6 ms·

Except of course for Apple with 44% of the market in the US, which is increasing, and somewhere around 90% of the profit. Winning in Android is a race to the bo

Except of course for Apple with 44% of the market in the US, which is increasing, and somewhere around 90% of the profit. Winning in Android is a race to the bottom where only the cheap survive, exactly what happened to Dell and its competitors in the PC market. And someday Google will decide it needs to actually make money from Android and that world will fork into Google Android Phone and the seven dwarf versions.

bobajeff 11y ago
I don't think Google will ever try to make money directly off of licensing Android or selling phones. It's far more likely they'll continue to leverage it to bring users to their services. I think the point where Google and consumers are misaligned would be their preference of Chrome OS over Android. Still, I don't see them throwing away their market power in a play to move users to Chrome OS. They'll just keep mixing them both together until there is no difference.
sremani 11y ago
Once the upgrade fatigue hits and people are no longer subsidized for their cell phones, putting down $600+ or putting down $60 for serviceable phone would become a no brainer. These phones have to become good enough and they are already getting there.
- graeme 11y ago
  How true is this for that 44% currently using iphones? Iphones stay good enough for at least 2-3 years, if you're not picky. $600/3 = $200. $17 per month, 0.56 cents per day. It's not nothing. But it is nothing compared to what the iphone class spends on, say, coffee. There is the one-off hit from paying the $600 all at once, but credit cards reduce that pain somewhat. Meanwhile, you're using the phone every day. If you have the money, you probably want a phone you really like, not one that is just good enough. Don't get me wrong, I think these new "good enough" phones are going to capture a large part of the market. I just am not sure it will be the iphone part. Past a certain income level, $540 savings for years of daily annoyance isn't really a compelling saving.
  - IkmoIkmo 11y ago
    Agreed, that's kind of how I value my rMBP, or equivalent windows laptops around $1500. I'll use it for 4 years, sell it for 25% the price (this is sadly where windows loses some value that's often not justified, resell market for Apple is great, resell market for top (not crappy but top) windows hardware seems to really undervalue the remaining quality). Got my MBP for about €1400, aim to sell it for at least about €400 a few years down the road. That leaves a cost of about 20 euros per month. Then I look at the fact that as an independent developer I'm earning a few thousand a month and this device basically like 90% of my office. It means a device that costs $100 or $1000 or even $5000 doesn't really make a huge difference. It's like a writer's pencil costs $1 or $10 or $100, when it's a tiny percentage of his costs and a gigantic percentage of his usage. That having been said, whether a purchase is justified in and of its own ignores the fact whether it's justified vs other purchases. After all, spending money supremely is a game of opportunity cost. And here spending an additional $500 starts to break down, and now we'd have to weigh the marginal benefit. Does a MBP vs a MBA for say a web developer who has a career in SEO, or say CSS, add much? Often the answer would be no, and compared to say $500 on a year at the gym, a romantic weekend, charity, is hard to defend. And with cheap phones hitting the essentials more and more (messaging, calls, basic snapshots, directions, quick info, a game of poker, dating etc), I'm already personally getting disinterested with new iterations of phones. The latest giants' 6 versions (samsung, apple) did nothing for me in terms of purchasing desire, despite thinking they're awesome devices.
  - norea-armozel 11y ago
    I have to agree. I owned a One Touch Idol 3 for a couple months and found it wasn't what I wanted. It was serviceable but it just didn't seem to be something that felt good to use when I did use it. Build quality is the only reason why I switched over to the iPhone (I think the software is horrible).
  - JTon 11y ago
    > Past a certain income level, $540 savings for years of daily annoyance isn't really a compelling saving. I think the whole point of this discussion is we've reached a tipping point where the "low end" phones aren't annoying anymore. For many users, they're perfectly acceptable
ksk 11y ago
Where have you seen the profit numbers for low cost phones?
- tdkl 11y ago
  They're measured in cents for flagship phones, so ...
cuicuocua 11y ago
I can't picture a day Google decides make money directly out of Android. It gets them tons of users to their services which gets them tons of money. And all companies building Android phones are doing the selling hard part instead of Google. Far more likely is an ever greater interaction between Android, online services and chrome OS until they all mix undistinguished or one takes over the others.
- michaelbuckbee 11y ago
  Don't need they make money from app sales?
- bryanlarsen 11y ago
  Google already makes money from Android. The base OS is free, but they charge for the application, store and play services bundle, IIRC.

bobajeff 11y ago

I don't think Google will ever try to make money directly off of licensing Android or selling phones. It's far more likely they'll continue to leverage it to bring users to their services. I think the point where Google and consumers are misaligned would be their preference of Chrome OS over Android. Still, I don't see them throwing away their market power in a play to move users to Chrome OS. They'll just keep mixing them both together until there is no difference.

sremani 11y ago

Once the upgrade fatigue hits and people are no longer subsidized for their cell phones, putting down $600+ or putting down $60 for serviceable phone would become a no brainer. These phones have to become good enough and they are already getting there.

graeme 11y ago
How true is this for that 44% currently using iphones? Iphones stay good enough for at least 2-3 years, if you're not picky. $600/3 = $200. $17 per month, 0.56 cents per day. It's not nothing. But it is nothing compared to what the iphone class spends on, say, coffee. There is the one-off hit from paying the $600 all at once, but credit cards reduce that pain somewhat. Meanwhile, you're using the phone every day. If you have the money, you probably want a phone you really like, not one that is just good enough. Don't get me wrong, I think these new "good enough" phones are going to capture a large part of the market. I just am not sure it will be the iphone part. Past a certain income level, $540 savings for years of daily annoyance isn't really a compelling saving.
- IkmoIkmo 11y ago
  Agreed, that's kind of how I value my rMBP, or equivalent windows laptops around $1500. I'll use it for 4 years, sell it for 25% the price (this is sadly where windows loses some value that's often not justified, resell market for Apple is great, resell market for top (not crappy but top) windows hardware seems to really undervalue the remaining quality). Got my MBP for about €1400, aim to sell it for at least about €400 a few years down the road. That leaves a cost of about 20 euros per month. Then I look at the fact that as an independent developer I'm earning a few thousand a month and this device basically like 90% of my office. It means a device that costs $100 or $1000 or even $5000 doesn't really make a huge difference. It's like a writer's pencil costs $1 or $10 or $100, when it's a tiny percentage of his costs and a gigantic percentage of his usage. That having been said, whether a purchase is justified in and of its own ignores the fact whether it's justified vs other purchases. After all, spending money supremely is a game of opportunity cost. And here spending an additional $500 starts to break down, and now we'd have to weigh the marginal benefit. Does a MBP vs a MBA for say a web developer who has a career in SEO, or say CSS, add much? Often the answer would be no, and compared to say $500 on a year at the gym, a romantic weekend, charity, is hard to defend. And with cheap phones hitting the essentials more and more (messaging, calls, basic snapshots, directions, quick info, a game of poker, dating etc), I'm already personally getting disinterested with new iterations of phones. The latest giants' 6 versions (samsung, apple) did nothing for me in terms of purchasing desire, despite thinking they're awesome devices.
- norea-armozel 11y ago
  I have to agree. I owned a One Touch Idol 3 for a couple months and found it wasn't what I wanted. It was serviceable but it just didn't seem to be something that felt good to use when I did use it. Build quality is the only reason why I switched over to the iPhone (I think the software is horrible).
- JTon 11y ago
  > Past a certain income level, $540 savings for years of daily annoyance isn't really a compelling saving. I think the whole point of this discussion is we've reached a tipping point where the "low end" phones aren't annoying anymore. For many users, they're perfectly acceptable

ksk 11y ago

Where have you seen the profit numbers for low cost phones?

tdkl 11y ago
They're measured in cents for flagship phones, so ...

cuicuocua 11y ago

I can't picture a day Google decides make money directly out of Android. It gets them tons of users to their services which gets them tons of money. And all companies building Android phones are doing the selling hard part instead of Google. Far more likely is an ever greater interaction between Android, online services and chrome OS until they all mix undistinguished or one takes over the others.

michaelbuckbee 11y ago
Don't need they make money from app sales?
bryanlarsen 11y ago
Google already makes money from Android. The base OS is free, but they charge for the application, store and play services bundle, IIRC.