iPad Expected to Have 50% Market Share Until 2016

[Maura]

[FONT=&amp]

According to new figures from IDC, as reported by AppleInsider today, Apple is expected to maintain its 50% share of the tablet market through until 2016, although it is expected to take a small hit from increased competition from Android and Windows tablets. IDC thinks that there will be 122.3 million tablets shipped in 2012 overall, with Apple’s iPad making up 53.8% of that total, representing a slight drop from 56.3% in 2011. The main reason for this would be the growth in Android tablet sales, up from 39.8% in 2011 to 42.7% in 2012. Good news for Apple and Android then, but less favourable news for Microsoft, with Windows-based tablets only expected to account for 2.9% of tablet shipments in 2012. However, things can only get better for Microsoft, and IDC believes that indeed they will, projecting that by 2016, Windows tablets will have 10.2% of the market, which would be quite an improvement.[/FONT]

"Tablets continue to captivate consumers, and as the market shifts toward smaller, more mobile screen sizes and lower prices points, we expect demand to accelerate in the fourth quarter and beyond," Tom Mainelli, research director, Tablets at IDC, told AppleInsider. "Android tablets are gaining traction in the market thanks to solid products from Google, Amazon, Samsung, and others. And Apple's November iPad mini launch, along with its surprise refresh of the full-sized iPad, positions the company well for a strong holiday season."

[FONT=&amp]Source:[/FONT] Apple's iPad projected to control 50% of tablet shipments through 2016

 

[tlbaker]

We will up to iPad 114 by then lol.


Sent from my Wi-Fi Black 64GB
iPad with Retina Display using Tapatalk HD

 

[s2mikey]

We will up to iPad 114 by then lol.

Sent from my Wi-Fi Black 64GB
iPad with Retina Display using Tapatalk HD

Right, and with that we will have 113 iPad models owned by disgruntled people because a newer model came out too soon after they bought theirs.

I'm actually surprised they don't have more of the tablet market than 50%. I would think it'd be even higher than that. IMO, they make the best tablets.

 

[tlbaker]

Right, and with that we will have 113 iPad models owned by disgruntled people because a newer model came out too soon after they bought theirs.

I'm actually surprised they don't have more of the tablet market than 50%. I would think it'd be even higher than that. IMO, they make the best tablets.

LOL!!! Yes, they do. I tried to like other tablets but I can't lol. I saw an Asus tablet that looked nice online. I have a BestBuy near work I will check it out again. So glad it is near as I can also check out Apple stuff as well w o having to run to an Apple store.

I am not buying another tablet anytime soon unless I am able to sell or regift the old ones.


Sent from my Wi-Fi Black 64GB
iPad with Retina Display using Tapatalk HD

 

[The OB]

Right, and with that we will have 113 iPad models owned by disgruntled people because a newer model came out too soon after they bought theirs.

Showing Thumbs


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[AQ_OC]

The much more interesting stat is who is actually making a profit on tablets.

 

[scifan57]

The much more interesting stat is who is actually making a profit on tablets.

Also very telling is the fact that almost all web traffic on tablets is on iPads. 98.1% of tablet web traffic is from iPads. The iPad also has a 54.5% share of web traffic among all mobile devices.

 

[ardchoille]

Also very telling is the fact that almost all web traffic on tablets is on iPads. 98.1% of tablet web traffic is from iPads. The iPad also has a 54.5% share of web traffic among all mobile devices.

Indeed! and I'm going to help increase iPad stats by buying more iPads

 

[s2mikey]

The much more interesting stat is who is actually making a profit on tablets.

Right. Although in many business cases, the hardware is given away for free per say because they make it back on the content. Apple makes big bucks on both but I bet the App Store cut that they get starts to add up quickly!

 

[AQ_OC]

Right. Although in many business cases, the hardware is given away for free per say because they make it back on the content. Apple makes big bucks on both but I bet the App Store cut that they get starts to add up quickly!

That's the claim, but does that really happen? I know amazon takes a big loss on prime, due to shipping and videos. They make a net profit, but that profit would be bigger if they didn't take these big hits will trying to own the book and video markets. Also, who involved with googles tablets is making any kind of profit? Google is undercutting the very vendors who have built devices for android. Samsung is the only one that seems to be making a profit, but they are huge and into everything. In the meantime, apple and its developers are raking in the dough.

 

[s2mikey]

That's the claim, but does that really happen? I know amazon takes a big loss on prime, due to shipping and videos. They make a net profit, but that profit would be bigger if they didn't take these big hits will trying to own the book and video markets. Also, who involved with googles tablets is making any kind of profit? Google is undercutting the very vendors who have built devices for android. Samsung is the only one that seems to be making a profit, but they are huge and into everything. In the meantime, apple and its developers are raking in the dough.

Apple and their walled garden system ensure the bucks roll in. By requiring the App Store to distribute your app, they've built in a nice commission for themselves with each purchase. Imagine if anyone could just sell and create apps however they wanted? Apple also charges a good buck for their hardware. It's smart and they can do it so they do it. You are right about google and their undercutting. You wonder why they don't come up with an App Store concept and seal things off a bit? That's the problem with open source or whatever you want to call it. You can't control it.

 

[AQ_OC]

Apple and their walled garden system ensure the bucks roll in. By requiring the App Store to distribute your app, they've built in a nice commission for themselves with each purchase. Imagine if anyone could just sell and create apps however they wanted? Apple also charges a good buck for their hardware. It's smart and they can do it so they do it. You are right about google and their undercutting. You wonder why they don't come up with an App Store concept and seal things off a bit? That's the problem with open source or whatever you want to call it. You can't control it.

But they also provide the machinery which allows all app sellers to distribute and advertise their apps and for customers to download them, over and over. This kind of services is costly to provide on an on-going bases. And their developers are making lots of money too, which is why there are some 275,000 iPad apps. It is a formula that works.

 

[epb]

But they also provide the machinery which allows all app sellers to distribute and advertise their apps and for customers to download them, over and over. This kind of services is costly to provide on an on-going bases. And their developers are making lots of money too, which is why there are some 275,000 iPad apps. It is a formula that works.

I dunno - I see history gearing up for a repeat, as this sort of behavior is exactly how Apple marginalized themselves as a PC brand during the home computer boom, and why - despite strong brand recognition - they're still less than 10% of the desktop and laptop markets. You had Macs that could run their OS and some software, and you had PCs that could run Windows and almost anything, and eventually they were swamped and gutted by all the cheaper, more versatile alternatives and Steve Jobs was fired.

It's been an amazing comeback, but it's been fueled not by computer sales, but personal electronics and their cut of App store/iTunes sales. So, just like last time they've got a strong lead, a devoted following, and yet we're seeing loads of cheaper tablets show up and Android following the same path to victory as MS - perhaps not as good as OS, but also not nearly as restrictive and with cheaper hardware than the Apple system. Once the app development for Android approaches parity with those available for iOS we'll see the market grow, and combined with cheaper apps (without the 30% cut Apple takes) and cheaper hardware (without the premium Apple charges), we'll see Android-based devices overtake them in 2-3 years and marginalize them in 6-7 years. MS beat them last time by focusing on software rather than hardware and creating an OS that runs on everything, while Apple insisted their OS should stay on their expensive Macs. The market said "Yeah, it's great but we'll take the cheaper option that works just as well.") and they became a footnote in the personal computer market, usually as *This product not compatible with Apple pc.

Here we are again: Apple with a well-loved operating system that only works on their pricey hardware, against Android which will run on everything else in the market, kidding themselves that this time it'll be different.

The solution? Port iOS to non-Apple devices. Yes, this would damage iDevice sales (unless they lowered hardware prices and accepted profit margins their competitors already live with), but they make the bulk of their money from App Store and iTunes fees and such a move would generate that income from the entire world market, indefinitely, and would effectively kill Android before it finds its footing. Lost sales would be compensated for by license fees from the other phone and tablet makers. They won't, though, and by 2020 the company that put tablets on the map will be as relevant to the market is Britain is to their former colonies. Sad.

 

[s2mikey]

I dunno - I see history gearing up for a repeat, as this sort of behavior is exactly how Apple marginalized themselves as a PC brand during the home computer boom, and why - despite strong brand recognition - they're still less than 10% of the desktop and laptop markets. You had Macs that could run their OS and some software, and you had PCs that could run Windows and almost anything, and eventually they were swamped and gutted by all the cheaper, more versatile alternatives and Steve Jobs was fired.

It's been an amazing comeback, but it's been fueled not by computer sales, but personal electronics and their cut of App store/iTunes sales. So, just like last time they've got a strong lead, a devoted following, and yet we're seeing loads of cheaper tablets show up and Android following the same path to victory as MS - perhaps not as good as OS, but also not nearly as restrictive and with cheaper hardware than the Apple system. Once the app development for Android approaches parity with those available for iOS we'll see the market grow, and combined with cheaper apps (without the 30% cut Apple takes) and cheaper hardware (without the premium Apple charges), we'll see Android-based devices overtake them in 2-3 years and marginalize them in 6-7 years. MS beat them last time by focusing on software rather than hardware and creating an OS that runs on everything, while Apple insisted their OS should stay on their expensive Macs. The market said "Yeah, it's great but we'll take the cheaper option that works just as well.") and they became a footnote in the personal computer market, usually as *This product not compatible with Apple pc.

Here we are again: Apple with a well-loved operating system that only works on their pricey hardware, against Android which will run on everything else in the market, kidding themselves that this time it'll be different.

The solution? Port iOS to non-Apple devices. Yes, this would damage iDevice sales (unless they lowered hardware prices and accepted profit margins their competitors already live with), but they make the bulk of their money from App Store and iTunes fees and such a move would generate that income from the entire world market, indefinitely, and would effectively kill Android before it finds its footing. Lost sales would be compensated for by license fees from the other phone and tablet makers. They won't, though, and by 2020 the company that put tablets on the map will be as relevant to the market is Britain is to their former colonies. Sad.

Very good points here and I do remember how apple kind of screwed itself back then with their hard headedness. I'm not sure if the same thing will happen though. This time, they were basically first with the iPad and have a good start on apps too. Back then, they're we're not first to market and didn't have a closed, proprietary ecosystem for apps and music like they do now. I agree that apple hardware is pretty costly but honestly, in most cases their products do feel and work a little better and more slick than their counterparts. They do over charge for memory and tend to be on the high side when you compare them to similar android tablets. But, people are buying them like crazy and that's what counts. And yes, there is no doubt that apple makes sick margins on their stuff. Just sick. What does that usually mean? It means that the products are probably a tad overpriced. We still buy them though, don't we? If they were truly overpriced then they wouldn't last long, would they?

Apple wasn't able to facilitate and make their walled garden system work with the PC market. However, tablets are different and their devices are the top sellers in this field. I just don't see that changing anytime soon. I'd welcome some different hardware choices for apple to get costs down and create some competition. But, apple doesn't roll like that and probably never will.

Good post though!