Only Samsung Can Save Android From iPhone Domination

[perknh]

Only Samsung Can Save Android From iPhone Domination

By Ewan Spence, contributor to Forbes.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ewanspence/2016/08/21/samsung-galaxy-android-google-fights-apple-iphone/#4689cf307e42

This is an interesting take on things --market share versus profit share.

[scifidude79]

Meh.  I use Android on an LG phone.  I don't really care about market shares.  It does what I need it to do and it's not made by Apple. (I don't like them any more than I do Microsoft)  Their store sales definitely make up a lot of what they have.  iOS can only install apps from Apple's app store, ensuring that they get a cut of every app and in app purchase transaction.  It's a tidy arrangement and not at all how Android works.

[emegra]

I don't care much for Android or IOS to be honest in fact I don't care much for smartphones in general, I have a wee Samsung Galaxy Ace bundled with a load of preinstalled apps I neither want or need nor can remove.

My next phone is definitely gonna be an Ubuntu phone they may be lacking in choice of apps (at the moment) but at least the apps I will have on it will be of my choosing not chosen for me

Profit & market share may be important to Samsung & Apple but for me it's all about freedom



Graeme

[perknh]

I would think that new features developed for the top-end phones would eventually find their way to the low-budget phones.  What I am seeing however, is that more and more young people are using iPhones.  I've also discovered that it costing me the same to use a smart phone as it is to use a so-called dumb phone, so that's one reason why I made the switch. (I use Boost Mobile in the United States.)

The most important reason why I carry a smart phone is for two apps --the weather app and a privacy flashlight app.  (Apparently flashlight apps have proven themselves to be particularly nefarious apps in regards to snooping and privacy.) Also I found, since I've begun using using the Z Launcher Beta from Nokia, my Galaxy S3 phone has become much more user-friendly.  I just scribble a letter or two on the screen for who or what I've looking for, and then who or what I'm looking for appears correctly on the screen nearly all of the time.  This means that using an Android phone has now gone from being a nearly insufferable experience to being a pleasant one most of the time. 

As for Ubuntu phones, I haven't seen one here in the US, and I don't know if they are CDMA or GSM based.  Boost Mobile, at present, only supports CDMA phones.  I've never seen an American carrier sell or advertise Ubuntu phones.

 

[scifidude79]

I would think that new features developed for the top-end phones would eventually find their way to the low-budget phones.

They do, eventually.  It's like that with any tech.  The latest is only the latest for a little while, then everybody has it.

[perknh]

I would think that new features developed for the top-end phones would eventually find their way to the low-budget phones.

They do, eventually.  It's like that with any tech.  The latest is only the latest for a little while, then everybody has it.

Then I intend to stay with the low-budget phones.  When you think about it, they're still amazing devices.  Besides that, I just can't see myself ever spending $600-$875 for a phone that will be worth $150-$200 in a couple of years.  Three years ago this coming November I paid half price, in a holiday sale, for my wife's $350 Galaxy 2 Straight Talk phone from Walmart's website.  The thing could never be updated beyond Gingerbread, and the phone certainly isn't worth much any longer.  Unlike Apple, which keeps all its OSes on its iPhones up-to date, Android phones become has-beens in a couple of years.  (This is one thing I really don't like about Android phones --closing off updates to the OSes after a year or two.*)

*  Maybe Google's Nexus Android phones are the exception to this rule of thumb, though I'm not absolutely certain about this.

[murraymint]

iOS can only install apps from Apple's app store, ensuring that they get a cut of every app and in app purchase transaction.  It's a tidy arrangement and not at all how Android works.

So what are some good non-Google sources of Android apps?

[scifidude79]

Yeah, pretty much any major tech advancements will eventually trickle down to the lower budget phones.  For example, my LG phone was $70 and has a quad core processor.  I'm sure it took a while for a quad core to make it to a phone that inexpensive, but it happened.

So what are some good non-Google sources of Android apps?

Amazon has a good appstore.  It's called Amazon Underground now.  It even has some stuff that's free to play, provided you don't mind data about how it's running (supposedly, no user data) being sent back to Amazon and the app makers.  Or, you can still buy the version that's not like that.  I know Samsung has their own store for their devices, though I never bought anything when I had a Samsung tablet.  I'm not sure what else there is, but I know there are others.  You can also "side load" apps onto Android, buy something (or get it free) from somewhere, download the .apk file and then install it.  Though, it's allegedly not as secure.  (like Google is secure )

[PCNetSpec]

Something (common sense and mathematics) tells me if Samsung weren't the #1 Android OEM .. someone else would be

What I mean is .. If Samsung didn't exist or suddenly disappeared I don't think their users would go Apple/iOS, they're much more likely to go / have gone say Sony / HTC / Google / Motorola / etc. but they'd still be on Android.

[EDIT]

In fact it could be argued that Samsungs dominance of the Android market has left other OEM's with less money to invest in development .. it's impossible to say whether Samsung are "good" or "bad" for Android .. it is what it is.

[perknh]

Something (common sense and mathematics) tells me if Samsung weren't the #1 Android OEM .. someone else would be

What I mean is .. If Samsung didn't exist or suddenly disappeared I don't think their users would go Apple/iOS, they're much more likely to go / have gone say Sony / HTC / Google / Motorola / etc. but they'd still be on Android.

Good point.  I find it interesting that Google's own Nexus phones are not in the top position of the Android phone world. 

[murraymint]

It even has some stuff that's free to play, provided you don't mind data about how it's running (supposedly, no user data) being sent back to Amazon and the app makers.

OK, thanks. The thing is I don't like paying for apps (I've got too used to Linux) so I'm determined not to give Google a card number. Amazon have already got my card number for book purposes but when I tried their app store once before I didn't like that I couldn't remove the store app itself without the game I wanted also being removed.

[scifidude79]

OK, thanks. The thing is I don't like paying for apps (I've got too used to Linux) so I'm determined not to give Google a card number. Amazon have already got my card number for book purposes but when I tried their app store once before I didn't like that I couldn't remove the store app itself without the game I wanted also being removed.

If you don't have a credit card on file with Amazon, you can set up one-click ordering with a gift card.  (not so much on Google)  At least, that's how it was four years ago.  I don't see why they'd have changed that.

[murraymint]

Yeah, it's not the card thing with Amazon really. It's the fact that they lock any apps you download to make them impossible to use if you delete their app store. I assume that's still how it works, or how else could they gather your data?

I don't have any objection to paying for software in principle. It's just that most of the Android apps I've tried have been pretty underwhelming and it doesn't give me great confidence to try the paid-for ones, plus not wanting to let Google have my payment info.

[scifidude79]

Most app stores are going to do that with paid apps.  They don't want you giving away copies, I guess.  It has to be able to access the store and your account to verify that you own it.

[Skara Brae]

<bump>

Well, I "hate" it that Samsung (and Apple, and Microsoft, and Intel, and Putin, and the NSA, and, and, and...) is so big in the smartphone market.

My first smartphone is the Samsung Galaxy S. I still have it, although I don't really use it anymore.

A couple of years ago I did NOT buy a Samsung on purpose and went for HTC instead. First a "Desire 601", and because I have two SIM cards/phone numbers, I later got a second HTC model: the (gold coloured) "One Mini 2".

I like HTC's "Sense" (version 6, that is). I like the scrolling up/down, instead of left/right. It is my experience that HTC is as good as Samsung.

When I look around at other people with a smartphone, then they either have an iPhone or a Samsung. As if iPhones and Samsungs are all there is...
Barely any of my colleagues at work even know HTC.
I have a sister, and recently she bought a new smartphone. 50% chance you can guess which brand it is, the first time.

I also have an iPhone 4 - but as excuse I bought it second-hand (so, Apple didn't make any money on me At least, not with their iPhones), just to see what all that "iPhone fuss" was all about. iOS, although looking and working nice, is boring, and I can change nothing about it. I will never buy another iPhone.

I regret that people aren't more "open-minded" and try other brands (although I understand it). But one or two companies having such a strong market position is a bad thing - just look at the computer desktop culture and Microsoft's near-absolute ruling it.

Perhaps we should be glad that Samsung does not own Android.