> ## RIP Nexus One > > The only loser in this affair is the Nexus One brand, which [didn’t perform brilliantly](http://mashable.com/2010/03/16/nexus-one-sales-poor/) in sales, and also got nixed by two major carriers for newer models. But while the Nexus One may be heading toward the [end of its lifeline](http://www.pcworld.com/article/195011/google_nexus_one_a_successful_flop.html), the phone has managed to raise the profile of the Android operating system, which is now [outselling the Apple iPhone](http://www.macworld.com/article/151148/2010/05/smartphone_market.html), according to the NPD Group. > > But Google or HTC are not losing: the search giant’s free-to-license mobile operating system lives through the HTC Incredible and EVO 4G, and of course, the [many](http://www.macworld.com/article/145048/2009/12/android.html) [other](http://www.pcworld.com/article/190859/welcome_to_android.html) [arriving](http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/188622/huawei_plans_to_launch_multiple_android_devices.html) this year. Interesting that Macworld, an obviously pro-Apple publication, gives Google a pass on this complete bungle. 

For starters, Android is not “outselling the Apple iPhone, according to the NPD group” as the article says. Android is outselling Apple in the US, not globally.

And again, I can’t help but think of what the headlines would be if Apple introduced a new iPhone model, put it up on a pedestal as God’s newest gift to the entire cell phone industry, and then failed as completely as the Google failed with this product.

> Google’s Android OS surpassed Apple in US smartphone market share during the first quarter of 2010. According to the NPD Group, Google now enjoys 28 percent of the smartphone market, earning the company the second-place spot behind Research in Motion (36 percent) and pushing Apple to third place (21 percent).  > > NPD credits Android’s success to strong carrier promotions, such as Verizon’s buy-one-get-one-free offer on RIM and Android OS devices. Still, the only company to offer Apple’s iPhone (AT&T) remained on top of the smartphone market with 32 percent share. Verizon was close behind with 30 percent, while T-Mobile and Sprint both ended the quarter hovering near the 15 percent mark. > > It’s possible that Apple will retake second place with the release of the next-generation iPhone this summer, but in the long run, Apple may always trail in terms of market share. So the big headline today is that Android has taken over Apple in the U.S. Yeah, but does it matter?

Remember, Apple’s plan is not to be the only phone provider in the world, no matter what the press might say. It has always been Apple’s desire to own the premium sector, not the bargain basement. They want other companies to compete right now, so they can avoid the appearance of a monopoly. They also have no interest in appealing to cheapskates, which is how Google managed to grab a lot of its market share.

That’s why all this talk of Apple’s “monopoly” lately is pure lunacy. Apple thrives when there is lots of competition. What Jobs wants is not to have a one-on-one fight to the death with Android, but rather to have several big competitors battling over the low-end of the market while he takes all the money off the high end. The same way he is skimming the top of the premium PC market right now.

Monopoly is not his plan. Money is.

Also note, Android’s numbers are still very deceiving. Total number of units sold with Android OS doesn’t really mean much, since the majority of those units run older versions of the OS that can’t be upgraded, and many users of those phones aren’t even aware that they are running Android. Many of those units are low-end Android phones, not the Nexus Ones or Droids of the world. So Android wins on a technicality. And again, only in the U.S. And again, it doesn’t matter in the scheme of things. It’s a bullet on a PowerPoint Slide for Marketing, not a statistic that matters in reality.

The real story here is that it took three years, several models, cheap prices, and availability on several carriers to accomplish this one sales statistic. And, to top it off, very few of those Android sales have come at the expense of Apple. iPhone share is still growing, not shrinking. Which means Android is killing Windows Mobile and other smaller companies like Palm, not Apple.

Android still doesn’t provide developers with any real profit potential, either, which is why the Android Marketplace is still not a hot target for young entrepreneurs looking to make a buck in the fledgling mobile software business. If you are a developer, and you want to make money, you write for the iPhone. All the “buy one get one free” promotions in the world isn’t going to change that much.

And don’t discount all those iPads and iPod Touches. Millions of devices running Apple’s app ecosystem that have no equivalent on the Android side at this point.

If you want a real statistic, look at the average sale price of an iPhone vs. all those other Android phones combined. And look at the total revenue from all those sales to Apple and Google, respectively. Because sooner or later, Google and its partners are going to want to profit from Android, and Google’s users are going to want software for their Android phones.

> Although Grønvold doesn’t see a reason to use Flash for video, he says that the relative ubiquity of Flash content makes the plugin a necessity in order to have a complete Internet experience. As such, he says that Opera still needs the plugin. Because Adobe followed the same basic business strategy of Microsoft, making its product a NECESSITY instead of a DESIRE, they are now facing the obvious consequences. What happens as soon as you are no longer necessary? People run away in droves.

Apple’s products, on the other hand, have never been a necessity. People use Apple because they want to.

“Is it better to be feared, or loved?” In the long run, I’d say loved, though love is much harder to accomplish, obviously.

> **Smartbooks have failed to materialise due to delays in Flash optimisation, a lower-than-expected uptake of Linux on netbooks, and the sudden emergence of tablets, ARM’s marketing chief has said.** > > ARM dominates the mobile phone chip design market and has since 2008 been [trying to get into the subnotebook market](http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/processors/2008/10/23/arm-cortex-based-netbooks-due-soon-39527261/ "ARM Cortex-based netbooks due soon") as well. The plan was to do so through Linux-based, [ARM-powered ‘smartbooks’](http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/processors/2009/06/01/qualcomm-lines-up-30-snapdragon-gadgets-39657633/ "Qualcomm lines up 30 Snapdragon gadgets") that would provide an instant-on, longer-life alternative to x86-based netbooks but, according to ARM’s marketing vice president, Ian Drew, events have conspired to stall this plan. > > “We thought [smartbooks] would be launched by now, but they’re not,” Drew told ZDNet UK on Tuesday. “I think one reason is to do with software maturity. We’ve seen things like Adobe slip — we’d originally scheduled for something like 2009.” > > [ARM and Adobe signed a partnership in late 2008](http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/desktop-hardware/2008/11/17/arm-takes-on-intel-with-adobe-partnership-39551922/ "ARM takes on Intel with Adobe partnership") that was [intended to see Flash Player 10](http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/mobile-working/2009/10/05/adobe-takes-flash-to-smartphones-39789642/ "Adobe takes Flash to smartphones") and Air — both rich web platforms — optimised for ARM-based systems. That work is only likely to come to fruition in the second half of this year, when an optimised version of [Flash comes out for Android smartphones](http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/mobile-apps/2010/04/29/google-to-add-enjoyable-flash-support-to-android-40088801/ "Google to add 'enjoyable' Flash support to Android"). As Apple’s Steve Jobs recently pointed out, [Flash was originally supposed to ship for smartphones in early 2009](http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/mobile-apps/2010/04/29/steve-jobs-launches-broadside-against-adobes-flash-40088812/ "Steve Jobs launches broadside against Adobe's Flash"). I seem to remember all the hype about smartbooks, back before the iPad was announced. Funny, it didn’t work out like people planned.

I love stories like this. Apple doesn’t need to open its mouth any more; Steve said his peace, and now he can sit back and watch Adobe lose.

Reality is on Apple’s side.

Again, people wonder why Apple wants control over the software and the hardware. The link to this story is all you need. ARM and Adobe, burning each other, while Apple flys past them both at one hundred miles an hour.

> “We believe that the native browser experience is the best reading experience for documents” as opposed to Flash, which requires duplicating browser functionality inside a browser, Friedman said. Scribd users will get such functionalities as search, zoom, and scrolling via HTML5, he said. > > “Previously, the Flash application needed to provide all that functionality itself, which meant that users had to learn and work with a whole new interface in order to manipulate what they were reading,” said Friedman. > > While Scribd is primarily a consumer site, it does have an enterprise business following, with uses like the downloading of business documents and document-sharing. “Scribd is the largest social publishing and reading site on the Web,” Friedman said. > > Documents on Scribd will be Apple iPad-friendly. Users will be able to read Scribd documents on handheld devices via HTML5. I asked before how long it would take sites to go from Flash only, to Flash on the Desktop and alternate version in HTML5 on the iPad, to just HTML5 for both.

Looks like the answer was a little over a month, at least for the first couple of sites. Expect an accelerating trend.

So now someone will have to create a graph showing the decline of IE vs. the decline of Flash. I can’t wait to see which one falls below 20% first.

The reason why Apple is winning this fight, by the way, has nothing to do with monopolies. Apple is just playing the game better. Rather than forcing people to make sites in a special way that would only work on the iPhone or iPad, they gave everyone an easy alternative (HTML5) that works everywhere. It’s the multi-platform “open specification” that Adobe claims Flash is. Write once, run everywhere.

And HTML5 actually works everywhere. Unlike Flash, which is still absent on all mobile devices, not just Apple’s.

At the end of the day, the fault for Flash’s demise will rest entirely with Adobe, because they couldn’t get their code in order three years ago, and because they lacked the vision to see mobile coming. They thought they had the desktop locked up, and that’s all that would matter. Hubris. Plain and simple.