Why WP has such slow growth

[tekhna]

At this point, I would like to note that the iPhone IS powerful smartphone and arguably the fastest on the market.

Android Phones are, in fact, significantly slower than comparable Apple counterparts because of an poorly written operating system. When benchmarking, the single core iPhone 4 phone performs better than a number of Android dual cores. Despite being an 800 mhz ARM Cortex-A9 dual core, iPhone 4s blows away all the Android dual core ARM Cortex A9 competition!
Tests show iPhone 4S as fastest phone on the market

If trends persist, the iPhone 4s should only be slightly slower than Android quad cores and dual-core ARM Cortex A15s. When the next iPhone launches, it WILL be the fastest device on the market. Let me make it clear now that every iPhone ever launched has been the fastest smartphone on the market when launched, even if it had inferior specs.

Android owners are frequently afraid to admit that their devices are actually significantly slower than the iPhone despite better specs. It is a myth that Android is a power user OS. Android is NOT and will never be a power user OS because it is startlingly inefficient. (Windows Phones do not benchmark well like the iPhone; however.)

FWIW, those tests were all conducted pre-ICS, so Android is being punished in those benchmarks for not being hardware accelerated at the time. I think 3.1 was, so that's why you see the Galaxy Tab keeping pace with the iPhone.

 

[fatclue_98]

At this point, I would like to note that the iPhone IS powerful smartphone and arguably the fastest on the market.

Android Phones are, in fact, significantly slower than comparable Apple counterparts because of an poorly written operating system. When benchmarking, the single core iPhone 4 phone performs better than a number of Android dual cores. Despite being an 800 mhz ARM Cortex-A9 dual core, iPhone 4s blows away all the Android dual core ARM Cortex A9 competition!
Tests show iPhone 4S as fastest phone on the market

If trends persist, the iPhone 4s should only be slightly slower than Android quad cores and dual-core ARM Cortex A15s. When the next iPhone launches, it WILL be the fastest device on the market. Let me make it clear now that every iPhone ever launched has been the fastest smartphone on the market when launched, even if it had inferior specs.

Android owners are frequently afraid to admit that their devices are actually significantly slower than the iPhone despite better specs. It is a myth that Android is a power user OS. Android is NOT and will never be a power user OS because it is startlingly inefficient. (Windows Phones do not benchmark well like the iPhone; however.)

This thread is about why Windows Phone has struggled in getting new users. The single-core, dual-core, whatever-core argument is about as stale as yesterday's doughnuts. Happy with iOS? That's great, I'm sincerely happy for you. Prefer Android? Knock yourself out. We are committed to bringing WP7 to the masses with you or without you. We'd prefer that you remain on our side but this endless Android or iPhone vs. the world BS is getting genuinely old. We know the differences, let's agree to disagree. Peace, love and soul.

 

[Jazmac]

I dunno, I think it only gets harder from here. iOS and Android now control 82% of the market. Now, if WP7 gets the remaining 18% then they're in great shape in third place. But they probably won't get all of it, realistically.
T..

82 percent of what market? Smart phones? In the US, and according to Nielsen, 40 percent use smart phones not 82. There is plenty left for Microsoft.

http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/online_mobile/40-percent-of-u-s-mobile-users-own-smartphones-40-percent-are-android/

 

[bigkevbosky]

I never said they " ALL " buy low end phones. The problem is all you " power users " think that only high end phones sell and pushing platforms, when they are not. The truth is a lot of people don't care about that. If we going to gain marketshare we have to win over those casual people who don't care about that and don't have the tech knowledge that we do. Like I said, a lot of people here underestimate how well those cheap devices sell

Well, the bigger problem is there are more "power users" on the Internet discussing smart phones, so they all run in a big circle-jerk thinking their opinions are the only ones that matter.

You're 100% right in the fact that MOST people don't care about a lot of what is discussed on tech blogs. Most don't compare specs and don't give a crap about technical jargon. What they do is go to a store, they play with a few phones, they look for a design that catches their eye, and they buy it.
_____

Thoughts on why WP7 hasn't caught on yet...

The iPhone was first to market, so it established a strong user base, and it didn't hurt that it was a strong product at a time where there were no real alternatives (except Blackberry, but bleh). The iPhone reminds me a lot of the Xbox 360 when it launched.

Android caught on simply because the phones were CHEAP. There are MILLIONS of people around the world who wanted iPhones but didn't want to pay the $199 entry fee, which seemed like a luxury in 2007/2008. People weren't used to paying more than $50 for a phone upgrade. So when Android came out, and it was pushing phones that were "cheap" compared to iPhone, people adopted the platform, regardless of how inefficient it was.

WP7 is behind, not only because some people are already invested in the Apple/Android ecosystems and don't want their money in apps to "go to waste", but also because WP7 hasn't established an "identity".

What is WP7? Apple is the system that "just works" but is expensive. Android is the system that is more "technical", but cheaper. WP7 is trying to be "just works" and "cheaper", and they have to push that message more. They TRIED with the "get in get out get on with your life" campaign, but they forgot to mention their phones are CHEAPER.

I'd like to see Microsoft's marketing message become a little more clear - and its started with the Lumia 900 stuff. They need to keep pushing the message of "best of both worlds" idea - its going to be HARD to get people to leave iOS, but I'm convinced you can get people off Android, because Android is really a frustrating experience.

 

[tekhna]

Well, the bigger problem is there are more "power users" on the Internet discussing smart phones, so they all run in a big circle-jerk thinking their opinions are the only ones that matter.

You're 100% right in the fact that MOST people don't care about a lot of what is discussed on tech blogs. Most don't compare specs and don't give a crap about technical jargon. What they do is go to a store, they play with a few phones, they look for a design that catches their eye, and they buy it.
_____

Thoughts on why WP7 hasn't caught on yet...

The iPhone was first to market, so it established a strong user base, and it didn't hurt that it was a strong product at a time where there were no real alternatives (except Blackberry, but bleh). The iPhone reminds me a lot of the Xbox 360 when it launched.

Android caught on simply because the phones were CHEAP. There are MILLIONS of people around the world who wanted iPhones but didn't want to pay the $199 entry fee, which seemed like a luxury in 2007/2008. People weren't used to paying more than $50 for a phone upgrade. So when Android came out, and it was pushing phones that were "cheap" compared to iPhone, people adopted the platform, regardless of how inefficient it was.

WP7 is behind, not only because some people are already invested in the Apple/Android ecosystems and don't want their money in apps to "go to waste", but also because WP7 hasn't established an "identity".

What is WP7? Apple is the system that "just works" but is expensive. Android is the system that is more "technical", but cheaper. WP7 is trying to be "just works" and "cheaper", and they have to push that message more. They TRIED with the "get in get out get on with your life" campaign, but they forgot to mention their phones are CHEAPER.

I'd like to see Microsoft's marketing message become a little more clear - and its started with the Lumia 900 stuff. They need to keep pushing the message of "best of both worlds" idea - its going to be HARD to get people to leave iOS, but I'm convinced you can get people off Android, because Android is really a frustrating experience.

Gah. As I've been saying, this is just plain wrong. Android DID NOT succeed because it was cheap. It succeeded because people bought expensive phones like the original Droid and the HTC Evo, both of which cost 200 dollars on contract at the time. The original Droid sold a million quicker than the iPhone did. The Evo sold something like 200,000 just at launch.
The market bears this out--go look at AT&T, Sprint, Verizon, or T-Mobile and compare how many high-end Android phones they carry compared to mid-to-low-range Android phones. That should tell you everything you need to know. They all, for the most part, stock many more high-end phones than mid-range phones, and most of their "mid-range" phones are high-end phones that are 9-12 months out of date.
Once you're investing 30 dollars a month in a data plan, the incremental cost of a 200 dollar phone over a 100 dollar phone is nothing.

If the argument is Android succeeded because it was cheap, then WP7 should have succeeded too because its phones have been dirt cheap for a year or more.

The logic just falls apart. People here need some sort of psychological comfort that "Android is cheap" because it somehow justifies their own choices, but it doesn't comport with the data we have available. Post-paid customers buy high-end Android phones. That's just how it works.

 

[snowmutt]

Okay, this has been done to death.

When WP7 first came out, there were all kinds of analysts and predictions on it being in 2nd or 1st place by 2014 or some-when-ever. MS itself was touting the "in it to win it" attitude, especially as Mango came rolling out. (That was about the time I got interested in it.)

All this did was set up this feeling of unrealistic expectations for WP as this combination of monolith and locomotive in the mobile world, unstoppable and massive.

We all know now what the reality is, and that this is a slow growth proposition. Android and the iPhone both came along at the right time- mobile growth exploded and they offered something unique and fun. People were sick of the sterile, unimaginative devices of BlackBerry and WinMo. The explosion of sales of those OS's are never going to happen again.

From this point on, Mobile is the equivalent of the auto industry: Yes, everyone wants one and yes sales are there, but there are established names and newbie's are going to have to fight, scratch and claw to get noticed.

The bright side is this: WP is doing it right. They are establishing a dependable OS, well reviewed and supported, and are making sure what the put out works. They are concentrating on the integration of social media, which is the driving force of today's market, and also on the integration of all mobile/home devices.

10%-20% of the market worldwide is a realistic number which will establish WP as the mobile force it needs to be. It is in need of many more things before it can knock off iOS as #2, which I believe can happen as Apple continues to try and do both software and hardware in-house, making it a slower development process. But we are talking YEARS here, folks. I do not believe Android will ever lose the #1 spot.

And look at it this way: Would we rather be WebOS, Tizen, or any other start-up right now?

 

[smapor]

Gah. As I've been saying, this is just plain wrong. Android DID NOT succeed because it was cheap. It succeeded because people bought expensive phones like the original Droid and the HTC Evo, both of which cost 200 dollars on contract at the time. The original Droid sold a million quicker than the iPhone did. The Evo sold something like 200,000 just at launch.
The market bears this out--go look at AT&T, Sprint, Verizon, or T-Mobile and compare how many high-end Android phones they carry compared to mid-to-low-range Android phones. That should tell you everything you need to know. They all, for the most part, stock many more high-end phones than mid-range phones, and most of their "mid-range" phones are high-end phones that are 9-12 months out of date.
Once you're investing 30 dollars a month in a data plan, the incremental cost of a 200 dollar phone over a 100 dollar phone is nothing.

If the argument is Android succeeded because it was cheap, then WP7 should have succeeded too because its phones have been dirt cheap for a year or more.

The logic just falls apart. People here need some sort of psychological comfort that "Android is cheap" because it somehow justifies their own choices, but it doesn't comport with the data we have available. Post-paid customers buy high-end Android phones. That's just how it works.

Wrong wrong

Android exploded because Apple only sold though AT&T for the 1st 3 years.

Android was the only other choice for other carriers. Simply the right place, right time.

If iPhone wasn't exclusive to AT&T, it would be number 1.

 

[selfcreation]

Wrong wrong

Android exploded because Apple only sold though AT&T for the 1st 3 years.

Android was the only other choice for other carriers. Simply the right place, right time.

If iPhone wasn't exclusive to AT&T, it would be number 1.

Actually Ipohne was the #1 OS even when they had exclusivity ( the first 3 years)

Android has only been #1 for about 1 year (maybe 2 ) and they came out roughly at the same time as Iphone and on EVERY carrier( sints 2007) .. Android had a REALLY hard time the first 3-4 years cause no one like it , same thing as WP.

WP is actually doing better then the first 2 years of Android.

Iphone is just losing ground now cause they haven't been innovative sints 2007 and the fact that customers BLINDLY buy into specs so they go to Android and also NEW OS ( like WEBOS and WP was slwoly taking people OFF Iphone )

WEBOS was a Iphone killer , very similar feel to it , ( I know its dead now but it did have a major impact on Iphone sales over the last 3 years )

I still think Iphone is 5times the OS android is. ( and i hate Iphone lol )


Key is: get a good establish clientele and a GOOD NAME BRANDING ( like Google / Android ) then start rolling out low end phones to attract more clientele.

believe it or not but LOW end phoens for android do help sales , if Apple made Low end entry lvl smartphones they would sale allot . example of this I still sale Iphone 3gs! cause they are FREE!! compare the the cheapest Iphone 4s at 159'99.

some people just don't care about BIG SPECS they just want a phone popular phone like their neighbors, kids or friends.

but its true that low end Android phones do sale like hotcakes. here at BELL we sale more Low end Android then GS2 / Nexus / Notes etc.... cause most LOW END android phone DO NOT require a data plan , so they are good entry level phones for people looking to TRY a smartphone from a featured phone. but that's one carrier in one country. our of HUNDRED of countrys and carriers.

 

[bigkevbosky]

Gah. As I've been saying, this is just plain wrong. Android DID NOT succeed because it was cheap. It succeeded because people bought expensive phones like the original Droid and the HTC Evo, both of which cost 200 dollars on contract at the time. The original Droid sold a million quicker than the iPhone did. The Evo sold something like 200,000 just at launch.
The market bears this out--go look at AT&T, Sprint, Verizon, or T-Mobile and compare how many high-end Android phones they carry compared to mid-to-low-range Android phones. That should tell you everything you need to know. They all, for the most part, stock many more high-end phones than mid-range phones, and most of their "mid-range" phones are high-end phones that are 9-12 months out of date.
Once you're investing 30 dollars a month in a data plan, the incremental cost of a 200 dollar phone over a 100 dollar phone is nothing.

If the argument is Android succeeded because it was cheap, then WP7 should have succeeded too because its phones have been dirt cheap for a year or more.

The logic just falls apart. People here need some sort of psychological comfort that "Android is cheap" because it somehow justifies their own choices, but it doesn't comport with the data we have available. Post-paid customers buy high-end Android phones. That's just how it works.

Yes, early adopters of Android paid $199. But Android QUICKLY spread to "lower end" devices, despite poor reviews and hardware that ran it sluggishly.

Android devices were coming out so quickly through 2009-2011, that prices dropped rapidly on phones that were just a few months old. iPhone prices only changed, really, once per year, when the new model was released.

To back up my point, look at the amount of Android devices released in 2010 alone :

HTC Nexus One, January 2010, T-Mobile
Motorola Devour, February 2010, Verizon Wireless
Motorola Backflip, March 2010, AT&T
Motorola Cliq XT, March 2010, T-Mobile
HTC Droid Incredible, April 2010, Verizon Wireless
LG Ally, May 2010, Verizon Wireless
HTC Evo 4G, June 2010 , Sprint
MyTouch 3G Slide, June 2010 , T-Mobile
Garminfone, June 2010, T-Mobile
HTC Aria, June 2010, AT&T
Motorola Droid X, July 2010, Verizon Wireless
Motorola i1, July 2010, Boost Mobile
Samsung Vibrant, July 2010, T-Mobile
Samsung Captivate, July 2010, AT&T
Samsung Acclaim, July 2010, U.S. Cellular
Samsung Intercept, July 2010, Sprint
Motorola Droid 2, August 2010, Verizon Wireless
Samsung Epic 4G, August 2010, Sprint
Sony Ericsson Xperia X10, August 2010, AT&T
HTC Desire, August 2010, U.S. Cellular
Sanyo Zio, August 2010, Cricket Wireless
Motorola Charm, September 2010, T-Mobile
Samsung Fascinate, September 2010, Verizon Wireless
Dell Aero, September 2010, AT&T
T-Mobile G2, October 2010, T-Mobile
Samsung Transform, October 2010, Sprint
Sanyo Zio, October 2010, Sprint
Samsung Intercept, October 2010, Virgin Mobile
Motorola Flipout, October 2010, AT&T
Huawei Ascend, October 2010, Cricket Wireless; Metro PCS
HTC Wildfire, October 2010, Alltel
Samsung Mesmerize, October 2010, U.S. Cellular
T-Mobile MyTouch 4G, November 2010, T-Mobile
LG Optimus T, November 2010, T-Mobile
Motorola Defy, November 2010, T-Mobile
LG Optimus S, November 2010, Sprint
Motorola Droid Pro, November 2010, Verizon Wireless
Samsung Continuuim, November 2010, Verizon Wireless
LG Vortex, November 2010, Verizon Wireless
Motorola Citrus, November 2010, Verizon Wireless
Motorola Bravo, November 2010, AT&T
Motorola Flipside, November 2010, AT&T
T-Mobile Comet, November 2010, T-Mobile
Motorola Droid 2 Global, November 2010, Verizon Wireless
LG Apex, November 2010, U.S. Cellular
LG Optimus M, November 2010, MetroPCS
LG Optimus U, December 2010, U.S. Cellular
Samsung Nexus S, December 2010, T-Mobile

Look at that! How insane is that?

Manufacturers and carriers FLOODED the market with Android devices. If you wanted an Apple device you had, what, 2 choices? And still had a $99 entry point for the 3GS in late 2010. If you were with say, AT&T, and you went in late 2010 to buy a smartphone, you could get a year old iPhone for $99, or you could get something like the Sony X10 or Samsung Captivate for free.

Not to mention, Android is still the only "smartphone OS" that has been able to be ported to prepaid devices from carriers like Cricket and Virgin. So consumers that wanted a smartphone on those carriers chose Android by default.

So you've got 2 camps in 2009-2010. A group of Apple loyalists that will pay any price, and a group of people that are intrigued by smartphones and want to jump in but don't want to invest a lot. People don't realize the $15/$25 a month fee adds up - a lot of people just want the most cheap, subsidized smartphone available. Its why a customer won't pay $499 upfront for a smartphone, even if they get cheaper monthly rates.

Remember, Windows phone came out in late 2010 so it wasn't a real "player" until sometime in 2011. By then, you already had a TON of Android devices on the market and people locked into 2 year contracts. And people, no matter how crappy the experience is, got used to Android, invested in the ecosystem, and are afraid to abandon the platform. They may upgrade to a nicer, more high end Android device when their contract ends (which is why there are more high end Android devices NOW than there were originally), but they stick with Android.

It's almost the same reason why Windows originally won the PC race. Because it was on EVERYTHING, and PCs flooded the market, the prices dropped rapidly, and people who once couldn't afford a Mac COULD afford a Packard Bell. Y'know? I'm no expert, but its easy to recognize trends in a certain market segment.

I think Microsoft would do a world of good by offering a gift card to their marketplace with each Windows Phone purchased, so an Android or iOS user can download their most used apps and "switch over". Something like $20. That should buy you 5-10 of your most used apps on iOS or Android. It might help, I dunno.

 

[AzD]

iOS is "5 times the OS" Android is? Aside from the nebulous nature of that statement, are you freaking kidding?

 

[selfcreation]

iOS is "5 times the OS" Android is? Aside from the nebulous nature of that statement, are you freaking kidding?

never said ti was 5 times the phone.. i said i THINK,.. if your gona quote , quote properly.

I still think Iphone is 5times the OS android is. (and i hate Iphone)

 

[AzD]

never said ti was 5 times the phone.. i said i THINK,.. if your gona quote , quote properly.

You're quite pedantic.

 

[bear_lx]

pedantic - pe?dan?tic/pəˈdantik/Adjective: Of or like a pedant.

Synonyms: punctilious - donnish - priggish - meticulous

nebulous - neb?u?lous/ˈnebyələs/Adjective: 1.In the form of a cloud or haze; hazy.
2.(of an idea) Unclear, vague, or ill-defined.

just in case, those are big words ya know...

 

[selfcreation]

You're quite pedantic.

ok..:dry dam strait. there is a differences between an Opinion and a concrete fact. and that was just my opinion. I need to make sure people understand its a opinion and not a fact.

just like the reason people buy specific cellphones, 99% of the time its a personal preference. not because one phone is better then an other . no phone is BETTER , its all about what is different about each individual OS that attracts people.

and that sir , is MY opinion

pedantic - pe?dan?tic/pəˈdantik/Adjective: Of or like a pedant.

Synonyms: punctilious - donnish - priggish - meticulous

nebulous - neb?u?lous/ˈnebyələs/Adjective: 1.In the form of a cloud or haze; hazy.
2.(of an idea) Unclear, vague, or ill-defined.

just in case, those are big words ya know...

LMAO!

 

[fisci]

Actually Ipohne was the #1 OS even when they had exclusivity ( the first 3 years)

Android has only been #1 for about 1 year (maybe 2 ) and they came out roughly at the same time as Iphone and on EVERY carrier( sints 2007) .. Android had a REALLY hard time the first 3-4 years cause no one like it , same thing as WP.

WP is actually doing better then the first 2 years of Android.

Iphone is just losing ground now cause they haven't been innovative sints 2007 and the fact that customers BLINDLY buy into specs so they go to Android and also NEW OS ( like WEBOS and WP was slwoly taking people OFF Iphone )

WEBOS was a Iphone killer , very similar feel to it , ( I know its dead now but it did have a major impact on Iphone sales over the last 3 years )

I still think Iphone is 5times the OS android is. ( and i hate Iphone lol )


Key is: get a good establish clientele and a GOOD NAME BRANDING ( like Google / Android ) then start rolling out low end phones to attract more clientele.

believe it or not but LOW end phoens for android do help sales , if Apple made Low end entry lvl smartphones they would sale allot . example of this I still sale Iphone 3gs! cause they are FREE!! compare the the cheapest Iphone 4s at 159'99.

some people just don't care about BIG SPECS they just want a phone popular phone like their neighbors, kids or friends.

but its true that low end Android phones do sale like hotcakes. here at BELL we sale more Low end Android then GS2 / Nexus / Notes etc.... cause most LOW END android phone DO NOT require a data plan , so they are good entry level phones for people looking to TRY a smartphone from a featured phone. but that's one carrier in one country. our of HUNDRED of countrys and carriers.

This is not at all correct..

Wp7 has about 2% of the market.

Android had this beaten pretty much right away..

You guys can make all the excuses and conjecture for why you "think" people buy into Android, but at best they are just laughable opinion with no basis of truth.

People buy them, and keep buying them.

 

[selfcreation]

This is not at all correct..

Wp7 has about 2% of the market.

Android had this beaten pretty much right away..

You guys can make all the excuses and conjecture for why you "think" people buy into Android, but at best they are just laughable opinion with no basis of truth.

People buy them, and keep buying them.

actually its not wrong....

Research company Canalys estimated in Q2 2009( 2 years after launch of ANDROID!! ) that Android had a 2.8% share of worldwide smartphone shipments. By Q4 2010 (1year + later) this had grown to 33% of the market, becoming the top-selling smartphone platform.

what does that all mean? it means that WP is actually doing BETTER then Android the first 2 years by about 1% of the market shares. the diff rents is that ANDROID had a BOOM of about 27% in the period of 1 year!

so my statement was pretty darn close!!! ( it was and still is an estimates )

and WP has 3-4% market share right now worldwide and growing every day! ( compare to Androids 2.8% the first 2 years )

AND!

aside from just telling us we are WRONG all the time , do you have an opinion? cause id MUCH RATHER read your opinion on the SUBJECT aside from you telling us are reasons are laughable. :dry

our opinion might be *laughable* but at lease we have one!

 

[12Danny123]

This is not at all correct..

Wp7 has about 2% of the market.

Android had this beaten pretty much right away..

You guys can make all the excuses and conjecture for why you "think" people buy into Android, but at best they are just laughable opinion with no basis of truth.

People buy them, and keep buying them.

Just go away u fat hippo . Nobody cares what you say. I don't get why you're even here and trolling this site. We moved on and you can't force us to use android. What do you do here go on the computer and troll this site while you're reject? I think so.

 

[fatclue_98]

Well, the bigger problem is there are more "power users" on the Internet discussing smart phones, so they all run in a big circle-jerk thinking their opinions are the only ones that matter.

You're 100% right in the fact that MOST people don't care about a lot of what is discussed on tech blogs. Most don't compare specs and don't give a crap about technical jargon. What they do is go to a store, they play with a few phones, they look for a design that catches their eye, and they buy it.
_____

Thoughts on why WP7 hasn't caught on yet...

The iPhone was first to market, so it established a strong user base, and it didn't hurt that it was a strong product at a time where there were no real alternatives (except Blackberry, but bleh). The iPhone reminds me a lot of the Xbox 360 when it launched.

Android caught on simply because the phones were CHEAP. There are MILLIONS of people around the world who wanted iPhones but didn't want to pay the $199 entry fee, which seemed like a luxury in 2007/2008. People weren't used to paying more than $50 for a phone upgrade. So when Android came out, and it was pushing phones that were "cheap" compared to iPhone, people adopted the platform, regardless of how inefficient it was.

WP7 is behind, not only because some people are already invested in the Apple/Android ecosystems and don't want their money in apps to "go to waste", but also because WP7 hasn't established an "identity".

What is WP7? Apple is the system that "just works" but is expensive. Android is the system that is more "technical", but cheaper. WP7 is trying to be "just works" and "cheaper", and they have to push that message more. They TRIED with the "get in get out get on with your life" campaign, but they forgot to mention their phones are CHEAPER.

I'd like to see Microsoft's marketing message become a little more clear - and its started with the Lumia 900 stuff. They need to keep pushing the message of "best of both worlds" idea - its going to be HARD to get people to leave iOS, but I'm convinced you can get people off Android, because Android is really a frustrating experience.

iPhone was the first to market? Sorry dude, but you need a history lesson. Long before there was an iPhone there were Treos. They were the granddaddy of all current smartphones because they took a Palm Pilot and put a phone on it. No other OS could touch Palm OS when it came to PIM or any other enterprise function, at that time. Palm's first mistake was to not put a wi-fi radio or a GPS into the Treos until the Sprint Treo 800w. iPhone never quite caught on with "power users" because it lacked cut & paste until recently, a common *****ing point for the early WP7 phones (imagine that).

 

[tekhna]

actually its not wrong....

Research company Canalys estimated in Q2 2009( 2 years after launch of ANDROID!! ) that Android had a 2.8% share of worldwide smartphone shipments. By Q4 2010 (1year + later) this had grown to 33% of the market, becoming the top-selling smartphone platform.

what does that all mean? it means that WP is actually doing BETTER then Android the first 2 years by about 1% of the market shares. the diff rents is that ANDROID had a BOOM of about 27% in the period of 1 year!

so my statement was pretty darn close!!! ( it was and still is an estimates )

and WP has 3-4% market share right now worldwide and growing every day! ( compare to Androids 2.8% the first 2 years )

AND!

aside from just telling us we are WRONG all the time , do you have an opinion? cause id MUCH RATHER read your opinion on the SUBJECT aside from you telling us are reasons are laughable. :dry

our opinion might be *laughable* but at lease we have one!

That's incredibly disingenuous, if not wrong, to compare Android's growth for the first two years to WP's growth in two years. Totally different markets, totally different software. In 2008 Sprint was still releasing garbage like the Samsung Instinct and claiming it was an "iPhone competitor" when it was patently obvious at the time it couldn't compete with anything other than itself for the title of worst phone ever.

Android wasn't 1.0 until late 2008, so to say that's two years after the launch of Android is absurd. The fact is that Android was basically garbage until 2.2 (2010) and it's still kicked the living crap out of WP7, which was also released in 2010.

 

[selfcreation]

The fact is that Android was basically garbage until 2.2 (2010)

so because it was garbag I cant compare it? LOL! hows that for * incredibly disingenuous*
It was getting its A** KICKED by Iphone / BB / WM

WP has been out for less then 2 years ( gonna be 2 years in October) and IS growing faster ,

it IS THE same market and I CAN compare it... Because its a smartphones ( they have not really added more function. ( sure they added a ANIMATED background an Facebook chat . WOOT ).... I could do MORE on WINDOW MOBILE then on WINDOWS PHONE .and they have like 5 years + diffrents in age!!! .. and people still compare them both .. you gona tell me they all wrong? and that they are different markets?

and obviously you cant compare the Samsung Instinct to the Iphone that was just a MARKETING SCAM like callign HSPA 4G when its 3G. ( the Instinct is NOT even a smartphone )