New Data Suggests That Android Could Overtake the Apple iPad in the Tablet Market

[dgstorm]

Perhaps this pic above is the way Apple perceives Android: The Android-Terminator!​

According to a new Pew report, shared in an article at Forbes.com, new data suggests that Android tablets are gaining ground quickly and may overtake sales of the Apple iPad in the near future. Here's a quote with the details,

A year ago, according to a report from the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism, Apple enjoyed 81% of the tablet market, but that lead has been reduced to 52%. Now, says the report, “Nearly half, 48%, now own an Android-based device; about half of them, 21%, Kindle Fires.” The Kindle Fire uses Google’s Android operating system with a different user interface and access to Amazon’s app marketplace rather than the Google Play app store.

This is bad news for Apple and the news could get worse as lower cost Android tablets start to flood the market. Already, Amazon has reduced the price for a slightly updated version of its original Kindle Fire to $159 as it starts to ship higher-end models including a $199 7-inch version and a nearly iPad-size 8.9 inch model starting at $299.

Apple does have a chance at keeping some of its market-share if it introduces a 7-inch tablet (dubbed “iPad Mini”) at an aggressive price but it’s likely to see the same kind of erosion in tablets that it’s already seen in smartphones. Android phones, according to IDC, have 68.1% market share compared to 16.9% for Apple and 4.8% for Blackberry.

We knew that Android was gaining ground on iOS in the tablet arena, but we honestly didn't realize it was this fast. Maybe this is why Apple sees Android as such a threat and is attacking them in the courts?

Source: Forbes

 

[mountainbikermark]

Totally off topic but that photo shall soon be my new avatar.
I hope Apple sees this as a wake up call and starts innovating or Android may stagnate from lack of a competition fire under their butts or putting all their efforts into warding off lawsuits
Support Our Troops!!!
<><
A Rezound phone was used for this Tapatalk post

 

[rowdyguy124]

Not suprising. We have 5 Android Tablets and 4 Android smartphones in our home now as it is. Next on the list is an Android device for the tv to replace the aging Roku.

 

[gthotie5]

I'm sure a good chunk of people will still buy the mini just because its apple

 

[LoudRam]

I'm sure a good chunk of people will still buy the mini just because its apple

Yep, no matter how good Android is there will always be isheep.

 

[gadgetrants]

I sometimes wonder if "Apple vs. Android" is a fair comparison. Apple is a company -- they happen to produce consumer devices AND also create the software that runs on them. But Android is just an OS. And it's more or less free. Maybe the fairest comparison is Apple against whichever company is leading the Android pack, e.g., Samsung. It's also not totally fair that Android devices (phones and tablets) are "commoditized," that is, sold at razor-thin margins to help the spread of the OS itself (kind of begging for a virus-and-host metaphor here!).

I think the counterargument is: it ONLY MATTERS what's in people's hands, which device they buy, to which side the dollars flow. And right now there are two major choices, and our favorite team is catching up or taking the lead. But is it a fair fight to pit ONE company/OS against 20 other companies (lumped into one category) that happen to use another OS? I think an interesting universe is the one in which iOS is commercially available, and other companies integrate it into their products and thus directly compete with Apple hardware and services. That would be a big step toward a much more equitable comparison.

-Matt

 

[TatDroid]

I think the comparison of operating systems is a fair one, it's just often STATED wrong. It's not Apple vs Android. It's iOS vs Android.

The issue BEHIND the comparison reveals two very different philosophies. The creator of iOS chooses not to license their product, so they can maintain very strict control. The creator of Android allows licensing.

You know, just like Windows vs Apple OS. History repeats itself.

 

[kodiak799]

Apple is already the biggest company in the world. Their closed system approach is why they are so profitable in phone, tablets and even computers. And Apple buyers tend to stick with Apple products, so there's the whole vertical suite of sales.

Market share, in this case, is really not the big deal people like to make of it. Apple only cares about that top 10-20% of customers where all the margin is. Is anyone in Android making money besides Samsung (and, well, Google)?

 

[jseah]

I would bet the biggest factor in Android's increasing market share has to do purely with pricing. Sure, Apple feels their product is superior and as such, should command a premium for the "Apple experience". That said, considering that the Apple premium runs at least $100 or more (depending on model), that is a tough sell to people, especially in this economy. When Apple is selling their base model WiFi-only iPad for $500, and prices go up to $650, and you can get a comparably equipped name-brand Android tablet for between $300 and $400, the many people will not be willing to pay the premium for one particular brand. The price differential is even more pronounced when you compare the iPad to the 7-inch Kindle Fire and Nexus 7, while retails for $200. When Apple finally does come out with the iPad Mini, they would be fools if they priced it any higher than $250 or $300.

While Apple had momentum in the marketplace, they are not willing to make the product more affordable, so those with less cash to spend will always gravitate towards a less expensive alternative. This is why for decades, Apple never amounted to more than a 5 or 10 percent market share in PC's. When Apple computers were selling for around $1500, comparable Windows PC's were selling for around $700. And look at the huge numbers of lower end model Windows notebooks that are priced in the $300-$400 range and how well they sell. The lowest priced Apple notebook is their netbook equivalent (11.6 in screen, 4 GB RAM, 64 GB storage) and that sells for just under $1000.

Apple has made their decision that they want to maximize profit, not maximize sales. Look at Mercedes. Their cars are expensive, and I'm sure that they make quite a bit of profit from their sales, but they will never turn over the number of units that GM or Toyota will, nor do they care to.

 

[TatDroid]

Apple is already the biggest company in the world. Their closed system approach is why they are so profitable in phone, tablets and even computers. And Apple buyers tend to stick with Apple products, so there's the whole vertical suite of sales.

Market share, in this case, is really not the big deal people like to make of it. Apple only cares about that top 10-20% of customers where all the margin is. Is anyone in Android making money besides Samsung (and, well, Google)?

I agree 100%. Market share, although it can be a good thing, is NOT Apple's top priority. Their priority is the "Apple Experience". They can charge more for that because, by definition, you can only get the Apple Experience from Apple! It matters not if the competition has a faster processor, a bigger screen, etc, etc, because the iPhone "just works". (How many times have we heard THAT?) And if the customer ever has a problem they just take it in to a "genius" who makes it "work" again.

I'm pretty sure that a 20% market share is just fine with Apple, as long as they can charge customers a premium and get them to buy into the "Apple Experience".

 

[MissionImprobable]

I would bet the biggest factor in Android's increasing market share has to do purely with pricing. Sure, Apple feels their product is superior and as such, should command a premium for the "Apple experience". That said, considering that the Apple premium runs at least $100 or more (depending on model), that is a tough sell to people, especially in this economy. When Apple is selling their base model WiFi-only iPad for $500, and prices go up to $650, and you can get a comparably equipped name-brand Android tablet for between $300 and $400, the many people will not be willing to pay the premium for one particular brand. The price differential is even more pronounced when you compare the iPad to the 7-inch Kindle Fire and Nexus 7, while retails for $200. When Apple finally does come out with the iPad Mini, they would be fools if they priced it any higher than $250 or $300.

While Apple had momentum in the marketplace, they are not willing to make the product more affordable, so those with less cash to spend will always gravitate towards a less expensive alternative. This is why for decades, Apple never amounted to more than a 5 or 10 percent market share in PC's. When Apple computers were selling for around $1500, comparable Windows PC's were selling for around $700. And look at the huge numbers of lower end model Windows notebooks that are priced in the $300-$400 range and how well they sell. The lowest priced Apple notebook is their netbook equivalent (11.6 in screen, 4 GB RAM, 64 GB storage) and that sells for just under $1000.

Apple has made their decision that they want to maximize profit, not maximize sales. Look at Mercedes. Their cars are expensive, and I'm sure that they make quite a bit of profit from their sales, but they will never turn over the number of units that GM or Toyota will, nor do they care to.

It's not just price, it's flexibility and features. More and more people are having that Samsung Commercial moment of, "When do we get to do that?" Just look at the Nexus 7, new Fire, and the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1. Options in terms of size and total features, but great functionality with any of them, especially when you add in the S-Pen and all its included tweaks on the Tab. New Android tablets offer competitive battery life and smoothness, more options, and a lower price point. Add the fact that you have all the apps you need to sync your iTunes and other iPoop and the locked down iPad is a less and less appealing offering.

As others have noted, Apple is now playing catch-up on bringing a smaller tablet size to the table and still lacks NFC and other evolving features. Apple has fallen behind the times in a game that they used to dominate.

I'm pretty sure that a 20% market share is just fine with Apple, as long as they can charge customers a premium and get them to buy into the "Apple Experience".

If that were true they wouldn't be trying to so aggressively control the market through litigation. Apple wants to stay number one in dollars but seems to have become completely confused about how to do so. They've become paranoid on their throne and are proceeding down empty paths instead of staying ahead of the pack. Apple most certainly isn't happy fading from the scene.

 

[TatDroid]

If that were true they wouldn't be trying to so aggressively control the market through litigation. Apple wants to stay number one in dollars but seems to have become completely confused about how to do so. They've become paranoid on their throne and are proceeding down empty paths instead of staying ahead of the pack. Apple most certainly isn't happy fading from the scene.

Apple obviously doesn't want to "fade from the scene". But I'll repeat what I said above - market share is not their #1 priority. It's profitability.

They went down this EXACT SAME road with PCs. Does anyone really think they said to themselves "well, this closed environment thing didn't end up making us the biggest computer seller in the world, but maybe it'll work out totally differently with phones"? Of course not.

Apple is an EXTREMELY PROFITABLE nitch player in the world PC market, are well on their way to becoming an EXTREMELY PROFITABLE nitch player in the world smartphone market, and will eventually be the exact same thing in the world tablet market.

Their model has worked for them so far, and they've shown no signs of changing it.

 

[MissionImprobable]

Apple obviously doesn't want to "fade from the scene". But I'll repeat what I said above - market share is not their #1 priority. It's profitability.

They went down this EXACT SAME road with PCs. Does anyone really think they said to themselves "well, this closed environment thing didn't end up making us the biggest computer seller in the world, but maybe it'll work out totally differently with phones"? Of course not.

Apple is an EXTREMELY PROFITABLE nitch player in the world PC market, are well on their way to becoming an EXTREMELY PROFITABLE nitch player in the world smartphone market, and will eventually be the exact same thing in the world tablet market.

Their model has worked for them so far, and they've shown no signs of changing it.

In the PC market they have flexibility: you can run Windows on a Mac. You don't have the flexibility of running other phone OSes on iPhones. They also are still ahead of the curve in aesthetics in the computing market as well. There's a whole spate of new pads from HP and others that obviously take their major cues from Mac Books. I'd be interested to see the profit margins for iPhones and iPads vs Mac computers. Regardless, Apple is not going to pull in the same kind of cash they had been if they settle for being on the low end of the totem pole instead of fighting to bring the latest and greatest to the table.

 

[mountainbikermark]

In the PC market they have flexibility: you can run Windows on a Mac. You don't have the flexibility of running other phone OSes on iPhones. They also are still ahead of the curve in aesthetics in the computing market as well. There's a whole spate of new pads from HP and others that obviously take their major cues from Mac Books. I'd be interested to see the profit margins for iPhones and iPads vs Mac computers. Regardless, Apple is not going to pull in the same kind of cash they had been if they settle for being on the low end of the totem pole instead of fighting to bring the latest and greatest to the table.

Marketing has more than made up for lack of innovation in their mobile lineup of devices. If the iphone and Ipad eventually fizzle they'll still make a gazzillion on ipods.

Support Our Troops!!!
<><
A Rezound phone was used for this Tapatalk post

 

[TatDroid]

Regardless, Apple is not going to pull in the same kind of cash they had been if they settle for being on the low end of the totem pole instead of fighting to bring the latest and greatest to the table.

If by "low end of the totem pole" you mean a smaller market share, then I disagree. Apple CAN be (and are!) very profitable with a smaller market share. Their smartphone market share has dropped from about 75% to about 30% over the last two years or so (less if you're talking global). But they're still "pulling in PLENTY OF CASH"!

It's all about Apple's overall philosophy. Closed environment (vs open source). The closed environment is destined to become high profit/low market share. As it did with Apple PCs. As it is now doing with smartphones. As it will eventually do with tablets. And Apple is obviously fine with that, because their philosophy has not changed over the years.