Apple's iPhone now represents 42% of Smartphones in US

The launch of the iPhone 5s and iPhone 5c helped propel Apple to a market leading 42 percent of smartphones owned in the U.S. in the fourth quarter of 2013, leading Samsung's 26 percent share, according to the latest data from the NPD Group.

Credit AppleInsider

Apple's share has been going up steadily over time and doesn't show signs of stopping. Samsung is in a distant second at 26%. Motorola, HTC, and Blackberry all saw significant losses in market share.

Google's acquisition of the mobile giant (Moto) doesn't seem to be paying off quite yet, and boy do they have a ways to go (to the tune of tens of billions of dollars of ground to make up).

These facts are also due to the fact that Apple enjoys more loyalty than the competition, which is indicative of a consistent and high-quality experience android manufacturers simply cannot match.

Didn't Sony and Nokia increase?

Also this is for hardware I though it was for the OS for a second.

In the U.S.

Pretty sure samsung is stomping apple in worldwide sales though.

In one of the worlds most affluent countries, people with the means to do so are choosing Apple devices over that of the competition. I think that's what is important to understand. Those sales you're using to paint Samsung "stomping" on Apple are not going to be comparable devices.

Android is the new feature phone OS.

One can put enough asterisks next to a sales figure and make any conclusion they want if they try hard enough.

So you didn't feel like trying then? That's what I'm gathering.

Love your sig, though, GOTY for me.

Trying what? Android/other smartphone brands dwarf apple in market share, your argument is "so what". You say they're not all flagship models like that's a bad thing. Apple's lack of a diversified product line is a liability.

The phone is getting too mainstream... time to switch to something new...

Why is it a liability? What empirical evidence can you share to support the idea that Apple's current lineup is a liability? The evidence I have seen, that has been evaluated, is exactly the opposite. And to see Apple sell so many devices, all of which can be considered flagship devices, is incredibly impressive when Samsung sells primarily android feature phones.

Iphone 5c is a flagship device now?

To explain what I meant, in terms of devices Apple sells relative to each other, the iPhone 5c is not a flagship (that would certainly be the 5s). However, in comparison to the highest selling android feature phones, the 5c is certainly comparable to a flagship device. It will enjoy support updates for years, it has a very powerful CPU, it enjoys compatibility with all the latest apps, it enjoys large 3rd party hardware support, and Apple enjoys high margins from a profit standpoint.

Essentially, the 5c is a flagship device in comparison to nearly every android phone except for a few lesser-selling android "flagship" devices and the iPhone 5s.

The 5C isn't even as powerful as the (now discontinued) 2012 Nexus 4.

Futuremark 3Dmark Ice Storm Unlimited:

• Nexus 5 (Qualcomm Snapdragon 800) - 16,205
• iPhone 5S (Apple A7) - 14,283
• Nexus 4 - (Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 Pro) 10,764
• iPhone 5C (Apple A6) - 5,629

The 5C does not have full compatibility with the latest applications as it does not support OpenGL ES 3.0. An API that the 2012 Nexus 4 has both hardware and software support for. Only Apple devices using the A7 (with PowerVR 6) can utilize GLES3.

The phones you listed would all fall under that "few, lesser-selling android 'flagship' device" qualification I laid out in the post. In terms of the android feature phones I specified, the 5c, by comparison, could easily be considered a flaship device.

I'm a little confused which phones you're comparing with the 5C. Just about every H1 2013 Android flagship used Snapdragon 600 and H2 2013 Android flagships used Snapdragon 800.

Just to name a few 2013 flagships from HTC, LG, Motorola, Samsung and Sony:

• HTC One (Snapdragon 600)
• HTC One Max (Snapdragon 600)
• LG Optimus G Pro (Snapdragon 600)
• LG G2 (Snapdragon 800)
• LG G Flex (Snapdragon 800)
• Mototola Moto X (Motorola X8 ~ custom Snapdragon S4 Pro/600)
• Samsung Galaxy S4 (Snapdragon 600)
• Samsung Galaxy S4 LTE-A (Snapdragon 800)
• Samsung Galaxy Note 3 (Snapdragon 800)
• Samsung Galaxy Round (Snapdragon 800)
• Sony Xperia Z (Snapdragon 600)
• Sony Xperia Z Ultra (Snapdragon 800)
• Sony Xperia Z1 (Snapdragon 800)

Right, those are all examples of flagship android phones that disappointed in sales, that again, I made reference to in my first post on the subject. We all know HTC, LG, Motorola, and Sony aren't experiencing much success (considering Apple and Samsung enjoyed more than 100% of mobile sales for the past two years). Even Samsung's sales outlook was a little bleak. All of that, however, is besides the point.

I think you're getting stuck on the flagship thing and regrettably ignoring the original post. In a nation with a high number of individuals who can and are willing to pay for a high end phone, Apple's share is increasing every quarter and is in a commanding first place. That's what we're focused on.

What Android devices do you consider to be successful in sales that you would compare the 5C with? You never clarified that. So no, it's not "besides the point".

Why does it matter so much that the iPhone is succeeding in Apple's home country when Android is making a significant push worldwide? The iPhone is arguably the least expensive in the US than anywhere else in the world (on contract or unlocked), meanwhile flagship Android devices aren't always the least expensive in the US.

What about android's market share world wide is significant? Why is Apple's marketshare in the US amongst smartphone venders not significant when they're even outselling glorified android feature phones, or at least android devices that wouldn't be considered flagship devices (and would therefore be far less expensive)?

I'm still waiting on an answer to my first question.

World > USA last time I checked. Android utilization worldwide is growing at a very fast rate, hence the significance in a successful platform that crosses multiple form factors and markets. I'm not claiming that Apple's success in the US is not significant, but it doesn't paint the whole picture for iOS in the smartphone industry.

What was the first question? I will do my best to answer it once I know exactly what it is.

This isn't about the world vs the USA, and "world > USA" makes no sense. This is a thread about how in a nation with a high percentage of people who are able to pay for premium smartphones when data plans are identical, many people are choosing iPhones instead of the other options. Apple has the largest smartphone market share in the United States, with second place going to Samsung at a distant 26%.

Why is android's world-wide adoption rate a good thing? How does it benefit anyone or any company? How are you qualifying android other than to say a phone not sold by Apple? What is the benefit of multiple form factors across multiple markets?

"What Android devices do you consider to be successful in sales that you would compare the 5C with?"

Higher adoption rate worldwide is what leads to a better ecosystem and platform success. Due to the platform's open nature, many companies hope to utilize it.

Looking at a few recent examples from some key players at CES 2014:

• Intel finished work on a 64-bit kernel of Android for their x86-64 Silvermont SoCs, as well, they have made it possible for Android and Windows to dual boot on a single device (no emulation). Android is also running on Intel Core CPUs.
• NVIDIA has worked to bring Kepler cores to their Tegra K1 (more graphical power than a PS3) and is running Unreal Engine 4 on Android. Due to the desktop level API support and hardware design, this will allow for developers to easily port their titles.
• Audi, GM, and Honda are all bringing Android into their cars.

As well, at CES 2014 it was announced that more engineers working on the Android ecosystem than any other ecosystem in the world.

I'm trying to understand the question, but if I do it's difficult to answer. I'm not sure any of the flagship phones you listed have alone sold more than the 5c has sold. Reports keep coming in of a record-breaking quarter for Apple in terms of iPhone sales. I'd be curious to see evidence to the contrary, however.

Honda was actually first out of the gate with integrating Apple's "iOS in the Car" solution for smartphone enabled autos, fun fact. Other companies planning support are listed below:

• Acura
• Audi
• BMW^[3][4]
• Chevrolet^[1]
• Chrysler
• Ferrari^[1]
• Ford^[5]
• Honda^[1]
• Holden
• Hyundai^[1]
• Infiniti^[1]
• Jaguar^[1]
• Kia^[1]
• Land Rover
• Mercedes-Benz^[1]
• Nissan^[1]
• Opel (Vauxhall)^[1]
• Toyota^[6]
• Volvo^[1]

It's also important to remember that Apple has already finished work on a 64bit iOS to run on the already available 64bit A7 SoC already avialable in all three major mobile devices (iPhone 5s, iPad Air, iPad Mini w/Retina). So much of what you're listing is actually other companies playing catch-up.

You can also bet that Apple has had OSX running successfully on their own A series chips for many years now. Don't forget that Apple, in secret long before it was announced, had OSX running not only on IBM;s PowerPC series chips but also on Intel chips behind the scenes in anticipation of the move to x86 CPUs. You can also bet Apple is on top of the GPU aspects of their SoC, as they have demonstrated each and every time a new A series chip is released.

I suppose I'm disproving your theory that world-wide adoption or the perceived open nature of android lead to any unique or exciting innovations that aren't already being displayed elsewhere. More engineers does not necessarily mean a better user experience or more advantages to anyone, end-user or otherwise. It certainly isn't helping Motorola, LG, Sony, or HTC.

I'd be interested in seeing sales figures for the 5c compared with the 5s. I've seen quite a few 5s iphones but no 5c models. From what I've seen in the UK, the 5c isn't enough cheaper than the 5s for people to bother.

I think estimates put the 5s at around 2 to 1 for sales in relation to the 5c (if not a little higher). Many theorize that Apple's intent was to encourage people to simply put forth the extra for the 5s, but that the 5c could be used as a less expensive alternative to folks who were so inclined.

To that end, it was certainly a successful paired product launch.

Can't wait for the iPhone 6 to get here. As much as I love my phone, I'm tired of having a screen not much larger than a CC. My 4S also lags a bit with iOS 7.

Apple better give me screen parity with Android within a year, or they've lost me to them.

I think you're missing what I'm trying to ask, so I'll try again. You made the claim that the iPhone 5C is a flagship in comparison to "X" Android phones. What phones are you comparing it to?

You've completely twisted the wording behind that list. To put that list into context: "So far the list of manufacturers who have shown interest for iOS in the Car and/or Siri: Eyes Free includes:" =/= "companies planning support for iOS in the Car". The Open Automotive Alliance is not simply Android integration (something that already exists in many cars), but the car's UI itself will be running on Android.

Futuremark's testing has shown there was only a 7% increase in performance running 32-bit vs 64-bit software on Apple's A7 with its 1GB of RAM. Devices using Intel's 64-bit Bay Trail or Core i3/i5/i7 will have larger amounts of RAM to better justify the jump to 64-bit.

I don't really know what OS X has to do with this conversation, when it comes to tablets look no further than an x86 Windows device. Mobile? OS X has nothing to offer. As well, Apple's not always on top of their GPU every release. The A6 in the iPhone 5 was outperformed by Qualcomm's GLES3 enabled Snapdragon S4 Pro. So Apple rushed to launch the iPad 4 with A6X. That was outperformed by Snapdragon 600 which launched only a few months after. In the summer of 2013, the Snapdragon 800 was launched. The GPU inside offers similar (some cases higher) performance than the new GPU in Apple's A7 which only launched in the fall. It took Apple a whole year to launch an SoC that could support OpenGL ES 3.0.

"perceived open nature"? That's a rather silly claim when companies/developers are free to create and push Android beyond Google's offerings (ex. Intel creating a 64-bit kernel, NVIDIA working with Epic to get UE4 running on Android). Android has always been growing in many ways, and with the push into wearables, cars, smart home, etc. in 2014, that growth will only become more apparent.

Things might change if the rumored bigger screen iPhone 6 gets out ~

To be fair, I openly admitted I wasn't sure what you were asking, perhaps you missed that.

In order to understand my point about the 5c, I think we have to do some back-peddling for perspective. In order to really compare apples to apples, we'd have to imagine a world in which companies only sold flagship phones, or at least phones within a certain price bracket (under which the 5c would fall). To my knowledge, no flagship phone has ever outsold the 5c, a flagship phone qualifying as one that would fit within the same price bracket. Therefore, to most android phone owners, the 5c is easily within flagship territory.

Regarding the car's UI running on an actual version of android -- that sounds absolutely terrible. You think it takes a long time for a phone company to push out an android update, just imagine how long it'll take a car company to do the same thing. One must also consider the costs associated with this sort of an upgrade, because it requires an entirely new team of people to manage, develop for, and integrate an android-powered UI. Apple's solution is worlds better for users and worlds better for car manufacturers.

iOS and OSX share a whole lot in common, and that was clear when Jobs first announced the iPhone on stage. Maybe you missed that, too. I'll tell you who didn't miss that -- Google. (See The Day Google Had to 'Start Over' on android -- that's reality, Apple leads and others follow)

And seeing as I don't want to appear to be ignoring other items in your post, regarding benchmarks, I will say that Apple has never focused on having the fastest everything for the sake of having the fastest everything. They've focused much more on proper balance, which is far more beneficial to end users for all the reasons regarding performance, battery life, and longevity.

And calling any OS based on android by that name seems almost disingenuous. From one perspective, the entire operating system has been an incredible and spectacular failure. The Motorola debacle, the forked versions, the diluted and fragmented mobile market, the reliance on acquisitions by Google, and the only one enjoying profits is the ethically corrupt and morally bankrupt Samsung. What a mess.

The growth of anything android means the dilution of anything exciting in the market. It's all boring, cheap, and meaningless.

Now I don't own, or even like mobile phones, or any kind of mobile device, but Apple sucks. Android is crapping all over them in world wide sales, and there is a reason for that.

Basing cars UI on Android is the most efficient option, you have a ready made system that supports all kinds of input options and is open source. You're bypassing creating the OS from the ground up and only focusing on adding on features that you want/need. Another thing you are getting is a very polished OS which means smooth operation and good stability.

As for the upgrades, that's the up to the devs and their bullshit, as Google can easily prove with their Nexus and Google Edition phones. I suspect cars will never get big updates and will have a limited feature set (like I highly doubt a full fledged store running on them or something).