New iPhones start at $349.

I think it's more about which ecosystem has the bigger lock in. I used to be locked into the Apple ecosystem and it was somewhat painful to extricate myself. What's interesting about Google's ecosystem is that I was locked into it even when I had an iPhone. And I can't imagine trying to extricate myself from Google, it would be even more painful. Now that I'm on Android the Google locked-in ecosystem is a bit smoother with things like Google Photos.

$350 gets you a 6 years old phone design, an iPhone 5 with better internals. $700 gets you a 4 years old phone design, an iPhone 6 with better internals. $1000 gets you a brand new iPhone.

I got a Sony XZ1 Compact for €500 and it works the same or better than an iPhone.

What's wrong with the "6 year old design"? All phones since the original iPhone are basically a slab of glass with improved intervals and different size screens.

I have a larger phone but the larger screen doesn't actually help me as far as usability. I use my phone for typing email and messages because it's better for one hand use. But I'm quick to grab my iPad given a choice.

So why not get the smaller phone?

Out of curiosity what year design is the Sony XZ1 Compact?

It was released in 2017, although perhaps your comment is alluding to the (small) iterative design updates that Sony gives its phones.

I wanted an XZ1 Compact due to USB Type-C and the plastic back, but settled for a Z5 Compact due to LineageOS support.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Xperia_XZ1_Compact

I've used mostly Android phones in the past I was trying to decide whether to get the Z5 Compact or finally try Apple with the iPhone SE. After nearly a year with my first iPhone I'm ready to switch back. How has your experience been with that phone?

Well, you can get an iPhone 6S for ~€500 (actually 5% more). That's not 4y old, it was officially released less than two years prior to the XZ1.

Not that I'd recommend getting one. iPhones have never been the best bang for buck product, especially not the substantially older but barely cheaper older models. But you're exaggerating a bit here.

This is a silly comment, to distinguish between the "design" (by which I assume you mean what it looks like) and the "internals" (how it works). In any practical sense, a phone with new internals is a new phone.

And people say that Apple fans are too sensitive to how things look...

What is the iPhone 8, but an iPhone original with better internals? The design differences are negligible at best. The iPhone X is the first deviation from the basic design.

The point is the age of the internals, not the design deviations.

5 year old phones don't run todays software very well.

Parent I was responding to was complaining about iPhones being old designs with new internals.

The SE isn't 5 years old, it's the same internals as (and newer than) the 6S.

There is no phone you can buy from Apple today that has 5 year old internals.

the SE runs great. have you ever used one?

Yes, and new Android phones start as low as $30-$50.

Example: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01EYT1URO/

>If you have the money to buy a new iPhone and are considering a new smartphone, your range of options is effectively any smartphone device in the market.

Not necessarily. 'having money' isn't the same as willing to over-pay. In the same vein 'saving money' could mean willing to pay an amount apropos to value of the goods.

I think they meant they have money that they are willing to pay for a new iphone. What is over-pay to you might be just-the-right-price for somebody else with different values.

Flagship Android phones are at about $1,000.

Android users might just like the ecosystem better. There are rational reasons for that. Just like some people prefer Apple's ecosystem.

> Flagship Android phones are at about $1,000.

I wonder how the loyalty levels vary by phone price?

I have a few friends with low phone budgets and in the past they've purchased low-cost Androids and been very dissatisfied with them. Their last purchase, a few months ago, was for iPhone 6's.

Apple may only have high priced phones in the latest generation but iPhone's that are 4 generations back are still being sold (new) as the budget option.

other things to consider is the fact that for a run of the mill Android the insurance cost is significantly less and the deductible in some cases $100 compared to the $250 for an iPhone. Those who realized that the first time around would reconsider buying an Android as their next phone.

Apple is not innovating as they used to in their phone and so Android is quickly closing the gap, which makes them financially speaking more viable option.

For the run of the mill Android phone, why buy insurance at all? My teenage son is always breaking phones. We haven't allowed him to get a phone (with his allowance) that costs more than $100.

I'm very impressed with the $100 Moto G.

> If you're buying an Android device, you're statistically likely trying to save money and therefore a new iPhone isn't a realistic option.

Disagree strongly. Yes, plenty of Android phones come in at lower price-points so they will be more appealing to people looking to save money when purchasing a smartphone. But calling this is "statistically likely" is a gross exaggeration of the situation.

How is it a gross exaggeration?

The average selling price of an Android phone is $227. The ASP of an iPhone is $692.

https://www.androidauthority.com/price-gap-samsung-apple-sma...

The fact is if your budget for a phone is $300. You're going to buy an Android.

EDIT:

The link above compares Apple and Samsung. The gap is even wider when you take all manufacturers into account. $691 - $215.

http://fortune.com/2016/02/15/apple-android-asps/

I think by "statistically likely" they just mean "more than 50%," or, in other words, that lower-price-point Android phones outsell top-shelf ones. Given that upmarket they compete with the iPhone but downmarket they pretty much own the entire product space, this doesn't seem particularly unrealistic to me.

Like someone pointed out, there is significant data around this.

I am not exaggerating in the slightest.

You're hiding behind bad statistics to basically ignore all high end android phones, Galaxy devices etc. You're pretending the entire high end android market is "negligible" by using such shoddy statistics to essentially claim "Android = Budget". We all know what you're doing when you make cheap, short comments which obscure context to push narrative.

This is a very similar situation to people who use averages because medians don't tell the narrative they want.

You have a narrative, and you have damned statistics, so reality doesn't really get in your way.

As mentioned already, I dont see whats hard to understand.

High end android are similar to high end Iphone. Low end android are similar to...nothing in the iphone world.

So people with money who like Android buy Android People with money who like iPhones buy iPhones People with low money who like Android buy Android People with low money who like iPhone...buy Android

(there's the used market that make things a bit more complicated, but I still think the data would work out)

I'm still going to enjoy my Galaxy S9+ in a week.

The statistics are fine. The point is that you’d expect Android -> iPhone switches to be rarer than iPhone to Android switches. Nearly everyone who can afford an iPhone who wants an Android phone can afford to switch. But many people who have an Android phone but want an iPhone cannot afford to switch. (Indeed, if you look at average selling prices, the average Android user could not afford to switch to even the lowest end iPhone, even if they wanted to).

Thank you, this is exactly what I wanted people to notice.

Perhaps your version is stated more clearly than mine. Though I thought it was pretty clear when I initially wrote my version.

I'm not making a value judgement about the devices or them being "budget". You're imposing that on my comment because for some reason you feel attacked by my statements.

I am simply pointing out the realities of the market and what the data says. Emerging markets are incredibly important in these numbers and emerging markets overwhelmingly choose Android for obvious reasons. Android simply has more market penetration in price-sensitive areas.

Look at Samsung's device ASP, it's around $300. Apple's is closer to $700. If you cross reference these ASP numbers with market penetration, the narrative will become clear. If Samsung's Galaxy line had significant impact, you'd see it reflected in the ASP numbers.

If you want to have an actual measured conversation, feel free to introduce new facts or data that might help us both gain a better understanding of the mobile landscape. Until then, I don't think this conversation is entirely productive if you choose to throw away all the data I pointed out and attack me personally.

Sure. Let's add to the discussion using your data, hope you won't feel offended or attacked since we're only discussing data

"iPhone owners are willing to spend more than double what Android owners are for what is essentially same thing"

"iPhone owners demonstrably have less concept of frugality/value -- is it advertising, branding or something else which overwhelms their judgement?"

I wonder why this is. Is it the marketing which makes iPhone owners spend double? Is it the branding, the social status of buying a $1000 status object? Or do iPhone users really believe that their phone calls and web browsers are actually worth 3X the price?

I'll look past your unwarranted snark - even with everything you said, my point is simple and nothing you say contradicts it: if you can only afford a phone for $300 or you only want to spend $300 on a phone, you are going to pick Android because iOS isn't even an option for you.

Whether you think people who buy Apple products have a poor concept of value or not is frankly irrelevant to the discussion.

I don't think it's irrelevant to a conversation where I explicitly said "what else can we learn from your data", but I understand why my looking for other conclusions from your data made you uncomfortable and made you use a weird "irrelevance" attack to discard the observations instead of actually responding.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hi2tjMLVpdQ

I find it interesting that many of the folks who own everything choose Android (unless they need iMessage).

>if you can only afford a phone for $300 or you only want to spend $300 on a phone, you are going to pick Android because iOS isn't even an option for you.

Absolutely, you can get near flagship level Android devices for $250 (I just picked up a Moto X4 for $250 myself) while such an Apple device would be more than twice as much (and be unpopular enough that Apple's average sale is much closer to full price).

I think this data makes a very strong case for iPhone users having a very poor sense of value, regardless of whether or not you think this conclusion from your data is "relevant" to discussion of your data or not.

The only point I made is about optionality at a price point and how that can be one factor that's important to keep in mind when looking at the data presented in the article. That's literally all I pointed out.

You can either agree with me, or disagree with me and offer evidence to disprove the value of what I said. I don't understand what you're trying to accomplish by bringing taste or sense of value into this. If iPhone users have a poor sense of value then so be it, it still neither helps strengthen nor helps disprove my original point...

I'm sorry but I don't get your angle. I get the sense that you just want some friends to argue with but I'm sorry - I can't be that person for you. You'll have to find someone else. I think it's best for both of us to move on from this conversation. It's been a pleasure, cheers.

> Emerging markets are incredibly important in these numbers and emerging markets overwhelmingly choose Android for obvious reasons. Android simply has more market penetration in price-sensitive areas.

The study covers only USA.It is not an emerging market and it is one of the few that market share of iOS and Android are not very different

I believe the ASPs being stated in the various comments in this thread are the global numbers being reported by IDC.

Yeah, but the loyalty report only covers USA

If the ASP of an Android phone is $227, how does that not imply my Android users are buying cheap phones?