1. Università Commerciale Luigi Bocconi
Faculty of Economics
Master of Science in Marketing Management
APPLE AND ANDROID IN THE
TABLET MARKET:
AN EMPIRICAL RESEARCH
Advisor: Prof. Luca Molteni
Discussant: Prof. Alessando Recla
Master of Science Thesis of: Alberto Xodo
Student ID: 1452747

2. Agenda
Market overview and research questions
Methodology
Findings
Managerial implications
Conclusions and Q&A
2

3. Market overview
Players 300 Volume Size1 (M Units)
250
Apple Android
200
150
100
Windows 8 50
RIM
(Fall 2012)
0
WebOS 2010 2011 2012
(Withdrawn)
Tablets PCs Notebooks
Shares by Volume in Q3 20112 Projected growth3
400
300
26.9% Apple
200
Others
66.6% 100
6.5% Android
0
3

4. Research questions
1 – What are the characteristics of
tablet consumers?
2 – How are Android and Apple
positioned in the market?
3 – What are the main segments in
the tablet market?
4 – How are Android and Apple
perceived by the different segments?
4

5. Methodology
Secondary research Preliminary interviews
• Books and Journals • 2 Knowledgeable Users
• Magazines and blogs • 2 Experts
Online survey
• 638 Respondents (450 complete)
• 367 Clean records
• 215 Users and 152 Non-Usersa
Data analysis
• Univariate: measures of location, spread and shape
• Bivariate: contingency tables and comparisons of means
• Multivariate: factor and cluster analysis
5
aUsers and Non-Users are defined on the basis of familiarity with tablets, not ownership

6. Findings: Users’ Characteristics
Gender Distribution Income Distribution
100% 100%
90% 90% 85.7%
80% 80%
70% 70% 66.3%
60.9%
60% 60% 54.3%
50% 50% 45.7%
39.1%
40% 40% 33.7%
30% 30%
20% 20% 14.3%
10% 10%
0% 0%
Users Non-Users IncomeQ1 IncomeQ2 IncomeQ3 IncomeQ4
Male Female
Users Non-Users
70%
Preferred Sources of Information on tablets
47% 50%
44%
37% 40%
26%
22%
6%
Internet Family Magazines Blogs Experts In-Store Forums Corporate Friends
Websites 6

7. Findings: Apple vs. Android
Market Shares by OS (Non-Owners Included)
25% Owners Apple
Owners Android
Owners Others
8%
66% Non-Owners
1%
80%
72%
Market Shares by OEM (Non-Owners excluded)
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10% 4% 6% 5%
1% 1% 0% 2% 2% 0% 2% 2% 2% 1%
0%
Apple HP Motorola Samsung HTC RIM Barnes & Asus LG Acer Amazon Sony Toshiba Other
7
Nobles

8. Findings: Apple vs. Android
Brand preferences by OS (Have No Preference Included)
Prefer Apple
39% Prefer Android
49%
Prefer others
Have no favorite brand
11%
1%
90%
80% Brand Preferences by OEM (Have No Preference Excluded)
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
8%
10% 4% 2%
0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 1% 1% 0% 1%
0%
Apple HP Motorola Samsung HTC RIM Barnes & Asus LG Acer Amazon Sony Toshiba Other
8
Nobles

9. Findings: Apple vs. Android
APPLE’S STRENGTHS >
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
9
Mean Android Mean Apple

10. Findings: Apple vs. Android
ANDROID’S STRENGTHS POINTS OF PARITY
> =
9 9
8 8
7.28 7.17
7 6.69 6.78 7
6.76 6.69 6.59
6.24 6.32
6.9 6.8
6 6 6.48 6.61 6.63
4.9 6.03
5 5
4 4
3 3
2
2
1
1
Price Customization Ease of CPU Speed Streaming Webcam Price of the Battery Life
Connectivity Service Quality Applications
Mean Android Mean Apple
Mean Android Mean Apple
10

11. Findings: Five Segments
App Freaks – 14,4%
• Male, older, more educated and richer • Prefer Apple (48,4% share) over Android (6,5%)
• Only care about the apps’ ecosystem • Images: Useful and Easy to Use
iPerformers – 25,6%
• Mostly students & managers • Apple 29,1% and Android 23,6% (Asus 10,9%)
• Focus on hardware components and price • Images: HighPerforming, Innovative & Safe
Softwaristas – 27,9%
• Overrepresentation of female respondents • Prefer Apple (50% share) over Android (8,3%)
• Mostly care about ease of use and brand image • Images: All of them
Mobilites – 17,7%
• Female, young and students. Lowest income • Prefer Apple (39,5% share) over Android (7,9%)
• Only care about 3G & 4G connections • Images : HighPerforming, Easy to Use & Useful
Hardware Maniacs – 14,4%
• Male, older and lower earning • Prefer Android (29% share) over Apple (22,6%)
• Focus on dimensions, components and price • Images : High Performing and Useful
11

12. Findings: Five Segments
Performance
Communication Applications
3G/4G Dimensions
Image Software & Usability
App Freaks iPerformers Softwaristas Mobilites Hardware Maniacs
12

13. Managerial Implications
Increase User Base Strengthen ecosystem
Customer education Applications
Improve corporate OEMs should ally to
websites
develop platform-wide
• Informative, easy and intuitive apps
Direct contact Simplify for developers:
• Temporary stands, dedicated • Reduce fragmentation
corners etc • Reduce OS personalization
Attract independent
developers
13

14. Managerial Implications
App Freaks • Offer more high quality apps
For OEMs & Google • Increase quantity, quality and variety of apps
• Make the OS more user friendly and intuitive
Softwaristas
• Offer basic OS + free downloadable customization plug in
For Google
• Reinforce the Android common brand
• Focus on high performing hardware
iPerformers
• Explore hybrids
For OEMs
• Offer more high quality apps
Hardware Maniacs
• Keep offering a wide variety of sizes and specs
For OEMs
Mobilites
• Offer 3G/4G devices
For OEMs 14

15. Conclusions
Low knowledge of the product
(41,4% Non-Users)
Apple: dominant market share and mind share
Android: cheaper and more customizable
Five segments identified and all but one (Hardware
Maniacs) prefer Apple
15

16. Limitations and further research
Limitations
• Market novelty
• Non-representative sample
• Answer biases
Further Research
• More representative sample (best: probability sampling)
• Other research methods (interviews, focus groups..)
• Different geographies
• OEMs’ level vs. Platform level
16

17. APPLE AND ANDROID IN THE
TABLET MARKET:
Thank you for your AN EMPIRICAL RESEARCH
attention!
Advisor: Prof. Luca Molteni
Discussant: Prof. Alessando Recla
Master of Science Thesis of: Alberto Xodo
Student ID: 1452747
17