Latest IDC worldwide smartphone marketshare numbers

[TheWart]

Pretty solid numbers all around.

http://www.businesswire.com/portal/...d=news_view&newsId=20100507005084&newsLang=en

 

[jpeyton]

I'm a little more interested in smartphone operating system numbers, since Android is used by multiple manufacturers.

 

[TheWart]

I'm a little more interested in smartphone operating system numbers, since Android is used by multiple manufacturers.

Well I can assure you that the companies listed above care more about handsets because that is how they make their money.

 

[rudeguy]

Nokia must still be gigantic overseas. Out of all the smart phone users I know, maybe 2 of them have Nokias.

 

[TheWart]

Nokia must still be gigantic overseas. Out of all the smart phone users I know, maybe 2 of them have Nokias.

Seriously. Pretty nuts that just to maintain their marketshare they had to ship almost 21 million smartphones.

 

[Deeko]

Nokia must still be gigantic overseas. Out of all the smart phone users I know, maybe 2 of them have Nokias.

Nokia is huge in places other than the US. 21.5m smartphones, and I think something like 115m overall handsets sold in Q1 this year alone.

 

[rudeguy]

Nokia is huge in places other than the US. 21.5m smartphones, and I think something like 115m overall handsets sold in Q1 this year alone.

My first digital phones were Nokias. 5120, 6120, 6120i...man those were the days. I was super geeked about Symbian...but it never really took hold here.

 

[Deeko]

My first digital phones were Nokias. 5120, 6120, 6120i...man those were the days. I was super geeked about Symbian...but it never really took hold here.

Yep, I've had lots of Nokias in my day...8290, 3390, 6610, 3220, and most recently, the N95. Part of the problem is they don't sell their high end phones subsidized through carriers. When the N95 came out, nothing on the market came close to it feature-wise....but how many people are going to drop $600 on a phone?

 

[BlahBlahYouToo]

thoughts.

where the hell are all these nokia smartphones because i only know 1 person with one (compared with multiple droid, iphone, BB users).

i expected HTC to have a bigger lead over moto seeing how they have multiple phones for like every carrier.

 

[AstroManLuca]

thoughts.

where the hell are all these nokia smartphones because i only know 1 person with one (compared with multiple droid, iphone, BB users).

i expected HTC to have a bigger lead over moto seeing how they have multiple phones for like every carrier.

They're worldwide numbers.

Nokia's smartphones run Symbian OS. Worldwide, Symbian still has more market share than any other smartphone OS, even Blackberry.

In the US, though, Nokia smartphones are very rare. Most Nokias in the US are feature phones.

You can look at worldwide OS market share, US-only OS market share, worldwide handset manufacturer market share, and US-only handset manufacturer market share, and all four charts will be very different.

 

[DivideBYZero]

They're worldwide numbers.

Nokia's smartphones run Symbian OS. Worldwide, Symbian still has more market share than any other smartphone OS, even Blackberry.

In the US, though, Nokia smartphones are very rare. Most Nokias in the US are feature phones.

You can look at worldwide OS market share, US-only OS market share, worldwide handset manufacturer market share, and US-only handset manufacturer market share, and all four charts will be very different.

Almost any Nokia running S60 must be being lumped into 'smartphones' then, and some of those are far removed from anything we use in anger today. As an example the N-Gage ran S60 back in the day and how smart does that look in todays market? A lot of the low end S60 Nokia's are feature phones at best, AFAIK.

Look I live, work and travel all over Europe and you see nothing like as many Nokia smartphones as this would suggest. E.g., this past week I have been flying between three countries. In all those trips I saw one e71 type device. The predominant devices are BB's and iPhones.

 

[Deeko]

Almost any Nokia running S60 must be being lumped into 'smartphones' then, and some of those are far removed from anything we use in anger today. As an example the N-Gage ran S60 back in the day and how smart does that look in todays market? A lot of the low end S60 Nokia's are feature phones at best, AFAIK.

Look I live, work and travel all over Europe and you see nothing like as many Nokia smartphones as this would suggest. E.g., this past week I have been flying between three countries. In all those trips I saw one e71 type device. The predominant devices are BB's and iPhones.

What is it those other S60 devices can't do, that an e71 can? Is the N95 a "smartphone" in your eyes?

 

[DivideBYZero]

What is it those other S60 devices can't do, that an e71 can? Is the N95 a "smartphone" in your eyes?

Basic phones with S60 != smartphone, that's my point.

 

[Deeko]

Basic phones with S60 != smartphone, that's my point.

I'm asking where you draw the line. What features do S60 "smartphones" have that S60 "featurephones" do not?

 

[DivideBYZero]

I'm asking where you draw the line. What features do S60 "smartphones" have that S60 "featurephones" do not?

Why don't you answer the question as you appear to be goading me into a response so you can start an argument.

Let me flip it on you and ask you this: Would you consider a Nokia 6700(even though it's S40 UI, it's still Symbian) a Smartphone?

 

[Deeko]

Why don't you answer the question as you appear to be goading me into a response so you can start an argument.

Let me flip it on you and ask you this: Would you consider a Nokia 6700(even though it's S40 UI, it's still Symbian) a Smartphone?

Huh? I don't have an answer, I'm asking you a question, you're the one making a claim that they include phones that don't reach the smartphone bar. You said the majority of what Nokia sells isn't a smartphone. I'm asking you which of these phones you consider non-smartphones, and why. If its a non-modern interface without a touch screen or full keyboard, well, then I guess RIM needs to remove all sales of the Pearl, yes?

I've never seen the Nokia 6700, but according to Wiki, it has a 5MP camera, A-GPS w/ maps, a webkit browser w/ flash lite, media player, email client, calendar....what is it missing to make it a smartphone?

 

[pm]

That's actually a good question - what makes a phone a smartphone? Certain Motorola Razor models had the ability to surf the web but no one I know would call them "smartphones". I've never been really clear on what makes a phone a smartphone". It can't be just basic data access, surfing the web, or a GPS or a camera, or the ability up sync calendar and contacts. Maybe 3G data access... but then the first iPhone fails. Maybe Wifi... but lots of smartphones don't have WiFi.

It's actually a hard question in my mind. It's like one of those "you know one when you see one things" but that leaves the question open to interpretation.

For what it's worth, the Nokia 6700 Classic is a smartphone to me... but like I said I'm still confused about the definition.

 

[Deeko]

That's actually a good question - what makes a phone a smartphone? Certain Motorola Razor models had the ability to surf the web but no one I know would call them "smartphones". I've never been really clear on what makes a phone a smartphone". It can't be just basic data access, surfing the web, or a GPS or a camera, or the ability up sync calendar and contacts. Maybe 3G data access... but then the first iPhone fails. Maybe Wifi... but lots of smartphones don't have WiFi.

It's actually a hard question in my mind. It's like one of those "you know one when you see one things" but that leaves the question open to interpretation.

For what it's worth, the Nokia 6700 Classic is a smartphone to me... but like I said I'm still confused about the definition.

Yea, there isn't a clear definition. Especially if you look at phones that launched a couple of years ago. Compare, say, the original iPhone to the Nokia N95. The iPhone's interface was worlds more modern than the N95's - but the N95's hardware capabilities were superior. Which of those phones do you today consider a smartphone? At the time, they were two of the top smartphones you could buy.

 

[DivideBYZero]

Huh? I don't have an answer, I'm asking you a question, you're the one making a claim that they include phones that don't reach the smartphone bar. You said the majority of what Nokia sells isn't a smartphone. I'm asking you which of these phones you consider non-smartphones, and why. If its a non-modern interface without a touch screen or full keyboard, well, then I guess RIM needs to remove all sales of the Pearl, yes?

I've never seen the Nokia 6700, but according to Wiki, it has a 5MP camera, A-GPS w/ maps, a webkit browser w/ flash lite, media player, email client, calendar....what is it missing to make it a smartphone?

Well despite the fact that the Pearl 3G has the modern OS5 interface that's in all current RIM devices that is an interesting point. It has been suggested that the new Pearl 3G isn't included as a Smartphone, even though it has the same guts as the 9700, with the addition of Wireless N. Why? Because it's T9(9105).

 

[Deeko]

Well despite the fact that the Pearl 3G has the modern OS5 interface that's in all current RIM devices that is an interesting point. It has been suggested that the new Pearl 3G isn't included as a Smartphone, even though it has the same guts as the 9700, with the addition of Wireless N. Why? Because it's T9(9105).

Blackberry is still selling OS4.x devices, aren't they? Those are still considered smartphones.

I personally think its foolish to try to deny a phone smartphone status because of its input method, or because someone prefers a different style interface. I can probably still type faster on a good T9 keypad than on a touchs screen, and probably faster than on a portrait QWERTY, too. If I were buying a Pearl 3G, I'd take the standard T9 version in a heartbeat.

That's what I'm getting at....just because the interface isn't flashy and it doesn't have some form of full keyboard shouldn't make a difference, if it can still do the things that a smartphone can do.

 

[DivideBYZero]

Blackberry is still selling OS4.x devices, aren't they? Those are still considered smartphones.

I personally think its foolish to try to deny a phone smartphone status because of its input method, or because someone prefers a different style interface. I can probably still type faster on a good T9 keypad than on a touchs screen, and probably faster than on a portrait QWERTY, too. If I were buying a Pearl 3G, I'd take the standard T9 version in a heartbeat.

That's what I'm getting at....just because the interface isn't flashy and it doesn't have some form of full keyboard shouldn't make a difference, if it can still do the things that a smartphone can do.

All new BB devices are 5.x, current stock may ship with 4.6/7, FWIW, but I don't know why we're getting bogged down on the UI. I'm also trying to avoid the looming and all too common X brand vs Y argument, so please don't draw me on it.

I was stating that devices that are clearly sold as feature phones are getting Smartphone status and I don't think that's right, not debating UI's. (I am aware that S40/60 refers to the UI, but I couldn't be arsed to quote Symbian 6.x or whatever they run underneath)

 

[Deeko]

All new BB devices are 5.x, current stock may ship with 4.6/7, FWIW, but I don't know why we're getting bogged down on the UI. I'm also trying to avoid the looming and all too common X brand vs Y argument, so please don't draw me on it.

I was stating that devices that are clearly sold as feature phones are getting Smartphone status and I don't think that's right, not debating UI's. (I am aware that S40/60 refers to the UI, but I couldn't be arsed to quote Symbian 6.x or whatever they run underneath)

no one is making this a brand argument- simply making comparisons.

You still haven't answered the question, then. if it isn't the ui, the os, or the capabilities, what is it that is keeping certain phones from smartphone status? You must not think the specific nokia you asked about is smartphone-why?

 

[DivideBYZero]

no one is making this a brand argument- simply making comparisons.

You still haven't answered the question, then. if it isn't the ui, the os, or the capabilities, what is it that is keeping certain phones from smartphone status? You must not think the specific nokia you asked about is smartphone-why?

No, I don't think it is a smartphone. It's a feature phone with some box-ticking features to allude to being a smartphone, but in reality it's not.

The applications section of the phone is a little misleading actually; while it's chock full with items to go click-crazy on, most of these (Facebook, YouTube, MySpace and so on) are all just links to their mobile web counterparts, and really are nothing more than glorified bookmarks.

http://www.techradar.com/reviews/phones/mobile-phones/nokia-6700-classic-620360/review?artc_pg=6

 

[Deeko]

No, I don't think it is a smartphone. It's a feature phone with some box-ticking features to allude to being a smartphone, but in reality it's not.



http://www.techradar.com/reviews/phones/mobile-phones/nokia-6700-classic-620360/review?artc_pg=6

So then your definition of being a smartphone is strong social networking or third party apps? Other than that, it seems to have pretty similar feature set to a standard smartphone. Android didn't have a Facebook app for quite awhile, for what its worth. Different people look for different things in a phone.

Anyway, do you have a link that states what these studies use as a determination of what is and is not a smartphone? Or what Nokia uses? Nokia sold roughly 115 million phones last quarter, so obviously not everything they sell is branded a "smartphone".

 

[DivideBYZero]

So then your definition of being a smartphone is strong social networking or third party apps? Other than that, it seems to have pretty similar feature set to a standard smartphone. Android didn't have a Facebook app for quite awhile, for what its worth. Different people look for different things in a phone.

Anyway, do you have a link that states what these studies use as a determination of what is and is not a smartphone? Or what Nokia uses? Nokia sold roughly 115 million phones last quarter, so obviously not everything they sell is branded a "smartphone".

I'm sensing you want me to post up a list so you can knock each down with that marketing inspired spec sheet from the 6700 one by one. I'm not going to do that, I'll let the summary of the review do the talking:

The Nokia 6700 Classic is a good phone, there's no doubt about it. The target market is simply a person who likes a decent looking phone with a good pocket size and basic phone functionality, but done well.

As far as I can tell the 6700 doesn't have any apps of note. It has OVI maps, which appears to be very basic and graphically weak, but other than that relies on mobile sites for everything else. It does appear to have a comparable feature set, but not all cars with reciprocating combustion engines are supercars, just as not all phones are smartphones.