3 ms·

Yes. They are, by the plain meaning of the words, a minority player in mobile phone sales globally by a HUGE margin. The most recent data for 2021 suggest that

Yes. They are, by the plain meaning of the words, a minority player in mobile phone sales globally by a HUGE margin. The most recent data for 2021 suggest that sales for last were split pretty evenly in the US, but overall usage still heavily favors Android. They DO have a much bigger footprint in some desirable segments of that market, but overall they're a minority player. By definition, minority players do not enjoy any monopolistic power. They are under no obligation to give up any competitive advantage until and unless they exhibit true, market-manipulating monopolistic behavior.

mthoms 5y ago
Just because they don’t have a majority share of global sales doesn’t make them a “minority player”. That’s not really what that term means. The term “minority player” means they have less influence/importance than the “major players”. Though, to be fair I can see how that could be confusing (because English).
- ubermonkey 5y ago
  Wow, that's a rhetorical mess! "Minority doesn't mean minority" is some serious doublethink. iOS is a minority player in the mobile phone market by a wide margin globally, and by a small margin in the US. End of.
  - mthoms 5y ago
    I really think you're conflating the (subjective) expression about an entity being a "major/minor player" with the factual claim of a company having a majority or minority marketshare. They're different, but you're treating them the same. Hence, confusion. Major Player: an important and successful company, especially when compared with other, smaller companies in the same type of business or industry. Source https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/major-player https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/major-pl... Ergo, the vast majority of people would agree that Apple is a "major player" in the phone industry despite having a "minority marketshare". PS. There's nothing wrong with the point you're making, I'm only pointing out that its confusing to others because of the terminology you're using.
jacob019 5y ago
They are #2 globally, behind Samsung. 15.2% of the global smartphone market to Samsung's 20.8%. They are #1 in the US, 47% to Samsung's 34%. That is a dominant position. Apple would be wise to avoid the appearance of abusing that position and inviting regulatory oversight.
- 2muchcoffeeman 5y ago
  I guess another way to look at it is by platform dominance though. Android is 85% globally. Apple is only a majority in some English speaking countries. And even then they barely have a majority. It’s a fairly even split between Apple and Android. Most people I know are brand agnostic but platform loyal. Google could have captured half of all English speaking countries and 85% globally if not for their incompetence. They still could since here we are complaining about Google’s messaging apps.
- ubermonkey 5y ago
  You're cherrypicking by conflating "manufacturer" with "operating system." Yes, Apple has a bigger market share than ONE Android handset maker. But if you compare by platform, iOS is, in the US, more or less even with Android. Globally, it remains a small minority. 47% of a market is NOT a dominant position. It's a GOOD position, but it's not strong enough to control the market in ways that typically produce antitrust interest.
partiallypro 5y ago
They are not a minority player in the US, which is what we are talking about. That's like arguing Facebook isn't a monopoly becaues it doesn't exist in China. It's a nonsense argument.

mthoms 5y ago

Just because they don’t have a majority share of global sales doesn’t make them a “minority player”. That’s not really what that term means. The term “minority player” means they have less influence/importance than the “major players”. Though, to be fair I can see how that could be confusing (because English).

ubermonkey 5y ago
Wow, that's a rhetorical mess! "Minority doesn't mean minority" is some serious doublethink. iOS is a minority player in the mobile phone market by a wide margin globally, and by a small margin in the US. End of.
- mthoms 5y ago
  I really think you're conflating the (subjective) expression about an entity being a "major/minor player" with the factual claim of a company having a majority or minority marketshare. They're different, but you're treating them the same. Hence, confusion. Major Player: an important and successful company, especially when compared with other, smaller companies in the same type of business or industry. Source https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/major-player https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/major-pl... Ergo, the vast majority of people would agree that Apple is a "major player" in the phone industry despite having a "minority marketshare". PS. There's nothing wrong with the point you're making, I'm only pointing out that its confusing to others because of the terminology you're using.

jacob019 5y ago

They are #2 globally, behind Samsung. 15.2% of the global smartphone market to Samsung's 20.8%. They are #1 in the US, 47% to Samsung's 34%. That is a dominant position. Apple would be wise to avoid the appearance of abusing that position and inviting regulatory oversight.

2muchcoffeeman 5y ago
I guess another way to look at it is by platform dominance though. Android is 85% globally. Apple is only a majority in some English speaking countries. And even then they barely have a majority. It’s a fairly even split between Apple and Android. Most people I know are brand agnostic but platform loyal. Google could have captured half of all English speaking countries and 85% globally if not for their incompetence. They still could since here we are complaining about Google’s messaging apps.
ubermonkey 5y ago
You're cherrypicking by conflating "manufacturer" with "operating system." Yes, Apple has a bigger market share than ONE Android handset maker. But if you compare by platform, iOS is, in the US, more or less even with Android. Globally, it remains a small minority. 47% of a market is NOT a dominant position. It's a GOOD position, but it's not strong enough to control the market in ways that typically produce antitrust interest.

partiallypro 5y ago

They are not a minority player in the US, which is what we are talking about. That's like arguing Facebook isn't a monopoly becaues it doesn't exist in China. It's a nonsense argument.