Report: Q2 smartphone sales growth slowest since 2013

Gartner has released its analysis of the worldwide smartphone market for the last quarter.  The report, uh, reports the market's lowest quarterly growth rate since 2013, as well as Android's all-time lowest year-on-year growth.

First, let's talk about smartphone sales in general. According to Gartner, vendors sold 330 million phones worldwide, which represented a 13.5% year-on-year increase. However, last quarter also saw the slowest growth in sales since 2013. The Eastern European, Middle East, Africa, and Asia and Pacific markets saw the biggest growth during the last quarter, except for China, where sales dropped 4% versus last year. Gartner cites saturation in the lower-end phone segment as the main reason for the drop. This downturn significantly affected the market as a whole, given that China accounts for 30% of worldwide phone sales.

As for phone manufacturers' scorecards, Samsung is still in a rough patch. Gartner says the Korean company now holds 21.9% of the market, a 4.3% drop since Q2 2014. Meanwhile, Apple, Huawei, and Xiaomi all saw their respective market shares rise. Cupertino achieved a 2.4% year-on-year increase in market share, fueled in part by a 68% increase in Chinese sales. iPhone sales overall were up 36% year-on-year, and Gartner says Apple's growth in the high-end segment is chipping away at its rivals' premium phone sales and profit margins. The Chinese market was also a big win for Huawei, whose total sales climbed 46.3% year-on-year.

Let's break down operating systems now. iOS' market share rose to 14.6%, a 2.4% year-on-year rise made at everybody elses's expense. Android's share dropped 1.6% to 82.2%. Windows Phone lost 0.3%, and currently sits at 2.5%. BlackBerry is nearly extinct—its 0.7% market share in Q2 2014 decreased to only 0.3%. Gartner also notes Android phone sales saw their slowest year-on-year growth ever at 11%. It attributes the slowdown to weak performance in the Chinese market, where Apple took away market share in the last three quarters.

Comments closed
    • ronch
    • 4 years ago

    Well, if their marketing depts could find a way to convince us that we each need 10 smartphones….

    • LoneWolf15
    • 4 years ago

    Anything new that I was interested in was killed by marketing’s “Hey! A giant 5.7″ you-can’t-use-it-one-handed-display is what people want!” designs.

    The Droid Turbo and 2014 Moto X are probably the pinnacle of phones for me if I were to want a new one right now. 5″-5.2″ are the largest size phones I want.

      • Billstevens
      • 4 years ago

      Thats fine, that is the normal phone size, so you should have no issue. I personally can use the note 4 in one hand just fine. And its much better for the occasional game or reading.

        • LoneWolf15
        • 4 years ago

        I have decent sized hands, with the longest fingers of everyone I know. 5.7″ = still too big to reach all parts of the screen one-handed.

          • culotso
          • 4 years ago

          Same here, my fingers are rather long (2.75-3.75″ each), and a 5.5″+ phone is just not comfy to use one-handed, it’s downright clumsy.

      • culotso
      • 4 years ago

      2014 Moto X with a 4/3/APS imaging sensor, fast wide lens, 128gb storage, and a large battery would be about ideal for me. Beauty and brawn, compact digicam replacement – hell yeah. The new Moto X’s are so hideous, such a disappointment. Their price is nifty though.

        • LoneWolf15
        • 4 years ago

        Thinking of picking up a mint-used Droid Turbo. More battery than the Moto X 2014, wireless charging, and the ballistic nylon, and despite the Verizon branding, it will work on other networks. Only sadness is not having the update level the Moto X 2014 does.

        Sold my Droid Maxx to my BIL (work is providing me a phone now) and he’s happily using it in the Philippines with no issue.

    • UberGerbil
    • 4 years ago

    Smartphones are down. Tablets are down. PCs are down. Consoles are down. Where’s the discretionary tech spending going?

      • Billstevens
      • 4 years ago

      Hopefully debt repayment and retirement accounts.

        • uni-mitation
        • 4 years ago

        The thing is that people aren’t saving. The Fed has continued to inject more of that sweet morphine to mask the symptoms. Keeping interest rates at essentially zero does nothing for actually growing the economy. It increases consumption, but it does nothing to actually foster an environment of an efficient allocation of resources. Watch as inflation wipes out the worth of your diminishing dollar. They need to keep printing the money, diminishing the value of the dollar. Oil demand is historically low and yet the price continues to rise due to inflation. Inflate those assets bubbles.

        Central Banks think that monetary policy can fix what fiscal policy has failed to do. Government spending is out of this world. The United States will in the very future will not be able to even make payments on the interest. Yet, we continue in this grand illusion of recovery. The US government will default, it is just a matter of time. Then, we will have to accept our new place in the world. Another country bloated with Government spending, and a currency in tatters, just like in Greece, and many other developed countries.

          • oldog
          • 4 years ago

          Just a few problems with your analysis… the dollar is getting stronger, savings rates in the US have been rising since 2006 (http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/personal-savings), and US personal spending is flat over the last 10 years or so (http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/personal-spending).

          Take away lesson. The US is in fine shape compared to most other economies. Be an optimist! Invest in the future it will pay handsomely.

          Your welcome.

            • uni-mitation
            • 4 years ago

            Please tell me about government debt. You failed to mention anything about that. With the evidence that I see, I am not confident at all in the US’s prospects if they don’t manage to get their act together.

            The world will not continue to buy our IOUs for eternity. There will come a time when they are gonna wise up.

            • oldog
            • 4 years ago

            Short answer: “government debt doesn’t matter”. Ask Ben Bernanke.

            Kidding aside, there is no doubt that we are kicking the proverbial debt can down the road but don’t be too worried about the distant future i.e. the universe is dying (it is) or global warming will kill us all (it won’t).

            The present looks very good. Humans have this uncanny way of avoiding Armageddon and using our collective mental prowess (techno-logic and otherwise) to get out of these messes. (Remember the “ozone hole”? How about global “nuclear winter”?)

            Don’t worry. Be happy. Martin Seligman is right! Optimism is good for you!

            • uni-mitation
            • 4 years ago

            I want to take whatever you are taking. As a species I don’t have much confidence in our survival prospect in the near future.

            In all seriousness, I don’t think you should be quoting Ben Bernanke. History will be very unkind to him. Let’s see when the Fed has to reckon with the reality that they are going to have to raise interest rates, and let’s see how strong is your economy.

            • sweatshopking
            • 4 years ago

            Moving goal posts a bit, aren’t you? You made claims he showed where you were wrong, so then you say “government debt”?

            • uni-mitation
            • 4 years ago

            Please re-read the whole statement I made again. If I made a mistake about savings rates for households, then it is my mistake. But, please show me how a Fed that is has kept interest rate so low for so long and done so much to increase consumption has not yet raised interest rates. This whole ideology that central banks can fix things that fiscal policy can is a sham. Everyone is drinking this awesome kool-aid.

            The United States Government has guaranteed that the next time another big failure happens that they will step in to cover their losses. This is because these too big to fail bank’s failure would mean the failure of otherwise solvent banks. This would create an atmosphere of fear, and credit would dry up. This would have deep negative effect on the economy that would send economy to a tailspin of a recession. This is why the Fed stepped in last time. Unfortunately, this has created a moral hazard(look it up). These fat cats continue to take very risky risks that otherwise it wouldn’t be possible due to such low interest rates. If the Fed is really interested in preventing another bubble burst then they would have raised interest rate.

            The sad reality is that our central bank has taken the job of trying to fix this mess under extreme political pressure since our elected politicians can’t manage to find a fiscal solution to the very real problem that we have now.

            And yes, the US dollar might get a bit stronger, but the sad fact remains that the US Fed has not raised interest rates. Once the interest rate goes up, the US government will have to pay way more for every one percentage hike. Let’s see then when the US government can’t service its debt. Let’s see if savings rates will matter. China’s central bank will not continue to peg their Yuan to the US dollar. After a while, China’s central bank will realize that they are throwing good money after bad one. The reason they keep doing it is so they keep the value of the YUAN relatively low so they can continue to export goods. Look at Switzerland when it decided to stop pegging the Euro to their Francs.

            I am not moving goal posts. My claim and opinion has always been that this 21 century economic idealogy of Central Banks will meet its end. History will see with very unkind eyes these failed economic ideas spoused by Alan Greenspan and his progeny, Ben Bernanke, and its ilk.Let’s see how far moral hazard bankrupts this country. For now, the world keeps buying our IOUs, but it is not gonna last forever. Sooner or later, all those socialized losses and privatized profits are gonna raised a big question mark in the US government’s ability to service their debt. Who bails out the US government then? This is crony capitalism. There is essentially no risks for these big fat cats.

            • sweatshopking
            • 4 years ago

            I agree with your second paragraph.
            interest rates should have gone up a while ago, if for nothing else than to curb consumer debt levels. i’m don’t necessarily agree that debt is a major concern for a fiat currency (which greece doesn’t have) and i’m not terribly worried about the debt of the USA or Canadian government, but certainly for households this cheap debt will be catastrophic. The canadian housing market (i’m canadian, and you think YOUR credit is cheap? you should see ours!) is a disaster waiting to happen, but nobody will raise rates as it WILL crash the market, and who wants to be responsible for that?

            • uni-mitation
            • 4 years ago

            I know. Canadian banks are practically printing money since they have no [url=https://gilliganscorner.wordpress.com/2008/04/06/canadas-private-banks-have-no-reserve-requirements/<] fractional reserve requirements. [/url<] This is a systemic thing that is present in all central banks. They have the hubris to think they can manage the economy. The sad fact is that the Canadian economy is in a housing bubble, and it will be burst. Those that are in the bubble are practically unable to see the reality of the impending burst. They are high on the Central Bank's kool aid. Every one is convince and all predictions are based on ever increasing prices. Then reality hits, and all of that "equity" is evaporated. This failed economic idealogy of reducing interest rates to increase consumption actually grows the economy has been proven wrong time and time again after bubble after bubble. What grows the economy is the efficient allocation of capital to new investments that increase the standard of living. For this to happen, interest rates must be at a sweet spot in order to give incentives to the savers, and those that own retirement accounts to actually invest their money instead of taking more debt to artificially increase GDP. I respectfully disagree with your notion that government debt(sovereign) is not important. The fact is that all fiat currencies are back by nothing but the trust of the issuing authority. Every US dollar is a federal reserve note by which the United States government finances everything. The reason why the US dollar is valuable is because the market deems it trustworthy. Once the trust and ability of the US government to meet its financial obligations is shattered, then the market will not buy US treasuries at the same fantastical yield that they enjoy. Everything that we enjoy from the fantastic standard of living, to the fact of the US the de facto reserve currency and petro dollar is because of the World's and markets' trust in the US's government to meet its debt and raise more revenues via taxes. The problem that we are in is a totally fiscal one that must be resolved in Congress, and not by printing more money. This is such an immense problem that all that central banks's efforts are akin to pulling a big boulder with cotton strings.

            • sweatshopking
            • 4 years ago

            I never said it wasn’t important. I said it wasn’t a major concern, and given the other issues, i dont think it is. We need a few years of heavy inflation to drive down debt levels to a reasonable level. It’ll annoy people short term, but long term it will be an improvement. I am not saying be irresponsible, but consumer debt is a MUCH larger problem for the economy then governmental. Taxes MUST go up, and people need to check their incorrect views on living standards to one that’s actually affordable, and I’m not saying cut health or infrastructure spending. We need to move away from a consumption based economy into a services, production, and infrastructure based economy. Expecting to pay more taxes will be an important part of that. Educating people that services are WORTH the money and that as Oliver Wendell said, the price of civilization, we can expect, as with all things, to get what you pay for. Taxes need to be efficient and accountable, but they’re insanely low right now. somebody has to pay for all this stuff, and once we understand that, we can actually look at improving things.

            • uni-mitation
            • 4 years ago

            SSK, there is no such thing as “inflating your way” out of debt. This is another failed economic idea that has consistently be prove to do nothing. Granted that I am not an economist, and I might not use the correct terms, but I will try to explain.

            Basically, what happens if the US government tries to inflate their debt away? Well, let me explain what we are essentially talking about. Well, the US government has two distinct economic policies that are separated. One is fiscal policy, and the other one is monetary policy. Fiscal policy is under the purview of the US Treasury department which is in charged of financing and issue future debt by selling treasuries(IOUs) bonds to finance and borrow money from the market to meet its budget. Congress is ultimately the one in charge of fiscal policy since they are the ones that control the purse strings. All that the executive branch does is submit a proposed fiscal budget in which the government outlines the ways that it will continue to finance the functioning of government.

            Second, we have monetary policy. This falls under the purview of the Federal Reserve System. The Fed as is commonly called, is a hybrid public-private central bank. “The Congress established the statutory objectives for monetary policy–maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates–in the [url=http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/money_12848.htm<] Federal Reserve Act[/url<]." Basically they are charged with "running the printing presses." There basically several ways that the Fed can manipulate interest rates. To wit: "The [url=http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2012/05/how-federal-reserve-manipulates.html<] Federal Reserve[/url<] manipulates interest rates, generally, by buying and selling Treasury bills. When they buy Treasury bills, they add reserves to the banking system. That is they issue a credit to the bank (primary dealer) that they buy the T-bills from. If the bank doesn't put the credit into excess reserves, the money becomes part of required reserves that the bank lends money out against, which increases the money supply. (The increase in money supply is actually a multiple of the added required reserves--see Rothbard) The [url=http://www.amazon.com/The-Mystery-Banking-Murray-Rothbard/dp/1105528782/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1338403822&sr=8-1<]Mystery of Banking[/url<] is an awesome book for anyone that is earnestly interested in the mysterious, unsupervised shenanigans that the FED pulls. So basically, what essentially started as a system created to prevent the several bank runs in the beginning of the 20th century has morphed into a frankenstein's creature. So, the FED decides as you say, to inflate our way of this problem of sovereign debt in their undisputed wisdom. Well, now that the money is inflated, then the government is able to nominally raise more tax revenues to service its debt, and away to a "forever happy story" to sunset. Only, that it does nothing to the future obligations that the government must now meet with a paper that is worthless because it was printed to nothing. And inflation can turn into hyperinflation really quickly by a concious choice. Look at Poland's hyperinflation period, and what stabilizers were deemed to have stabilized Polannd's inflation. "3.2.3. [url=http://www.tiger.edu.pl/kolodko/artykuly/Polish_Hyperinflation.pdf<]Monetary Policy[/url<] It has been assumed that the budget equilibration measures and price liberalisation will not lead to hyperinflation if the whole economic and financial system is adequately "anchored". Under the Polish stabilisation programme the following factors are of special importance as so-called anchors (stabilisers): a) a hard budgetary policy (both on the side of rigourous revenue enforcement and on the side of severe economic discipline with regard to expenditure); b) a restrictive monetary policy; c) a quasi-freeze on wages; and d) a uniform and fixed exchange rate. " The Congressional Budget Office estimates that entitlements will outstrip the government's ability to raise more revenues. The fact is that we have a more aging population, and the entitlement programs of medicare, medicaid, and social security. To with, the CBO states that: "Unless substantial changes are made to mayor health care programs and social security, spending for those programs will equal a much larger percentage of GDP in the future than in the past" CBO's 2015 long-term budget [url=https://www.cbo.gov/publication/50300<]outlook, slide #10 [/url<]. So, if there is any doubt in your mind to the misguided and failed monetary policies of the FED & Cohorts, then I don't know what will. Summary: this is only a problem that has a fiscal solution. The US government must find a solution to the incoming avalanche of debt that is entitlements. This is Congress's job to solve. One that they have been spineless to find! I can't reiterate this enough, this is a fiscal policy problem, one that will bring the house of cards down. I have continually made my claim that Government debt does matter, and is a major concern. That it is not only goes to show the very spineless political atmosphere of legislative inaction is Congress is in. My claim has been supported by evidence. And given the evidence, I don't have much confidence. I hope this helped, although I am no an economist, and there are many other very smart people that have talked and talked and been ignored.

            • sweatshopking
            • 4 years ago

            While I don’t necessarily agree with your perspectives for a few reasons (one of which being I’m not an american, and the system i deal with is the canadian one, so the FED isn’t really as relevant to me). I agree that politics is fundamentally broken, and anyone expecting a 300 year old system to fix a 21st century problem is insane. There needs to be fundamental changes to the way government operates. This isn’t the only issue where that’s the case. This is really the crux of ALL of the problems we face, whether in the USA, Japan, Canada, etc. It’s not a problem with the politicians, it’s a problem with the system, and the nature result of it. if you’re waiting for somebody to fix the problems within that same system, you’ll be waiting literally [i<] forever [/i<] I already told you I didn't agree that government debt is the largest problem. I'm not worried about government debt, but i'm not in the USA. My government has less debt, but our consumers are VASTLY more in debt vs americans. [quote<] Looking at Group of Seven countries, Canada ran up an increase in its debt-GDP ratio of a little less than 10 percentage points from 2006 to 2013, compared with the increase of 35 to 40 percentage points in France, Britain, the U.S. and Japan. If you look at household debt, however, Canada stands out, with the largest increase in the household-debt-to-income ratio of all the G7 countries, at about 30 percentage points โ€“ double the next-largest increase, in Italy, and 50 percentage points higher than the U.S., where household debt ratio fell. [/quote<] [url<]http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/rob-commentary/conservative-partys-taste-for-indebted-households-strains-economic-future/article26041950/[/url<] You guys might need to figure out how to get your governmental debt under control, but for us, it's the consumer debt that's paying for the recession. I don't know that I would necessary consider QE as the only solution to drive inflation. Certainly it's the one that's easiest politically to accomplish, but higher corporate tax rates and higher minimum wages would drive inflation, and rather than just "inflate debt away" would give people more money to pay back debts. it'll also make some corporations mad, and there needs to be political will and consensus with other nations as to how to prevent capital and company flight. It's going to have to happen though, there simply isn't a reasonable tax base or wage increases to keep up with the inflation that's been ongoing. the question is when. Our housing crash is coming, and the longer it takes the worse it'll be. We do live in a house of cards, and people don't seem to understand it. Drives me nuts. Stop buying so much junk, stop buying giant houses, and lower total debt rates. there WILL be an economic slowdown as people deleverage, but there's not really anything you can do about that unless you can do it slow enough (not really likely given the crazy high levels. our average consumer debt is up to 170%) or [i<] really [/i<] drive productivity and find a way to accomplish deleveraging at the same time. I'm also not worried about services being a larger part of the economy. they NEED to be, and we need to pay more taxes for them. We might buy fewer graphics cards as a consequence. Allow more immigration (canada NEEDS to do this if we're to take care of our aging population) as another way of increasing productivity to help pay for it. Need more of these guys, and on average higher taxes. I don't even understand why politicians think i WANT lower taxes. the roads suck, health care isn't doing great, education blows, etc. Somebody has to pay for it, and a few hundred dollars at the end of the year means [i<] NOTHING [/i<] if i'm dying and can't get a bed or crashing my car on terrible roads. I think we largely agree. Just different views on the solutions. I'm not an economist either. edit: i realized i said we dont' agree when i think we do. just slightly different problems, and different views on how to solve it.

            • uni-mitation
            • 4 years ago

            I am an American, so I was obviously talking about the American economy. I profess my ignorance in Canadian affairs since it isn’t something that I actively follow, although I always strive to keep with all current events.

            It is okay if you disagree with me in certain points. What I value more is the exchange of ideas. I abhor people that actively choose ignorance instead of taking an active interests in their surroundings, and in their lives. Although I and you are generally helpless to the institutional forces around us that affect our daily lives, we still have a duty to continually talk about these things.

            What I can say that actually drives economic growth is having a balanced budget, a conservative monetary policy in which the central bank only acts as a lender of last resort, and the effective allocation of money into new investments that increase the standard of living. No where do I leave out not taking care of those that are most helpless. I strongly believe that Government has the legitimate role of providing a safety net for those hard times. Yet, we must keep the fire of entrepreneurship alive. To those that often rail against the welfare state, I tell them that I wholeheartedly agree with them. We should start by cutting all of the corporate subsidies that create a welfare state for corporations. We should streamline our tax code, and we should finally fix our health care, and entitlement once and for all! Let’s reward the risk takers, but we should not have a system that is essentially rigged for no risks or consequences for these too-big to fail entities. That is not the Capitalism that I know and love.

            As for Canada, I abstain from commenting since I don’t know about it much.

            Thank you for the exchange. Take care.

            • sweatshopking
            • 4 years ago

            I full agree with your third paragraph. <3
            Great discussion.

      • Ninjitsu
      • 4 years ago

      WATCHES!

        • LoneWolf15
        • 4 years ago

        Okay, I lol-ed.

      • HisDivineOrder
      • 4 years ago

      Saving for VR?

      Haha, j/k.

      Actually, they’re saving for 4K TV’s. They’s expensive.

      • sweatshopking
      • 4 years ago

      I think going to raised living expenses in canada. Savings rates are poor here, debt is at an all time high, and housing costs are a silly bubble.

    • Ninjitsu
    • 4 years ago

    POST-PHONE ERA! TIME TO COMMUNICATE BY COMPLICATED TAIL WAGGING!

      • HisDivineOrder
      • 4 years ago

      Pshaw. Smoke signals or go home.

        • Ninjitsu
        • 4 years ago

        Ah yes. I hope Apple has a large brushed aluminium drum to sell me as well.

    • AJSB
    • 4 years ago

    Here i go attract downvotes…or maybe not, let’s be optimist ! :p ๐Ÿ˜€

    Remember when there was the article about tablets and what i said about tablets…and that also end up to happen with smartphones, only slower ?

    Well, It’s happening…still slowly but its happening.

    IMHO, YMMV.

      • NeelyCam
      • 4 years ago

      [quote<]Remember when there was the article about tablets and what i said about tablets...[/quote<] Um, no - I don't remember. A link to your comment would've been nice...

    • albundy
    • 4 years ago

    Sorry, my supermarket was fresh out of smartphones next to the bread and milk. At $300-700 each, I just don’t understand why people just don’t buy them every day! It makes no sense! I mean, am I the only one that grows money on trees? You know what they say about an Apple a day…

      • ronch
      • 4 years ago

      Oh I totally feel you, brother! I have money growing on trees too! They just keep growing and growing and I have to rake them all the time and burn them up! Then the next day, I wake up to the smell of EVEN MORE MONEY!! Oh why is life so hard??! Can’t money just burn when it hits the ground?!? To make things worse, I use up all the money I can to buy smartphones and tablets but the EPA says I can’t burn them like I burn money because it’s bad for the environment! Good grief! Life is soooo unfair!!!

    • anotherengineer
    • 4 years ago

    So the market is finally becoming saturated?

    • ronch
    • 4 years ago

    I imagine that back in 2013 smartphone sales were still pretty strong. Given how most folks today already have one or two and sales are still as strong as when people left and right were buying, I don’t think it’s as bad as it seems.

    BTW, I’m rooting for LG, Asus, and HTC.

      • HisDivineOrder
      • 4 years ago

      I’m rooting for me. Companies can all pile into the arena and claw one another’s eyes out for my amusement for all I care.

    • uni-mitation
    • 4 years ago

    I got to hand it down to Apple’s marketing. This game is not much about market share as it is about margins. Apple has consistently cornered the high end segment of this mobile market since they created the market with the Iphone. Takeaway: Don’t have to sell many phones, just sell a decent amount with huge profit margins.

    Objectively speaking, the Iphone is certainly not the best phone in the market, and is not certainly worth for what is sold, yet perception is king. They manage to sell it at that price because people keep buying it at that price!

    I wonder what effect will the end of wireless contract subsidies will have on Apple’s bottom line?

      • Ushio01
      • 4 years ago

      Well then we will get to see how locked in people are to the iPhone ecosystem of apps.

      • wimpishsundew
      • 4 years ago

      This doesn’t make sense. Apple didn’t corner the high end market, they’re the first one in and for the longest time, they did make the best phone. Apple sells a ton of phones. Yes, it’s true they’re selling high end high margin phones but it’s definitely high volume selling ~200M+ phones a year. They’re pretty much the most successful brand and one of the few brands in history that achieved high end, high margin, and high volume.

      The iPhone is certainly not the best phone on the market right now. But people have always liked the iPhone because it’s simpler to use, less buggy and aesthetic pleasing and unoffensive for most people. On top of that, they have the best customer service and warranty. If you look at their marketing, they’re telling you they’re selling the experience and peace of mind.

      That’s why Android phone makers still struggling. They’re not willing to put more into everything around the phone. They’re just selling phones. It’s only recent where Android phone makers are promising prompt update(which is still hit or miss) and a decent warranty(like HTC). But it’s still nowhere near as convenient as walking into an Apple Store and walk out in 10 minutes.

        • Ninjitsu
        • 4 years ago

        [quote<] But people have always liked the iPhone because it's simpler to use, less buggy and aesthetic pleasing and unoffensive for most people. [/quote<] No, that's what Apple marketing has pushed very hard for them to believe. It's the same PC vs Mac thing. I don't remember the last time I was offended by a phone, btw.

        • soccergenius
        • 4 years ago

        Whether or not Apple has cornered the high-end mobile market is not debatable. The average selling prices by vendor and vendor shipments/sales speak for themselves.

        Apple [i<]only[/i<] competes with new products in the high-end market(s). (iPhone 5c wasn't [i<]really[/i<] a new phone.)

      • blastdoor
      • 4 years ago

      [quote<]Objectively speaking, the Iphone is certainly not the best phone in the market[/quote<] I don't think that there is any single objective truth about which phone is "the best on the market" any more than there is a single objective truth about which car, restaurant, beer, wine, cheese, pizza, etc is "the best." Different people will see different phones (cars, restaurants, beers, etc) as being "the best," depending on what's most important to them and their own particular tastes (and what they can afford). The reason that Apple is able to make a fair bit of money is that they offer a phone that is considered "the best" by people who can afford Apple's phones.

        • sweatshopking
        • 4 years ago

        These guys state WHY it is the best phone and then argue it isn’t.

          • trackerben
          • 4 years ago

          I think he’s saying that most global users who can most easily afford iPhones see them as the “best”, even though Apple hardware isn’t always more advanced than that of rivals.

          The iOS ecosystem is another thing though. In systems and lifecycle term’s it’s the closest thing to the holy grail of consumer network computing. Despite the recent raft of bugs and slowing feature innovation, its champion apps and usually reliable backends and comfortable UI are what most find “best” about Apple mobiles.

            • Ninjitsu
            • 4 years ago

            But when will Apple stop it’s childish methods of forcing vendor lock etc? ๐Ÿ˜‰

      • HERETIC
      • 4 years ago

      You have to remember the apple 1-2-3.
      1-K.I.S.S.
      2-Make it pretty.
      3-Con everyone into believing the high price they’re paying
      is because they’re getting the best…………………………………..

        • uni-mitation
        • 4 years ago

        I think you missed a very important step.

        0- Appropriate a previous technological invention as your own.

    • uni-mitation
    • 4 years ago

    [quote<] BlackBerry is nearly extinctโ€”its 0.7% market share in Q2 2014 decreased to only 0.3%. [/quote<] Bye bye BB10, you had a good run. It is such a pity that such a great OS is destined to the dustbin with Palm Pre, and Web OS. Maybe the many innovative OS features such as the BB Hub will be adopted by other OSes. See the new [url=http://crackberry.com/blackberry-venice-slider-device-demo-video-leaks-out<] Venice Slider [/url<]. The writing is on the wall.

    • Ushio01
    • 4 years ago

    Hmm so using the third table “Worldwide Mobile Phone Sales”

    16 million year on year drop for Microsoft/Nokia and 8 million for Samsung plus smaller decreases for Lenovo/Motorola and LG.

    The future of the mobile phone industry is Apple at the high end and Chinese/Indian OEM’s at the $200 and under price for Android.

    Everyone else is dead or dying.

      • meerkt
      • 4 years ago

      Indian?

        • Ushio01
        • 4 years ago

        Micromax 9.9 million shipped 10th largest phone company in the quarter and growing

          • sweatshopking
          • 4 years ago

          Yeah, india is growing in EVERY metric. Any economic marker will include india going forward.

      • blastdoor
      • 4 years ago

      Yup.

      To improve products, companies need to invest, both in R&D and capital. Investment is fed either by profit or by debt (which will be eventually have to be repaid with future profit). If Apple is the only company that can make money, then Apple will be the only company that can sustain investment, which means it will be the only company able to improve its products.

      Some people argue that we may reach a point when product improvement is no longer desired. But outside of true commodities (oil, corn, etc), that actually almost never happens. Even cars, which have been around for over a century, continue to improve in meaningful ways, requiring R&D investments.

      If this continues, then Apple will take over the market. But I don’t think it will continue. Somebody else is going to figure out how to make non-trivial profits in the smartphone industry. If nothing else, they can sell to Apple haters.

        • Billstevens
        • 4 years ago

        The market is will likely continue to be dominated by android. Even though Apple makes all the money.

        Apple may nudge out a bunch of other premium offerings but it has no reason to go after the non-premium market because the margin sucks.

        Fortunately for Apple the premium market should still have plenty of room to grow with India and China having growing middle classes.

    • NeelyCam
    • 4 years ago

    So… what’s Apple’s market share? Who is First?

    It would be nice to have the numbers in a table form, so it’s easier to figure this stuff out

      • Ushio01
      • 4 years ago

      [url<]http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/3115517[/url<] Why they don't link to article I don't know.

        • morphine
        • 4 years ago

        Link was there, but there was an editing snafu. Crap happens. ๐Ÿ™‚

        Thanks for the heads-up!

      • Ninjitsu
      • 4 years ago

      Clever first post.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This