Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 26th Jun 2013 13:03 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless "Market trends in Western Europe are not looking good for Apple's iPhone. 'Apple's iOS continues to lose ground as market share declined to 20% from 25% in 1Q12 [first quarter 2012]', IDC said Tuesday. Android, meanwhile, is gaining operating system market share, up 14 percent year-to-year in the first quarter. 'Android continues to dominate the smartphone landscape', according to IDC. In the quarter, Google's OS shipped 21.9 million units and market share increased to 69 percent in the first quarter of 2013 from 55 percent in last years' first quarter." On top of that, Apple got knocked out of the top five in India, where it's also bleeding market share. The America-centred large technology sites that dominate our reporting often fail to spot this huge problem for Apple: the company is only doing well in the US. It's losing everywhere else. And just in case you don't know: 'everywhere else' is 95% of the world, and that's where future growth is to be found. The fact that Apple hasn't addressed this yet is exactly why its shares aren't doing stellar anymore.
Thread beginning with comment 565673
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Why?
by Laurence on Wed 26th Jun 2013 17:06 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Why?"
Laurence
Member since:
2007-03-26

But that's better right? Android has true multitasking.

Android doesn't have true multitasking. It's actually more a hybrid between the Palm and WinCE model (IIRC, Android will run n apps concurrently and kill apps that are older than n. It's the job of the app to remember it's state.

However Apps can also create services and such like, which can prevent it from being killed. Then you have widgets, custom launchers (et al) and a few other exceptions.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Why?
by chithanh on Wed 26th Jun 2013 20:57 in reply to "RE[3]: Why?"
chithanh Member since:
2006-06-18

The maximum number of processes, and what happens to a process that is evicted from memory, is inconsequential to the question whether there is "true multitasking" or not.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: Why?
by Laurence on Wed 26th Jun 2013 21:12 in reply to "RE[4]: Why?"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

The maximum number of processes, and what happens to a process that is evicted from memory, is inconsequential to the question whether there is "true multitasking" or not.


Yes and no. When one discusses "true multitasking", you don't generally imagine an application cap. But I do take your point.

What I forgot to add -which does have a bigger impact on whether you'd class Android as "true multitasking"- is that applications are paused when they're backgrounded unless they're registered as a service (it's actually a little more complicated than that, but it's been a couple of years since I've written my last Android app so I need to revise the details myself).

As a whole, Android doesn't do true multi-tasking in the sense that WinCE users were -and PC users are- acclimatised to. But it's a damn good close compromise.

Edited 2013-06-26 21:14 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Why?
by JAlexoid on Thu 27th Jun 2013 08:16 in reply to "RE[4]: Why?"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

It can run multiple third party process - yes.
It cannot properly multitask, unless we are talking about Samsung's half baked implementation.

Reply Parent Score: 2