ICS adoption in the Android smartphone market

[zsdersw]

Who do you think is ultimately at fault for ICS's relatively small portion of the Android smartphone market?

 

[Puddle Jumper]

The fact that all of the major updates rolled out shortly after that graph of ICS market share was produced is the main reason. Now that the Galaxy S2, Droid Razr/Maxx, and several HTC handsets are now on ICS and the Galaxy S3 is selling like crazy ICS will be far more common.

 

[zsdersw]

True, but I keep seeing iOS fanatics blame Google specifically and criticize Android in general for ICS's slow adoption... when it's really not their fault.

It's the phone manufacturer's fault.. and it's the consumer's fault.

 

[shortylickens]

MOST phones arent capable of running ICS. Thats no ones fault, just the way it is. I love my Droid but its two generations old and asking it to do too much is ridiculous.
If you insist on keeping slow hardware put Cyanogen Mod on it.

 

[zsdersw]

MOST phones arent capable of running ICS. Thats no ones fault, just the way it is. I love my Droid but its two generations old and asking it to do too much is ridiculous.
If you insist on keeping slow hardware put Cyanogen Mod on it.

Phones released when ICS was released are/should be capable... but the manufacturers choose not to make updates for them that include it.

 

[Red Storm]

I think it's pretty obviously choice #1, but the carriers should also be included.

Android wouldn't be much of an open platform if Google could force updates on every fork of Android out there. iOS fanatics just don't understand what open source means, and they try to peg everything into an Apple shaped hole.

 

[zsdersw]

I think it's pretty obviously choice #1, but the carriers should also be included.

Yeah, it's pretty obvious to me as a common sense thing... but, then again, as we all know: common sense isn't at all common.

 

[dlock13]

I blame Carriers and Manufacturers. Verizon needs to test for 10 years before they approve an ICS build so they're partially to blame. Manufacturers I blame since they have to fix their skin for ICS.

 

[bearxor]

I blame the consumers. I guess I don't REALLY blame them, but the vast majority dont really care. Since they don't care, it's ok for the manufactruers to throw a phone out there and then forget about it.

 

[MotionMan]

True, but I keep seeing iOS fanatics blame Google specifically and criticize Android in general for ICS's slow adoption... when it's really not their fault.

I think the issue is not who is to "blame" for ICS's slow adoption. In the discussions I have seen about Android vs. iOS, the Android proponents (I am told I cannot call them "fans" anymore) keep touting many ICS features over iOS 5 (or future 6) features. It is usually then that the subject of adoption numbers come up.

If Android proponents stop bringing up ICS specifically (or ICS-only features), and not argue the adoption numbers in a defensive manner, then iOS proponents won't be able to legitimately discuss ICS adoption numbers.

MotionMan

 

[T_Yamamoto]

Carrier and manufactoers keep ics for high end phones. Most people don't care about os at all. People think its a phone. More noticeably as a "Droid". People call me nexus a "Droid"

 

[Red Storm]

I think the issue is not who is to "blame" for ICS's slow adoption. In the discussions I have seen about Android vs. iOS, the Android proponents (I am told I cannot call them "fans" anymore) keep touting many ICS features over iOS 5 (or future 6) features. It is usually then that the subject of adoption numbers come up.

If Android proponents stop bringing up ICS specifically (or ICS-only features), and not argue the adoption numbers in a defensive manner, then iOS proponents won't be able to legitimately discuss ICS adoption numbers.

In a discussion about feature comparison, I don't see what adoption numbers have to do with anything.

 

[AstroManLuca]

I peg the blame at 70% carriers, 25% manufacturers, and 5% Google.

Sorta wish Google would at least attempt to do something to alleviate update delays. But I'm not sure what they can do without turning Android into an iOS/WP style walled garden.

Carriers are more to blame than manufacturers, though. My old Samsung Epic got a leaked version of Samsung's Gingerbread update a good six months before they finally sent it out OTA. In addition, look at Verizon's handling of the Galaxy Nexus - in that case, you KNOW there was no delay from Samsung, at least in terms of adapting their own software to the update, because the Nexus runs stock Android. So that was clearly 100% Verizon's fault.

 

[AstroManLuca]

In a discussion about feature comparison, I don't see what adoption numbers have to do with anything.

Think of it this way. The whole iOS vs. Android debate is a childish schoolyard debate, nothing more. Fans of either platform want to say "nuh uh that's cheating!" and invalidate as many of their opponents' arguments as possible, in order to "win."

So iOS fans will claim that features in ICS don't count because not enough users have them, and Android fans will claim that iOS is a closed system and therefore none of its advantages count either.

 

[Red Storm]

Think of it this way. The whole iOS vs. Android debate is a childish schoolyard debate, nothing more. Fans of either platform want to say "nuh uh that's cheating!" and invalidate as many of their opponents' arguments as possible, in order to "win."

So iOS fans will claim that features in ICS don't count because not enough users have them, and Android fans will claim that iOS is a closed system and therefore none of its advantages count either.

Oh I know, you see petty arguments from both camps. I've used devices from both sides for quite a while so I see the advantages in each, but that specific argument ("doesn't count if it's not popular") just seems odd to me.

 

[MotionMan]

Android wouldn't be much of an open platform if Google could force updates on every fork of Android out there. iOS fanatics just don't understand what open source means, and they try to peg everything into an Apple shaped hole.

It is not that iOS proponents (please, don't call anyone a "fan" or "fanatic" - that is derogatory) do not understand open source (you know most of them absolutely do). The discussion of Android vs. iOS just tends to angle towards adoption numbers because of the features that get discussed.

If iOS proponents kept arguing that iOS is better because of a feature that only 7% of all iPhones ran, you surly have little doubt that Android proponents would jump on that fact in a heartbeat. I have seen Android proponents put down iOS6 because some if its features will not run on anything lower than an iPhone 4S. I am not sure what the numbers are, but I think more than 7% of all iPhones are 4S.

Like most of these religious discussions, what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

MotionMan

 

[zsdersw]

If iOS proponents kept arguing that iOS is better because of a feature that only 7% of all iPhones ran, you surly have little doubt that Android proponents would jump on that fact in a heartbeat. I have seen Android proponents put down iOS6 because some if its features will not run on anything lower than an iPhone 4S. I am not sure what the numbers are, but I think more than 7% of all iPhones are 4S.

Like most of these religious discussions, what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

MotionMan

That's ridiculous. Android advocates who did such a thing would be just as idiotic as iOS advocates who are doing the same thing.

It's not good for either the goose or the gander.

 

[Red Storm]

It doesn't matter who is saying it about who, what I'm saying is that it is not relevant in a feature comparison. Apple holding back features from older hardware or Android manufacturers holding back ICS has nothing to do with a feature comparison between ICS and iOS6. It's an entirely different discussion.

 

[Brian Stirling]

I put the blame at 40% Google, 35% Phone makers/carriers and 25% the customers. It would be great if Google were able to force the makers/carriers to update more quickly, but I don't think they care -- they have what they want whether you're running ICS, GB or even Froyo -- they have search on most of these devices no matter the version.

The makers and carriers are more interested in the next release and give too little attention to updates.

And the customers have not been sufficiently demanding for the updates.

If this continues Android will plateau and then, probably within a couple more years, begin to LOSE market share to Apple. If Apple continues to support devices for 2 years or so and Android users are lucky for 6 months of support it will eventually begin to impact the market share.

At this point Android and Apple are eating RIM's and the other makers market share, but sooner-or-later, when the other competitors are dead there will be no way for Android and iOS to gain market share at the expense of the other makers and they'll be eating each other market share. With the dismal support Android in known for Apple is in the catbird seat when it's just Android and iOS.


Brian

 

[Puddle Jumper]

I put the blame at 40% Google, 35% Phone makers/carriers and 25% the customers. It would be great if Google were able to force the makers/carriers to update more quickly, but I don't think they care -- they have what they want whether you're running ICS, GB or even Froyo -- they have search on most of these devices no matter the version.

The makers and carriers are more interested in the next release and give too little attention to updates.

And the customers have not been sufficiently demanding for the updates.

If this continues Android will plateau and then, probably within a couple more years, begin to LOSE market share to Apple. If Apple continues to support devices for 2 years or so and Android users are lucky for 6 months of support it will eventually begin to impact the market share.

At this point Android and Apple are eating RIM's and the other makers market share, but sooner-or-later, when the other competitors are dead there will be no way for Android and iOS to gain market share at the expense of the other makers and they'll be eating each other market share. With the dismal support Android in known for Apple is in the catbird seat when it's just Android and iOS.


Brian

Apple doesn't really support devices for two years either, if they did the iPhone 4 would have Siri and turn by turn navigation.

 

[MotionMan]

In a discussion about feature comparison, I don't see what adoption numbers have to do with anything.

Thee is some validity to the argument that a feature that less than 10% of all users can use is not much of a feature in the big picture.

To say that "iOS" is better than "Android" because of X feature, yet only 7% of all iOS users can use X feature, does not make for a good feature.

Now, if you are ONLY comparing iOS5 (or 6) to ICS, without making a broad proclamation about "iOS" and "Android" in general, that is a different story.

MotionMan

 

[MotionMan]

That's ridiculous. Android advocates who did such a thing would be just as idiotic as iOS advocates who are doing the same thing.

It's not good for either the goose or the gander.

Unfortunately, it is what is being done in many, many iOS vs. Android threads. Android proponents love to say how X feature won't run on anything less than a 4S, and thus that feature is invalid.

MotionMan

 

[MotionMan]

Apple doesn't really support devices for two years either, if they did the iPhone 4 would have Siri and turn by turn navigation.

Exhibit A to my posts above.

MotionMan

 

[cronos]

Answering the question as you presented it, I don't think anyone is at fault at all.

I really don't think the fact that ICS adoption rate is relatively small is necessarily a horrible thing. It's a major version upgrade.

 

[Puddle Jumper]

Exhibit A to my posts above.

MotionMan

Except I never said that all Android devices get ICS, I was simply pointing out the fact that Apple doesn't provide two years of support like everyone claims.