The stat trackers at StatCounter have come out with their internet usage numbers for the month of March, and they have, for the first time, reported Android as the world's most popular operating system. Nudging ahead of the once-untouchable Windows by a tiny fraction, Android is now the world's most-used platform for getting online according to these latest figures. This represents a natural progression from the difference in devices shipped every year — more than a billion for Android versus 200-something million PCs per year for Windows — but StatCounter is among the first to claim that Android is now in the lead in usage numbers as well.
The trend of mobile internet use taking over from the desktop has been a familiar one for at least the past couple of years. In developed markets, people have been tempted away from their desks by do-everything smartphones and fast 4G connections, while newcomers to the web in poorer countries have been finding their way online via a mobile phone as both their first and only connected device. Android has been the primary beneficiary of both of these trends, consuming practically the entire mobile market outside of Apple's iPhone and iPad.
StatCounter's data is drawn from web trackers installed on 2.5 million websites, and it was previously one of the main sources for tracking the ascent of Google's Chrome browser ahead of Internet Explorer. But there's an inherent limitation to tracking internet usage via websites: mobile use happens in apps at least as much as it does in a browser, and StatCounter doesn't factor that in. That's why Apple's iOS looks so woefully behind in the chart above. And yet, that's also what makes Android's rise impressive: Google's mobile operating system is accelerating beyond Windows without the help of apps, just via the traditional browser.
Comments
It had to happen at some point I guess… it’s easier to get an Android phone than it is to get a Windows laptop and people tend to keep the latter more, resulting in less devices laying around.
I think this is a weak argument to try to explain an otherwise very strong difference. After all, both have browsers and apps and function roughly the same.
By NukedKaltak on 04.03.17 8:03am
Also doesn’t include time spent in online gaming by millions of Windows users.
That won’t close the gap, but it’s not insignificant.
By texazzpete on 04.03.17 8:39am
I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that people play more on mobile nowadays. I bet you’re a PC gamer to make that statement
Oh and try generals.io
By dEcmir on 04.03.17 5:54pm
True, desktop and traditional computers are usually multi-user whereas mobile devices are more personal and 1:1 ratio.
By prompt on 04.03.17 9:17am
I thought that statement was a bit odd, too. This is a measure of OS, right? Not of browsers. So, app or browser doesn’t matter here unless there’s an app out there accessing websites without divulging what OS it lives on?
Just thought to myself ‘This isn’t the way this works’ when I read that.
By VoxMediaUser1083125 on 04.03.17 10:48am
It is interesting that Microsoft used to fear Linux so much on the desktop. Obviously that fear never materialized into a real threat – on the desktop.
But then Google used a Linux core to create Android, and today Android passes Windows. And Android is a Linux kernel. So in fact Linux DID overtake Windows, just not in the way that they feared.
By TheVergeUrge on 04.03.17 11:38am
On a PC, you’re mostly using browser not apps. So StatCounter has that captured almost 100%. But mobile devices use a lot of apps and that’s not captured by the same service. For example, I use Reddit and News apps far more than the website/browser on my phone. So Android and iOS are probably have higher usage than what the stats show.
By pboardman on 04.03.17 11:48am
Although some Reddit and news apps on Android use the built in web view and so they would be counted by StatCounter as they’re loading and displaying the HTML, CSS, JS, etc. just like the browser would.
I believe some of the apps on iOS are similarly written and would count as well.
By nobled on 04.03.17 1:50pm
At work and at home, most of my PC time is spent in apps and games, not in the browser.
In fact, 90% of my PC time at home is spent online gaming, not web browsing.
By Mergatroid Mania on 04.03.17 3:28pm
The convolutions this author makes to explain iOS’s numbers really just add fuel to the fire at how tech writers can’t compartmentalize their pervasive use of Apple products from their professional work.
I mean, this one doesn’t even begin to make any sense. The best fake news is steeped in something that at least can pretend to sound legit.
By fueledbygin on 04.04.17 1:43am
Windows ruled desktop, Android rules mobile – whoever comes up first, and comes up good on the next platform wins. What that ‘next’ thing remains to be seen though..
By prompt on 04.03.17 9:15am
I thought iPhone came first? The real reason android has surprassed iPhone in sales and usage is because there are more budget android phones. And I still think 4 or 5 years from now, smartwatches become so powerful, useful, and independent of smartphones that they begin to take over. I could be wrong tho.
By Stone Cold Dan Quinn on 04.03.17 10:03am
Nah, not likely. Smart Watches are too limited by form factor to "take over" or become much more than they are now. We love taking pictures, watching video content, playing games and reading longform text on our phones, and it’s our phones relatively large screens that enable this. Sticking a decent camera on a watch probably won’t happen any time soon and more over I doubt it will ever not be an awkward way to take photos, and for everything else the small screen size makes watches a poor device to accomplish these tasks. I mean imagine reading this article on a watch screen- it would be awful. Smartphones are unique in a lot of ways and frankly I don’t see their success being replicated in the next few decades.
By Velvet_Spaceman on 04.03.17 10:57am
And 640K is more memory than anyone will ever need?
By Dr Strange on 04.03.17 11:04am
I’m talking about success and impact, new things will come out and succeed but the iPhone especially is an impossible product in terms of revenue and effect.
By Velvet_Spaceman on 04.03.17 1:33pm
Wasn’t that long ago people never thought this whole smartphone thing would catch on.
By Stone Cold Dan Quinn on 04.03.17 11:17am
But when it came out, it caught on pretty quick. Smartwatches (even tablets) on the other hand… seems to drag on.
By NukedKaltak on 04.03.17 11:39am
Yeah big screen phones make it so that most of us don’t need tablets. Honestly, I still think smartwatches have potential but they seem years away from really being a must have item.
By Stone Cold Dan Quinn on 04.03.17 11:52am
I can definitely see myself adopting a watch+laptop strategy in the coming years if phone screens keep growing at the current rate!
By web0rama on 04.03.17 1:55pm
Have fun web browsing, texting and watching video on a watch. The form factor just doesn’t work, you have to keep in mind the fact that they use tiny batteries so using them the same way we use our phones is out unless we get used to charging our devices every hour or half hour, the screens are infinitely smaller and will stay that way unless they loop around in which will then mean display distortion, so you can’t fit much content- so poor for video content, longform text (which includes most things) and games. Imagine typing on a watch- it’s not particularly fun. A flat slab you can put in your pocket it just a better form factor for these tasks than a bobble strapped to your wrist.
By Velvet_Spaceman on 04.03.17 4:52pm
Maybe you’re concentrating on the wrong use case. If you can make calls, check messages, get directions, and make payments, all without the need of a phone, it will probably catch on eventually. Will it replace a phone? No…not until you can fit a pico projector in a watch at least. Will I continue to feel obligated to carry a phone everywhere when I can rely on my watch for critical stuff? No.
By DylanMB123 on 04.04.17 9:48am
One can also carry an 11" convertible which is about iPad size and use the watch just for calling and such, not for browsing and whatnot.
By rheerani on 04.04.17 11:29am
I think that’s reasonable, I’m sure smart watches will carve out there own niche. What I find unreasonable however is this idea that they’ll take over the smartphone or that their success will look like the success of the smartphone which has been unique and unprecedented.
By Velvet_Spaceman on 04.04.17 1:20pm
Not the point I was trying to make but smartphones come with their own compromises, even at the tippy-top of the market.
By web0rama on 04.04.17 7:01pm
Sure but for the tasks they accomplish there are far fewer of them than the idea of a smart watche being your primary mobile device.
By Velvet_Spaceman on 04.04.17 8:24pm