ iphones (2)

Tony Isaac (1301187) | about 6 months ago | (#46667331)

It probably says that you waste a lot of money!

Lesson (0, Troll)

PopeRatzo (965947) | about 6 months ago | (#46665841)

So people who use iOS devices do more shopping with them than people who use Android devices.

Is anyone surprised? I'll bet they get their bodies waxed more, too. Probably spend more on moisturizer and bath oils. Drink more wine rather than beer. Watch more episodes of Girls and Ellen.

I bet we could come up with a whole list of things they do more.

Re:Lesson (-1, Troll)

PopeRatzo (965947) | about 6 months ago | (#46665973)

And please folks, let's try to keep the homophobia to a minimum. So I don't want anybody mentioning that people who use iOS devices "have more anal fissures".

That would be inappropriate. Take the high road for once. Because iOS users' low road is kind of sore, if you catch my drift.

Re:Lesson (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46666667)

Android users could probably afford iPhones if they didn't drink so much malt liquor and do so much heroin.

This data is about Twitter not platforms (1)

joeflies (529536) | about 6 months ago | (#46665905)

The only conclusions that I can draw has to do with the people who use Twitter. While twitter's user base may be sufficiently representative of the overall mobile user space, I don't see how it can correlate to wealth of platform adoption until other factors are also ruled out.

Re:This data is about Twitter not platforms (2)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about 6 months ago | (#46666029)

Let's all remember that Twitter starts with "Twit".

I'm gonna launch my own service, called "Idiotter".

Re:This data is about Twitter not platforms (1)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about 6 months ago | (#46666607)

Many a tweet makes a twat.

Re:This data is about Twitter not platforms (1)

breeze95 (880714) | about 6 months ago | (#46667089)

The only conclusions that I can draw has to do with the people who use Twitter. While twitter's user base may be sufficiently representative of the overall mobile user space, I don't see how it can correlate to wealth of platform adoption until other factors are also ruled out.

Their assumptions are based on economics and geography. For example, most of the Tweets in Manhattan (a high income area) comes from iPhones. In comparison, most of the tweets in Newark (a much lower income area than Manhattan) comes from Android devices. Therefore, iPhone users are more wealthy than Android users. Of course other factors weren't taken into consideration making the author's conclusion dubious.

Misleading map (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46665941)

Looks like the map always puts the red (apple) on top of the (green). There are way more android users in Manhattan than what you see at first glance. Just turn off the "Apple" users.

It's not just economic; it's personal privacy (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46665979)

"iOS continues to win over many app developers and businesses who want to maximize their earnings. Now, an article at Slate goes over some of the statistics demonstrating this trend. A map of geo-located Tweets show that in Manhattan, a generally affluent area, most of the Tweets come from iPhones. Meanwhile, in nearby Newark, which is a poorer area, most Tweets come from Android devices."

You don't seem to get it. Yet.

Android is not "free" at all. For the vast majority of users, to have Android means to be a unpaid whore...and unpaid whore for Google. Google uses you. Google pimps you out for money. You get reamed. You get to play with a few baubles... a few apps which you think are 'free'. It's rather like the deal the original indians got when they agreed to sell Manhattan for trinkets.

It isn't SMART to choose Android. It's the ultimate stupidity, in fact. Unless, of course, you don't respect yourself and your privacy and are Ok with being tracked and cataloged and bought and sold 24/7. Myself...I'd rather pay a few extra dollars and be free of the targeted ads. I'm worth that. Now if I could just sue Google for flying over my house taking pictures, recording my ip address as they drive by, and asking my friends to give them pictures of me and my telephone number. Google ranks up there with Monsanto as a corporation which should be driven out of business.

"If you would not give your body to any passerby to do with as he wished, then why do you give your mind?" -Epictetus

LOL (1)

ArchieBunker (132337) | about 6 months ago | (#46666399)

You think Apple doesn't sell advertising metrics and other stats? I guarantee Apple does the exact same thing Google does but they don't tell you.

Re:LOL (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46666659)

Where does Apple sell advertising metrics? Google's business is advertising. Apple's is hardware. I saw probably over two hundred targeted ads today, most of which were in Gmail and Google.

a car analogy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46666015)

Many people would love a Ferrari, but they are expensive, so they drive Toyotas instead.

I know of VERY few people who lust after an Android device. They lust after Apple, and buy Android because that's what they can afford. The low end of ANY market is always a lot bigger than the high end. Cars, houses, phones, whatever. Toyota outsells Ferrari by quite a lot too.

Re:a car analogy (3, Insightful)

Dutchmaan (442553) | about 6 months ago | (#46666085)

Many people would love a Ferrari, but they are expensive, so they drive Toyotas instead.

I know of VERY few people who lust after an Android device. They lust after Apple, and buy Android because that's what they can afford. The low end of ANY market is always a lot bigger than the high end. Cars, houses, phones, whatever. Toyota outsells Ferrari by quite a lot too.

oh that's a load of horseS#$T, I know a LOT of people who lust after flagship android devices, The Samsung Galaxy line and HTC models are amazing. iPhones are fine devices to be sure, but they aren't the "Ferrari's" of the world no matter how much your ego would like to believe that.

Re:a car analogy (1)

amiga3D (567632) | about 6 months ago | (#46666395)

There are nice android phones. What the iOS world lacks is cheap ass junk phones. The android world is full of them, shitty little cheap smart phones. Yeah the S4 Samsung is really nice and the HTC one is cool but for every one of those there are 5 or 6 of the cheapo throwaway ones.

Re:a car analogy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46667285)

There are nice android phones. What the iOS world lacks is cheap ass junk phones. The android world is full of them, shitty little cheap smart phones. Yeah the S4 Samsung is really nice and the HTC one is cool but for every one of those there are 5 or 6 of the cheapo throwaway ones.

Lexus has cheap ass junk cars. They call them Scions.

Ferrari has cheap ass junk cars. They call them Chevys.

Not every vendor wants to relish on the cheap side. Some do just fine catering to the upper end.

Re:a car analogy (2)

amiga3D (567632) | about 6 months ago | (#46667623)

Toyota makes Scions and Lexus. Ferrari only makes Ferraris, GM makes Chevys. If you're going to do a car analogy at least get it right.

Money is a Valid Reason (1)

ohnocitizen (1951674) | about 6 months ago | (#46666079)

A group owning different devices to the design elite is not a valid reason to neglect their needs.

A group spending less money on your app is a valid reason to prioritize other groups first, or exclusively (depending on the cost of development and potential money on the table).

Misleading map (5, Informative)

TheNarrator (200498) | about 6 months ago | (#46666183)

If you look at the heatmap of downtown San Francisco and you click off Apple you'll see that there are plenty of android users in wealthy areas. The apple red just blocks you from seeing the android blue underneath. So IMHO, Android has a lot of wealthy users but Apple only has wealthy users.

Re:Misleading map (1)

MeNeXT (200840) | about 6 months ago | (#46667209)

Sorry don't have mod points but I'd mod you up.

What I see with the limited data is that the average sale will bring you more from iOS device but you will make more sales from Android devices. Android has a better penetration on more demographics than iOS. Which is common sense that the more expensive devices will sell to more affluent individuals. No kiddin Sherlock.

Is this news? I bet if we compared BMW owners to Kia/Hyundai owners we would come out to the same conclusion. For sure BMW owners would pay more for tires than Kia/Hyundai owners but the total revenue from Kia/Hyundai owners on tires would be more than BMW. BMW owners would have a higher average price for sure.

Cry me a river (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46666231)

This article is a modern day equivalent of an old take about if enough monkeys bang on keyboards eventually one will write a Shakespearean masterpiece but in this case if enough people bang on a touchscreen they will find a way to complain about every possible imaginary situation.

Or maybe we have finally achieved Nirvana because if poor people's biggest problem today is that mobile app developers aren't catering to them enough then we can say we have solved all the worlds major problems and are now only dealing with petty ones.

Trading time for money (1)

grantspassalan (2531078) | about 6 months ago | (#46666273)

Most people in this world have to trade their time for money in order to pay their bills. This includes people who spend their time writing programs for phones and computers. Why is it so surprising that people that can afford Apple products are also able to spend more money?

It does not cost significantly less to make the hardware of phones and tablets from one company to the next. What costs a lot of money is making good software to run on this hardware. It is mostly because the software on Android is "free" that makes these devices cheaper than Apple products. This is also the reason why Android customers expect their apps to be free also. Android however is not really free for the same reason that over the air broadcast television is not free. For Google and broadcasters the users are the product and the advertisers are the customers. Both are selling the user's time. In the case of Google, the users private information as well as their time is sold to the advertisers. Besides huge profits, Google is using a large fraction of their substantial pile of money to provide "free" software to deliver more of their product (eyeballs and information) to their customers the advertisers.

You pick a platform based on market size. (2, Interesting)

tlambert (566799) | about 6 months ago | (#46666283)

You pick a platform based on market size.

PC's historically have had a lot more software available for them than Macs because you have a larger target market. If you target one platform, you target PC's, unless the market for your application is graphic artists, musicians, etc., then you target Macs. If you target two markets, you target PC's and Macs, and you don't target Linux.

If I target iOS because I have a product that will work on a tablet/mobile platform, then I have the largest possible market. I'm guaranteed a practically forced upgrade to the most recent version of the OS the platform can run, and I'm guaranteed that the device is going to have the same set of sensors and input methods as every other device.

I'm guaranteed that, even though it's not in AT&T's best interests, given their contract model, to not have the carrot of me not being able to run the latest OS unless I re-up my contract, I'm going to get the latest OS anyway, and screw what AT&T wants, and screw their business model, because that's what Apple wants.

For Android, I have to target a lot of versions of the OS; I practically have to target whatever the version was at the time they did the repo code freeze on the android sources, and started the platform port. I have to target different screen resolutions. I have to target different input methods. I have to target different camera capabilities, resolutions, directionality, and so on.

Practically speaking, each android device is an island. Some have a lager market share. If I wanted to target 6 platforms, 2 of them would be iOS, 1 of them would be iOS on iPhone 5 (different aspect ratio), and the other 3 would probably be Samsung Galaxy products (2 phones and a tablet, based on market share).

If you could resolve the android version difference problem, that'd go a hell of a long way toward making android competitive. It would require changing the android development model, and some of the partnership agreements.

Instead, Google is concentrating on forcing branding onto the boot screen, and forcing apps onto the device by default. The apps are a good thing, in general, since they tend to rationalize the user experience, but not the same way the VGA standard rationalized the user experience on PC's: minimally, there should be resolution and aspect ratio requirements for android - they matter a hell of a lot more to establishing an applications base than putting up a logo at boot time.

The walls on Google's walled garden are also rather porous. They are more "We won't let you play with the toys we have" rather than "we will keep the bad guys out". And it shows. It shows that other people can run android app stores, that they do, and that there's a huge amount of malware out there in those place. They show in the balkanization of the market by OEM vendor stores, and by carrier stores.

It's crap that I can buy an iOS device, and get "The Apple Experience" - a uniform thing across all the devices - but that I can't buy an android device and get "The Android Experience" - unless you call a balkanized chaos "The Experience".

So yeah, as a developer, I don't target android unless I'm Roxio and have more money than God to spend on programmers for platforms where I'm going to end up selling 50 copies of the game that everyone has, and then sell follow-on modules on a monthly basis until the cows come home, in order to monetize that investment over a long (I don't care how long; I'm not living hand to mouth, I'm Roxio!) period of time.

So yeah, android has shit apps. Make it a uniform platform, instead of me trying to develop for the Mac and the Apple IIe and the Ohio Scientific, and the Orange Micro, and the TI-99/4A, and the Timex Sinclair Z-8000, and the Tandy CoCo, and the Wang word processing station, and the ... or keep your balkanized mosaic of "Choice, man! Yeah! Choice!" and write your own damn software.

Re:You pick a platform based on market size. (1)

R3d M3rcury (871886) | about 6 months ago | (#46666855)

You pick a platform based on market size.

It's not quite so simple, as you point out.

If you target one platform, you target PC's, unless the market for your application is graphic artists, musicians, etc., then you target Macs.

This is the important part. You don't target based on the number of devices sold--the market share--you target based on the platform that your intended audience is using. It is the rare application that will force people to forgo the newest things or switch platforms. There were plenty of DOS developers who eschewed Windows. Where are they now? There were some Mac developers who ignored Mac OS X for as long as they could as well. Eventually, they either updated or disappeared.

Also, as an aside, it can depend on what you're trying to accomplish. Take Bungie, for example, who made a name for themselves on the Mac platform before going to Windows and eventually getting bought up by Microsoft. It was a heck of a lot easier for Bungie to make a name for themselves on the Mac platform than it would have been for them to do it on the Windows platform because there's a lot more competition and it can be tough to shout over the cacophony of other developers. So if I were developing games for Xbox live, for example, I'd be looking at Windows mobile to try to make a name for myself.

I can't buy an android device and get "The Android Experience" - unless you call a balkanized chaos "The Experience".

While I agree, I'd argue that I can get "The Android Experience" from Google's Nexus line of phones. I can get a "Motorola Experience" from Motorola, a "Samsung Experience" from Samsung, etc. This is different from the PC world where everybody has the same "Windows Experience." The problem is that it leads to a commodity environment where all you can really compete on is price in a race to the bottom that nobody wins. Needless to say, Samsung and Motorola don't really want to be in a market like that.

Another metric (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46666361)


People who have better jobs that offer health insurance use iPhones.
People with lousy jobs (and income) use cheap Android.

Why I chose Android over Apple (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46666599)

I could easily afford an iDevice, but chose an Android phone because it offered the features and applications I wanted without all the drama. I have lost count of the number of co-workers who started off with a simple device like an iPod, then found themselves buying more and more Apple branded hardware assembled by Foxconn. An iPhone here, an iPad there, a Macbook over there. Why? Because "I like the design" or "I want all my hardware to match" or "I miss Steve Jobs" (RIP). Meanwhile, Apple's stock price soars higher and higher while your co-workers do the same thing.

No, Slate, household income has little bearing on iPhone vs. Android and it is disingenuous to suggest otherwise. Choosing to not fall into what seems like a cult or drug addiction to us outsiders probably weighs more heavily on the minds of your technical readers. Now, to be fair, there are people in the category of "too much money, not enough brain" who view the latest iDevice as a status symbol. Those people probably have bigger problems in the grand scheme of life than which phone they use to tweet their latest fashionable selfies at Starbucks to their tweeps.

In other words: (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46666795)

"Most of my peers walked into the Apple ecosystem, for various reasons. I think they're stupid sheep and drama-llamas, so I bought an Android phone. Also, I hate Starbucks."

WHUT

Apple == Stupidity Tax? (0)

Progman3K (515744) | about 6 months ago | (#46666661)

Tech-savvy people agree that dollar-for-dollar, android is better quality than Apple.

Apple has much better marketing, though, so they've got that going for them

HAHAHAhahahahahahaha! *cough* (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46666803)

Oh curse you; now I have to clean a whole bunch of food crumbs off my desk

Re:Apple == Stupidity Tax? (2)

RavenManiac (220921) | about 6 months ago | (#46667491)

Perhaps that's so. Maemo, Meego and Symbian are better than both. I like Android devices because I can use standard cables and standard peripherals, mount it on my desktop and view/hack contents, instead of having to decrypt/jailbreak, etc. to get into an iPhone. Best thing about Android: No iTunes!!!!

Is there a stupid tax for Windows 8 phones? Nokia Lumia 521 far exceeds expectations, more so with Lumia 1520. How many apps do you need anyway?

Elysium (1)

Chad Smith (3448823) | about 6 months ago | (#46666859)

I promise you, one day I'll take you to Elysium where nobody gets sick and everyone has an unlimited iTunes account.

iPhone more appealing because less bloatware (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46667153)

Android vendors don't care about user experience, only about packing as much bloatware as possible onto their phones.

Spain loves Android (1)

nadaou (535365) | about 6 months ago | (#46667311)

Interesting that the map shows Spain to be so solidly in the Android camp.

I wonder if iOS is doing something funny there to skew the data, Apple has abandoned the market, or if it is local preference.

https://www.mapbox.com/labs/tw... [mapbox.com]

Re:Spain loves Android (2)

wanax (46819) | about 6 months ago | (#46667585)

Having recently been in Spain (with my unlocked iphone 4 in tow), I can tell you that the support for iphones (at least in Barcelona) is terrible. It took trips to 4 different stores to find an iphone 4 compatible prepaid mini-sim (if I had the iphone 5, I would have been SOL and had to pay for roaming data from my US plan). None of those stores prominently placed iphones (although they were available, at least through vodaphone, even the 5 new, but you couldn't use a prepaid sim in it).

I tend to think that the issue is that Spain has a really fractured retail environment, both with a lot of providers (vodaphone/movistar/orange/yoigo and lots of 3rd party options) and with a lot of kiosk type stores. Vodaphone has their own retail outlets, but most of the others seemed to be based in malls, and the malls in turn seemed to have one 'basket' of stores, depending on who owns the mall. During my search for a mini-sim for example, I was sent on a goose-chase from store to store with directions that turned out to be pretty approximate (wrong address, but within about 300 meters of the correct address).

Given that retail environment, I think it's pretty natural that android, with its myriad of slightly customized, provider branded phones etc, fares a lot better than iOS at the moment... People want something that can be supported by their local mall/kiosk.

Re:Spain loves Android (3, Interesting)

Windwraith (932426) | about 6 months ago | (#46667737)

I can confirm this, and that's considering Barcelona is a hotter spot for Apple than other cities, where Apple only has a small corner in a number of shops. Their presence is growing slowly but steadily, but the market here usually prefers those local kiosks for availability and price, and they predominantly offer Android devices of most brands.
Towns and cities with Apple Stores usually have only one of it, whereas there are dozens of sellers for Android devices scattered all over, predominantly in malls as you said.

Offers are usually pretty cheap subsidized phones, and even for free with binding contracts, and they even renew your phone once every year in several cases, for minimal or no cost. However, as you probably realized, this stops being nice and shiny the moment there's any issue or nonstandard need whatsoever. Every side service, from tech support to repairs, is sub-par. Most people will go around with busted phones waiting for a renewal instead of bothering to repair it, which is notoriously complicated, requires a lot of time (and trips) and it usually ends just in replacing the thing entirely.

The prices, the complicated repairs, and the large availability kind of created a culture of changing phones very regularly, even in people with limited income. Good repair shops exist, but they tend to be little electronics workshops in some little corner that you only learn about by word of mouth, and are only used when you are attached to your device for some reason (sentimental value, niche features, etc), or when someone wants to unlock a phone to use with other provider's SIM card.

Re:Spain loves Android (1)

Windwraith (932426) | about 6 months ago | (#46667599)

Well most phone operators will give you deals for Android phones, not iPhones. Apple products have always been notoriously expensive for Spain. Also, Spain is quite impoverished right now, which doesn't help "luxury" things like an iPhone getting sold.

Apple Stores only started having a presence well past the iPod days, so there isn't that much of a cult following for it as in other places. Of course there are regional differences, you will see more Apple presence (and following) on Madrid and Barcelona than other places.

Also, many developers are unemployed (Spain has a ridiculous unemployment rate since the Real State Bubble popped that has been exacerbated by the latest labor reform), and can't face the yearly cost of the Apple SDK. For that reason, as well, most "cheap money-grabby apps linked to certain service, company-or-product-or-tv-show" are developed for Android in Spain, since they rely on the ease to find a Java developer desperate for a paid job and the higher amount of downloaders for that platform.

So, in short, you'd say it's local preference due to lower income reasons. Apple is trying as far as I can tell, as new iStuff tends to be available shortly after the American release, which is a rarer sight than you'd expect. I remember having issues finding any phone (vendor-locked sale or not) using Android 4.x in January of 2013, where iPhones were at their latest US release in every shop I visited.

better metric (1)

plonk420 (750939) | about 6 months ago | (#46667325)

if you're going to sell an app, IMO, you should look at platform marketshare by country [macrumors.com] , among other things.

It didn't have to be this way. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46667381)

Google targeted the lowest common denominator with Android. And they got it.

Android is a phone, iPhone is a fashion accessory (1)

RavenManiac (220921) | about 6 months ago | (#46667445)

Apple is a marketing company. They're great at convincing people to pay more for older tech that Apple claims is new--they're customers don't know, don't care.

With Android, it's more about what you can do, and do well, without paying too much.

Ignore majority of the world at your peril (2)

iamacat (583406) | about 6 months ago | (#46667693)

Most of human beings with access to Internet are using Android. They may not be spending most of the money right at this moment, but that is going to change very fast. Or, if your platform gets superseded by competition on iOS, alternative platforms may let you live to fight another day. Remember, Facebook didn't pay 19 billion for $1/year revenues of WhatsApp.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?