Question: How long will it be before Android is the truly dominant phone OS?

[Journey]

Prompted by another thread about, why is Android good this leads me to this thread.

It's clear in the last 12 months that with the massive proliferation of Android based handsets, availability, and pricing that Android is going to become the number one used phone OS but just how long can it take, and is there anything that can stop it?

If you look at the fact you can get a PAYG handset for £99 already and, Google has it's new Flagship out on the 20th of this month, they have pretty much got the whole market from low to high end.

Obviously there is the issue of fragmentation on some of the earlier handsets, and that looks like it will continue until the life cycle of this generation of handsets has expired.

Do you think this inevitable growth will slow the development down or speed it up?

Can Google continue to outpace the likes of Microsoft and Apple given how much of a following the company had, or do you think that MS and Apple with counter with lower priced handsets?

It's been shown time and again that there is massive money to be made in the low-mid range phone market and with the dawn of the new 'Smartphone' era will this continue to be the case?

I look forward to your answers, and please don't use this for bashing other phones, keep it constructive, keep it civilised, and above all please keep it on topic.

 

[Amp34]

I think Android will sew up the low end market and hold its own in the high end market. MS definately won't be heading back down the cheaper end of the market (that was one of the killers of WinMo, low spec machines unable to run it properly) and Apple would never touch that end either.

High end phone wise I think it will probably be a reasonable split between the 4 smartphone OSs (inc BB), each with their own style (excluding Symbian which is still by far the most dominant smartphone OS).

The thing google are always going to have issues with is fragmentation. Companies are going to have to start releasing two versions of their programs, those for the high end phones set against WinPho/iOS and those for the cheap and cheerful budget end (with much lower hardware specs). We shall see how that does them...

 

[manic111]

It will be interesting to see what happens if/when MeeGo gets going. I expect that Nokia will push it hard on phones at all levels, and if it's any good and gets developer support it could "spread" to other brands of phone. If it becomes attractive to manufacturers for phones at a low price-point it could be eat into the Android share.

 

[Totality]

The thing google are always going to have issues with is fragmentation. Companies are going to have to start releasing two versions of their programs, those for the high end phones set against WinPho/iOS and those for the cheap and cheerful budget end (with much lower hardware specs). We shall see how that does them...

The fragmentation isn't such an issue for low end 99 quid phones I reckon as people who buy a cheap phone aren't generally the types of people who look at upgrading the firmware.

The problem comes when you look at the higher end phones because people expect more from them. If 3.0 doesn't stop fragmentation then you have a host of 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 and 3.0 devices out there. Making apps for Android would be an utter nightmare as if some of the new versions of the OS supported new features, you could possibly have to write many version of the app to do different things.

Until the fragmentation is sorted out, the high end market won't take off in my view, but the low end mass market will do well. My mates GF has a cheap android phone and loves it. I asked her what version it runs and she had no idea so it could be 1.6 for all I know, but for her needs it works fine.

Generally the type of person who spends a lot of money on a phone are the techies or people who know about phones so want them to always be running the latest software, etc.

 

[MikeHunt79]

I think it could do well if they manage to sort of the latency issues of the current versions of Android...

 

[Columbo]

The thing google are always going to have issues with is fragmentation. .

Where people see fragmentation I see choice.

 

[Amp34]

The fragmentation isn't such an issue for low end 99 quid phones I reckon as people who buy a cheap phone aren't generally the types of people who look at upgrading the firmware.

That wasn't really my point.

The problem comes when you look at the higher end phones because people expect more from them. If 3.0 doesn't stop fragmentation then you have a host of 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 and 3.0 devices out there. Making apps for Android would be an utter nightmare as if some of the new versions of the OS supported new features, you could possibly have to write many version of the app to do different things.

This was however. You're going to have to create two or more versions of the same software to allow it to work on all phones released. Android will get a lot of stick if not all people who buy an android phone can play the latest big hit etc.

Until the fragmentation is sorted out, the high end market won't take off in my view, but the low end mass market will do well. My mates GF has a cheap android phone and loves it. I asked her what version it runs and she had no idea so it could be 1.6 for all I know, but for her needs it works fine.

Generally the type of person who spends a lot of money on a phone are the techies or people who know about phones so want them to always be running the latest software, etc.

That's an interesting point, however the prevalanc of low end devices could mean the high end devices will be neglected (low end graphics etc) and in that case Android in high end phones will end up back where it started, for gadget freaks... Most others will just buy a phone with the other OSs on the market (who can afford it) because it has the better software and games.

Also my sister has an android phone and has no idea how to use it other than make calls, it's just too confusing for her (her words), major issue for the low end market and potentially something that other OSs will exploit.

I've said this for the last year or so, unless google pull out something big Android will be going the way other mobile OSs have gone, fragmentation and then obscurity as its name is dragged through mud, developers stop developing for it and manufacturers start shipping more and more phones with other OSs on.

 

[Amp34]

Where people see fragmentation I see choice.

You had choice with with WinMo, look how that went...

There was no integrated market for a long time, partly because it was quite difficult to work out whether a program would work on your phone (both button and screen resolution wise as well as processing wise). That was just the start, manufacturers then shoulder the blame by providing sub standard hardware for the OS to run on and/or don't optimise it for the hardware. We're already seeing this happen with Android, it can only get worse.

I love choice, I love WinMo (although I have a new phone now), unfortunately most don't want the issues that come with that choice. It's why MS have decided with WinPho 7 to have a specific set of hardware options and features that have to be adhered to, as well as a specific minimum requirement for other bits of hardware.

 

[Morba]

Won't be long, but that's not hard given it's competition (no iOS).

 

[sarge78]

The thing google are always going to have issues with is fragmentation. Companies are going to have to start releasing two versions of their programs, those for the high end phones set against WinPho/iOS and those for the cheap and cheerful budget end (with much lower hardware specs). We shall see how that does them...

Here's a good article on fragmentation for those interested.

+ 'High end' phones become cheep 'low end' phones within 1-2 years these days... No point worrying about fragmentation (for any OS)

 

[mrk]

Yeah, fragmentation isn't an issue considering new low priced phones like the San Fran are fairly high in spec and fully capable of running the latest Android OS thick and fast.

This trend should continue well into Android 2.3 uptake and Google have taken measures to see to it that 2.3 doesn't suffer from such fragmentation due to how modular it is. FroYo saw the start of this modular system with core OS apps like Market being updated.

 

[Amp34]

Cool, well, we shall see.

That's not a "I told you so but just an interested party. As long as Google keep working at it and manufacturers don't start cutting corners too much then hopefully it should be ok.

Oh and interesting article too.

 

[Malt_Vinegar]

I am not sure Android will be the number 1, or at least if it does become number 1 it will not stay that way. iOS is not going to let go lightly and has a very "loyal" user base.

Also, not wanting to sound like a broken record, but I think WP7 is a slow burner. It is going to pick up dramatically once people are over the initial "OMG WTF IT MICROSOFT" reaction and get hands on

There will always be multiple OS in this sort of battle. No one will win over totally in my opinion. Its not like the days of old with early MS domination. Its bad for the market, and slows innovation.

Choice is not a bad thing!!

 

[Journey]

I agree choice is not a bad thing, but as far as I can see from the current situation, iOS cannot become the number one market share holder unless they release cheaper handsets, a bit like how they have staggered the iPod line over the years. Unless they start to push other phone devices out iOS will just end up being a portable OS for iPad and iPod Touch and the call functions will be tacked on for one device only. Before anyone cries iPhone bashing it's far, far from it since I like the iPhone and iOS I just think the price is far to high to make it a leader in the world market.

As for Win7Mo I'd like to think slow burner is right, since it will take maybe 12 months for the hardware it runs on now to become cheap enough to make lower price models for the regular PAYG users, and those who don't want to have to buy a phone they pretty much need to insure for peace of mind.

I think RIM has already lost the race before they begun, they started a great trend/fad and let it slip away by not seeing the potential it had in consumerville. I do think they will continue to have a significant presence in the business market and will give MS a good fight.

I seriously see a pie chart showing a big green segment that fills up 60% of the circle within a year if current trends are anything to go by.

 

[Danthus]

Android is flawed in the sense that Google produce it and then it ends up in the hands of the developers of the phones and the then carriers.

Look at the farce with updating from 2.1 to 2.2 in this country alone.

 

[Macky]

Android is flawed in the sense that Google produce it and then it ends up in the hands of the developers of the phones and the then carriers.

Look at the farce with updating from 2.1 to 2.2 in this country alone.

How do you think it should be done?

 

[krooton]

As for Win7Mo I'd like to think slow burner is right, since it will take maybe 12 months for the hardware it runs on now to become cheap enough to make lower price models for the regular PAYG users, and those who don't want to have to buy a phone they pretty much need to insure for peace of mind.

Pretty sure the Orange San Fran/ZTE Blade hardware could run WP7.

 

[Tunney]

Pretty sure the Orange San Fran/ZTE Blade hardware could run WP7.

The Orange SF doesn't conform to Microsoft's chassis specs. Only a 600Mhz CPU and no (?) GPU acceleration.


As for the original question, it depends on how you define dominant. Are we talking 50% marketshare? Or Windows-style 80%+ marketshare?

I don't think it will see either in the next 5 years. If you look at profitability, the lions share of the market goes to only three players - Apple, RIM and Nokia. None of these companies are using Android and they have the money to invest in their own operating systems. Single manufacturer operating systems have the potential to evolve quicker and fit the hardware better. Android has its advantages but not enough to destroy the competition. I can easily envision there still being 4 big operating systems around in 2015.

 

[sarge78]

^The Orange SF has the same GPU as all current WP7 phones, the Adreno 200
(It won't be able to run it due to no ARMv7 instruction set, only the old QSD8250 is currently supported anyway)

 

[Journey]

The Orange SF doesn't conform to Microsoft's chassis specs. Only a 600Mhz CPU and no (?) GPU acceleration.


As for the original question, it depends on how you define dominant. Are we talking 50% marketshare? Or Windows-style 80%+ marketshare?

I don't think it will see either in the next 5 years. If you look at profitability, the lions share of the market goes to only three players - Apple, RIM and Nokia. None of these companies are using Android and they have the money to invest in their own operating systems. Single manufacturer operating systems have the potential to evolve quicker and fit the hardware better. Android has its advantages but not enough to destroy the competition. I can easily envision there still being 4 big operating systems around in 2015.

Profitability is questionable judgement of what makes something a dominant force. Since Google are making their money off the back of the manufacturers who use Android, so therefore you could argue that Android is the most profitable by far since you have to take in to account dozens of manufacturers from across the planet to work out how much money it is making for them all combined.

Nokia has a declining presence in the new world Smartphone OS market so they are not going regain ground unless they produce something amazing next year.

Apple ship more of one type of phone than any other single manufacturer does, but look at the increasing sales again from the combined dozens of Android handsets, it's increasing steadily and is out stripping Apple in terms of volume quite easily.

So I ask you this, does Apple and MS need to settle for second and thirf best but have better overall perceived quality? Since volume is not the be all and end all, but it but numbers make big bucks and that's what Google are all about the Bucks.