James Kendrick
Lawrence Dignan
Opening Statements
Snowball rolling down a steep hill
James Kendrick: Google doesn't always do the expected with the Android platform, and while at times it seems the development is a bit disorganized, it is going to remain a major player in mobile for some time. The platform has taken the smartphone space by brute force, and is so big it would be difficult for Google to screw it up enough to knock it down.
The latest figures have a mind-boggling 550,000 Android activations happening daily. These are not shipments of phones hoping to be sold; these are activations. Over half a million actual users are setting up a new Android phone or tablet each day.
Android is like a snowball rolling down a steep hill. It's already huge so it rolls over all comers that get in its way. It is already so big in the smartphone space it will continue to dominate for the foreseeable future, even if Google starts screwing things up.
Widely successful - but vulnerable
Lawrence Dignan: It's hard to argue that Android has been widely successful. Android has come from nowhere to owning 41.8 percent of the phone market in the U.S., according to comScore. Gartner puts global Android market share at 43.4 percent as of the second quarter. On the tablet front, Android has 17 percent of the market, according to IDC.
How can I argue that Android is vulnerable? For starters, there are other operating systems that will take some share going forward. Microsoft Windows Phone 7 will grab share simply based on Nokia distribution. RIM has smartphones just good enough to retain customers. And on the tablet front, Android has been a disappointment. The tablet-specific apps are missing and good luck trying to get integration similar to what Apple has.
And finally, Android is clunky. As an Android customer, I feel like I'm using the mobile version of Windows 3.1. Android is OK, but if something better comes I could bolt.
The Rebuttal
Closing Statements
Lots of partners and quality phones
James Kendrick
With over half a million device activations daily, Android is here for the foreseeable future. Google has created a monster in Android, and one that reaches all corners of the smartphone market. As budget Android phones appear in greater numbers, the phones will start selling en masse in emerging countries in unprecedented numbers.
Google's Achilles heel is in the tablet space, as no definitive non-iPad market has been confirmed in the consumer space. This is further complicated with the upcoming Kindle Fire. Google may find it a good strategy to concentrate on its huge smartphone base, and drop tablets entirely.
The scattergun approach to the market of having lots of partners releasing lots of quality smartphones is the reason Android has grown so phenomenally. Continuing this strategy doesn't gain Google any Android brand awareness, but it doesn't need any. The platform will continue to grow at the expense of the fall of the BlackBerry.
Commodity hardware a tough game
Lawrence Dignan
Android is at an inflection point on both the smartphone and tablet side of the equation. Android smartphones are swarming the market, but growth will stagnate due to Windows Phone 7 distribution. Windows Phone will be a hedge for HTC and Samsung, and garner global distribution via the Microsoft-Nokia deal.
Ultimately, Android commoditizes hardware and that's a tough game for handset makers to stay in for the long run. Meanwhile, Apple's iOS is broadening its distribution. If RIM stabilizes, Android stagnates.
On the tablet side, Android tablets lack traction. Android will continue to be dominant, but that hockey stick growth curve will be a thing of the recent past.
Verdict: More growth ahead. It's tough to see Android faltering
Jason Hiner
The pace of growth for Android over the past two years has been remarkable, especially when you consider that it came into a crowded market dominated by entrenched players like Nokia, BlackBerry, and Microsoft. However, I agree with Larry that the iPhone may have been one of the biggest factors in Android's success because buyers were drawn to it but it was available on a limited number of carriers, so the carriers jumped on Android as a better alternative to the iPhone than any of the existing phones and that bet worked.
Android market share growth is going to naturally slow now that it has already taken so much share, plus you have the fact that the iPhone is now available on a lot more carriers and Windows Phone 7 could start to steal some attention away from Android at hardware partners like HTC and Samsung. That said, there are still a lot of customers converting from old cell phones to smartphones and Android is already in the market with a bunch of solid devices and so it's prepared to capture a lot of that business.
While Android has plenty of problems, which Larry has rightly noted, it's tough to see Android faltering at this point. There are just too many hardware makers and telecom carriers that are pumping out and promoting Android devices. They love Android because they can do almost anything they want with it, and that's also where a lot of the problems come into play. So, I'm going to rule in favor of James and the crowd for this one.
In partnership with Ricoh Doc's final thoughts: The Avalanche Called Android
DocSorry Larry, but you’re on the losing side of this argument. James is right – the sheer momentum of Android assures it will be a long term success. In fact, rather than describe it as a snowball gaining size as it rolls down the hill (nice analogy James), Doc would call it more of an avalanche. Google will probably bury some of the operating system rivals like Symbian and maybe even RIM. (And does anyone even remember the promise of Nokia’s MeeGo?) I wouldn’t give Windows Phone 7 much of a chance either, despite Microsoft’s sizable muscle (which has become pretty flabby of late). It’s clearly down to Apple and Google in the smart phone wars.
Why? Well, aside from the raw numbers (which put Android in front of the pack), there is likely to be increasingly better integration with Google Plus and Google search, and Google whatever-comes-next. And when you combine Google Wallet (and similar third-party apps) with all the near field communication (NFC) chips that will soon be embedded in Android phones, you have a powerful commerce tool that the credit card processors and direct marketers are wetting themselves over. Mobile payments are the next big thing, and Google is in the best spot to stimulate that market – Apple will eventually get there and certainly do it better, but Google will drive the bus.
Doc’s not saying Google will be king of the hill forever – we all know that today’s leaders are often tomorrow’s has-beens. But I wouldn’t bet against Google anytime soon, and if you can’t or won’t buy an iPhone, then Android is clearly the second best choice, clunky interface and all.
More from "The Great Debate"
Androids global sales growth rate dropped to 3 percent in the March 2011 quarter from 7.5 percent in the fourth quarter 2010 and 9.5 percent in the September 2010 quarter.
CommScore reports Android growth in US smartphone marketshare (where Android growth has been strongest in the developed world to-date) has dropped to 1.9 percent July through to August.
Android tablet marketshare has already dropped from 34% in Q1 to 26.8% in Q2 are projected to hit 23.0% this quarter according to IDC.
Kevin, that 550,000 Android smartphone, tablet and other device activations per day sounds great until you realise Apple sold 622,000 iOS devices per day in the 45 days up to October 4th this year - and that was with the year-old iPhone 4.
The iOS installed base at 250 million is far larger than Android's 135 million. ComScore reports iOS has 43.1% of the active installed base in the USA in August 2011 versus only 34.1% for Android. The numbers in Europe are even more in favour of Apple with iOS 116% larger than Android.
All these numbers are however useless if those Android users don't buy more apps and browse more sites and ads than iOS users. The data says they don't. The iPad had 97% web browser share and iOS as a whole had 58.5% browser share in August compared to Android at only 31.9% according to ComScore.
Apple is now capturing 61% of the profit share of the entire cell phone industry.
All things considered, it is obvious that although Android will maintain a large share of smartphone market unit sales, further growth *is* stagnating and those numbers are not translating into overall platform market share or manufacturer profit share or developer profit share.
I will give you the others but more is not always better.
My concern is that without the growth of an OS like Android or WP we will see a serious stagnation in the mobile world driven by the tenants of Apple.
With their mindset of "family consumerism" and "Apple Moral Values" we need an area where the "wild west" is open to those who want to expand and have choice - the pioneer spirit if you will.
Android: let's see where it leads us. It allows me choice.
Actually, I think that going forward, iOS will decline much faster than predicted for the simple reason that it would not offer large screens for a year or so. Those who want something larger than a 3.5'' screen, will have to go Android or WP7 (and there are lots of those).
I'd feel a lot more confident in Microsoft's ability to make a go fo Windows Phone 7 if they hadn't been forced to abandon their Zune player after years of failing to grab a toehold in the market. The only reason I'm not giving up on Windows Phone 7 entirely is because the phone sector is critical to any company that wants to be a major player in tech, so Microsoft will likely devote nearly unlimited resources to it. I'm not convinced, however, that that will be enough.
If it was going to succeed, it would have by now, but it hasn't. I don't buy that nokia will make it happen.
iOS is software, it does not have any "screen size". Currently it is used on two families of mobile devices (same, identical OS): iPhone/iPod Touch at 3.5" and iPad at 9.7".
In the end, users do not care what the OS their mobile device runs --- as long as it is stable, nice, does the job, is pleasure to use, works intuitively etc. Some of the characteristics, such as stability, pleasure to use, nice etc are also influenced by the hardware -- Android sometimes get's bad reputation because of flaky hardware.
Frankly, the most stable, intuitive and usable OS I have seen are iOS and Symbian.
It is funny, that according to US users, Symbian does not exist or is "dead", while it is successful elsewhere.
also, google products tend to be simple, well thought out, and work. There was a time when I thought microsoft products were the best tech in the world. but they always were a bit thrown together. These days they keep throwing more and more code in, but never seem to stop to think and simplify. i've had so many CE devices and in each case been disappointed with the crashiness. windows for PC is a constant headache of updates, unpredictable slowdowns and so on. by comparison my experience with google from the start has been slick. Slick search, best of class always, mail/calendar best of class, links to android so well. Chrome best of class, and great apps within chrome, like within android. It all just works, and works well. No broken PC-centric model to be upheld. (and google docs is great - i keep all my personal data in there).
The ace in the hole that Android has is Google's unique choice to push rapid updates out. This almost forces manufacturers to keep up with hardware. As far as I can tell Apple nor Microsoft have the infrastructure to develop at such a rapid pace.
So why should the tablet market share decrease when legal hick ups are resolved?
Nothing against competition and the availability of Linux will likely give many options to the consumers for a reasonable price.
By the way, where do I find a similar discussion on the Apple market share? Where is the discussion "Will Microsoft have to abandon WP7?" located? And where "What would happen to the dominance of Windows if one would have a practical choice to pay less and install an alternative?" can be found?
Android has brought vast changes to the way I live and work in just the last year. The idea that I can find and buy, no matter where I am, nearly anything on Earth and get it delivered faster than I could go into my garage and find the same thing I already own is just astounding.
I can't wait to see what the future brings.
or an android laptop (assuming there is a difference).
the way chrome browser app for calendar and docs keeps an offline working copy is great!
A goodportion of those a projected numbers based on what they have seen.
If the sell point had not gone down and they had to institute reservations we would actually have a fairly accurate number.
Dr. Shalit
Example: Americans are a bit lazy- an iphone would do them well as there is that controlling-do-it-all-for-you aspect with the iphone (the pitfall to that is very little customisation and modification), in the asian market this wouldn't go down so well. the average asian (particularly) chinese person is more tech-savvy than the average american. they love modification and customisation and thats what android os presents. Apple basically is a company which is tailored for the laid back, lazy, lethargic american automated way of life. this is displayed in their products ex with the ipod you can't put music manually as with my android phone, you need itunes which aut syncs your music for you. So in closure for the laid back less tech savvy person th iphone and ios would do, however for the more tech-savvy individual who loves customization and modification--give them and android phone (the os itself has tons of phones to choose from, unlike the ios which just boasts the iphone). In this world today android is the way to go, Apple needs to open up and stop behaving like the rich kid at the playground who don't share their toys.
I would write a long, detailed, well sourced rebuttal to your claim that Americans are lazy, but... man, it would be just too much work.
+100
Man have not laughed like that in a while.
Written by a true genius (sarcasm)
I perceive a current marketing trend where cheap, generic Android phones (especially the pre-paid varieties) are indeed advertised as "Android Phones," whereas the high-end models such as the Samsung Galaxy II or the Motorola Droid Bionic are sold by their own unique monikers.
Yes, Android, as a mobile OS, is proliferating. Yet the actual brand of "Android" isn't exactly the marketing vanguard it used to be a few years go. Why make something a distinct selling point when it's simply everywhere?
You swap via contract.
If you have an iPhone and an Android phone and want to swap sim cards you are okay if going from an iPhone to an Android but not Androi to iPhone.
Different data set ups. Cost is the same.
Since you want to use such a narrow minded view to portray iPhone plans as over priced compared to Android I can play that game as well by only looking at one carrier to make judgmentnt about Android. AT&T for almost a year now offered what was the latest model iPhone 4 but they also offered the over one year old 3GS. The 3GS being the outdated over one year then two year old model out sold all Android phones they offered combined. Since you can make a claim and think it's valid using only one carrier I guess I can claim thaoverallll Apple old model out sells all Android devices combined so Apple has won the smartphone battle, time for Google to close up shop on Android.
I don't believe that but it's as valid a claim as yours.
Can you provide numbers: how much are paying vendors for Windows and how much for Android. Or you are just trolling?
I will clarify, I currently have an Android phone myself. And I like it, much more than iOS, I can just see the writing on the wall for Android. Certainly not trolling though???
Join the conversation!
Debate Event Reminders
The Great Debate Newsletter
With the Great Debate newsletter, you get a front-row seat to every argument until the final gavel falls.
Upcoming Debate
-
Can PC makers survive in a post PC world?
May 29, 2012 | 7:00 AM PDT
Add to Calendar
Comments from the floor
Facebook Activity
Android Is A Trend, Not for Real Task.
Who cares?
RE: Great Debate: More growth ahead for Android, or is it stagnation time?
I would argue that the various forms of Android with multiple feature points will be hard to beat.
Even the moderators have to admit that, for the first time, when the iphone 4s came out, it was not leading in feature set or performance. Before the 1st quarter, there will be more phones that are faster and more attractive.
The Android OS is getting more stable each day. It will eventually take over the entire ecosystem and push cloud computing to a whole new level. Because enterprise and the consumer will have choice and different price points, and the carriers will use hardware envy to keep pushing out new phones, it will be hard for a single phone maker to push out this type of variability.
As much as we hate to admit it, Amazon's fire and various other iterations of the Android OS are proof that this type of customization plays into the hands of the very people that control the parameters of our phone and data use.
RE: Great Debate: More growth ahead for Android, or is it stagnation time?
I feel tired to change phone because the Android manufacturer didn't offer OS upgrade for old device, I am no doubt iPhone will be my next phone.
RE: Great Debate: More growth ahead for Android, or is it stagnation time?
I don't know all the numbers because no-one needs to. I also didn't feel the need to read through all the various arguments above, because they're academic. The first statement I DID read came from Larry Dignan: "Android's market share gains were created by Apple as much as Google. Android came along as right place at right time. Carriers---notably Verizon---needed an anchor OS to fend off Apple, which had an iPhone exclusive at AT&T. In other words, Verizon had to push Android."
But that early lead created by Apple's one carrier situation in the US - only applied to the US. Very soon iPhones were available from multiple carriers in Europe. What Apple did initially appeared to be suicidal, but in reality what they did was very much Chinese war strategy.
By forcing their competition [not Android, but the OEMs hoping to sell phone devices], to compete for the remainder of the market, they absolutely guaranteed no-one made any money. And in case everyone has forgotten, it's not OS market share, any more than turnover that keeps businesses alive, it's profit. This is the fragmentation effect from a company point of view.
From a user point of view, the story is rather different, as you grow to loath the company that gave you a phone and a OS that didn't do everything you want it to do, or operated differently from your friend's Android device...
Which brings us back to mobile OS device integration. If the fragmentation effect was bad for Android phone OEMs, it's been horrendous for tablet makers. They all came late to the market. Almost everything sucked. Three of the big players are all but out of the game already, and the rest are suffering stagnant sales. The result is that 18 months on, Apple not only own the market, they're making massive profits from iPads and sales are continuing despite a rash of much cheaper competing devices. And this is important because mobile OS device integration is what will drive the market more and more in the future. Having a mobile phone that's compatible with your tablet is going to be crucial.
So Android started dying from the moment it was released into the wild. Despite a lot of growth thus far, the future is an inevitable decline, never mind just stagnation.
Finally, there was a way in which this story could have played out differently. Google could have done with Android what NeXT Computer and then Apple did with Cocoa. But that would have been actually learning from Apple, instead of concentrating on only trying to beat them with a naive, idealistic model based on open source, and an OS gift for lazy OEMs incapable of designing their own OS.
Steve Jobs' legacy will ultimately be ALL the lessons we get to learn, as we reverse engineer not only Apple's successes, but also the failures of their competition. Very Chinese indeed.