For the millions of people that don't develop for the iPhone and have one, it's safe to say they are content with the app market. They don't know or care that Apple is closed becaused they still end up getting what they want. If Android was starting to pull away with open source, however, then Apple would likely open up as well.

Apple's only problem right now is AT&T's network issues. The iPhone is doing just fine.

Considering Android == Google Spying on you I'll stick with my iPhone. Too bad the average user doesn't understand that (or care?).

What StoutFiles said.

Also, Android might be 1000% more advanced (it isn't) in all sorts of techie ways. No-one (OK, apart from us few geeks) knows or cares about open source. The iPhone has a well designed and easy to use interface, which is what people care about most. Then it has thousands of fantastic and easy to download and use apps.

It's a phone. Who needs more than that?

Nobody got my point. I was not talking about apps. My point is that iphone OS can only be used with iphone hardware. That is what is going to kill them. Very soon there will be androids on every carrier and made by many different hardware vendors. Iphone might sell the most hardware but android will sell the most software. Apple had the best products before windows came out. Apple will continue to be a smaller company because of their business practices. If Apple had sold the iphone software they would have all the iphone sales they have now plus the OS sales to other hardware vendors.

MS makes a very bad cell phone OS and apple just recently passed them. Apple continues to make bad decisions. They will never make it in the Chineese market because they won't change the way they do business to acomadate how Chineese use cell phones. The list goes on.

Apple is a successful company but they will never be a Google or Microsoft.

Apple will also have the least amount of security problems. What's your point? You keep looking at it from a nerdy point of view...the average person will think:

1. Apple is a cool brand to own.
2. This has a lot of applications, more then I'll ever need.
3. There aren't any viruses.
4. 3G coverage isn't great (AT&T's fault, the public knows this now though)

I'm not an Apple fanboy by any means; I own all PC's. But they market extremely well and aren't even close to being toppled by either. The majority of people buying Android phones were either biased towards Apple to begin with or want/need to remain with their non-AT&T carrier.

Apple continues to make bad decisions.

You're right; Apple made horrible decisions with the iPhone and iPod. They aren't making any money with either! Also, their overpriced computers don't make any money. If only they were successful!

Apple isn't trying to be Google or Microsoft. What they are is clearly working and they've built themselves a comfortable niche that will be incredibly difficult to overcome. Like I've said before, Apple would adjust if they felt they were losing ground by being closed, but they aren't.

I've had an iPhone since they came out, and whilst I like it, I positively HATE every time I have to interface with that godawful program iTunes. I don't know what it's like to use if you're on a Mac, but it is the worst bit of software, by a country mile, that I have to interface with on my PC.

If I leave the iPhone family, it'll probably be because of iTunes - an absolute sxxt bit of software design.

StoutFiles sounds like we agree. Your right Apple seems to be happy with being a niche. They have no lofty goals to become the next MS. They have had several opportunities and just passed them up. Google will become the next MS. They are setting themselves up to own the Internet. In the next few generations of Internet speed Google will be set up to dominate. I predict that Google will dwarf MS, Pre break up AT&T, and US Oil.

What scares me is what will happen when we have to split up Google. The Gov will decide that Google has too much power and take it away from them. Even if Google is being perfectly 'not evil" right now that does not mean they won't be in the future. What happens when the founders are dead and it is just one huge corp.

It is hard for most people to see what google is doing right now because current technology won't let them go as far as they could. There will be a time probably not for another 20 or 30 years when bandwidth will be unlimited. This will change how we live. It will be a huge paradigm shift and Google is working very hard to be set up to control just about everything. They are not set up to do this yet but by the time it gets here they will be ready.

Interesting thread
[webmasterworld.com...]

The iPhone may have the lead and but ultimately requiring an Apple to develop for the iPhone and being tethered to AT&T another year while Android rapidly expands will be their undoing.

The best thing Apple could do right now would be to release a Windows version of their SDK but the odds of that happening seem slim.

Google going open source with Android and an SDK that anyone can develop with, on their existing computer, will probably create an Apps explosion that will ultimately outpace iPhones lead.

The only things really holding Android back from doing some really cool tricks IMO is that the USB drivers are incomplete and the lack of an IR interface.

I just got an iphone a couple of weeks ago, and on the way home, i decided that I wanted to explore the option of trying to create an iphone app..
Unfortunately, I need a Mac running 10.5 leopard or above in order the the SDK to work, and I'm primarily a windows guy, so I don't have any Macs laying around..

I'm a little bummed that there isn't a windows SDK for the iphone. I certainly hope that Google does not follow Apple's lead and limit what OS's the apps can be written on using the SDK.

Google going open source with Android and an SDK that anyone can develop with, on their existing computer, will probably create an Apps explosion that will ultimately outpace iPhones lead.

But again, only geeks care about that. Who really wants or uses the millions of Windows or Linux tools for PCs? I would guess that 90% of computer users rarely instal any softare on their PC other than what it came with. Similarly, iPhone users may buy sme essential apps, or download the ocasional game. But only a minority really thinks there is anything missing from the thousands of available apps.

Geeks have been complaining about iPods lacking features for years. Look how much the market cares.

Simplicity of use and security are far bigger factors in the iPhone success. Even the name Android sounds geeky. Who wants that?

But again, only geeks care about that.

But geeks write the apps and there are more PC geeks than Apple geeks and that's not a Mac vs PC thing, it's a sheer numbers game.

The more geeks get access, the simpler things become which will make it more successful.

The poor geeks that could never afford an Apple in the first place can now program for Android and try to make a buck, so let the horse race begin.

Who wants that?

Apparently the 500K-1M users (depending on the source) that purchased from Verizon in the first month of sales.

[quote]But geeks write the apps and there are more PC geeks than Apple geeks and that's not a Mac vs PC thing, it's a sheer numbers game. [quote]

And yet, there are still an incredible amount of apps for the iPhone. When money is to be made, I wouldn't worry about lack of development. Maybe it sucks for the small developers, but there will always be plenty of apps for Apple from the big boys.

What does concern me is AT&T's unwillingness to budge on apps that would otherwise hurt their money revenue, namely Google's free calling and texting apps. If they take off on Android then AT&T has a big problem on their hands.

The argument that because Android will be on every cell provider network and therefore will ultimately win is bogus. It's like believing in Norse Gods or something. A lot of people say that because Microsoft won the desktop OS war by being on most systems and that Apple didn't that the current mobile race is exactly the same set up and that history will repeat itself. That's called historical determinism. It's like believing in religion, Santa Claus, and ignoring that all the specific variables that were present in the desktop OS war are currently present today. The conditions we have today are totally different than those we had 20 years ago. Nothing's the same. For example, there was not real Internet as we know it today. The world wasn't a global place as it is today. Consumers were not as informed. That's only a few of the variables that have changed that makes today's current mobile OS war totally different. But it's so much easier, sexy and convenient to say that today's mobile war is the sequel to the desktop wars. It's black and white and doesn't force one to think of the various shades of grey.

For Android to continue to succeed, it needs the backing of Google. Google's brand name, currently is in search and email (the regular people who don't follow tech). In marketing, there is something known as brand expansion or something similar. Extending a brand to another market is not an easy thing to do. Like Nokia making notebooks makes no sense for the average consumer. Nokia is known for phones. Apple has been successful at using its brand to expand into new products categories. Will Google be as proficient? As of now, I say no.

Also for the OS war to be a repeat of the desktop wars, Google has to be solvent. The way that company is moving these days, before it is ever broken up by the government, it may be a victim of its own size. Nothing is clear about how well Google is managed, the internal conflicts of the company and what are the risks the company faces. Just a change in advertising rules online could decimate its entire business model overnight and severely curtail its support for Android.

I say that there is a third bubble and you've read it here first (actually, I've been saying there needs to be more scrutiny at the workings of Google from a financial perspective for a while now - but I've been dismissed as a crying wolf type of guy).

History will not repeat itself. Saying so, ignores the fact that outside of the West/industrial nations, mobile usage is different and has other needs. I have no idea where it's all going, but I'll certainly not shut the book on history now and declare Google a winner. That would be silly, and a lack of judgment.

For Android to continue to succeed, it needs the backing of Google.

Nonsense.

Ever hear of the "Open HandSet Alliance"?

Google is just one of many names [openhandsetalliance.com] supporting it.

The fact that Android was tied to Google had ZERO to do with why I bought one nor a factor in most other buying decisions.

Facts:
1. AT&T network stinks, been there, done that dropped call thing, wasn't doing it again
2. iTune software stinks, wife has an iPod, we hate iTunes, wasn't doing that again
3. DRM stinks, got hosed with Yahoo Music and others, not doing that Windows thing again
4. The Palm Pre is too tiny and too little apps support, not going down that sinkhole
5. Verizon and Sprint have better networks, so whatever they shipped first was going to be purchased, whether it was an iPhone or an Android

They shipping Android, about 1M sold in no time at all.

Had the iPhone shipped on those networks I think millions would've been sold, but people are evangelizing the Droid and Hero, showing them to our friends, our friends are tossing their old phones once they see what it can do.

Guess what?

Google is never part of that conversation until you get down to the cool apps like voice search, Google MAPs GPS and Google SKY on Android.

Swanny007, would you rather AT&T / Apple spying on you? It's all the same...

Apple is doing what they did with desktops back in the 80's. They made a closed system again.

I think Apple failed to understand (or forsee, which is difficult to do) the future of mobile devices. Plus, like ogletree mentioned, building proprietary systems is just what they do.

They shipping Android, about 1M sold in no time at all.

A lot of that was because users in the U.S. are tied to their carrier, and loathe the $150-$200 early termination fees. Many of them may have preferred the iPhone, but opted for their carrier's smartphone if they thought it was comparable [to the iPhone].

But again, only geeks care about that. Who really wants or uses the millions of Windows or Linux tools for PCs? I would guess that 90% of computer users rarely instal any softare on their PC other than what it came with. Similarly, iPhone users may buy sme essential apps, or download the ocasional game. But only a minority really thinks there is anything missing from the thousands of available apps.

Good point. Most non-geeky, non-techy people I converse with want the same things: A smartphone with unlimited Internet access; reasonable data rates; the ability to port their number to a different carrier; the ability to switch carriers no matter which smartphone they have; free long distance; a good quality camera; the ability to record video quickly; and any application they think is necessary for daily/weekly living (i.e. online banking, GPS mapping, games, etc.)

Some points:

1. Apple has an exclusive deal with AT&T, but that needs to change if Apple expects the iPhone to keep its lead in the smartphone market.

2. No matter which smartphones are delivered to the market, it is probable that the iPhone will retain its current user base and acquire millions of new users since it was the "wow" device that started it all.

3. AT&T needs to update its network. I can't really complain since--I have been an AT&T customer for over 7 years, and I can count--on one hand--the number of dropped calls I've had.

[edited by: celgins at 9:10 pm (utc) on Dec. 27, 2009]

Hi Guys,
In this discussion we are simply forgetting the developing world of india and china. Where iphones are not real hit due to their cost in the local market. (approx US$ 800-1000 which is not affordable to most of the people. In india average person buys a phone which cost him around US$200.)
Also in both 2 countries piracy is the biggest concern, even for MS. So I feel these 2 countries will lead the way to develop many applications for open source handset OS. Let it be android or anything else. Also the number of users in these countries are huge and price sensitive and they will be the first to buy cheaper phones with open source OS and only the required softwares will be purchased or these phones will be again adverts supported, depending on the user preferences.

I just googled for android phone in india and found out that it costs around US$650, so I suppose it will still take some time for it to become popular.

Thats my 2 cents.
Rajiv

A lot of that was because users in the U.S. are tied to their carrier

Define tied.

In California it's lack of coverage, not the fee to changing carrier that concerns many.

In my area, Northern California and Sierra/Nevada area, Sprint or Verizon are the two best choices and swapping one for the other is a toss up. On AT&T we lost connection driving to Reno in the high mountains or driving past Reno, not a problem for Sprint or Verizon.

In Southern Califonia, Verizon is the defacto leader in coverage as you go deeper into the desert and mountains so it's virtually the only choice so swapping carriers is kind of a moot point.

Therefore most people in California area (and Nevada) tend to use Verizon by default.

I hear a lot of complaints about signal quality from those that just had to have an iPhone so it's possible some of them might convert now that there's a viable alternative on a network with far superior local coverage.

Don't forget, we had other iPhone-like options like the Blackberry or Palm, they just weren't close enough so we held tight until Android came out.

Define tied.

"...and loathe the $150-$200 early termination fees. [in referencing users in the U.S.]"

Many users feel tied to their carrier because of these fees, and refuse to leave because of said fees. If you ask cell phone users to list their biggest complaints, my guess would be: 1) Dropped calls; 2) Not enough voice/data usage minutes; 3) Being tied to 1 or 2-year contracts.

No one would feel tied to these contracts if there were no $150-$200 early termination fees. Folks would simply move wherever they got the biggest bang for their mobile buck.

In Southern Califonia, Verizon is the defacto leader in coverage as you go deeper into the desert and mountains so it's virtually the only choice so swapping carriers is kind of a moot point.

Yeah, but that's only one part of the world. Like I mentioned, I've been with AT&T for over 7 years and I have rarely had issues in the southeastern U.S.

Back on topic:

Android is going do to the Iphone what Windows did to IBM.

I'm not so sure. We were in a different time then, and MS products pre-installed and shipped with every PC was domination. But with smartphones, there are many models and I think the OSs they host will continue to be a hot topic.

But who's to say that Apple will not release a Windows version of its SDK? What happens if/when the iPhone is no longer restricted to AT&T? Is it possible that Apple is smart enough--even though they want to maintain their niche and not be the next MS--to break their bind with AT&T?

I have an iPhone, and I'm not in the U.S. so I don't have the complaints about the carrier that came with the phone (which is the same carrier I've been using for a decade without complaints).

And I have to say:

The iPhone is the single worst tech buying decision I've made in years.

It's so dang locked down, in so many ways, it just sucks. I had a w300i for a couple of years before my iPhone, and it doubled as a USB stick - I could plug it in to any computer, and without installing software, transfer files back and forth. With a 1gig micro-SD card it was somewhat limiting, but still pretty dang useful.

If I wanted to add music to it, I just had to copy MP3s into the appropriate folder. That was it. None of this farting around with that useless iTunes garbageware.

I could go on for days in the ways that the locked down architecture, and locked down philosophy that's at the core of everything Apple does tics me off, and the ways that it became represented in the iPhone. But why bother? There's a crowd out there in **luv** with their iPhones, and aren't likely to move away from them.

For the rest of the planet, Android is the future. It's open nature isn't just for geeks.

Android means you can use your phone as a USB stick (without paying for an app that partially lets you do this).

Android means you DO have access to the file system in meaningful ways. Which lets you just copy files into folders you organise in a way that makes sense to you (and don't underestimate the importance of this even to non-geeks).

Android means you can get apps from wherever you want to get apps from, not just from one store that arbitrates what you are and aren't allowed to run on your phone. And yes, that matters to non geeks too.

Android means you can install Flash, and be able to surf the web that IS, rather than surf the web that Apple wishes would be.

Android means you can run Java. Again, this allows you to surf the web that IS.

And those last two points are the most important, and the reason why Android will grind the iPhone into the dirty corner of a niche market in the long run.

What I'm amazed people here (especially here, of all places) fail to realize is that your cel phone is no longer a phone. It is becoming the "portable web". And THAT, my friends, is the ultimate killer app.

Why install an app when you can use your phone to surf to a web page that has a million and one free flash games designed for the small screen and touch interfaces? (Don't think for a second there aren't Flash programmers already working on this).

Why use a kludgy app to be able to see a tiny portion of YouTube that's been ported to Apple's custom codec when you can, well, surf to YouTube in all it's kitschy, low production video glory?

The iPhone/80's Apple vs Android/80's Microsoft comparison isn't the right comparison.

The right comparison is iPhone/AOL's closed garden vs. Android/The Whole Damn Internet in your pocket.

If you believe the iPhone is going to win, have fun with that. As soon as I can sneak an Android into the house without my wife complaining about the price... I already have the video planned out in my head... It involves a hockey stick, a brick wall, a slapshot, and an iPhone for a puck.

@Incredibill

1 - "Ever hear of the "Open HandSet Alliance"? Google is just one of many names supporting it."

Right. If Google had not been one of the members of this initiative mainly advertised as Google one, there would be no Android worth its name today. It would be but one of many other "open" alternative vying for attention. Open Handset whatever is a Google toy, whether you want to admit it or not.

2-1. "AT&T network stinks, been there, done that dropped call thing, wasn't doing it again
2. iTune software stinks, wife has an iPod, we hate iTunes, wasn't doing that again"

Issues about AT&T, DRM, ITunes have nothing to do with why the majority of users have smartphones and are relatively small issues compared to the big picture. That you have issues with iTunes or AT&T is not why regular users NON GEEKS will adopt Android or not. People keep making geeky arguments instead of real arguments that are based on solid marketing metrics and an understanding of users. AT&T's bad network is only an issue in the United States. If Android is to succeed, it has to spill out of the US. I hate debating issues with people who only consider their small corner of the universe and dislike of iTunes and AT&T are just that.

"4. The Palm Pre is too tiny and too little apps support, not going down that sinkhole"

Last year, before the new batch of Android phones of 2009, Android as a platform was tiny and with too little apps support and basically a sink hole. Put a good marketing campaign and ample support from the wireless provider and the sales will be there. Last year, Android didn't sell much. Why is that? Don't tell me it's the software that's better. It's the marketing and the perception in the market that changed. Based on that alone you and a lot of other people think Google will change the world.

I'm more interested in the fundamental basics. I want to know about Google's finances and all the other stuff that is needed for the company to be taken seriously for a long time. I want to know about company morale and what's going on inside. That's what gonna determine how far Google will go. People keep saying Android this and Android that while ignoring the real fundamental thrust behind it.

Android, no matter how you pad it, is a Google project.

@grelmar I agreed with you until you pulled out the usual Android marketing pitch which is basically a bunch of non arguments, myths that keep being propagated.

People can already use Flash on several mobile devices. If there is one platform that is ready for the rest of the world, as you say it, it's Nokia. You can already run Flash, Java, and have an open platform with Nokia that is more open than Android. There's no jailbreaking your device with Nokia - you have to jailbreak with Android.

But no matter what people will say against Apple, they understand their consumers best and they know how to sell handsets to regular joes. I haven't seen that from any of the makers of Android phones thus far. Again, stop thinking like a geek with your own corner of the world covered by Android. Think of real users who don't develop for the Web for a living. They will decide what takes off, not geeks hooked on Google PR.

The reason Android (or lots of other smart phones) will leave iPhone in the dust is, simply, that the iPhone is not a good PHONE. And a smart phone must fulfill that role first of all; else one might as well carry a plain ol' phone and an iPod Touch.

Software interface, corporate structure, ...moot points until this key qualification is satisfied.

I can't post a URL here, but presumably I may post the specifications of a review worth reading: on cnet see a review by Flora Graham, posted on 03 November 2009 at 8:00AM, entitled, "The iPhone is the worst phone in the world"

You'd think the geeks would be smart enough to see this is googles toy they want to push out on the public. All of googles products are like trojan horses.

Symbian has a good chunk of the market.

Issues about AT&T, DRM, ITunes have nothing to do with why the majority of users have smartphones and are relatively small issues compared to the big picture.

Considering most people, non-geeks, usually want the phone primarily to a) make calls and b) listen to music, those are big issues to that demographic which is why AT&T and iTunes can easily be a deal breaker.

AT&T's bad network is only an issue in the United States.

That's where I live, so whether the phones work good in Timbuktu is of little concern and the population of California, the largest of any state in the US, is a significant market share.

Last year, before the new batch of Android phones of 2009, Android as a platform was tiny and with too little apps support and basically a sink hole.

We're not talking about last year, we're talking about today.

Today Android has rapidly out paced Palm in the apps dept. and is quickly creeping up on iPhone.

I want to know about Google's finances and all the other stuff that is needed for the company to be taken seriously for a long time.

When people are buying a phone it never crosses their mind.

Can I easily see the screen?
Can I easily type on the phone?
Can I easily make a phone call?

That's what consumers care about, not Google's financial welfare.

For Android to continue to succeed, it needs the backing of Google. And if Apple loses the smartphone market, it won't because of technological obsolescence but because they fail to communicate their message to their target markets.

Considering most people, non-geeks, usually want the phone primarily to a) make calls and b) listen to music

You don't need android or an iphone to do that. All cell phones do that now, and have for a while

Android is going do to the Iphone what Windows did to IBM.

I think Android will do to the iPhone what Windows did to Apple. It will usurp it's dominance as an OS. Apple will continue to sell nicely packaged hardware they just won't sell nearly as much of it as they otherwise would have.

Maybe the only difference will be that Android, being open source and backed by a fast moving company, will take an even larger share of the market from Apple than MS did.

[edit: typo]

iphone OS has a head start on Android, no doubt its a great platform, but there is only one thing they are winning in. Games. Lack of decent hardware in early android days might have been the reason (not to mention lack of audience to sell the app to) but with new wave of android 2.0 phones hitting the market next year, it will attract big game studios and many people not interested in iphones.

Now as far as apps go, android apps are far better and more advanced than iphone apps due to openness of android OS. There is a lot of crap apps, yes, but this is because there is very little monitoring or moderating. This problem will go away itself when devs really start competing. Right now there is little to no competition since the platform is small. Also I would like to mention that Android is customizable out of the box, and Iphone isn't. And the amount of manufacturers now on android bandwagon having access to both android market, and the OS for free, just puts Apple back on the sideline from their manufacturers perspectives.

[edited by: tedster at 9:16 pm (utc) on Dec. 28, 2009]