Why Apple can't beat Android

This story was contributed to VentureBeat by Paul Grim, a General Partner at venture capital firm SunBridge Partners. Grim blogs on wireless issues at Grim Times.

For the better part of 20 years, Mac lovers fumed in frustration as Apple languished in sub-5% PC market share territory. Wintel dominated. Big, ugly, buggy, clunky, and everywhere. It seemed as if graphic designers were the only people stubbornly refusing to admit defeat and join the rest of the planet in using Windows.

But then Steve Jobs came to the rescue — and over time, people actually started buying Macs again. And then the iPod! and iTunes! Somehow Apple found a way to reinvent and completely dominate an entire category of consumer electronics. The company seemed to change overnight — and became the leading-edge technology giant it always knew it was supposed to be.

And then the iPod begat the iPhone – and lo, the consumer beheld it and said it was good.

Windows Mobile, Symbian, Brew, RIM, all the closed-deck nonsense pushed by the carriers — they were the dinosaurs in the path of the iPhone asteroid. Even AT&T’s awful network couldn’t stop the juggernaut. Apple had irreversibly changed the wireless industry, for the better.

And then onto Apple’s coattails stepped the Google.

When Google bought the little startup Android in 2005 and eventually launched it into the market, people were extremely skeptical. Previous Linux-based and open platforms had failed miserably, and why would developers want to work on Android when there were already 100,000 apps in Apple’s App Store and growing?

Then HTC and Motorola latched onto Android in a big way (the former to come out from the white-label shadows, the latter to get its mojo back). Droid, Hero, Desire, Droid Incredible, Droid X — all of a sudden it was like a veritable Jawa swap meet. Yes, the Android market was a scatty mess, the apps were fewer and barely legal in some cases. But Android was getting ready to take over.

Back in January I pointed out that Google’s Nexus One was not a big deal, but Android was; Nexus was the concept car, not the iPhone killer. Some believed Android would win because the iPhone was chained to AT&T, whereas Android wasn’t chained to any network. This was partly right, however it goes far beyond that. Once it was clear that Android was building a critical mass, handset OEMs saw their chance to beat Apple and stay relevant. The smartphone segment suddenly had exploded — up to 50% of all new shipments were now smartphones, and in another year it will be closer to 100%.

You may laugh at that last statement, but it is more likely to happen than not, and all because of Android. I realized this when I saw the LG Optimus, an Android smartphone now on T-Mobile for $30. Thirty bucks for a smartphone. Remember when the Motorola RAZR became ubiquitous? It wasn’t popular at the start when it cost $300, but when it became cheap it was everywhere.

Apple may certainly come out with a very low-end iPhone; the company is indeed incredibly adept at segmenting markets with 2-3 different versions of a product and relentlessly driving down prices on all of them. But will Apple ever have 20 versions of the iPhone? 50? Of course not. Will it ever license the platform to OEMs? Are you kidding me? This is why Android will completely dominate the wireless world. It is spreading like a virus throughout the ecosystem as you read this (see chart above). Apple will always be the Maserati of smartphones — leading-edge, trendy, stylish, downright awesome. But Android will be the Ford Taurus — maybe a little dull in comparison, sometimes clunky, but dependable, cheap and everywhere you look, just like Windows in the last Apple Holy War (except for the dependable part).

Mobile app developers don’t necessarily have to choose between these platforms, and mostly aren’t. It’s a far cry from several years ago when you’d have to port your app to dozens of different handsets — now just 2 or 3 platforms and you’re done. However, if you had to prioritize your focus, Android in the long run is the right place to be. Apple’s distribution platform is much better currently, but the numbers game is more important. If you want ubiquity, sell to Ford, not Maserati.

Topics:

,
  • drorm

    Funny, I often make the same analogy comparing

  • drorm

    Funny, I often make the same comparison of smartphones to cars except that I say that Apple is the BMW. Android is the Toyota, and the Honda and the Mercedes, and … That's because Android is attacking both at the high end with phones like the HTC EVO and the Droid X, but also on the low end with upcoming Android phones that are under $150 unlocked like the Huawe ideos. These are going to be the Hondas and the Toyotas. Doesn't make as much of a difference in the US, but the rest of the world cares a lot about the retail price.

  • http://twitter.com/TheMacAdvocate Jeremiah

    I failed to read this to guard against the possibility that my ears might start to bleed or at the very least that my IQ would take a permanent hit. I scanned the article looking for your “money chart”, which it surely had to have. I already knew what it showed and took a guess at the title: “Android vs. iPhone Sales 3Q 2009 vs 2010″. Wouldn’t you know it, there it is, the cornerstone for 700 words I had no interest in reading. I knew the most important part of the chart would be its subtitle: U.S. Sales.One country. As has been pointed out by several people who know what they're talking about, the iPhone enjoys the significant disadvantage in this country of being offered on only one network. In countries where this isn't the case, Android is a rounding error.Yours is a generic offering: a photocopied article based on the hundreds of other hit-pieces authored by pageview prognosticators that came when 3Q sales were announced for the year – except yours is about 2 and a half weeks late. Try harder.

  • pbreit

    Lousy analysis. Apple is not Maserati, it's more like a high volume Lexus. This isn't the PC market where the decision maker was IT, not the end user.

  • travisgamedev

    Let's have this discussion again in 2011 when Apple has stepped into the Verizon realm. Everyone I know with an Android device does so because they refuse to embrace AT&T. Android saved the other carriers from utter failure, but that will change soon. They won't need Android anymore to compete with AT&T.

  • http://twitter.com/holmser Chris Holmes

    It seems to me that some iphone people simply don't understand the wireless market. While I don't have numbers to quote, I do know that the majority of people I come into contact with care very little about their cell phone. They simply choose the new free phone every 2 years. Fanboys can debate the merits of android vs apple all day long, but once android phones are the free option, they will take over the market. Iphone will always have it's place with people willing to spend the money, but the average wireless customer simply wants cheap.

  • vinosp

    Yet, on a recent business trip on a plane, I estimated 50% iPhone 4, 10% iPhone 3g/s, 10% Android, 30% regular cellphones. You make Android sound dependable – this is completely UNTRUE. Every Android user who has tried to show me a new feature – eventually has to say – “Sorry – for some reason its not working”. Android IS the Windows of Phones. Android is not Googles OS – it belongs entirely to the Carriers and Handset makers. The Google OS is the code that pageranks and searches through user data – now that is even more closed that iOS or any other software. Google hides this from the average user by touting Android – but that is actually a distraction. They just need the data and could care less about user experience. Eventually – I see this by 2020:Unit Sales: 50% Android Based, 30% IOS, 20% WindowsRevenue (from OS+Hardware Sales): 70% Apple, 20% Others, 10% Windows (Note Google does not sell OS)Revenue (from Data Extraction): 50% Google, 30% Apple, 20% Windows/BingLets see who gets it right.ViNo

  • http://www.devindra.org Devindra Hardawar

    So you can tell all this by not reading the article?

  • http://www.facebook.com/jcroasdaile Joseph Croasdaile

    I think apple doesn't care… they will be more than happy losing the overall war while taking all the profit to the bank.How many of the android phone manufactures are making a good profit? None last I checked… HTC is doing ok, but their numbers are so low and Samsung is doing decent. Then again in comparison to Apple their numbers look pitiful.Apple feels there is plenty of market and simply aren't concerned as long as sales are humming along. It is funny one point this article makes is it takes a multitude of cell phone vendors, android phones and cellular carries to beat the iphone.

  • Crowd_Sorcerer

    If the venerable Apple iPhone cannot compete with Android, where does that leave lesser phone OSes that are just launching onto the market with few apps?

  • stophobophobia

    Android is only becoming ubiquitous because you can get one for $30 or with BOGO deals. Apple makes nearly 50% of the profits on ALL handsets worldwide. Apple's not in the market share game, it's in the money making game. If Android is so unstoppable, why is the iPhone coming to Verizon? because Verizon added less than 1m subscribers last quarter. People are trading in their flip phones for Androids at non-AT&T carriers like Verizon, so not much net benefit to Verizon. The US represents 40% of the international smartphone market. Does anybody have any pretensions about what will happen to Android market share when iPhone goes multi-carrier in the US? Ask the French. iPhone went from 15% to 40% when it went multi-carrier there. The article is biased and the title is stupid, “Why Apple can't beat Android.” Developers aren't going to abandon the iPhone? Why would they? People buying $30 Android phones are not going to be the people paying for apps. Is it any wonder why some of the most popular apps on the iPhone like Angry Birds are free on Android? Because Android users are less wiling to pay for their apps, just like they were less willing to pay a premium for the iPhone. Don't think for a moment that the Android manufacturers aren't shaking in their boots at the prospect of a multi-carrier iPhone in the US.

  • http://twitter.com/jonathanM21 Jonathan

    very Android user who has tried to show me a new feature – eventually has to say – “Sorry – for some reason its not working”lmao ok and from there we know you're making up nonsense. Android works and most Android users are extremely proud of their phones because of all the cool things they actively do with it – primarily cloud and wireless things.

  • http://twitter.com/jonathanM21 Jonathan

    The article actually addressed the one network theory. It would help to read.

  • http://twitter.com/jonathanM21 Jonathan

    The most popular Android phone is a Droid, it sold millions before it hit low pricing.Most BOGO deals are with $100+ phones. Apple sells $99 iPhones. It all evens out. If anything it's harder to sell two Android phones with BOGO because you need to have someone with you who is also eligible for upgrade, anyone can walk right into AT&T and get an iPhone for $99.

  • http://twitter.com/jonathanM21 Jonathan

    Android took a while to shape up and it's still coming together with quality and user friendly-ness but there's no way Apple can remain on top simply because it's on every carrier at every pricepoint for every audience. The iPhone's strategy is different and can't compete with that.A lot is sometimes made of the fact that Android vs iPhone is different in other parts of the world but at the same time Verizon and the Droid marketing as responsible for Android's success in America vs other countries where it's just another smartphone with no umbrella branding or cool marketing campaigns.iPhones on Verizon would probably slow Android down but there are people who love Android or simply want cheap phones. Android is definitely here to stay, it's just about whether or not Apple's ego can be lowered to allow multiple/all carriers. And then it'll get really interesting.

  • http://twitter.com/jprgrim Paul Grim

    Your first sentence was my point precisely – Android will dominate unit sales because it will replace the current low-end feature phones (do people actually read these articles before they start flaming?).Apple's model is certainly far more profitable, the current distribution model is much stronger, and iphone market share goes up when offered on multiple networks – no argument there. Prevalence of free vs. paid apps on Android makes sense as price points drop. Who cares? The Android business case will be driven by search and ad revenues, not app sales. The Apple business case will continue to be a blend of high-margin device sales, app sales and ad revenues. There will be room in the market for both – one will have higher margins, the other higher volumes. What's biased and stupid about that?

  • http://www.VentureDeal.com Venture Capital | VentureDeal

    So with the inevitable commoditization of hardware, does that mean that Google takes home the spoils in the form of native mobile search driving new advertising revenues?

  • lrd555

    Apple's executing a near perfect plan. Soon to make it the world's most valuable company. Google on the other has made nearly nothing from Android and is in state of total disarray. One day it's Android, the next the fugly Google TV, then next their taking on FaceBook, then next Microsoft. But guess what? They made almost no money beyond their core business of search.I think, like many others, Google's going to be left holding the bag ( like a thousand people bag ) when the iPhone comes to Verizon.Apple's out flanked any potential Android tablet success by bringing the iPad to Verizon & AT&T.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_76W3ROP6LJSHLI62AHAWSNYUHQ ChristianEcon.com

    I think it's really funny people even compare an Android to an iPhone. An iPhone is on the verge of a mini-Mac computer, and Apple has long and serious hardware and OS experience with producing tools for the film industry and music industries e.g. That's why a real iPhone benefits from serious audio API's, serious d/a and a/d converters, etc., e.g., and why the heavy-hitters in the pro industries are developing serious apps for it, etc. Beyond a casual glance, typical smartphone capabilities, and market race drama, I don't see Google OS being able to compete on that level any time soon.

  • http://twitter.com/nodaki Michael Barbere

    You forgot to mention enterprise adoption. Both Android and Apple are taking chunks out of RIM's share. It remains to be seen if they will use Apple or Android as Exchange ActiveSync supports both without a problem. The benefits of dropping BES in favor of ActiveSync is becoming a matter of economics and a viable alternative for the enterprise. My guess is that enterprises will favor the Android devices primarily due to price point (cheap bulk pricing). Some organizations (government) will be reluctant to provide iPhones because they appear to be a luxury/vanity device.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steffen-Jobbs/100001574843303 Steffen Jobbs

    Ugh! Cheap. Get that cheap crap outta my face. I think that even the average consumer has more pride than that. Walking into the cellphone store and yelling “Just show me the cheapest smartphone I can buy.” I'm glad I'm not that person. If that's Google's dream for Android, Apple should just let them have the market share and keep a steady 30% wealthy consumer's business.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Martin-Hill/717947739 Martin Hill

    What is your definition of beat?I would say the most important measures of who is beating who are these:- Unit sales: 275,000-300,000 iOS sales per day vs 200,000-230,000 Android activations.- Mobile OS installed base: 125 million iOS devices vs 20-25 million Android devices.- App download rate: 17.7 million iOS app downloads per day vs 3 million from no.2 store, GetJar- Total App downloads: 6.5 billion iOS app downloads in 2 years vs 1 billion GetJar downloads in 7 years- Mobile developer income: $1 billion to iOS devs vs $21 million from Android Marketplace over similar time frame- Number of developers: 43,185 iOS devs vs 10,199 Android devs- Entire cellphone market profit share: Apple captured 48% of the entire cell phone industry profit vs 1% share to Motorola and 2% for Samsung vs 20% for Nokia vs 17% for Blackberry- Mobile OS web browser share: 50-60% for iOS, vs 11-15% for Android. iOS now has greater share than all Linux distros put together (inc Android)- Number of Free apps: 70,000 in iOS App Store vs 50,000 in Android Marketplace- Number of Paid commercial Apps: 180,000 iOS apps vs 30,000 Android apps- Total number of Apps: 3000,000 iOS Apps vs 100,000 Android apps- Total Tablet Apps: 25,000 iPad apps vs 0 tablet-specific Android apps- Tablet sales: 14 million iPads in 2010 (est) vs rounding error for competing tablets- Mini Tablet sales: 45 million iPod Touches sold, no credible Android equivalent- Stock Market Valuation: Apple second largest after Exxon Mobile- Hardware peripheral market share: thousands of cases, docks, iPhone/iPod/iPad-dock connector compatible sound systems, chargers, insulin pumps, GPS amplifiers, hands-free kits, aircraft seat dock connectors etc- Car Integration: 70% of new cars with iPod dock connector and steering wheel control integration- Music and Media Store: 70-80% marketshare- One-click credit card accounts: 160 million iTunes accounts vs …- 0 malware for iOS vs 50 bank phishing apps, SMS premium texter trojan, wallpaper trojan, etc etc- 0 spam apps for iOS vs 45,000 spam apps in the Android Marketplace (via Appbrain)I think it is pretty obvious who is beating who in all the metrics that matter. Phone-only unit sales in the USA as measured by NPD is a pretty useless measure when you look at the big picture.-Mart

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Martin-Hill/717947739 Martin Hill

    Even in unit sales Apple is Still beating Android – it's about the platform silly. NPD isn't counting sales of the iPod Touch (or the iPad) but from a marketshare perspective, what is it that developers, advertisers, consumers and investors are interested in? Why it is the total number of devices out there capable of running iOS apps and browsing ads on web pages. Likewise, hardware peripheral manufacturers want to know what devices sharing the same form factors and dock connectors have the largest maketshare. No individual Android device comes close in unit sales, so no wonder when you walk into a store all you see a rows and rows of cases, hifi systems, car kits, GPS amplifiers, clock radios, car steering wheel integration all designed to work with the dock connector on the iPod/iPhone/iPad.The iOS installed base is far larger than Android (125 million vs 20-25 million) and more iOS devices are sold every day (275,000-300,000) than Android devices (200,000-250,000) so the gap is only getting greater each day not smaller.That $30 Android smartphone you mentioned is still tied to an expensive 2 year contract so it's not so cheap after all. In contrast, the iPod Touch is available for $229 without any contract – This is something Android has been completely incapable of competing with. Have you seen the new Samsung Galaxy Player 50, Samsung's attempt at competing with the iTouch? It is fatter, has only16% of the screen resolution, half the battery life, no HD video recording, no VC camera, lower storage and yet it is only $30 cheaper than Apple device.Likewise, notice that Android manufacturers have been completely incapable of competing with the iPad (95.5% marketshare). The best they can do is release tablets with less than half the screen size and tie them to expensive 2 year contracts to try and compete. Apple now has the upper hand when it comes to component pricing due to the vast economies of scale that competitor can only dream about.As such, it doesn't matter if more Android phones are sold each quarter, because the total iOS platform is far larger than just phones and Apple will keep raking in the profits from many more income sources than Google. Likewise, developers writing apps for all iOS devices will continue making far more from the iOS platform than they do on Android. Android Marketplace apps have only generated 2% of the $1 billion income that the iOS App Store has generated, despite Google's store only being 3 months younger. (source Larva Labs and AndroidZoom). With Google not making any money on Android activations and carriers like Verizon choking off Google's ad-based income by exclusively licensing Microsoft's Bing as the default search engine, and the potential for massive Java licensing fees courtesy of the Oracle lawsuit, the increasing unit sales of Android devices is turning out to be a very hollow victory indeed.It is not the case that there will be only on winner – there is room for both iOS and Android and probably one or more other mobile OSes as well.-Mart

  • wired-4058

    So you reckon cheap and free wins, I guess you could be right because they are more cheap skates than people with money, And these cheap skates will go saddle for second best because they have no money to go for first class products.I guess you could be right so a win for cheap skates who don't main second rate products.

  • dolilmao

    The reason apple can't beat android is because with android you can do alot more with android than you would do with apple for example you can watch youtube videos without any additional apps as in the iphone you need skyfire an app that was launched recently that lets you watch flash videos at the moment it does not support flash games.

blog comments powered by Disqus