It’s the holidays, let’s spend a couple of minutes on some simple degruberization:
Update 1: There is no native iPad app for Facebook, so maybe the difference is just the iPod Touch?
Wait… an application available on only one flavor of iOS? I thought there was no fragmentation on iOS?
Update 2: Also worth pointing out, perhaps, that while Facebooks Android app is growing fast, it isnt catching up to the iPhone app. The Facebook for iPhone app gained about 4.5 million users for the month, going from 53 to 57.5 million users. The Facebook for Android app gained about 4.25 million users, going from 17 to 21 million users.
Another way of looking at it is that the Android app gained 23% while the iPhone app increased only 8.5%. In other words, Android is growing three times as fast as the iPhone.
I don’t think these numbers mean much, to be honest, but isn’t it funny that whenever there are two ways of looking at statistics, Gruber will always pick the one that shows Apple in a more favorable light?
And in a more recent entry, Gruber quotes an entire press release from Amazon saying that the Kindle is their best selling product of all time. His laconic comment:
Short version: Lots of people are buying both Kindles and iPads. (I own both and Im glad I do.)
Er… no. The short version is that a lot of people are buying Kindles. The PR says absolutely nothing of the iPad.
With these latest posts, Gruber is fast approaching the Fox News level of reporting.
#1 by Louis Gray on December 27, 2010 - 9:42 pm
But he’s very good at it! :)
In today’s article, recapping my discussion of Android with TechCrunch and Scoble (http://daringfireball.net/2010/12/emotional_rescue), he says: “Ignore for the moment whether its true that Android can go feature by feature against iPhone now. and “Ignore also that the best Android phones, like the Nexus S, cost over $500 unsubsidized.” So let’s ignore discussing the points and just add on generic hyperbole about emotion and “feeling” instead. :)
He says, “To discount the emotional appeal of Apples products is to ignore the entire point of Apples products.”
Did I discount emotional appeal? No. Did I bring it up? No. That’s part of the loose bucket of “preference”. Oh well.
#2 by Yuri Schimke on December 27, 2010 - 11:57 pm
Louis, I don’t understand, he was replying to a direct quote from your post. And his comment made perfect sense in the context of your blog post.
I agree about Gruber, but people know that he is completely biased and like reading him partly because of it. The world would be a very boring place if everyone was 100% neutral. These discussions wouldn’t happen.
As Two Android Fanboys, its your option to respond exactly like you have. But I just don’t get the complaint about “emotion”.
#3 by Albert on December 28, 2010 - 12:36 am
Please read the Amazon PR again. It has a specific quote from Jeff Bezos about their data showing that customers are using kindles alongside “lcd tablets”, which is clearly his euphemistic term for the ipad. Bezos clearly makes the point that the kindle and ipad are not directly competing but rather are complementary products.
#4 by Pietrotull on December 28, 2010 - 2:19 am
Grubies post about Facebook statistics is titled: “Facebook for iPhone Usage Statistics (Requires Flash Player)”
Don’t you love the irony of not being able to see those statistics with iPhone.
#5 by Ian Betteridge on December 28, 2010 - 2:47 am
“Wait an application available on only one flavor of iOS? I thought there was no fragmentation on iOS?”
It’s not “only available” on one flavour of iOS. Facebook’s iPhone app works fine on the iPad. But it’s not the best experience, because the app isn’t optimised for the screen size.
So no, your claim of fragmentation is a bit of a fantasy I’m afraid.
#6 by Cedric on December 28, 2010 - 6:25 am
“Please read the Amazon PR again”
Tell me again which part my my statement “The PR says absolutely nothing of the iPad” is incorrect?
“its not the best experience, because the app isnt optimised for the screen size.”
This is the exact definition of ‘fragmentation’.
#7 by Eric on December 28, 2010 - 10:28 am
Cedric, it’s not fragmentation any more than the fact that Mobile Safari on iPad provides a vastly superior experience of Facebook than either the Facebook iOS app on iPhone, iPad, or Mobile Safari on iPhone is. Perfectly scaled to iPad dimensions, the Facebook iOS app on iPad would *still* be inferior.
This is not fragmentation or the fault of iOS. It is the result of decisions made by Facebook and what they want to pack into the app vs. what they present on the “regular” web version.
That’s not fragmentation, it’s simply design choice.
#8 by Mark on December 28, 2010 - 10:35 am
If anyone is trying to twist the facts, it’s you. He said that Android isn’t catching up. iOS is ahead, and Android users aren’t downloading as many copies of the Facebook app per month as iOS users, thus, it isn’t catching up, but is falling farther behind. If Android gains another 23% and begins to surpass the monthly downloads of iOS, then it will be catching up.
As for the Kindle – again, how is he spinning things? Bezos might not have mentioned the iPad explicitly, but what other tablets are selling in any quantity that he was talking about?
Like many people, I have both. Like many people with the DX, I don’t carry it around with me – if I take anything it’s my iPad, because I’m not going to carry a single-use product around if I have one that does everything that single-use product does and more. My DX actually sits in a closet because it’s rare that the advantages have matter to me (e.g. I’m not sitting in bright sunlight right now reading a book, and I find the screen quality of the iPad good enough at this point to read 60-100 pages of a technical book without a significant break and without eye strain, etc.).
#9 by jbones on December 28, 2010 - 10:38 am
Gruber’s a douchebag and you’re an Android fanboi/Google apologist.
#10 by Grant on December 28, 2010 - 10:38 am
“Tell me again which part my my statement The PR says absolutely nothing of the iPad is incorrect?”
The part where they refer to LCD tablets, the most popular one of which is the iPad.
Part of being an intelligent human is having the ability to read between the lines.
#11 by Cedric on December 28, 2010 - 10:39 am
You can rationalize as much as you want, it’s a design choice that forces developers to write different code for different hardware
#12 by Dan on December 28, 2010 - 10:40 am
“I dont think these numbers mean much, to be honest, but isnt it funny that whenever there are two ways of looking at statistics, Gruber will always pick the one that shows Apple in a more favorable light?”
And on the flip side, you’re picking the numbers that show Android in a favorable light. Stop acting so butthurt.
#13 by Mister Snitch on December 28, 2010 - 10:40 am
“isnt it funny that whenever there are two ways of looking at statistics, Gruber will always pick the one that shows Apple in a more favorable light?”
Yeah, whereas there’s no bias HERE.
“In other words, Android is growing three times as fast as the iPhone.”
“Isn’t it funny” that you chose to pick up on this, instead of the fact that the iPhone – available from only ONE carrier – has twice the installed base of this app than Android – available from MANY carriers – does?
Mind you – Gruber has his problems. Enormous ones. No argument there. But all you’re doing is proclaiming your bias to be better than his.
#14 by Jason on December 28, 2010 - 10:40 am
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&defl=en&q=define:fragmentation
Searching for “the app isn’t optimised for the screen size” didn’t yield any results. Sorry, it’s not the exact definition. It’s not even one of the /many/ definitions. There’s not even “app” in any of the definitions! Nor size… nor screen…
Fragmentation, in the context we’re arguing, is when you call many things by one name (this EVO is ANDROID, this Nexus is ANDROID, this whatever other phone is ANDROID), and then something doesn’t work on each existence of ANDROID. (No, I’m not saying Facebook doesn’t work on some Android phone, this is a general statement regarding app compatibility about different versions of the same thing.)
Facebook.app works on every flavor of iOS, period. iPhones, iPods, iPads. It works. On ALL of them.
This discussion is not about OS versions (A: 1.5 -> 2.0, i: 2.0 -> 3.0) either.
Arguing that Gruber is biased (he is), and Faux News (it is an opinion site, not a news outlet), is one thing. But turning raw numbers into percentages to give Android the advantage? Pot, meet Kettle.
Android isn’t growing at “3 times” the rate of the iPhone. Android and iPhone users on Facebook grew at approximately the same amount. Approximately 4 million and change. What exactly do percentages show? That Android has more ground to make up… which, ultimately, is a completely worthless statement in the conversation.
#15 by EB on December 28, 2010 - 10:41 am
I really don’t understand people’s desire to have a custom app for facebook when you have a full page browser. Facebook is a web app. I’d much rather be able to use the full website than a custom version of an app for a large screen. I applaud fbs decision to NOT make a version specifically for the iPad.
#16 by Grant on December 28, 2010 - 10:41 am
I would also appreciate a link to the Daring Fireball post that says there’s “no fragmentation on iOS.”
#17 by no on December 28, 2010 - 10:42 am
It is 8.5% = 57.5/53. so got you statistics wrong as well.
#18 by Mark on December 28, 2010 - 10:42 am
Cedric,
Not having a version of an app that is optimized for a particular form factor is not fragmentation. Having an app that doesn’t run at all due to missing APIs is fragmentation. The fragmentation that people are concerned about on Android is due to APIs present on one vendor’s release and not on another. It’s arguable how much of an issue this is, but it’s not arguable that this is the real concern – not a concern that people most often raise – not whether than application is optimized for a particular screen size.
#19 by Grant on December 28, 2010 - 10:43 am
“Facebook.app works on every flavor of iOS, period. iPhones, iPods, iPads. It works. On ALL of them.”
To be pedantic, it doesn’t work on Apple TV 2 ;)
#20 by Cedric on December 28, 2010 - 10:44 am
When you write the “short version” of an article, you don’t include things that weren’t part of the story. The “short version” of the Amazon PR is that they are selling a lot of Kindles.
#21 by yoshi on December 28, 2010 - 10:44 am
So you counter Gruber’s biased entry with an equally biased entry?
Awesome.
#22 by Joe on December 28, 2010 - 10:44 am
Cedric,
you are right, of course, on fragmentation. The whole iphone/iPod Touch/iPad does certainly introduce a certain amount of fragmentation. To say that it doesn’t is silly, but “fragmentation” is not a binary state.. I think to this point fragmentation in iOS has been pretty mild.
As for the Amazon press release… you are also right that he does not say “iPad” explicitly.. but lets not be coy… what else do you think he means by lcd tablet? Do you seriously think he is thinking of the galaxy tab?
#23 by Paul on December 28, 2010 - 10:44 am
As someone that develops both iOS and Android apps, I have to laugh every time someone tries to jab iOS with regards to fragmentation. Most interface layout files (and code) work beautifully on both iPad/iPhone. It makes universal apps a reasonably possibility. Meanwhile when discussing specs for an Android app, I need clarification on supporting 1.6+, 2.1+, HVGA, WVGA, QVGA, etc. And please don’t get me started on the effort required to make really nice UI’s in Android.
Honestly your analysis of the statistics seem more biased to me. After all, a dwarf that increases in height by 200% is still shorter than the giant that grew by 20%.
In that same vein, you can’t discount the user experience and the investment Apple has put into that. You may have a Honda Civic with MORE horsepower, BETTER tires, and fancier stereo than a showroom stock BMW. But it’s still feels like a shitbox Honda.
#24 by Mark on December 28, 2010 - 10:45 am
EB,
I find in many cases apps are a superior experience (overall) to web pages. Twitter for iPad is one such example. Perhaps with HTML 5 this will change in time.
#25 by JC on December 28, 2010 - 10:46 am
If the Facebook for Android app had one user last month and 2 users this month, it would have had 100% growth. If anything, using percentages is the deceitful method in this particular scenario. This is about adding users for an app, in which case, the actual numbers mean more, not the percentages. Percentages would be more useful in looking at month-to-month growth or even more so over several months, which these numbers are not indicative of.
But even so, if they both add 4 million users a month, every month, Android will never catch up with iPhone in Facebook app numbers. And in fact, if that happened, both their percentages of growth would steadily decline, even though their numbers would grow.
As for the Kindle press release: “We’re grateful to the millions of customers who have made the all-new Kindle the bestselling product in the history of Amazon — surpassing Harry Potter 7. Were seeing that many of the people who are buying Kindles also own an LCD tablet. Customers report using their LCD tablets for games, movies, and web browsing and their Kindles for reading sessions. They report preferring Kindle for reading because it weighs less, eliminates battery anxiety with its month-long battery life, and has the advanced paper-like Pearl e-ink display that reduces eye-strain, doesnt interfere with sleep patterns at bedtime, and works outside in direct sunlight, an important consideration especially for vacation reading. Kindles $139 price point is a key factor its low enough that people dont have to choose.”
Bezos spends one sentence extolling their best-selling on Amazon device. He spends the entire rest of his quote talking about how people like owning it alongside an “LCD tablet,” and how “people don’t have to choose.” Yes, you could argue he didn’t say the word, “iPad,” but you can’t argue that the iPad currently has almost the entire tablet market share, hence Gruber’s recap.
While Gruber certainly prefers Apple products and the company to most others, he also fully admits it and often gives concrete reasons for his opinion (whether or not people agree with those reasons).
Seems to me that you are actually more like what you accuse Gruber of being.
#26 by yoshi on December 28, 2010 - 10:48 am
@ #15
For the form factor a native version of the facebook app is more useful than trying to navigate the facebook webpage on a small iOS or Android based device. That’s true of many other sites as well.
But the thing of it is that there are at least 3 iPad version of apps I’m aware of that lets you access and post content to Facebook (and many many others to access other social sites). So why does Facebook even need an iPad app if the market is already served?
#27 by Grant on December 28, 2010 - 10:48 am
“When you write the short version of an article, you dont include things that werent part of the story.”
Ugh. He didn’t include anything that wasn’t part of the story.
Quote from the PR: “We’re seeing that many of the people who are buying Kindles also own an LCD tablet.” He is obviously talking about iPads there. In fact, the bulk of the PR goes on to say why the Kindle and “LCD tablets” are more complementary than competitive. Why isn’t that allowed to be included in the “short version”?
#28 by Scott G. Lewis on December 28, 2010 - 10:51 am
“You can rationalize as much as you want, its a design choice that forces developers to write different code for different hardware”
Universal apps show that, yes, you can easily write one app that runs everywhere. That some developers haven’t MADE universal apps, was a choice. To expect an app started three years ago to run on a newer, not-yet-conceived at the time platform, is a bit much.
Next, you’ll illustrate fragmentation when highlighting the fact that there are iOS apps that REQUIRE iOS 4 or won’t run on hardware older than a 3GS.
The jailbreak apps that force iPhone only apps to display at native iPad resolution shows what’s missing… a recompile by the developer.
Fragmentation is the thing that makes Angry Birds free on Android, since they couldn’t sort out where it might run, and where it might not.
But you’re right… Gruber is biased, as compared to your completely bias-free blog.
#29 by Tim F. on December 28, 2010 - 10:51 am
This sounds like Fandroidism. The FB piece explicitly states that the Android downloads are growing at a faster rate: why would Gruber comment on it by saying the same thing? Instead he looks at the numbers and observes that even at the far greater rate, the iOS downloads are at a rate sufficient enough to continue to outpace Android downloads — an actual new observation being drawn from the data already presented.
And the Amazon PR, what is this?
“We’re seeing that many of the people who are buying Kindles also own an LCD tablet. Customers report using their LCD tablets for games, movies, and web browsing and their Kindles for reading sessions. They report preferring Kindle for reading because it weighs less, eliminates battery anxiety with its month-long battery life, and has the advanced paper-like Pearl e-ink display that reduces eye-strain, doesn’t interfere with sleep patterns at bedtime, and works outside in direct sunlight, an important consideration especially for vacation reading. Kindle’s $139 price point is a key factor — it’s low enough that people don’t have to choose.”
Do I actually believe clients are telling Bezos that the Kindle isn’t interrupting their sleep patterns, or do I think Bezos is specifically going down every single FUD point that eInk eReader supporters have dragged out to combat the iPad, and not “LCD tablets,” specifically? And in what way is his summary any different than Bezos’s conclusion (“it’s low enough that people don’t have to choose”)? But rather than denigrating one product he says both are great and he uses both.
#30 by nagha on December 28, 2010 - 10:52 am
I read DF because of his slant. You don’t like it, don’t read it. Just like I typically don’t read your page. Your vapid thoughts don’t interest me. Cheers.
#31 by Jackson Pollock on December 28, 2010 - 10:54 am
There’s a native iPad app for Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/friendly.iPad
#32 by André on December 28, 2010 - 10:54 am
Well, I think gruber’s take on the numbers is better than yours. if you look at the graphs it’s clear that, if the rate of adoption doesn’t change, android’s facebook app won’t catch iPhone’s. Not that I think theses curves can’t or won’t change, but that’s what the data shows now.
#33 by giuliano on December 28, 2010 - 10:56 am
“You can rationalize as much as you want, its a design choice that forces developers to write different code for different hardware”
Yeah, right. Wonder why apple hasn’t made the iPad with 3.5” screen. Those fragmentation whores.
#34 by David H. McCoy on December 28, 2010 - 10:58 am
What does this have to do with software? Currently, the iOS piece of the bigger. Will Android surpass it? Who cares because Apple will *still* make all the money.
#35 by I.P.Freely on December 28, 2010 - 10:59 am
Your logic is bit flawed Cedric…
iPhone app = +4.5 million users from 53 to 57.5 million users.
Android app = +4.25 million users from 17 to 21 million users.
Your statistic means nothing, more people are using iPhone app and the market is pretty much saturated yet iPhone added more users. Hmmm
If Company A had 1 user and added 1 more… Company A user base by 100%.
If Company B had 100 users and added 10 new users… Company B grew its user base 10%.
Yes I am exaggerating here but that’s to show how illogical Cedric’s thinking here.
Company A had a hell of a year using your logic.
#36 by Gregory on December 28, 2010 - 11:00 am
Gruber may be biased as all hell (and, well.. he admits that) but at least he’s usually pretty accurate with his statements, even if they tend to be favorable to Apple.
Here you clearly don’t understand what fragmentation is and also show your poor data manipulation. Tufte would disapprove.
To put it another way – an unoptimized form factor is not fragmentation, and the Android growth was impressive proportional to its install size, but at the same level as the iOS. It also means that Android needs to grow at a greater rate to even think about catching up with the iOS.
This is Dvorak level analysis here.
#37 by Andre Richards on December 28, 2010 - 11:01 am
“Wait an application available on only one flavor of iOS? I thought there was no fragmentation on iOS?”
You’ve never really used iOS, have you? Do you understand what “native app for iPad” even means? It has nothing to do with fragmentation.
I own both an Android phone and an iPhone and I can assure you that the fragmentation problem on iOS is negligible especially compared to Android. My Android phone is barely over a year old and it’s not supported for ever being updated from 2.1 that it shipped with. Meanwhile, my iPhone 3G, which is almost 3-years-old, is running the latest version of iOS without a hitch.
Trying to compare the fragmentation on these two platforms is a losing game for Android fans, unless you can explain why, almost 8 months after Froyo’s release, more users are still on older versions of Android.
#38 by King on December 28, 2010 - 11:02 am
You wrote: “Another way of looking at it is that the Android app gained 23% while the iPhone app increased only 8.5%. In other words, Android is growing three times as fast as the iPhone… Isnt it funny that whenever there are two ways of looking at statistics, Gruber will always pick the one that shows Apple in a more favorable light?”
A commenter pointed out: “If the Facebook for Android app had one user last month and 2 users this month, it would have had 100% growth.”
Uh huh.
#39 by Brian on December 28, 2010 - 11:03 am
Angry Birds on Android is an example of fragmentation. It only runs on some Android phones, not all. Writing a single app for a single os that can’t run on ALL devices is fragmentation even if they’re at the same OS level is fragmentation.
The iOS Facebook app will run on any iOS device designed to run apps. Whether or not it’s “pretty” is a matter of taste, but it does run and runs exactly the same on all said iOS devices.
If a developer wants to optimize the program for a device’s display properties, they have the CHOICE to do so by writing a universal app. Twitter is a single app that loads on an iPhone or iPad and depending on the device alter the appearance. This is not mandatory; purely optional. Twitter chooses to do it, Facebook hasn’t.
#40 by Bob on December 28, 2010 - 11:07 am
The difference between you and Gruber? He carefully constructs the arguments for his propaganda so that they can be easily defended (cf., the easy refutations of your arguments in the comments above).
Clever man, that Gruber.
You? Not so much.
#41 by 243235235 on December 28, 2010 - 11:16 am
Apple iOS is NOT fragmented. Android it is.
#42 by brian gillespie on December 28, 2010 - 11:19 am
Let’s spend a moment on your Buestardization of the statistics.
So if it keeps up this pace in absolute numbers of adoption it should still be 36 million users behind next year this time and only slowly losing ground.
If it keeps up the pace in percentage, it should surpass iPhone in around 8 years, providing there still is a Facebook, or even a coherent Android.
Not quite as impressive as it sounds huh?
#43 by Tim F. on December 28, 2010 - 11:19 am
“You can rationalize as much as you want, its a design choice that forces developers to write different code for different hardware.”
And you can choose to use this as your definition of fragmentation. I will continue to use “shipping numerous version of the software that support different APIs and hardware features, updating the software at wildly varying rates, if at all, and allowing a broad array of customizations that further complicate what software and features are available or are not, preventing the end users and developers from having a reasonably simple and unified set of target devices, feature expectations, and software choices.”
But, go ahead, feel free to say that targeting a different screen resolution is the same as shipping a new Android device with 1.6 today and it never being officially updated. Just go ahead.
#44 by iBagwan on December 28, 2010 - 12:05 pm
Hello Fanboi, my name is pot….
#45 by Mau on December 28, 2010 - 12:25 pm
I agree with Eric (#7) and Brian (#42)… fragmentation would NOT allow you to run the same app on fragmented device/OS combinations… the facebook app for iOS runs on ANY iOS device. Granted, it is not optimized for iPad, but you can use it just as you can on an iPhone.
On Android, an app can run on device W or Y with OS version A, and not run on device X or Z with (same) OS version A. Now, THAT’s fragmentation. same OS, different device.
As for the “LCD tablets”, you can just go ahead and keep thinking Bezos was indeed referring to the HP Slate, or the Playbook. Not the iPad.
#46 by phil swenson on December 28, 2010 - 1:06 pm
Some people really like to twist things to support their case. Cedric is right mostly, there is some fragmentation in iOS. Apps for iPhone are terrible on the iPad, it’s that simple. This counts as fragmentation just like Angry Birds playing slowly on some versions of Android hardware is fragmentation.
But Bezos was talking about the iPad. It has 95% of the “LCD tablet” market. So at the very least he was 95% talking about the iPad.
#47 by Cedric on December 28, 2010 - 1:10 pm
Of course Bezos was talking about the iPad, that was not my point.
I was pointing out Gruber’s dishonesty: he claimed to offer a summary of the article but he actually twisted it to mention the iPad. It would have been perfectly okay if he had said “my take” instead of “short version”.
#48 by Michael on December 28, 2010 - 1:11 pm
“This is the exact definition of fragmentation.”
Actually operating system fragmentation refers to the branching of code bases. Android based devices do not have to be compatible with other versions/branches of Android. This is platform fragmentation.
There is no iOS fragmentation, there is only one version; Apple’s. The API’s support different types of views that allow applications to optimize the UI for the type of device being used to make use of physically larger screens. This is not fragmentation. This is the same application presenting the same information in different ways.
Market fragmentation isn’t about what versions are currently being used by users, but by what versions are currently being sold on the market today. iOS; 4.2. Android; 1.6, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3.
For iOS developers it’s clear which version to target, why? Because iOS 4.2 is being sold on all new devices and is available to all iPhone, iPod touch and iPad users with devices sold in the last 2.5 years.
#49 by David H. McCoy on December 28, 2010 - 1:19 pm
“Of course Bezos was talking about the iPad, that was not my point.
I was pointing out Grubers dishonesty: he claimed to offer a summary of the article but he actually twisted it to mention the iPad. It would have been perfectly okay if he had said my take instead of short version.”
“Short version” == “My take”, Cedric, obviously. Since you don’t like Gruber, you just don’t want to see that.
And as for the guy who said that iPhone apps are terrible on the iPad. Not necessarily. I have several games like Angry Birds, Pocket God, Tretris a a few others I can’t remember that I only play the iPhone versions because they work so well. I also use a few utilities like SpeedTest.
So you are not quite correct.
#50 by phil swenson on December 28, 2010 - 1:20 pm
“I was pointing out Grubers dishonesty”
Isn’t that being a bit harsh? When someone says “short version” on their blog it’s pretty obvious that means it’s “their take.” And I have to say after reading the link, it’s my take too. There isn’t much more content to the link than to say the kindle is selling well and people are buying both LCD tablets and Kindles (they are complimentary).
#51 by Tim F. on December 28, 2010 - 1:28 pm
Cedric: “Tell me again which part my my statement The PR says absolutely nothing of the iPad is incorrect?”
Cedric: “Of course Bezos was talking about the iPad, that was not my point.”
What was your point?
#52 by Woody on December 28, 2010 - 3:11 pm
‘Another way of looking at it is that the Android app gained 23% while the iPhone app increased only 8.5%. In other words, Android is growing three times as fast as the iPhone.’
But, in terms of absolute numbers of new users, the android app is growing more slowly than the iPhone app, and therefore ISN’T CATCHING THE IPHONE. I’d rather run a $3bn company growing 25% a month than a $200k one growing 50%.
#53 by God of Biscuits on December 28, 2010 - 3:15 pm
Cedric wrote:
Clearly, you’re not a developer.
The kind of fragmentation being talked about has to do with different versions of the OS/SDKs being out in the wild for what is effectively the same hardware because the carriers don’t do Android OS releases on same time schedules–by WIDE margins.
Meaning that if I were an Android developer, not only would I have to make sure that my app ran on each different Android handset out there, but I’d have to mux that against the various LATEST Android OS’s available for each handset (e.g,. it took more than 7 months for Froyo to be >50% of the Android OS market out there).
So save it.
And as far as your 23% growth for Android vs. 7.x% growth for iOS w.r.t. the Facebook App? first, did you subtract out the iPad?
Secondly, this is a time where absolute numbers make more sense than percentages: more iOS users started using a native facebook app than Android on Christmas. Done. Get over it.
It’s along the same lines as saying that Android must be doing better because Android users surf the web more than iOS users: completely flawed because iOS users are spending more of their time in native apps and only *defaulting* to the web browser when they don’t have the native app.
Y’know, like Facebook’s own app for iPad.
#54 by Gromit on December 28, 2010 - 5:06 pm
Gruber has many faults and can sometimetimes be a bit of an idiot. But on the evidence of this piece, you are off the scale in idiocy. If you are going to lambast someone for bias reading of statistics, it is a bit dumb to counter with your own twaddled reading of the same data, and expect to be taken seriously. Please try and construct an argument next time you commit pixel to screen.
#55 by Gromit on December 28, 2010 - 5:20 pm
// #19 by Grant on December 28, 2010 – 10:43 am
Facebook.app works on every flavor of iOS, period. iPhones, iPods, iPads. It works. On ALL of them.
To be pedantic, it doesnt work on Apple TV 2 //
That is because Apple TV does not run apps (any apps). It would be equally true and stupid to say the Facebook app does not run very well on my kettle, though I have worked an hack so it is reasonable on my pop-up toaster.
#56 by mogua on December 28, 2010 - 9:51 pm
Those newly added users of either mobile Facebook app have NOTHING to do with prior population. In other words, is it any easier for the iOS Facebook app to gain 4.5 million new users compared to Android’s 4.25 million just because it had 53 million users already? No.
If one were to assume that both apps would continue to gain 4.5/4.25 million users per period, that would be an educated guess.
If one were to assume that the iOS app would continue to see a rate of 8.5% per period while the Android app would see 23% increases per period, then you’d know that person probably majored in economics and has a sick love for “growth” in the wrong places.
The correct way to interpret these statistics with percentages would be that iOS gained 5.88% more users in the same period than Android did.
#57 by vkuzkokov on December 28, 2010 - 11:00 pm
mogua wrote:
The correct way to interpret these statistics with percentages would be that iOS gained 5.88% more users in the same period than Android did.
Honestly? The correct way? The correct way is not to interpret statistics in the first place. There are numbers. These are for iPhone, these are for Android. Some are bigger, some are smaller.
Also, one could normalize these data by total number of iPhone/Android users to get more “statistics”.
#58 by Richard on December 29, 2010 - 12:45 am
“We’re seeing that many of the people who are buying Kindles also own an LCD tablet.”
*cough* reading comprehension … now available on an internet near you! *uncough*
#59 by Richard on December 29, 2010 - 12:56 am
I’d also noted that if you squinted hard at the vertical axis on those graphs you’d get a surprise – that the total number of users added was very close for both platforms.
So yes, Gruber deserves to be dinged for that. But ignore that. *Every* pundit on the internet does exactly the same thing. What he really should be really dinged over is the bald faced hypocrisy over market share.
For years when Apple was the under-dog Gruber and other similarly aligned pundits would say that market share DOESN’T MATTER, you have to look at things like profit share, and trot out the Mercedes vs Honda comparisons, muddy the waters with terms like premium etc.
Then as soon as a product comes along where Apple does have a lead in market share, he’s all “YES! WE’RE WINNING!! WE HAVE THE MOST MARKET SHARE! SUCK IT EVERYBODY ELSE!!!”
#60 by Multivitamin on December 29, 2010 - 1:59 am
Hey Cedric,
Here’s a trick question for you.
Every month, Facebook iOS users grow by 4.5 million.
Every month, Facebook Android users grow by 4.25 million
How many months will it take the number of Android users to pass iOS users?
Like I said, it’s a trick question.
#61 by Andrew on December 29, 2010 - 5:44 am
Dear Mr. Buest,
I came across your website thanks to a comment by John Gruber. I thought some of your comments, and many of the user comments, for and against, were interesting, and thought I might check back to read some other posts.
However, your statement “With these latest posts, Gruber is fast approaching the Fox News level of reporting” made me think again. By “the Fox News level of reporting” do you mean “honest, fact-checked and unbiased professional-standard journalism”? Or do you mean “whatever gets website hits and promotes our distinctly biased agenda”?
This got me confused. I respect John Gruber as a journalist, while recognising his particular area of interest. Are you calling him a liar?
I will continue checking John Gruber’s website. I cannot say the same for yours.
#62 by Brendan O. on December 29, 2010 - 10:35 pm
Just because I read Gruber’s blog, doesn’t mean I’m incapable of thinking for myself. I was looking forward to your response to all the (unfortunately, seething) comments here. Too bad you felt the need to be hostile back at your readers (refer back to your comments on Twitter), who happen to also read Gruber’s blog. Eh, I guess you won’t have me come back here often. I guess it’ll be my own loss.
#63 by Bill K on January 3, 2011 - 8:27 am
I don’t know if your job is much different than it used to be–or perhaps your life? I really loved your technical stuff, you had some fantastic insights and great thoughts that gave the developer part of my mind something to play with.
I really can’t stand advocacy though. I’m not an Apple fan or anything, I have an iPhone and mac but will probably replace them with Android and Linux next time–I don’t like they way they are going either.
But I just don’t get into these advocacy thing and if you look back over the last year, I think you’ve done far more of this type of post than anything else.
I realize it’s just a change in direction not a problem or a fault–just wanted to point it out in case it wasn’t a deliberate change.
Pingback: Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics « marcussbarber