Android steals Symbian's Top Smartphone OS crown
The King is dead. Long live the King. You got it right, folks, Android is now the most popular mobile operating system in the world according to the latest Canalys report. Sales of phones running the green robotic OS stood at 33.3 million, while Symbian smartphones accounted for 31 million in the last quarter of 2010.
The industry has gradually stepped out of Symbian land during the last two years and now Nokia is the sole producer of Symbian phones. Major manufacturers like Samsung, HTC, LG and Sony Ericsson have all put their chips on Google's OS and the situation is hardly changing in the future.
Nokia still retained its position as the global leader in smartphone sales with a share of 28%. HTC and Samsung accounted for the major part of Android smartphones with a combined share of 45%.
Nokia's official numbers for converged devices (which include smartphones and mobile computers) however differ
from the estimate by Canalys. The Finns reported converged device volume
of 28.3 million for the fourth quarter, even less than the figure by
Canalys. Last quarter's results are no surprise,
but rather prove a trend that has formed long before. It also remains
some S40 devices with a touchscreen like the Nokia C3 Touch and Type could indeed fall in the smartphone category.
1. Nagol (unregistered) posted on 31 Jan 2011, 10:22 3
Not surprised about this, android's on what? 40783083237028320185-647 phones?? While Symbian is 1 OS under 1 phone??? So it took 3 or 4 years for Android to catch up to Symbian?!?! Hah Android phones are pathetic.
2. Allday28 posted on 31 Jan 2011, 10:35 8
Hahahahahaahh! Symbian is a Joke of a os.. Android is the future so get used to it LOSER!!!! Hahahahahahahahaha!!!
6. JeffdaBeat posted on 31 Jan 2011, 11:42 3
While I agree that Android is the new Windows Mobile (in that every new smartphone that comes out is Android), I don't think all their phones are jokes. But man, since Google holds no standard with Android, there are definitely some shitty ones out there.
And Symbian was on far more than one phone. It was Nokia's smartphone OS...
7. Tristann posted on 31 Jan 2011, 11:42 4
Symbian is not under 1 phone its under ALOT as well like android. And symbian was first created in 1980 so that's 30 years to get where its at and it only took what android 3 year to get where its at. Not really pathetic is it?
3. shyne (unregistered) posted on 31 Jan 2011, 10:42 2
it's no big deal, every leading hardware manufactures using android and symbian has only Nokia,,,, so it has to be this way...... people has no other choice now..!!!
when another powerful os comes in with something special then android will be buried
12. ILikeBubbles posted on 31 Jan 2011, 15:07 1
do you people really believe that Android is the top os because manufacturers all had a secret black opps meeting to force them into it? it's called the peoples' choice! do you have an iPhone? maybe you don't even have a smartphone... Customizability! Android is more reflective of the USER than any other os ever presented!! but i must admit. conspiracy theories ARE fun. just don't get carried away ;)
18. JeffdaBeat posted on 01 Feb 2011, 06:17 1
Android is great, but you have to trust your carrier or manufacturer to actually work towards delivering updates to your phone unless you want to try and cook an update yourself. Most users don't know how to set up email let alone update software. And with manufacturers and carriers always pushing towards the next new handset, do you really expect them to go back to older phones and update them? It's quite a bit easier to do that when you only come out with one phone a year...
4. Feed Back (unregistered) posted on 31 Jan 2011, 11:20 0
the graphic says shipments are 33.3 not 32.9. The market share is 32.9%.
5. JeffdaBeat posted on 31 Jan 2011, 11:40 5
Symbian was definitely a leader in smartphones, but it's definitely a joke now. The thing is, Symbian is still an echo of when smartphones were just for business people. Apple killed that and Android exploited it. Because of it, RIM, Nokia, Palm, and even Microsoft have suffered because they didn't adapt quickly enough.
Android being number one isn't a big surprise at all. They have completely blanketed the market because it's cheaper to put Android on a smartphone than any other OS. Is Android the future? I still don't think Android will get much further if they don't figure a way to make some things universal across the platform. Folks won't want to put up with having some apps on some phones and not on others...but we shall see...
8. shekhar (unregistered) posted on 31 Jan 2011, 12:40 0
I love Android. East or West, Android is the Best.
9. protozeloz posted on 31 Jan 2011, 12:41 1
I loved Symbian with all my heart.... it was a symbol of mobile power, my dream was to see a Symbian powered device doing what the Atrix MIGHT do, but Symbian had something that make change... it was not adapting quick enough.... manufacturers need OS's that get to move with ''new waves'' Symbian needed a better funding....
will android be #1? who knows... they have stuff to work on
10. Whateverman posted on 31 Jan 2011, 13:33 2
Bottom line... Android is the best OS on the market! And i believe it is the future because other OS's are inflexible. You gotta commend iOS and Palm for leading the way, but even they became stall and obsolete as well. Web OS should have done a lot better but then again this is Palm we're talking about. And Apple makes great LOOKING phones, but how long can you stare at the same dull blocks on you screen. Is a little customization too much to ask? As for Nokia, at least they are trying. And not half-assed trying like RIM. (The Torch was the best you guys could do, really?)
No matter how much work some may think Android needs, this just goes to show how good it already is if it could take down numbers 1, 2, and 3 in just 3 short years and all within months of each other.
16. E.N. posted on 01 Feb 2011, 02:26 1
Android is definitely a great OS, but I wouldn't go as far as saying it's the best. It is definitely the most flexible no doubt, allowing you to customize whatever you want. But flexibility and customizability aren't the only thing that makes a great smartphone.
As for Palm, it's really sad that they are doing so poorly because they have such a great OS. when I heard palm was selling their company, I was hoping Apple would buy because that would make a killer combo.
RIM accomplished what they set out to do, which is be a high-security and highly interconnected business smartphone. But now people want a little bit more apps and fun added to blackberrys, but that's going to be really hard to do considering Apple has pretty much already taken that market.
Congrats to Android on being #1, but you're acting a teeny bit fanboyish in knocking down all other OSes.
17. Whateverman posted on 01 Feb 2011, 04:29 1
If I am a fanboy, I am a fanboy of innovation and the other OS's just aren't coming up with anything. Not every launch is going to be a game changer but at least try! Palm screwed themselves putting out two crappy devices with a great OS. Pretty soon you will see ads that say, "Buy a Droid X or an HTC Evo and get 3 Palm Pixies absolutely free!" That's just how bad that phone is. And while HTC and Motorola are beefing up the specs, RIM is still shoving 3.2 mp cameras in just about every device. The consumers have spoken and if these companies don't listen up, their gonna end up just like Palm. I hope someone comes up with something to push the envelope, no matter if its Apple, Palm, Samsung or whoever. More innovation means better selections at the retailers. But right now, Android is the best OS out there, period.
19. JeffdaBeat posted on 01 Feb 2011, 06:27 2
As I said above, there are two big problems with Android. The first is that there is no standard for Android phones. Apps may work on a Samsung Galaxy S, but may not work on a Motorola Flipout or Backflip. Now, as a nerd, I'd know the difference. But as a consumer, Android is Android...right? Wrong. But in the end, consumers are stuck with the phones that are part of the broken system. Some apps work on some Android Phones, some don't.
The second problem is that Google is leaving it up to manufacturers and carriers to update software. Probably the worse people the put in charge of that. Most phone companies want to keep a phone for maybe a season: 5 to 6 months maybe before they come out with a new version. Same with manufacturers. So do you think they are going to work on a software update for a phone that is end-of-life? Do you think your Android from a year ago is going to be updated? Check out the SE Xperia that is stuck with 1.5 even though it's strong enough to handle the most recent Android software... And sure, you could cook your own OS, but as nerds we know that. The general public don't.
I am not saying the iPhone model is for everyone...but I think the Windows Phone 7 strategy is where Android needs to be. Have some requirements for the phone that are universal, but allow for other changes.
Android will fail under it's own weight. There will always be a choice and it will always be the most shipped OS because it's cheaper to put it on a phone than any OS...but quality is not quantity.
20. protozeloz posted on 01 Feb 2011, 08:42 1
Ive been saying that there are 3 easy fixes for the android problem
1. Make "feature smartphones"(the cheap phones) that have no android market but a manufacturer app that "ports" some apps from the market they know that work on their phones
2. Make skins(blur, touchwizz, sense) optional features... and get a workaround to get them installed on the phones they want, now if the user wants to wait for his skin to be completely functional on his OS then they must wait till the skinned update is available.
3.Check that developers are doing things as they are supposed to.... some apps are limited to some phones because of bad development....
just hope they realize this before its too late
21. JeffdaBeat posted on 01 Feb 2011, 12:15 0
Actually, I think that's an awesome idea.
I mean think about it...some people just want a phone that will sync with their computer, surf the web, and get email on. They may not bother with apps at all. So you've got a feature phone with everything but an App Store.
I agree whole heartedly about making skins optional.
The last part might be a bit tougher with the thousands of developers out there.
Plus, a lot of the carrier apps stores have apps that work on regular phones so those could be included too. Good job on this one dude.
22. protozeloz posted on 01 Feb 2011, 15:29 0
thanks, this encourages me a lot, Ive been writing an open letter for Google and the manufacturers in order to see if we get better stuff but still lack some ideas...
I noticed many don't actually care much when it comes to apps and updates, I have few friends with the X10 that think their phone is just fine the way it is and couldn't care less, so i figure out some people just want their feature phones to be a little more smart...
11. rafael.roque posted on 31 Jan 2011, 13:34 1
That was just 4th Quarter 2010, not the entire year ending!!! Thank you very much Phonearena.com!
If anything considering the fact that Android HAS SO MANY MANUFACTURERS under their belt; it seems absurd that it just barely bested Symbian(Backed mainly by Nokia, WITH LITTLE TO NO U.S. CARRIER SUPPORT) for one important Holiday Quarter!
And even if they take the top position; that doesn't mean that everyone has to follow them. I love Symbian, because it does what I wanted to do how I wanted it to; and not because they hold the largest OS share in the WORLD MARKET.
Android can keep jabbing at Symbian all it wants, but if it's numbers it wants to brag about; then it better not be satisfied with just winning a quarter of the year!
13. Nickmfnjackson posted on 31 Jan 2011, 17:17 0
The reason the q4 of 2010 is being used is for comparison between q4 2010 and 2009. What pa is eluding to is symbians numbers last year are MUCH worse than they were last year. As for this year, expect nokia/symbian to do much worse. I was a symbian user in q4 of 2009. Last year, i got a galaxy s so, um, there ya go.
14. CRICKETownz posted on 31 Jan 2011, 21:33 0
I wouldn't call Android "the best" OS nor would I call any other OS the best. Maybe the process of integrating Android is more efficient than the major players out there...that's why its so widely used. Who knows, but i think all of the new Os' from Apple to webOs have heir strengths & weakness. Unfortunately with Symbian I can't think of ANY strengths. I'm really not surprised that they have been surpassed so quickly. No "wow" factor at all. Congratulations green robot...now if you would only decide on a software name and stop working on six other newer versions before you release the next (still no froyo on my Galaxy S...i have the hardware specs of a netbook but the functionality of a Droid Eris...great. Google c'mon? wtf? great).
15. CRICKETownz posted on 31 Jan 2011, 21:53 0
"ah, bitch...you got jacked bitch" (in my stewie voice).