Posted on 05/10/2010 11:24:56 AM PDT by SmokingJoe
* Google's Android OS in 28 pct of U.S. smartphones in Q1
* Apple U.S. iPhone share 21 pct in Q1
* Research in Motion retains No. 1 rank with 36 pct share
SAN FRANCISCO, May 10 (Reuters) - Google Inc (GOOG.O) displaced iPhone maker Apple Inc (AAPL.O) to become the second most popular provider of smartphone software in the United States during the first quarter, the latest sign of the increasing competition in the fast-growing mobile market.
Smartphones featuring Google's Android operating system accounted for 28 percent of U.S. smartphone unit sales in the first quarter according to NPD Group, behind top-ranked Research in Motion (RIM.TO), maker of the Blackberry phone, which had a 36 percent share of the market.
Smartphones, which allow consumers to surf the web, send email and run specialized applications on wide, color screens, are increasingly replacing no-frills cell phones for many U.S. consumers.
The devices have become a prime battleground for a variety of tech companies seeking to ensure a good position in the evolving market.
Last month, Hewlett-Packard Co. (HPQ.N) said it would pay $1.2 billion to acquire Palm Inc (PALM.O), which sells two smartphone models based on its WebOS operating system. Microsoft Corp (MSFT.O), whose Windows operating system is used in the majority of the world's PCs, unveiled a pair of smartphones last month and recently launched a revamped version of its mobile operating system.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
To HTML5, eventually, from what, today? (Hint: It starts with an "F" and rhymes with SPLASH)
These were problems before Jobs started his crusade. I'm glad someone with that kind of power finally did.
Well Job’s crusade is going to end up like the original crusades to the Holy Land. He is going to lose. A year from now, Android spartphones would have left the iPhones far behind in quarterly sales, and the Androids will be happily running Flash. Adobe is going to be happy they went with Google who actually want Flash on their smartphone OS. The momentum is with the forces that are in opposition to Apple right now.
HTML5 and Flash. Even though there's that 75% figure floated around, it doesn't count the fact that all of YouTube also delivers non-flash video in H.264 to those clients that request it. So there it's not a question of availability, but in what clients are requesting.
Android phones are currently getting quality video from sources such as TV.com, Discovery, YouTube, etc. It all works great on the Droid right now -- minus Flash. Flash is simply no longer necessary. Like other Macromedia products I mentioned, it has been superseded by superior and more widely available products and technologies.
Even Google isn't exactly excited about putting Flash in Android, they're only doing it because many people want it. Specifically, access to sites such as Hulu are mentioned. But wait, Hulu is moving to HTML5 and H.264 anyway (in fact, already have H.264 versions of all of their video, ready to serve).
The inclusion of Flash is also just a jab at Jobs.
/sarc. Is that why I use Flash very day to watch great programs on HULU, playoff clips/matches on Foxsports.com, NBA.COM, NHL.COM all running really great with no problems at all. And is that why there are literally thousands of sites serving great Flash games on the internet?
” Like other Macromedia products I mentioned, it has been superseded by superior and more widely available products and technologies.”
Like what?
Name me even one technology that has superseded Flash on the internet for video streaming and games.
“Even Google isn't exactly excited about putting Flash in Android, they're only doing it because many people want it”
That's what companies(and politicians fort that matter) are supposed to do. Do what the people/their costumers demand.
“Specifically, access to sites such as Hulu are mentioned. But wait, Hulu is moving to HTML5 and H.264 anyway (in fact, already have H.264 versions of all of their video, ready to serve).”
Like someone else mentioned on another thread, HTML5 is not even on the same planet as Flash right now. It has a very long way to go before it gets as good as Flash (if ever). Right now, vastly more sites use Flash than HTML5.
Heck, HTML5 does not even work on all browsers yet, nor has it even been standardized yet even by the W3C themselves:
http://www.w3.org/QA/2009/05/_watching_the_google_io.html .
“The inclusion of Flash is also just a jab at Jobs.”
Google is putting Flash in Android because their costumers demand it. It's that simple. Jobs can boycott Flash all he wants, its not gonna stop Android from continuing to grab market share from the iPhone for the foreseeable future, and with it, put Flash on more smartphones than there are iPhones..
ESPN, MLB, NHL, Fox News, Netflix, National Geographic and others are already with HTML5. It is probable that those you mention (except for Hulu) are already serving HTML5 to clients that ask for it.
Like what? Name me even one technology that has superseded Flash on the internet for video streaming and games.
Superseded Macromedia technologies mentioned earlier. As far as games, HTML5 can do it, but SVG is the open standard for that kind of thing on the WWW.
That's what companies(and politicians fort that matter) are supposed to do. Do what the people/their costumers demand.
To an extent, yes. But then there's the very wise old quote from Henry Ford, "If I'd asked my customers what they wanted, they'd have said a faster horse." The only reason people use Flash is because Macromedia was successful in getting the plugin shipped with the major browswers. It's not because it's the best.
Jobs can boycott Flash all he wants, its not gonna stop Android from continuing to grab market share from the iPhone for the foreseeable future, and with it, put Flash on more smartphones than there are iPhones..
I don't know whether you've noticed the topic of this thread, but Android is doing very, very well without Flash. I wish it would stay that way.
I like Hulu. It's one of my favorite sites. I use Flash to watch great programs on Hulu every day. Why on earth would I give up Flash for some immature HTML5 which is not supported on all the sites I use? HTML 5 has at least 5 years to go before it can even begin to compete with Flash. It doesn't even work on all browsers yet.
I use the technology that serves my needs. Over 90% of Windows PC’s have Flash installed on them, and Flash gets 8 million downloads every single day, because users need Flash to stream video, music and play game on the web sites they visit. It's not up to Steve Jobs to tell anyone what they can and can't use..apart from the Apple zombies of course.
“Superseded Macromedia technologies mentioned earlier”
You are avoiding the question. What I asked was, what technology has superseded flash right now as far as streaming and games are concerned on the internet, like you claimed in your last post?
“As far as games, HTML5 can do it, but SVG is the open standard for that kind of thing on the WWW.”
How many gaming sites use HTML5 for games, and more importantly, how many games on the internet have been developed using HTML5?
” But then there's the very wise old quote from Henry Ford, “If I'd asked my customers what they wanted, they'd have said a faster horse.”
/srac Yeah..that's why Betamax managed to clobber VHS.
Bottom line: Give your costumers what they want. Senator Bennett just found out to his cost, that doing what he likes, instead of doing what the people who voted for him want, will get you booted out of office.
“The only reason people use Flash is because Macromedia was successful in getting the plugin shipped with the major browswers. It's not because it's the best.”
Try shipping some crap plugin with browsers and see where that gets ya. Real Player was bundled with practically every computer for years, where did it get them?
Flash would not be where it is today, if it wasn't good. There have always been lots of alternate players available.
“I don't know whether you've noticed the topic of this thread,”
It just so happens, I started this thread. Read up.
“but Android is doing very, very well without Flash”
People buy a product in anticipation of what it will be able to do in the future. That's why for example, people buy PC’s with expansion slots for more RAM etc. Everyone knows Flash is coming to Android. Flash is already running blazing fast on Android 2.2. Watch this:
Android 2.2 Froyo 4 times faster than 2.1 Eclair
http://www.techtree.com/India/News/Android_22_Froyo_4_times_faster_than_21_Eclair/551-111167-580.html
” I wish it would stay that way.”
You and Steve Jobs may get to control what the Applebots do. You don't tell Windows 7, Windows Mobile, RIM or Android users what they should or shouldn't do. Last time I checked it's still a free country. Take your dictatorial tendencies elsewhere.
Excuse me, it was revolutionary and exclusive when Apple invented it a year and a half before Verizon offered it at all. And your recollection was off by quite a bit, claiming available on ALL Verizon phones for five years... and it is NOT available on all Blackberry offerings.
Who cares. Visual voice mail is not worth 2 bucks. Geesh. Revolutionary my butt.
Hulu's great. And you probably wouldn't notice when they switch to HTML5. For video, HTML5 is already there to compete with Flash. Lots of content providers are already using it.
because users need Flash to stream video, music and play game on the web sites they visit.
No, they don't. There are alternatives.
What I asked was, what technology has superseded flash right now as far as streaming and games are concerned on the internet, like you claimed in your last post?
And I told you, HTML5 and SVG. Both are there, both are open standards, both work. Flash is just hanging on because of momentum.
Bottom line: Give your costumers what they want.
Define requirements: What do customers want? Good video, good performance, good battery life, stable system. Now we need a product to fulfull that requirement. What products do? Certainly not Flash. Flash is only still around because that's what most people had in their browsers (not necessarily by their own doing either). Quite a bit of people probably don't even know the technology they're using to watch video or play games. They just want the video or games.
How many gaming sites use HTML5 for games, and more importantly, how many games on the internet have been developed using HTML5?
Don't blame me for your failure to understand the appropriate technologies.
Everyone knows Flash is coming to Android.
I'll bet you 90% of people who bought an Android phone didn't even know it doesn't do Flash. Especially for phones, people tend to play games in apps they downloaded, not on web sites. And video works just fine without Flash. Tech people very often think that everyone follows up on the latest tech news like they do. News flash: Almost nobody else does.
The vast majority of people buy things for what they do right now. Not what they may do in the future.
You don't tell Windows 7, Windows Mobile, RIM or Android users what they should or shouldn't do.
Interesting that Microsoft is pouring massive effort into HTML5 and SVG compatibility in IE9. They're even heavily concentrating on performance, using the GPU to render much of a page. Microsoft sees the writing on the wall, too.
BTW, Blackberries don't support Flash yet either, but Adobe is working hard to make a version of Flash for those devices. Adobe is trying hard to push Flash (gotta pay for that dumb Macromedia purchase), but not everybody's a sucker.
Betamax lost to VHS because Sony insisted on keeping it a closed standard.
Wow, practically defining sour grapes. It was revolutionary enough that nobody but Cingular would agree to implement it in their network. It was too risky. Plus the fact that Apple wanted it included, not $1.99 extra, didn't make them happy either. But they took a gamble, and won BIG TIME. I don't like AT&T, but I won't begrudge their iPhone exclusivity because they were the ones willing to take the risk, no one else. That's as it should be in business, risk paying off.
HTML5 is not even close t being as good as Flash, nor is it even supported in all browser's as we speak. It's still a work in progress. And why the heck would I stop using Hulu now and wait for Hulu to go to an inferior technology HML5 in the future?
Only Apple zombies would think that makes any sense.
“And I told you, HTML5 and SVG”
HTML5 has superseded Flash?
Since when?
And on what planet?
“No, they don't. There are alternatives.”
Again, name me even one alternative which is as widely used and as widely available and as widely supported for games and video streaming as Flash is on the internet.
“Define requirements: What do customers want?”
Consumers want a technology that is ubiquitous and a technology that works on practically every streaming site they visit for games and video, not a technology that works on some sites, and doesn't work on other sites, doesn;t work on some browsers, and is still a work in progress.
” Good video, good performance, good battery life, stable system. Now we need a product to fulfull that requirement. What products do? Certainly not Flash”
/sarc/ Yeah..that's why its by far the most widely used technology for streaming video and games on the Internet.
“What products do? Certainly not Flash. Flash is only still around because that's what most people had in their browsers (not necessarily by their own doing either). “
Flash is downloaded a staggering 8 million times every single day. Consumers wouldn't be downloading it if it didn;’t work. I use Flash, several times a day every single day. It works great.
“Interesting that Microsoft is pouring massive effort into HTML5 and SVG compatibility in IE9. ‘
Microsoft is putting most of their streaming and online gaming efforts into a technology called “Silverlight”, not HTML5. Ever heard of it? Microsoft wants a piece of the action for online streaming/games technology for themselves. In fact video games development for Windows Phone 7 will be done using Sliverlight. That's business. It's got nothing to do with Flash not being great.
“I'll bet you 90% of people who bought an Android phone didn't even know it doesn't do Flash”
Based on what?
I'll bet they do.
Android users are some of the technically savvy folks out there. Heck the CEO of Adobe and most of the folks at Adobe are currently using Android phones themselves. I have a link earlier in this thread from that Wall Street Journal interview with Adobe's CEO.
“BTW, Blackberries don't support Flash yet either, but Adobe is working hard to make a version of Flash for those devices.”
Flash has already been shown to be working very well on Android smartphones, and is on track to ship with the superfast next version of Android (2.2), just next month. They way Android is grabbing market share, don't be surprised if Android overtakes out RIM in market share by next year in this country as well, after clobbering the iPhone this quarter.
” Adobe is trying hard to push Flash (gotta pay for that dumb Macromedia purchase), but not everybody’s a sucker.”
There is no sucker like an Apple zombie sucker. Flash is just about to appear on Android 2.2, will appear on RIM smartphones, will appear on Nokia’s Symbian, is already on Win Mo 6.5, will appear on practically ever single smartphone OS out there apart from the iPhone. Flash is going to be ubiquitous on smartphones whether Steve Jobs likes it or not, and Adobe will be laughing all the way to the bank on smartphones as well.
Like the iPhone is closed while Android is very open? Inn any case, Betamax lost for lots of reasons, including VHS recorded for longer than Betamax did, and cost less.
Actually, I was thinking Flash vs. H.264 and HTML5.
Apple leaned a lot from the original Macintosh days -- they can have their high degree of control and provide user satisfaction by targeting the high end of the market and delivering a total quality of ownership higher than their competitors.
That still leaves plenty of market for other folks. It doesn't have to be a case of "I win, you lose" if each company finds its own niche and nibbles at the edges of the other guys just enough to foster competition.
I am thinking iPhone versus Andriod. This is one war Andriod is going to win, because Android is on phones from practically every major phone maker(apart from Apple and Nokia), and they are on practically every cell phone company's networks, and they are more open than the iPhone.
“Apple leaned a lot from the original Macintosh days —”
Yeah, they learned so much that they are doing the same thing they did with the Mac which allowed Windows to win, by allowing Google to swiftly grab the smartphone market share from them.
“they can have their high degree of control and provide user satisfaction by targeting the high end of the market and delivering a total quality of ownership higher than their competitors.”
Well Andiord smartphones like the HTC Desire, Incredidle and EVO 4G are at least every bit as good as the iPhone (if not better), and Andriod 2.2 which is coming out next week, is smoking fast. Good luck trying to get folks to pay for your so-called “high end” iPhones when they can get equal or better experience cheaper from Andriod.
Not true... Betamax was available on multiple platforms... including Sanyo, RCA, Sears, and other makers. BetaMax lost to VHS because the original Betamax tapes would not hold movies that were longer than two hours.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.