Apple VS Android

This story was donated to VentureBeat by Paul Grim, General Partner at SunBridge Partners venture capital firm. Grim blog about wireless issues in Grim Times.

For the better part of 20 years, Mac lovers mad with frustration as Apple languishing at sub-5% share of the PC market. Wintel dominated. Big, ugly, buggy, clunky, and everywhere. Looks like graphic designers are people just stubbornly refused to admit defeat and join the rest of the planet in using Windows.



But then Steve Jobs came to save - and from time to time, people really started buying a Mac again. And then the iPod! and iTunes! Apple somehow found a way to rediscover and completely dominate all categories of consumer electronics. This company seemed to change overnight - and become the leading technology giants always knew it should be.

And then beget iPhone iPod - and lo, consumers see and say that's good.

Windows Mobile, Symbian, Brew, RIM, all closed-deck nonsense pushed by the operator - they are dinosaurs in the path of the asteroid iPhone. Even AT & T's network could not stop the bad giants. Apple irreversibly change the wireless industry, the better.

Apple's coattails and then to go Google.

When Google bought Android small startup in 2005 and finally launched into the market, people are very skeptical. platform based on Linux and open previously had failed miserably, and why developers want to work on Android when already there are 100,000 applications in the Apple App Store and evolve?

And then HTC and Motorola Android bonding in a big way (the former to come out of the shadows a white-label, the latter to get his mojo back.) Droid, Hero, Desire, Incredible Droid, Droid X - all of a sudden it's like a swap DKI actually met. Yes, Android Market insanely messy, fewer applications and almost no laws in some cases. But Android was getting ready to take over.

Back in January I showed that Google's Nexus was not a big deal, but Android, Nexus is a concept car, not the iPhone killer. Some people believe Android will win because the iPhone is chained to AT & T, while Android is not chained to any network. This is partly true, but far beyond that. When it became clear that the Android build critical mass, handset OEMs saw their opportunity to beat Apple and remain relevant. Smartphone segment suddenly exploded - up to 50% of all new shipments now smartphone, and one next year will be close to 100%.

You may laugh at that last statement, but more likely than not, and all because of Android. I realized this when I saw Optimus LG, an Android smartphone now on T-Mobile for $ 30. Thirty dollars for smartphones. Remember when the Motorola RAZR became ubiquitous? It was not popular in the beginning when it costs $ 300, but when it became cheaper it everywhere.

Apple certainly can come out with a very low-end iPhone, the company is very adept at segmenting the market with 2-3 different versions of the products and constantly driving down prices on all of them. But will Apple ever has 20 versions of the iPhone? 50? Of course not. Was ever a platform for OEM licenses? Are you kidding? This is why Android will completely dominate the wireless world. It is spread like a virus throughout the ecosystem as you read this (see chart above). Apple will always be a Maserati smartphone - leading, trendy, stylish, truly amazing. But Android will be the Ford Taurus - the comparison may be a bit boring, sometimes clumsy, but reliable, cheap and everywhere you look, like Windows on Apple's latest holy war (except for the dependable).

Mobile application developers do not have to choose between these platforms, and most do not. This is far from a few years ago when you have to port your applications to tens of different handsets - a platform now only 2 or 3 and you're done. However, if you must prioritize your focus, Android in the long run is the perfect place to be. Apple's distribution platform is much better now, but the numbers game is more important. If you want ubiquity, to sell to Ford, no Maserati.