Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Feature Phones Make Java ME, Not Android, the #2 Mobile Internet OS

Posted by timothy on from the feature-creature dept.

bonch writes "According to a report from NetApplications, which has measured browser usage data since 2004, Oracle's Java Mobile Edition has surpassed Android as the #2 mobile OS on the internet at 26.80%, with iOS at 46.57% and Android at 13.44%. And the trend appears to be growing. Java ME powers hundreds of millions of low-end 'feature phones' for budget buyers. In 2011, feature phones made up 60% of the install base in the U.S." Looking at the linked chart, it looks Java ME's been ahead of Android for all of 2011, too, except for the month of October.

17 of 286 comments (clear)

  1. Holiday impact? by DaphneDiane · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I wonder how much Christmas played into those little bumps. It's almost like people head off buying expensive new phones during that period, possibly in hopes in getting them for gifts. Possibly to afford more gifts. Would have been nice to see back one more year. Because otherwise looks like JavaME is steadily losing share, but had a bump the last two months.

    1. Re:Holiday impact? by vlm · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I wonder how much Christmas played into those little bumps. It's almost like people head off buying expensive new phones during that period, possibly in hopes in getting them for gifts.

      Sounds like "gifting" someone a puppy or a kitten. Hey, here's a phone as a gift. Whoops it comes with a $120/year two year contract, so sorry your "gift" actually cost you about three grand over the next two years, hope you don't mind.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    2. Re:Holiday impact? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      You are correct. Here is a link to a chart with a slightly longer time frame.

      JavaME has been rapidly losing share to Android. Thanks bonch for bringing this to everyone's attention.

    3. Re:Holiday impact? by Toonol · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I find it odd that the editors take submissions from people like bonch, or other known partisan trolls here. If you read slashdot with any regularity, you learn to recognize and disregard those names quickly. I'm forced to conclude that the editors either don't read slashdot, or like to post trolling headlines.

  2. Mobile OS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Duh, since when was Java ME an OS?

    1. Re:Mobile OS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well first there was Java 3.1,
      Then there was Java 3.11, For Workgroups,
      Then there was Java 95
      Then there was Java 98
      Finally there was Java ME

  3. Sorry, but this is bull by yelvington · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I have access to a great deal of actual and current mobile usage data, and this is just completely at odds with reality. "Feature phone" owners in the United States typically do not have data plans and do not use the Internet.

    Actual measured usage of mobile Web services by "feature phones" is slightly above that of Windows Mobile, which is to say "irrelevant noise at the bottom of the chart" in the range of 1 to 2 percent.

    Grandpa's Jitterbug may in fact run J2ME, but Grandpa doesn't use it.

    1. Re:Sorry, but this is bull by thebjorn · · Score: 5, Informative

      have access to a great deal of actual and current mobile usage data, and this is just completely at odds with reality.

      That is my experience too. Statcounter is more representative of what I'm seeing: http://gs.statcounter.com/#mobile_os-US-monthly-201012-201112

    2. Re:Sorry, but this is bull by Jerry+Atrick · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yep, if you paid more than $5 for the phone it can run Java (unless Steve Jobs said NO!), but only the really desperate access the net with one and almost none knowingly install or run any Java apps beyond what the device shipped with. I tested net access on my fathers feature phone and it was painfully, unusably slow. On a sad JaveME based 'china phone' it was still far too bad to actually use, even over WiFi.

      JavaME is a ubiquitous tech that no-one knowingly chooses to use. That's not a story, that's just a reminder Android did the right thing avoiding this steaming pile of mediocrity.

    3. Re:Sorry, but this is bull by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      StatCounter's Worldwide numbers show iOS and Android about even.

  4. Very true by Chrisq · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The upturn for java ME is matched by a drop in iOs, with adroid being rather flat.

    1. Re:Very true by cybe · · Score: 3, Informative

      The "article" like points to a table where the figures mentioned in the blurb are the OLDEST values included, not the LATEST... :) The trend is falling for Java ME, not the other way around.. Duh?

  5. Does it matter? by engun · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The fact of J2ME being widely available, is quite distinct from the issue of it being widely targeted. I can think of several reasons for why J2ME is irrelevant.
    1. Feature phones aren't really suitable for sophisticated apps. Most power users have already migrated to the next gen touch phones (Android, IOS) or at the very least, Symbian. Those who stick on with feature phones probably don't use custom apps in the first place.
    2. There is no proper marketplace for apps comparable to Android or Apple. This makes it difficult for the average user to obtain new apps, even if he/she were to actually want to use an app on their feature phone (which they probably don't).
    3. Ultimately, the J2ME support may be relevant only to the phone manufacturer, in order to provide some bundled apps, like a calculator or something. Without a market place and given the hurdles (lack of user interest, severe incapability of phones) there's little incentive for developers to program for it.

    Therefore, why would J2ME's wide availability be relevant?

  6. Re:Just another... by drummerboybac · · Score: 3, Informative

    There are more Android PHONES than iOS PHONES, that is true. When you factor in the iPad and iPod Touch that swings way around in favor of Apple. Hence Mobile Devices

  7. Re:Just another... by Ixokai · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Android may have the highest market-share, but what the Article -- and several others done that have rather consistently said the same thing -- is that despite being #1 in number of phones, it has trailed significantly behind iOS in actual web browsing.

    For whatever reason, though less people buy an iPhone, a significantly higher margin actually use their iOS device on the web. It is the #1 mobile platform for web browsing. Perhaps because iOS is more then iPhone by a large margin, but Android people tend to hate it when the iPod Touch or iPad are brought up and conflated with the iPhone (even though Apple people tend to view iPhone + iPad + iPod Touch as a single platform). Perhaps its just that iPhone users do use the web more. I have no idea.

    But this is not at all an isolated report in that regard. Even Google has stated that about two thirds of their mobile ad revenue comes from the iPhone.

    The J2ME thing is weird though and its the first time I've heard of it showing up at all in the top lists, so I dunno what's different about this report then others.

  8. Too bad JavaME is fragmented by Kagetsuki · · Score: 3, Informative

    There is basically no common API, compatibility with different versions is totally unpredictable, and the development tools are across the board awful. JavaME is crap and it should be ignored and forgotten.

  9. Re:Just another... by tomhudson · · Score: 3, Informative

    Where does it say this is about web site views?

    And the answer is "Where it says it's about measured browser usage data in the first line of the summary".

    Or if you actually read the article (yeah. right - you couldn't even read the first line of the summary), click on any of the links in the table and select by browser.