> Android is due to win simply because there are more people who can get it at any one time.
This is true due to cost, not carriers. The iPhone is available on most (all?) carriers in Canada. In fact, the USA is, I think, the only place in the world that has the carrier problem with iPhone. And since the USA is only ~5% of the world's population, that particular problem isn't very significant in the grand scheme of things.
More people are able to get Android phones than iPhones because there are price variations in the Android ones that allow people with little money to buy an Android phone.
Just to be clear, so people can sign up for $3000+ contracts, but they just can't afford that $159 for the iPhone 4? (on contract at Rogers. Or they can get the 3GS for $99)
That ridiculous argument doesn't pass the most superficial of consideration.
Further, the Galaxy S costs $179 on contract. I guess it's for the really rich. Even the miserable Dell streak is $149. The Blackberry Torch pushes in at $229.
If cost were a serious factor, Apple would have long had a iPhone 4LE or something of that sort. Right now they know it doesn't make a difference.
Even if there aren't many cheap Android phones out there right now, the potential is there and will be exploited. There'll probably never be a cheap iPhone, however.
Still, though, it's $50 on a 3-year contract, over which time thousands of dollars will be paid in tithe to the mobile company.
In smartphone pricing anything below $200 (in a contract) is a wash, because very few people actually buy their phone outside of a term. And yes, that includes internationally.
There'll probably never be a cheap iPhone, however
There's this myth that Apple just never lowers themselves to becoming the discount option.
Except with the iMac, which became popular because it was a cheap, all-in-one computer.
Except with the iPod and iPod Touch, which have always led the entire category in value.
Except for the iPad, which still can't be matched by competitors.
Except with Apple TV.
Except with the iPhone, compared to the Blackberry competition at the time.
Apple plays a great value game. That they are considered some sort of BMW of electronics is laughable. They are the Toyota of electronics: Great products, but if you really think they're exclusive...
> Apple plays a great value game. That they are considered some sort of BMW of electronics is laughable. They are the Toyota of electronics: Great products, but if you really think they're exclusive...
In some markets such as the UK, BMW models such as the 3-series outsell all the comparable vehicles from 'mainstream' manufacturers (e.g. Ford Mondeo, Vauxhall/Opel [GM] Insignia, Toyota Avensis, Honda Accord), so comparing Apple and BMW as examples of false exclusivity isn't necessarily that far off the mark.
This is true due to cost, not carriers. The iPhone is available on most (all?) carriers in Canada. In fact, the USA is, I think, the only place in the world that has the carrier problem with iPhone. And since the USA is only ~5% of the world's population, that particular problem isn't very significant in the grand scheme of things.
More people are able to get Android phones than iPhones because there are price variations in the Android ones that allow people with little money to buy an Android phone.