Now Android Also Biggest Tablet OS - iPad share eroding gradually, with Samsung looming

My competence is not in the tablets/PC space but I know many of my readers are interested in that area too, and obviously tablets are increasingly relevant in the overall digital convergence space. They don't compare in scale to smartphone sales or mobile phone handset sales, but tablets are very significant in the far smaller PC industry, and there is some overlap in usage. So for my readers, if you missed it, IDC has just reported tablet sales today for Q1. The moment has arrived when iOS no longer powers most tablets sold, Android has passed iOS. Apple's iPad still remains the bestselling single tablet brand, with Samsung the strong number 2. Here are the numbers as per IDC:

 

Top 5 tablet makers as per IDC in Q1:
Apple . . . . . . 39.6%
Samsung . . . 17.2%
Asus . . . . . . . 5.5%
Amazon . . . . . 3.7%
Microsoft . . . . 1.8%
Total tablets sold in Q1: 49.2 million units
Android powered 56.5% of all tablets, iOS powered 39.6% and Windows 1.8%

Source: IDC May 1, 2013

So ever more proof first, that Android is the dominant computing platform on the planet - as I reported here last year - and here are the total computer sales stats for year 2012 when all types of computers from desktops to smartphones are counted. 

Secondly, what is obvious to many tech analysts but not obvious to iFanatics, is that Apple cannot hold the majority of any market with its high-priced products, that is obvious, but some keep holding onto the fantasy. Apple can make the biggest profits, yes, but it cannot hold the market share, it is destined to become a niche player over time, and thus it needs to seek to discover more untapped market spaces (like portable music players, touch-screen smartphones and tablet PCs in the past 12 years). So we await the iWatch or whatever iCool next comes our way from the iBrains at the iCampus.

Lastly, Microsoft? Yeah. Windows ruled the computer worlds for three decades but under Ballmer it all has gone wrong (as I explained here last year) and the Windows era in computing is over. They have 1.8% in tablets - the future of portable computing - where they owned over 90% of all portable computing four years ago. Microsoft has 3% market share in smartphones, whereas under Bill Gates they held 12% in smartphones just six years ago. And all PC makers have said that smartphones are computers and smartphones are the future and the bulk of the mass market of consumer use of computing. So all Microsoft has left is the ever-shrinking piece of the pie that is the desktop. Good luck with that...

Comments

[cycnus]

Tomi,

I have one question....
Seeing the number Samsung/android already bigger than amazon kindle fire since (at least) 2012.

Why i keep seeing article saying that goggle/android is losing. The only android tablet selling well is amazon. What's wrong with all the news writer?

[Kevin]

Speaking of Windows's share as 1.8%, is it purely Windows RT?

[Huber]

@cycnus: >> Why i keep seeing article saying that goggle/android is losing. The only android tablet selling well is amazon. What's wrong with all the news writer?

Some are bought by Microsoft and some are just morons.

Windows is going nowhere in the tablet space: Windows RT is dead already (OEMs are fleeing from the OS and the Surface RT's sales are pathetic).

Windows 8 tablets have rarely a use case: There are almost no tablet Apps on the one hand, and on the other hand the devices are too small to compete with real notebooks.

Additionally, instead of a Windows Surface Pro you can also buy a notebook and a cheap tablet (e.g. a Nexus 7).

Then you have two devices which are superiour to the Surface Pro in their area.

Intel already targets $200-tablets running Android with their next-gen Atom chips. Acer, Asus and Samsung start selling sub-$200 tablets. Chinese Android tablets costs less than $100 meanwhile.

So Microsoft cannot compete in this area with their expensive, bloated tablet OSes: Any OEM has to pay for Windows while Android is free. Additionally, Windows is a resource hog, which additionally increases BOM costs.

And MS can always undercut their own OEMs because they don't have to pay for the Windows license.

So OEMs want Android to succeed, not MS.

And Apple is just too expensive. The battle will be won in the $100-$200 space, I'd guess

[Spawn]

@Huber

> Any OEM has to pay for Windows while Android is free

More so OEM's have control. Microsoft is working since a while now on increasing the Android OEM price using patents. No success. Next step would be to decrease Windows price-point. Will not make a big difference too. Final step may to give up control on Windows to stay in the game. That's going to be interesting. How far are they willing to go?

[zlutor]

@Spawn: Open source Windows? Wow that would be something new... ;-)

[Sander van der Wal]

Apple is also making as much money with their desktop business as the next five desktop PC makers combined. And they are growing their share too. Clearly they are in it for the money, and not for market share alone.

[Lusekofte]

While the IDC numbers are interesting, they don't show "sales", they show "shipments". Only Apple reports sales. The rest don't report much at all.

Could still be that Apple has lost the market share crown in regards to sales numbers, but to know that for sure, another source of information would have to be consulted.

/M

[khim]

@Lusekofte: Only Apple reports sales.

Well, yes. But that's because others use an English, Apple uses a newspeak.

Check for yourself. Open Apple's SEC 10-Q filing, scroll down to the appropriate page and you'll see it right there: "Product is considered delivered to the customer once it has been shipped and title and risk of loss have been transferred. For most of the Company’s product sales, these criteria are met at the time the product is shipped."

So, yeah. Apple reports SALES (that is, "how many devices they delivered to resellers"). Everyone else reports SHIPMENTS (that is, "how many devices they delivered to resellers"). See? They are so different! True iFan can never EVER mix them!

P.S. There IS small difference: for devices which Apple ships directly via AppStores sales are indeed sales. But even Apple admits that "most of the Company’s product sales" don't happen in such a way.

[Lusekofte]

khim. Ok, so let's say that what Apple say is not "sales" and instead a fancy way of saying "shipments".

The IDC numbers still show shipment, not sales. Can we agree on that?

/M

[khim]

Obviously. Information about sales comes too late to be of any use. That's why noone tracks actual sales to end-users.

It's true that we don't know how many devices were actually sold thus we should take all these numbers with a grain of salt, but usually they are close to reality: you can inflate numbers for one or two quarters by "stuffing the channel" but after that retailers will just stop accepting your stuff. Only very desperate do that - and Android vendors are not desperate enough. Microsoft and Nokia... here I'm not so sure.

Let's wait couple more quarters but I doubt we'll see radically different numbers WRT iOS or Android. Windows can go both ways (it can crash even from this low percentage if Microsoft and Nokia actually stuffed the channel, or it can grow if people will suddenly start buying them in droves). I, personally, don't believe that Windows tablets will start selling like hotcakes (after more then ten years of awful performance, remember!) but stranger things happened.

[N 900]

I think you made a mistake with your Windows market share. Microsoft had a 1.8% market share as a manufactorer of the surface tablets. But Windows 8 pro had a market share of 3.3% and Windows RT of 0.4% in 1Q13. So the total platform market share for Windows was 3.7%. Still nothing to brag about, but since you're so concerned with numbers, I thought to point it out.

[Hansu]

@ N 900 it is the Tablet makers not installed OS numbers so Microsoft has gotten 1,8% cut as maker and the total installed OS number among tablets is 3,7%, altough I am wondering does that number also include "hybrid" tablet/laptops or just the pure tablets? Good point though

[Turd Elopson]

Microsoft/Nokia is so desperate these days.

Anyone saw their new ad promoting Lumia phones?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z19vR1GldRI

[Spawn]

Surface 2 end of june:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/05/02/smaller_surface_in_june/

No RT/Pro suffix. Both again? Rumors: smaller, cheaper, for gamers, lunch same time like new xbox, maybe also in time for Windows Blue.

[Huber]

@Spawn:

Microsoft has no chance in hell to be successfull:

First of all the thinking in Redmond is something like 'we released 10 inch tablets almost nobody wants. So we release 7 and 8 inch tablets now, customers will love them'.

This simply won't happen, especially because Windows gets less competitive with lower sales prices.

In Germany, Saturn sold Acer 7 inch Android tablets for €109 a few weeks ago.

Microsoft charges OEMs about $80 for Windows RT with Office according to Charlie at semiaccurate. Additional, you need more storage: My Asus TF700 with 32GB has about 28GB free after a fresh install, a Windows RT device has 15GB left.

Additionally, Windows carries all this legacy code and other bloated functions needed for teh desktop, so you need a faster tablet to get the same performance out of it compared to Android and iOS.

So even if MS gives away Windows for free, you still have the bloated BOM.

MS cannot be competitive in the are of cheap tablets, except if they use a version of Windows Phone instead of RT or W8. But we all know how WP is loved by customers, so this is no option either.

I don't think they can get competitive as long as a moron like Steve Ballmer is CEO.

[Magnus Jørgensen]

Wow.

I really didn't expect this.
Now i don't think windows 8 has a chance.
And also i think that Redmonds fanatical act of stopping the shipment of Windows 7 to OEM's is going to hurt them. Very much actually. Now is the time for any competing desktop OS to go to the market.

I know you normally focus on the mobile market, but i really think this will influence the entire IT industry. If windows 8 for tablets doesn't gain ground, then the Microsoft monopoly just might be broken. And thats a huge thing.

[foo]

@Huber

> Windows 8 tablets have rarely a use case: There are almost no tablet
> Apps on the one hand, and on the other hand the devices are too small
> to compete with real notebooks.

According to the strategy guru Michael Porter, the worst strategic position a company can be is in the middle, between the best experience and the best price.

So far, Microsoft have managed to offer something that is "good enough"; but it is not the best, and not the most cost-effective.

This is the recipe to become a niche player. (And Michael Porter said that some 30 years ago...)

[Spawn]

@Huber

> thinking in Redmond

Top-down, Gates named there strategy a failure. That means change in strategy. How far are they willing to go? I think very far. No, not open source but they may well open up possible revenue-streams, give up control and profit to gain support.

> Microsoft charges OEMs about $80

Even more worse is they control everything. The ecosystem, the app-market, the content delivery, the communication, services. Any partner is degenerated to be reseller, hardware-monkey like Nokia. That worked with the desktop for a decade but it failed, past - its done, outside in the nee consumer markets. Either they give up all that or they are done and gone. If they gave up on it its an opportunity for potential partners to control and cash. Microsoft needs to downgrade itself, its platform revenue to keep in. Are they there yet? I don't know. It could also be they try 3-4 other strategies before and fail with them too.

> So even if MS gives away Windows for free

For free, no license payments, is by far not enough. Its all about control and revenue-streams. They need to grow partners, support, interest. For the first time in a decade they depend on partners and not the other way around. They need to offer ways for partners to make more money then with Android, long term, secured, protected from themself.

> cheap tablets
> blood

Lets assume two things:
First cheap is not good for anybody but customers. So, that's going to change. Lesser on hardware and software then on services and data. First two will more or less be free or low-cost long-term, fat profits come with the last two. The printer-model.
Second just like with votings customers only get the choice among a pre-chosen selection of things. Customers have choice isn't wrong. Its just wrong to think they could influence the options they can chose from.

Microsoft lost the WP battle long before customers decided and it can be changed. Our, customers, luck is that Google seems to be strong. But hey so was Symbian/Nokia once...

[me.cyc.nus.cant.post.again]

Anti scroogled campaign.

microshafting.com
#microshafting

[SMP]

It is funny when you think about it, but Elop and Microsoft are largely responsible for Android's dominance today. Nokia had 29% of the smartphone share, but although their marketshare was slowly declining, without Windows phones, Nokia's total sales were growing.

Enter Elop with his exclusive Windows deal and his insistence to kill Symbian and Meego which were selling well, to be exclusively replaced by Windows Phone which has failed when other very successful OEMs like Samsung and HTC had tried to sell it. He pursued this strategy with single minded focus, and drove Nokia's customers to Samsung and Android.

Had Elop done nothing, Symbian and Meego (and Nokia) would have a much bigger market share now, and Android much less than it has now. Had Nokia done a deal with Google for Android, Android would still have lower market share, because the dramatic shift of Nokia customers from Symbian and Meego to Android would have been less pronounced because Google would not have insisted that Android an exclusive Nokia OS.

Elop and Balmer are in reality the biggest promoters of Android.