Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 26th Jan 2012 09:09 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless "Android accounted for 39% of the market in the final three months of last year, up from 29% a year earlier, Strategy Analytics said. Apple's share fell to 58% from 68%. Microsoft's share stood at 1.5%." Really now.
Thread beginning with comment 504684
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Kindle Fire
by WorknMan on Thu 26th Jan 2012 09:43 UTC
WorknMan
Member since:
2005-11-13

Can/should the Kindle Fire be considered an Android tablet? I mean, technically it runs Android under the hood, but is severely neutered, has most of anything Android-related ripped from the UI (esp the Google apps) and Amazon doesn't even advertise it as such.

Also, I doubt many iPad sales were lost due to the Kindle Fire... unless you really think a 7" $200 tablet competes with a 10" $500 tablet?

Reply Score: 2

RE: Kindle Fire
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 26th Jan 2012 09:59 in reply to "Kindle Fire"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Does it matter, really? I love that the iPad is losing some share so we can end up with a more competitive market place. I bought my iPad 2 last summer because it was quite clearly the best tablet. It probably still is today, but with competition heating up, it won't be long before the difference isn't so clear-cut anymore.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Kindle Fire
by rhavyn on Thu 26th Jan 2012 17:13 in reply to "RE: Kindle Fire"
rhavyn Member since:
2005-07-06

Does it matter, really?


The title of this article is "Android's Share of Tablet Market Jumps" so in that context, yes it matters greatly. If ultimately the Kindle Fire isn't an Android tablet then likely Android's market share didn't jump very much if at all.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Kindle Fire
by kristoph on Fri 27th Jan 2012 19:28 in reply to "RE: Kindle Fire"
kristoph Member since:
2006-01-01

I think that the Kindle is quite a different device from an iPad so it's success does not necessarily augur the coming of iPad competitors.

Now, that said, Apple's share of the marker will almost certainly fall though I personally believe that it will be because of the arrival of Microsoft/Windows 8 tablets rather than Android tablets if for no other reason then that many PC manufacturers will build hybrid netbook/tablet devices.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Kindle Fire
by moondevil on Thu 26th Jan 2012 10:05 in reply to "Kindle Fire"
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

Also, I doubt many iPad sales were lost due to the Kindle Fire... unless you really think a 7" $200 tablet competes with a 10" $500 tablet?


For the people that use tablets to read ebooks, check email, play some games and browse online while waiting for others in a coffee shop, it sure does.

Reply Parent Score: 11

RE: Kindle Fire
by bnolsen on Thu 26th Jan 2012 14:04 in reply to "Kindle Fire"
bnolsen Member since:
2006-01-06

or do you think a 10" 500USD tablet can compete with a 200USD 7" tablet?

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Kindle Fire
by twitterfire on Thu 26th Jan 2012 16:11 in reply to "RE: Kindle Fire"
twitterfire Member since:
2008-09-11

or do you think a 10" 500USD tablet can compete with a 200USD 7" tablet?


Yes it can. In fact the 500 USD tablet would probably cost 200 USD if it weren't for the very high profit margin.

Kindle Fire and B&N Nook Tablet cost much less because the profit margin is very small, because the manufacturers are making money by selling content, not the actual hardware.

To see if some hardware can compete with another hardware, don't look to the price or what some fanboi are saying. Just go look to some benchmarks: go look at Quadrant, Neocore, GLbenchmark etc. figures and judge for yourself.

More expensive is not always better. It should be, but it's not.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Kindle Fire
by dsmogor on Thu 26th Jan 2012 16:02 in reply to "Kindle Fire"
dsmogor Member since:
2005-09-01

I believe it's the analysts muddying the waters accounting fire as an Android tablet which it clearly isn't.
Soon it will have as much in common with Android as Meego or Webos.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Kindle Fire
by broken_symlink on Thu 26th Jan 2012 17:20 in reply to "Kindle Fire"
broken_symlink Member since:
2005-07-06

[quote]Also, I doubt many iPad sales were lost due to the Kindle Fire... unless you really think a 7" $200 tablet competes with a 10" $500 tablet?[/quote]

I know for me it did. The main reason I got a 7in. android tablet vs. an ipad is because of portability. I can literally just put my tablet in my jacket pocket or the pocket of my sweatshirt and go.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: Kindle Fire
by jared_wilkes on Thu 26th Jan 2012 17:41 in reply to "Kindle Fire"
jared_wilkes Member since:
2011-04-25

I think it's only appropriate to not count as Android what cannot use legally the "Android" trademark -- which includes both the Nook and the Fire.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Kindle Fire
by OMRebel on Thu 26th Jan 2012 17:53 in reply to "RE: Kindle Fire"
OMRebel Member since:
2005-11-14

I think it's only appropriate to not count as Android what cannot use legally the "Android" trademark -- which includes both the Nook and the Fire.


If that is the case, should a jailbroken iOS device be counted in Apple's numbers?

Edited 2012-01-26 17:55 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Kindle Fire
by Stephen! on Fri 27th Jan 2012 22:32 in reply to "RE: Kindle Fire"
Stephen! Member since:
2007-11-24

I think it's only appropriate to not count as Android what cannot use legally the "Android" trademark -- which includes both the Nook and the Fire.


If nothing else, if it's not technically Android, they should at least be immune to Microsoft's patent threats against Android.

Reply Parent Score: 2