
iPhone 6 and Android value - taylorwc
http://ben-evans.com/benedictevans/2014/9/10/iphone6
======
rdtsc
$600. I know they were always expensive. But for me, I just don't see paying
that for something I might forget, drop, sit on, lose, have it stolen.

I got a Moto G for $170. Paid cash, and then got on a T-Mobile month by month
plan. If I break it. I'll just go and get another one.

My relatives and friends have iPhones and looking and comparing them, I just
don't see the extra "niceness" worth the other $430. Same goes for expensive
Android phones.

~~~
mgreg
Google's strategy of driving down handset costs continues. They don't make
money on the hardware or software but rather on the data collection and
advertising from android devices. Apple, on the other hand, makes their money
from the devices. As people continue to undervalue their data and put up with
advertising we'll increasingly see this logic. Why pay $600 to Apple when I
can pay $170 to X. This puts pricing pressure on Apple and will eventually
reduce their competitiveness.

It's google's ad supported model that is winning - not a superior product.
That's not to say their product is bad - its quite good. But they can
essentially give it away and make money on the users…

~~~
mcphage
> Google's strategy of driving down handset costs continues. They don't make
> money on the hardware or software but rather on the data collection and
> advertising from android devices. Apple, on the other hand, makes their
> money from the devices.

But Google isn't making the devices.

> Why pay $600 to Apple when I can pay $170 to X.

How much does X make on that $170 device, compared to how much Apple makes on
their $600 device?

> But they can essentially give it away and make money on the users…

Google can, yes. But their device manufacturers can't. And that's where a lot
of Windows PC developers ended up—they raced to lots of low margin sales, and
made less and less on each sale. It hasn't gone well for them.

~~~
mgreg
Agree with your points. What I was trying to say was that Google has created a
competitive ecosystem like PC manufactures that will drive the price of
handsets close to their cost thus depriving them of profit.

In other words there is less and less differentiation between a samsung and
htc and lg handset as the pace of innovation slows in hardware. They cannot
differentiate on software this they are left primarily with price. This will
only exacerbate in the future.

~~~
mcphage
> In other words there is less and less differentiation between a samsung and
> htc and lg handset as the pace of innovation slows in hardware. They cannot
> differentiate on software this they are left primarily with price. This will
> only exacerbate in the future.

Definitely, and that's a rough place to be in for hardware manufacturers. Dell
and HP and Compaq and Acer have shown what lies down that road. Hopefully
they'll find some other area to differentiate their products.

------
declan
I think the article's author is right and that there could easily be high-end
market shift from Android at the margin. On the other hand, Android Wear
watches are already shipping, Google voice search is better than Siri, Google
Now is kinda magic, Material Design is a very nice unified design language
that is arguably better than iOS, and Android Auto could take off.

(By way of background, I'm working on developing
[http://recent.io](http://recent.io) for both iOS and Android. Currently I
switch between an iPhone 5 and a Nexus 5 and expect to buy both the iPhone 6
and the Nexus 6/X rumored to be coming out this fall.)

>with the iPhone 6 Plus (a very Microsofty name, it must be said)...

Except for the Apple II Plus, the Mac Plus, the LaserWriter Plus, the Apple
IIc Plus, the Apple III Plus[1]... In reality I'd say it's a very Appley name!
:)

[1] Yes, there actually was such a critter:
[http://support.apple.com/kb/TA31434](http://support.apple.com/kb/TA31434)

~~~
toomuchtodo
+1; The value isn't in the device, it's in the ecosystem.

Siri isn't going to integrate with my Nest, Apple Maps isn't going to have a
fleet of vehicles driving around to confirm mapping data, and Google Now has
the ability to digest information from both existing Google users and the web.

Can Apple create a better platform backend faster than Google can meet them at
design/UX?

~~~
threeseed
> Siri isn't going to integrate with my Nest

What makes you think Apple won't release a SiriKit in the future ?

> Apple Maps isn't going to have a fleet of vehicles driving around to confirm
> mapping data.

Neither does Google in most places. And Apple, Google, Microsoft etc all rely
on third party data providers for most of their map data. Surely they would be
confirming the data.

> Can Apple create a better platform backend faster than Google can meet them
> at design/UX?

The issue is not what Google itself does. It's the ability of Google to
influence the ecosystem to come along with it. That has always been the
problem.

~~~
deong
> Neither does Google in most places. And Apple, Google, Microsoft etc all
> rely on third party data providers for most of their map data. Surely they
> would be confirming the data.

Apple Maps has been out for two full years now, and it hasn't improved at all
where I live, and the benchmark for demonstrating improvement is quite
literally "find almost anything at all".

Admittedly, I'm in Iceland, but Reykjavik is a world capital, and a city with
a bit over 200,000 people, so it's not like we're trading pelts over here
either. And I don't think anyone understands how shockingly bad their maps are
here. I've done quite a bit of testing with them, and if you search for a city
in Iceland, you have pretty good odds of finding something (maybe 80%
accuracy). If you search for a point of interest, it drops to maybe 40%.
Everything else is 0%. Literally 0%. There's one fucking highway in the
country, and if you look for directions between the two largest cities, it
says "No results found". __Way __more than half of the searches I 've tested
just pop up that message in a UIAlertView, and it's exactly 100% of the
searches for directions. I work at a university with 4000 students, and we're
not on the map at all. It points you to a dozen high schools in the city
instead.

Open street maps supposedly provides their data, but OSM is quite good here.
Somehow Apple turns correct data into "No results found", and that's been true
since launch day.

~~~
dublinben
Apple doesn't have any recent OSM data. All of their input dates from 2010 or
earlier, before they adopted a newer copyleft license. Apple is now relying on
a scattered bunch of different providers for map data.[0]

[0][http://screenwerk.com/2014/05/23/apple-maps-expanding-
data-s...](http://screenwerk.com/2014/05/23/apple-maps-expanding-data-
sources/)

~~~
deong
Ah, that would explain it.

------
phaus
What about the 7th category, the consumer that is tired of having his wallet
savaged by the four major carriers. Android offers users the opportunity to
buy a high-end device, off-contract, for $350. You can then use this phone
with a pre-paid service that costs 1/2 of what the major carriers sell.

Maybe its a small demographic, but it seems like its growing.

~~~
estel
Whilst obviously it's not at this price, but surely you can get an iPhone off-
contract?

~~~
phaus
You are correct, but the pricing was the entire point of the statement I made.

------
capcah
I'd like to point out the writer for dismissing customisability. This is my
opinion, but the popularity of some apps used to customise my phone leads me
to believe I do not stand alone.

Let's not forget that the android can offer advanced functionality that Apple
seems to refuse to offer on its devices: access to a local file system,
ability to work as an USB stick(it's even possible to have your phone work as
a boot stick), being able to turn its wireless card into monitor mode for
mobile sniffing.

Last, but not least: Waterproofness and mechanical resistance. Apple seems to
have forgotten these two points on the iPhone, even though they already have a
good starting point(phone with no removable battery).

So, yeah, I don't think apple will win over the premium market that easily.

EDIT: Adjusting newlines, forgot that newfags can't triforce.

~~~
psychometry
I laughed when he wrote that Android customization is basically alternate
keyboards and widgets. Clearly he's never even held one in his hand. I
switched to Android after four iPhones and I'm amazed at how much easier and
quicker it is to do things on Android when I have total control over the UI.

~~~
benedictevans
That's not what I wrote. I said that iOS8 addresses some of these points, with
keyboards as just one example, and that the key difference is now personal
taste rather than screen size or availability.

Clearly some people prefer iOS and others Android. But that's not the issue,
is it?

~~~
psychometry
>You can get a bigger screen, you can change the keyboard, you can put widgets
on the notification panel (if you insist) and so on. Pretty much all the
external reasons to choose Android are addressed

It wouldn't be hard to come up with a list of dozens of features that you can
customize on Android that you can't on iOS. If you really think you're covered
"pretty much all the reasons" to choose Android, you haven't researched the
platform very thoroughly.

~~~
Danieru
It is that exact line which broke me out of the "this is an objective
analysis" trance. It is clear to me the author tried to impartial For that I
have to credit him. Yet afterwards the faux-impartiality became grating. I can
only conclude he did his best but just does not fully understand Android.

Leaving out stuff like water proof-ness, wireless charging, and multi-windows.
These are features which in five years we'll all take for granted. These are
real innovations.

I was honestly expecting more from Apple. Apple has the engineers and the
component budget to reach the forefront and push it forward. Yet I'm left
wondering what their component budget actually went into and where their
engineering time went.

------
harshreality
It's interesting how Apple talked about ApplePay as if it's something
revolutionary, that "only Apple could do". Maybe Apple did motivate retailers
to put in NFC payment hardware, but I've been using Google Wallet at Whole
Foods (with a N5 released 9 months ago) for weeks, since they put in NFC at
the payment kiosks (probably in advance of the Apple Pay launch, but that
makes no difference to my ability to use them). So I had to laugh at the
attempt to promote Apple Pay and NFC as a selling point of iPhone 6 and iOS 8.
A little late to that party, Apple... if you're going to show up late, don't
pretend you're first, instead focus on how you implemented it better (which
may very well be true, although I haven't seen android 5 yet).

~~~
sosuke
I think it must be conceded that Apple was much more aggressive in on-boarding
POS systems and credit card companies than Google, and for that they deserve
credit. Google moved first with the tech, said "here, go forth and code for
it", and didn't get a ton of traction.

Apple went so far as to even get a cut of the credit card transaction fees if
Bloomberg was right.

Even Paypal hasn't had a ton of success trying to be THE mobile payment
platform, and what was poking fun at Apple actually turns around, IMHO, to be
a stab at themselves for not delivering on a system themselves.

"Nobody can dispute Apple's strong track record, but payments is a difficult
area," PayPal's Rob Skinner told TechRadar. "It's much more difficult to do
payments than to keep a live stream working."

~~~
simonh
'PC guys are not going to just figure this out. They're not going to just walk
in.'

------
higherpurpose
Here's one thing the author is missing: _all_ high-end phones are essentially
being "disrupted" by lower cost models that are getting increasingly better -
or in other words just as good as the high-end ones were 2-3 years ago, when
many people were _very happy_ with their high-end phones at the time.

Why do you think Apple's market share is steadily declining at the global
levels? It's because of the lower-cost phones. So Apple may "win" the 600+
dollar/euro high-end, just like they won in the $1,000+ PC market, and while
that will no doubt continue to remain profitable for Apple, it will ultimately
mean Apple has a _small market share_ , and therefore a smaller ecosystem.

------
Zigurd
The BIG HUGE problem with the article is in using app store revenue to measure
"value to the ecosystem." Google does not show signs of caring about app store
revenue and would certainly continue to develop Android without that revenue.
Google has a completely different ecosystem than Apple.

That said, The value of the new iPhones is considerable. They will make a dent
in Android market share, but not as big a dent as had they been
"indestructable" sapphire clad.

~~~
benedictevans
App store revenue is not really relevant to Apple or Google - it's small as a
proportion of either company. It is, though, relevant to developers - partly
for its own value, but as importantly for what it tells you about the users.
That is, it's a proxy for overall willingness to spend on anything. Pretty
much all ecommerce companies will tell you they see the same proportions, even
if they're not using iTunes or Google payments directly.

~~~
Ologn
I primarily program for Android. One of my personal apps has bounced between
$1000 and $2300 a month in revenue since May 2013. Over 99% of that was ad
revenue (the other <1% were experiments in alternative revenue). Not
spectacular, but I've been happy with it, and I have other Android apps making
money on ads as well.

Many websites make money on ads, why not apps? In mobile ads versus web ads,
mobile has drawbacks and advantages. Some of the advantages have not been
fully employed yet. If John Doe is walking through a mall, a Macy's ad can
spring up for a sale within that mall. Mobile is still in its nascent stage,
and ad networks to support it are still in early days.

Insight into what Android consumers are willing to spend money on is next to
nothing. Ecommerce companies have cruddy Android apps, and their web sites
look horrible in a phone.

One billion Android phones will be sold this year. Lack of Android consumer
willingness to spend has little to do with them, and a lot to do with how
little businesses have been giving users. Making money with Android is like
shooting fish in a barrel since, for whatever reason, companies and
programmers aren't stepping up to do add-ons for the billion Android phones
that will sell this year. That may be changing though - three years ago the
New York Android meetings fit around a table at a bar, now they're sponsored
by companies and overflowing the 200 person registration limit. So that
infrastructure is getting built out. Until then, we know next to nothing about
the overall willingness of Android consumers to spend.

~~~
Zigurd
I make Android software, but not for businesses that rely on app store retail
sales for revenue. There just isn't enough of that.

------
buro9
If you follow Benedict Evans on Twitter then you know that he is something of
an Apple fan boy, so it's hard to read such a piece without noting that there
is already considerable bias in it.

I'd like to address the first list though, "There are a bunch of reasons why
someone would buy a high-end Android rather than an iPhone".

That list does not include the two reasons that myself and people I know use
Android:

1\. We wish to have control over our devices

2\. We have not invested heavily in either Apple or Google and we avoid making
choices that will force us to be invested in one over the other

On the first point, control may be about privacy (using something like
XPrivacy), personalisation (perhaps CyanogenMod), adblock (AdAway), or simply
having more control over what runs to be able to extend the battery of a Nexus
5 to a few days of heavy use rather than a single day (kill all the background
services but still have the apps available for us to use).

On the second point, myself and my friends do not use Google as an ecosystem
or as a range of permanent services and virtual assistants. We invariably are
using different launchers (Nova is most common), perhaps Duck Duck Go... and
our Google footprint is really just to use some Google apps as standalone apps
(Gmail, calendar, drive). We tend to get media from Kindle, or Spotify... so
we're not even hooked on Google Play.

What this means is that we've avoided deep lock-in with Google, and we make
choices that avoid being locked in to Microsoft or Apple too.

When I think of what most of my friends use, it's a mix of technologies. Apple
and Lenovo laptops, the latter running Windows or Linux. iPods and Cowon music
players. Mostly Android phones.

The biggest reasons not to go for an iPhone are the same reasons we haven't
gone for an iPhone to date: It feels like an all or nothing decision that
would be hard to change in the future.

The value of an iPhone seems to be of the entire Apple ecosystem, it makes
sense if you've bought into it already, or are choosing to buy into it, but
not if you do not choose to be locked in.

The value, to us, of an Android device is that you can get the benefits of
this technology without having to be part of any ecosystem, Google's or
Samsung's or that of anyone else (Amazon?).

I'm not sure it's possible for Benedict to see this any more... he's
personally so deep into the Apple world that his perspective is skewed by that
reality. The question of why anyone would choose _not_ to be a part of an
ecosystem isn't even asked. He's made it an Apple vs Google question, when the
people I know using Android are not even considering that question.

PS: If I think of what entices people to consider an Apple iPhone more than
anything else, it's the camera (usually noted as the software ecosystem around
the camera). Photography on an iPhone bests every Android device there is.
This is the single reason that some of my friends have an iPhone.

~~~
fuzzythinker
One of my main reason for using Android is I hate being forced to use iTunes
to update and sync.

One, it has one of the worst UI for device managers (was designed manage
music), and it's a very unpleasant experience for me every time I am forced to
use it to manage my idevices.

Two, it had wiped out everything in my iphone one time I try to sync it to a
new computer. To me, the word "sync" means to update devices so that the data
missing from the other device gets synced. No way would I have second guessed
it would wipe out data from the device. So every time I use iTunes to sync, I
get super nervous.

With Android, I can just navigate my device as if it's just an external drive
when I plug it into my computer(a Mac).

iTunes is just the opposite of Apple's "it just works" motto.

~~~
lutusp
> To me, the word "sync" means to update devices so that the data missing from
> the other device gets synced.

But that's not what sync means. True sync has a source and a target, and the
target's file collection is always made to match the source. If you confuse
the source and the target and the "source" is empty, you get the outcome you
describe -- the empty device's file collection is "duplicated" (i.e. erased)
on the other device that's been mistakenly chosen as the target.

This is a surprisingly common outcome among people who don't fully understand
the meaning of sync. If your interpretation were the default meaning, it would
be impossible to delete any tracks from your music collection. If you deleted
some tracks from the source device, the source would have those tracks
restored from the target instead of being deleted from it -- but that's not
what sync means.

EDIT: People, don't downvote posts just because you don't understand the topic
under discussion. The above description is absolutely, incontrovertibly
correct in every detail. Therefore, in a depressing trend, it's been downvoted
because it's annoyingly, infuriatingly right.

~~~
shalmanese
That's nonsense.

Sync has always meant merging semantic changes in state between two or more
devices. If I buy an app on my desktop and take 4 photos on my phone, when I
sync the two devices, I expect the new app on my phone and 4 new photos in my
iPhoto.

As version control has taught us, merging changesets can lead to a menagerie
of pathological cases and there's no universally correct automatic merging
tool. iTunes in the grandfather's case, chose to merge incorrectly and lose
data.

~~~
lutusp
> That's nonsense.

You either need to read more carefully, or you do not understand what "sync"
means. Please do not add to public confusion about this.

1\. Synchronization means making two directory trees identical -- same files,
same count, no more, no less.

2\. If tree B (destination) has more files than tree A (source), sync deletes
files from B so it agrees with A.

3\. If tree B has fewer files than A, files are added to B so it agrees with
A.

4\. If tree B has the same number of files, but different contents or dates,
the sync program replaces them with files from tree A.

5\. THEREFORE, ERGO, the operator MUST say which is the source, and which is
the destination.

For the life of me I can't understand why people find this so confusing.

> Sync has always meant merging semantic changes in state between two or more
> devices.

YES, as clearly explained above. And that means if the user chooses the wrong
source, for example a device with no music tracks, then the program will
dutifully erase all the music tracks from the destination device.

> iTunes in the grandfather's case, chose to merge incorrectly and lose data.

Yes, but that outcome resulted, not from an error in iTunes, but from the user
misidentifying the source device, and that, in turn, resulted from his not
understanding sync, a misunderstanding that he revealed in his post by
attempting to rely on an incorrect dictionary definition of the word.

EDIT: consider this hypothetical example.

1\. Directory tree A has 9 files.

2\. Directory tree B has 10 files.

3\. In your description, the user doesn't have to say which is the source --
no user intervention is required.

4\. If so, without user intervention, how does the sync program know what to
do? Does it add a file to tree A, or delete a file from tree B?

Think before answering.

EDIT: Readers, do not downvote posts simply because you're confused. Ignorance
is not a justification to cast a downvote.

~~~
mandalar12
> Sync has always meant merging semantic changes in state between two or more
> devices.

That is a definition of file synchronization [1]. Usually the aim of "syncing"
is to input two directories and the outcome is that the contents of both
directories are the same.

What you are describing below point 1. is an algorithm to achieve this goal.

The algorithm you describe needs a source and destination folder and this may
be Apple's algorithm and implementation (I have no idea) but this is by no
means the only way to do so (see two-way file synchronization [1]).

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_synchronization](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_synchronization)

~~~
lutusp
Your post is attached to mine, but it quotes and discusses a point made in its
parent.

~~~
mandalar12
The quote is not yours but I discussed your post.

~~~
lutusp
In that case, there are two strategies for synchronizing file systems --
either:

1\. The operator tells the program what to do.

\-- or --

2\. The program gets it wrong at least some of the time.

In the case of contact list synchronization, like Google Contacts, the system
assumes that the device the operator is editing at the moment is the source,
and acts accordingly. Notice that a positive determination is made as to what
the source and destination are, based on the operator's activity and its
timing.

In all other cases where two directory trees are synchronized, are made to
have the same content, and in which files may be deleted as well as added, the
operator has to tell the program which is the source and which is the
destination. End, full stop.

~~~
mandalar12
I agree that you need some user input or the program will get it wrong in some
cases.

But the distinction between source and destination is relevant with some
algorithms (one-way sync) and irrelevant in others.

Let say you have two directories A and B to sync and both contain a file f but
the one in B is more recent than the one i A. A consistent strategy would be
to always favor the most recent file and end up with A and B containing the
same f file that was the one being in B at the beginning of the syncing. At no
point I asked the user to define a source nor a destination but still the two
directories are synced.

Note that it is your choice to continue or not the discussion as much as it
was mine (not yours, shockingly) to answer your post. So please keep your
"End, full stop" and "Think before answering" to yourself, they are quiet
annoying.

~~~
lutusp
> But the distinction between source and destination is relevant with some
> algorithms (one-way sync) and irrelevant in others.

True, but the decisions made by the operator are critical to any desirable
outcome, _in all cases, without exception_. Your example proves the point:

> Let say you have two directories A and B to sync and both contain a file f
> but the one in B is more recent than the one i A. A consistent strategy
> would be to always favor the most recent file and end up with A and B
> containing the same f file that was the one being in B at the beginning of
> the syncing.

Yes, unless that's not what the operator wants. Suppose the operator has
edited a file as part of a programming project, but introduces a bug and
simply wants to restore the system's original state with a minimum number of
file operations. In that case, the operator wants _older_ dated files to be
copied over newer ones.

How shall the algorithm proceed? _The operator tells it what to do._

> So please keep your "End, full stop" and "Think before answering" to
> yourself, they are quiet annoying.

If people understood the meaning of file synchronization, I wouldn't have to.
All the replies suffer from naive assumptions contradicted by real-life
experience, such as the OP losing his music collection as just one example, or
the example I just gave -- things that happen to real people in the real
world.

------
minusSeven
From an Indian perspective Iphone prices in India are really well out of
budget of most people. Only people who can afford Iphone go for them. But even
then lot of people like to try other options. Android is really dominant here
and most people are rather familiar with the Android ecosystems.

~~~
msoad
That's this article's point. If someone can't afford $600 phone, Apple has no
interest in them. Because Apple wants big margins. On other hand, Google is
even willing to pay you to use Android to collect your data. They do it with
their Android One program in India now.

~~~
prapam2
Apple was giving heavy discounts to attract buyers. High end Samsung costs
around same and they have good sales. "Google is even willing to pay you to
use Android to collect your data" \- where did you get that? Most of the
people here buy at full price, we don't have subsidies.

------
fpgeek
One the one hand, this argument sounds plausible.

On the other, we've seen this movie before. Remember Verizon? The iPhone 5
(LTE and a screen-size bump)? NTT DoCoMo and China Mobile?

These were all supposed to be game-changers. And while they all helped Apple
sell plenty of phones, the Android/iPhone game didn't really change.

I'm sure the iPhone 6 and 6+ will be very successful. But I'm going to need to
see something more before I believe that this time the game really will
change.

~~~
aetherson
I bought my first smartphone about 4.5 years ago. It was an Android because at
the time an iPhone meant AT&T, and I didn't want to deal with their network.

Two years ago I bought my second smartphone. It was an Android because inertia
and also because at the time iOS was really a bit behind Android in terms of
things like notifications and useful o/s features.

I also bought my first tablet a little more than two years ago. It was an
android because Apple didn't have a small tablet then (and because my phone
was an android).

I'm going to get a new smartphone soon. And you know what? It'll be an
Android. Yes, Apple has at this point addressed all the things that pushed me
to Android. I could get an iPhone on any network. The o/s has caught back up.
They have a small tablet now. But at this point, why would I change? Every
time I use an iOS device, in bothered by a ton of small details -- they aren't
really flaws, just things that don't work the way I expect. What's the upside?
I like Android now. If they had had all those features from the start, it
would have been a different story.

The flaw in this article is that it presumes that there is a large population
of people who are just waiting for that one important feature to come to iOS
so they can finally ditch Android. I don't think there are many people like
that.

------
ZeroGravitas
Is all that money that the App store rakes in still mostly crappy, IAP-stuffed
mobile games?

I know people like to pretend it's all artisanal productivity apps, but aren't
the revenue numbers like 80% games?

(A quick Google finds some sources vaguely claiming this was true a couple of
years ago, can't quickly find newer or better sourced stats)

------
diminish
The Apple's sales market share of non-phablets <5" is known, around 20% for
14Q2 where sub-5" make up 60% of the total market ( Tomi Ahonen).

The upcoming hidden truth is that Apple is on its way for a single digit
global smartphone market share. It's main strength appears to be the operator
lock in in US mainly and elsewhere. Moto360 and others are even competing
against this point with a price lower than just the contract prepayment.

Another problem is the looming lower overall smartphone growth next year,
which will drive prices further down. Fred Wilson ended up being right, in
that, the smartphone market turned out to be similar to PC market where a
dominant ~90% Android will be next to a single digit Apple.

~~~
benedictevans
Actually, I quoted utterly uncontroversial, industry standard stats. I'd
response to your other points, but I don't quite understand what you're trying
to say. Apple sold around 20% of all smartphones in Q4 2013 (it's pretty
cyclical) and is at or around 10% of all phone sales - this number is rising
steadily.

~~~
diminish
ok, tried to make it better. Apple iPhone Plus may dent into >5", phablet
category where in Q2 it has 0%, which makes 40% of overall. For the Larger sub
5" Apple has 20% share of sales in Q2.

------
jasonwen
About the value of Apple vs Android users, it also helps that Apple has an
easier payment system with Touch ID. This will only increase in the future.

Android however does have introduced a 2-hour money back guarantee on apps.
This might increase the spend on apps.

------
Htsthbjig
I have an additional reason:

7.Taking notes on our devices.

I have an iphone for developing iOS and a galaxy Note.

I hate lots on things on Android(painfully slow and half baked) but note
taking I love.

~~~
boyaka
I don't understand why so many people in the Apple vs Android debate are
completely oblivious to the fact that Apple is just a lot smoother
transitioning from task to task and handling lag so that the user doesn't
notice it. I've been a majority android user (Droid 1 '09-'11, Galaxy Nexus up
to today) but I did purchase a 5s last year, which is currently waterlogged
due to lending it to my mother.

I borrowed my mom's 3GS and even though it is quite slow, it has a magical
ability to accurately detect and respond to my inputs as I would expect it to.
Even on my Galaxy Nexus I have trouble with video lag switching between tasks,
very long delays between my input and a response, and sometimes complete
ignorance of my inputs. One of the most frustrating things for me when using
the device is opening a web browser and trying to type a query into the search
bar without having to wait for it to do who knows what in the background and
attempt to load the last page I was looking at that I have no desire to see,
while ignoring my spam clicking of the "X" to try to get it to stop.

Not to mention the app support for the 3GS is amazing compared to my Droid 1.
I certainly can't get all the latest apps, but older apps still function
extremely well, it really lives up to the UX hype. My Droid 1 can't even run
YouTube anymore.

It's obvious that the advantage Apple has is that it has it's walled garden,
closed hardware/software ecosystem. But it really shines in making the devices
usable.

------
dude3
Apple needs to publish SunSpider Javascript and other real world browser
benchmarks. The new A8 is going to be much faster than a 2.7 805 in the Note
4. The iPhone is actually a great deal when you consider performance.

[http://hothardware.com/articleimages/Item2222/sunspider.png](http://hothardware.com/articleimages/Item2222/sunspider.png)

------
msoad
Take me as an example:

I'm switching to iOS from a high end Android phone. My main reasons are better
privacy and better user experience. My main reason I switched to Android was
screen size.

~~~
kissickas
Do you see Apple as being better for privacy? Sure, Google has my Gmail, but
only because I choose to give it to them. I could use anything else on my
Android phone.

Do you use Firefox, duckduckgo, XPrivacy etc.? Because Apple, in reality, only
gives you one choice (even when I was using Opera, Safari would butt in all of
the time - I haven't read a word about iOS8 so correct me if I'm wrong), and
you're screwed if it doesn't work.

~~~
msoad
My main issue with Android is how app permissions work.

~~~
MichaelGG
Android's permission model is inexcusably malicious. For instance, the "phone
status" permission, that also gives apps the ability to see who you call, read
your device ID, etc. There's zero reason that checking to see if the phone is
active requires a permission. But by including those very intrusive
permissions along with a benign one, Google encourages people to get used to
revealing tons of personal information.

Google now allows apps to silently add even more permissions, if they are in
the "same group". They try to downplay and confuse things as much as possible.

It seems highly unlikely this was accidental. This is the main reason I'm
disgusted with Google/Android and am doing all I can to stop using their
products and services.

~~~
kissickas
I agree that that is terrible, but I use XPrivacy to combat it.

If you don't mind educating me further - what is the state of permissions on
iOS? I haven't been using it for a year, but I don't recall any user
involvement in allowing or forbidding any permissions at all. Is it better in
any way?

------
personZ
This article is a bit like postulating "Why you might not eat steak for
dinner", and then positing reasons that all orbits the assumption that steak
is your default choice, and alternatives must therefore have extenuating
circumstances. It is an absurd foundation.

Did the grocer get more commission selling you chicken? (sidenote: That
commission bit appears in every conspiracy laden story about Android's rise,
despite having zero empirical evidence. Indeed, many carriers do more to
market and pitch the iPhone than any other brand, implying something very
different).

For most people now, smartphones are _largely_ interchangeable. They really
are. You have a browser, can make calls, can access Netflix and your fantasy
football app and Facebook and Twitter, etc. An iPhone 6x versus a GS 5, for
instance, to many users it is simply a wash. Apple has tried hard to lock
people into an ecosystem (Facetime me? No, Skype or Hangouts me please), but
those efforts have fallen by the wayside and are becoming more of a hindrance
than a benefit.

So it comes down to marketing (you know, like having U2 and giving out albums
to gain more attention for your keynote) and differentiating features. Apple
tried with the "true tone" flash or whatever. HTC is trying the dual-lens
camera. Others make their devices waterproof. And so on. It isn't so clear.

Further, Ben Evans isn't just a bit of an Apple fan boy -- he is a huge Apple
fan boy, with compromised credibility outside of that circle. He got a taste
of the Apple aficionado love so now he panders to it fullstop. And given that
Evans loves pointing out the payout to developers (then, _absurdly_
calculating per capita metrics because it sells his point), note that the Play
Store payout is growing more quickly than the App Store is -- YoY growth in
the most recent yearly period was 150%. At current rates the Play Store will
payout more than Apple within a year. But of course they're both very
lucrative targets, and it would be folly to ignore either, and it's bizarre
that this metric even appears in a piece contemplating consumer choices.

~~~
pinaceae
the true value of the iphone is the Apple ecosystem.

i give an rat's ass about android phones, they could be miles ahead - doesn't
matter anymore. just a phone.

i have an iphone, ipad, apple tv, macbook air and a compatible printer. and
everything just _works_ , like magic.

i've spent years in the windows ecosystem tinkering. wrote my own sync for my
iriver mp3 player, fiddled with regedit and battled drivers. so much lost
time. IT bullshit galore. so tired of it.

i _know_ that if i want an apple watch i can buy it and it will perfectly into
the rest of my devices and just work with them.

no other vendor can claim such a value.

iOS8 and Yosemite make this crystal clear, the new handover between apps will
even work from Apple Watch. Just like that.

~~~
Mikeb85
You must have never used Google's cloud services. Docs, Drive, Hangouts,
etc... Everything works device to device. Even a non-Google device that
belongs to someone else. All you really need is Chrome and your credentials.

How about Google Cloud print? All you need is to have Chrome on the computer
that hooks up to your printer, and you can print to that printer from any
device, even remotely. I can be at school/work and print to my printer at
home... And if you buy a printer with the feature enabled, it doesn't even
need to be hooked up to anything (except some sort of internet connection).

And of course, Google Now. Tells me how far to work on the days I work. What
the weather's like, even when I go out of town. Where my car is parked if I'm
somewhere new. Where the restaurant I just called is located. Even the
application on my phone that I use to call people (the one with a phone icon
that used to just be for calling people) - I can search for their name and
call them or, if it's a business or place I've never heard of, I can search
for them in the same box, and it will find them and just call them. Super
cool.

I'm sure your Apple ecosystem is just fine, and I'm sure it feels like magic
compared to Microsoft's sludgery... Heck, Linux feels like magic compared to
MS. But on the other side, Google's ecosystem is absolutely fantastic.

Oh yeah, and then there's Chromecast. But even without it most Smart TVs have
some measure of compatibility with Google's ecosystem...

