A PROJECT REPORT ON POPULARITY AND USAGE OF SMARTPHONES SUBMITTED TO PROFESSOR SOHAN MOHANTY INSTITUTE FOR TECHNOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT

KHARGHAR (2011-2013)

SUBMITTED BY:
GROUP 4 GAURAV DHINGRA KALYANI DANDWATE PRIYANKA SHARMA DHARMESH PATEL GAURAV GHOSH AMIT PARMAR

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
To, Prof. Sohan Mohanty ITM Business School Kharghar Navi Mumbai 410210 Sir, We are submitting the report, due 8th Sep 2012, that you assigned to us. The report is entitled POPULARITY AND USAGE OF SMARTPHONES. The purpose of the report is to inform you of our Research done in finding the popularity and the usage patterns of smart phones.

Yours Faithfully, Group 4. Gaurav Dhingra Kalyani Dandwate Priyanka Sharma Dharmesh Patel Gaurav Ghosh Amit Parmar

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page......................................................................................................................................... 1
Letter of Transmittal ..................................................................................................................................... 2 Table of contents .......................................................................................................................................... 3 Acknowledgements....................................................................................................................................... 4 Introduction.5

Research Objectives..6 Literature Review7 Research Design10 Sampling Design10 Data Collection10 Data Analysis and Findings 11 Limitation14 Appendices17 Bibliography.42

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We have taken efforts in this project. However, it would not have been possible without the kind support and help of many individuals and organizations. We would like to extend our sincere thanks to all of them. We would like to express our heartfelt gratitude and veneration to our project coordinator and guide Prof. Sohan Mohanty for offering us this Research topic and for his kind co-operation, constructive suggestions. We sincerely thank him for ushering, inspiring and actuating us during the course of work. We would like to express our gratitude towards members of our Group No. 4 for their kind cooperation and encouragement which help us in completion of this project. Last but not the least, we express our sincere gratitude to our entire set of respondents for their help and co-operation during the assignment, nonetheless the research would be incomplete.

Introduction:In the recent years smartphone has been a major Boone in cellphone industry. It has changed the way cellphone was seen by the people. Now smartphone has become miniature computer for the new generation. In todays life, Smartphone are playing an important role as a recreational device, social connect device and many more things. But one thing that Smartphone has done is that it has made blogging easy for the users. Gone are the days when bloggers used to carry laptops with themselves everywhere so that they could work on their blogs or on other important things. A new era in blogging has begun with the introduction of Smartphones. We are conducting the survey on the new generation to find out how smartphones has been penetrated the new generation and how it is affecting their lifestyle.

Scope:The study helped us to find out the connection between features and popularity of smartphones. It also provides us how the new generation uses different features of the phone in their daily life and why people choose one smartphone over another.

Problem definition:The present study proposes to understand the growing popularity of smartphones and what factors actually affects the increase in the popularity of smartphones.

Business Problem:How to increase the popularity and usage of Smartphones.

Research Problem:What are the various factors affecting the sales of Smart phones.

Research Objectives: To determine if the income level of the individual affects the choice of the cell phone brand. To analyze if the brand of a Smartphone affects the performance of certain features like GPS and networking. To determine the relation between gender perception for features offered (by a Smartphone) and the extent to which it affects the choice of Smartphone. To determine the extent of gender difference on the choice of Smartphone brand To determine the influence of reference group on different gender for the choice of a Smartphone. To analyze the effect of price sensitivity on the different gender. To determine if the security provided by the Smartphone affects the choice of the brand To determine the relationship between the kind of usage of the Smartphone and the requisite security level. To determine the relationship between the reference group influence and the choice of a brand.

Literature Review:
1. Augmented Smartphone Applications Through Clone Cloud Execution Smartphones enable a new, rich user experience in pervasive computing, but their hardware is still very limited in terms of computation, memory, and energy reserves, thus limiting potential applications. Our approach is first to replicate the whole smartphone image and to run the application code with few or no modifications in powerful VM replicas to transform a single-machine computation to a distributed computation (semi)-automatically. We modify the virtual hardware for capability inflation. We increase the CPU clock rate of the virtual hardware, the number of virtual CPU cores (if there are multiple cores available), and the memory size of VMs. This requires a mechanism that reconciles the difference between the smartphone hardware and the virtual hardware. Second, we expose any special capabilities of the hardware platform (e.g., a cryptographic accelerator) to VMs through virtual hardware. We believe that the CloneCloud architecture enables new, exciting modes of augmented execution for applications in diverse environments, and offers intriguing opportunities for research and for practical deployments that marry the convenience of hand-held devices with the power of cloud computing. 2. 35% of American adults own a smartphone This report is based on the findings of a survey on Americans' use of the Internet. The results in this report are based on data from telephone interviews. Smartphone adoption is highest among the affluent and well-educated, the (relatively) young. Smartphones are typically defined as mobile phones with advanced capabilities such as internet access and the ability to download and install applications or apps. Nearly nine in ten smartphone owners (87%) use their phones to access the internet or email, with 78% of these users saying that they go online using their phone on a typical day. Put differently, that means that on a typical day 68% of all smartphone owners go online using their phone. Although smartphone ownership varies significantly based on demographic factors, within the smartphone owner population there is relatively little variation when it comes to using ones

phone to go online. Age is the primary differentiatorfully 94% of smartphone owners ages 1829 use their phones to go online, with eight in ten (81%) doing so on a typical day . 3. A glimpse into the mobile lives of college students More than half of college students are early adopters of smartphones, according to our national survey, but few take full advantage of many of the advanced features these phones have to offer.Students use smartphones while multitasking and doing another task such as watching TV, listening to music, shopping, or walking. Students were asked how often they use their smartphone, excluding voice calls, while simultaneously doing other activities. While watching TV, 82% use their smartphone on a regular basis, while 85% use their smartphone regularly while listening to music. Similar trends were seen with walking, 84% and shopping, 75%. When looking at the types of information consumed on a smartphone, the most popular uses among college students are text messaging, with 93% doing this on a regular basis, and e-mail with 93% using their phones for sending and viewing e-mail regularly. Students use their smartphones routinely to search for specific information, with 92% using their phone for that purpose on a regular basis. In addition, 77% consume news on their smartphone regularly. Using programs like Skype, AIM, or Google Talk are not popular, with 68% not using these on a regular basis. Listening to audio podcasts also is not popular, with 77% of students rarely, if ever, using this mobile media format. In addition, 61% seldom, if ever, watch videos on their phones. Reading books is also unpopular with 93% rarely, if ever, using their smartphones for this. 4. RIM Secret Weapon The article reports on Canadian telecommunication and wireless device company Research in Motion and the popularity of their BlackBerry smartphone among teenagers. The author discusses how the product is ideal for text-messaging, the efficiency of BlackBerry's straightforward keyboard, and the development of the successful instant messaging feature, BlackBerry Messenger. Research In Motion Ltd. originally developed BlackBerry Messenger or BBM, so employees could chat in real time, but it has since morphed into a powerful social networking tool. And some observers argue the feature, despite having roots in 1990s desktop chat tools like ICQ and MSN Messenger, may actually hold the key to RIM's future success as it fights an increasingly pitched battle with rivals Apple Inc. and Google Inc. The teenagers send an
8

average of 3,339 texts a month, which are roughly six per every hour that they're awake. By far the biggest users are teen girls, who send and receive an average of 4,050 texts a month. That's roughly 135 text messages a day. "The prime directive of a teen is to be available for chat and text at all times. Text messaging is the number one feature used on smartphones, and no one text more than teens, making them an attractive market.

4. A Nation Addicted To Smartphone

Teens seem to be the biggest fans of such as Smartphone BlackBerrys, iPhones and Androids with 60% admitting to being 'highly' addicted to their phones. Smartphones have begun to intrude on our most private moments, with 47% of teenagers admitting to using their device in the toilet. Only 22% of adults confessed to the same habit. Unsurprisingly, mobile-addicted teens are more likely than adults to be distracted by their phones over dinner and in the cinema and more would answer their phone if it woke them up.

5. Smartphone : Leading Wealth Management to Mobility Mobile wealth management is on a strong uptrend. With the branch and Internet channels assuming a greater advisory role, we can expect more banking and wealth management transactions to be fulfilled over the mobile, especially the smartphone, which will enjoy even higher adoption in future. Also, the evolution of mobile computing technologies has expanded the scope of mobility; hence, mobility is no longer limited to the mobile phone, but rather, extends to mobile-enabled devices like the iPad, tablet and notebook computer. With the unfolding of 3G and even 4G telecom services across the world, it will be possible to bring a rich audio-visual experience to wealth management on all these devices, going forward.

Research Design:We started of with exploratory research followed by Descriptive Research. First of all we have conducted an exploratory research, in which we explored the secondary sources of data to gather the factors that affect the Popularity of Smartphone .These data included the 5 Literature review. Then we have conducted descriptive research, in which we used primary source of data. For primary source of data we used quantitative method using questionnaire technique. Then through SPSS we have arrived at our result.

Sampling design
It is a method of selecting samples from a population. Sampling design is broadly divided into 1) Probability Sampling 2) Non Probability Sampling Our sampling design is based on Non-Probability sampling method. For our research, the population we chose was ITM, Kharghar College. Ours was Simple Random Sampling Without Replacement method and Convenience Sampling As the topic for our research is Popularity and Usage of Smartphone our sample size was all those students who used Smart Phones in ITM and NIFT campus.

Data Collection
The source of our data collection is Primary data collection. In this we collect the required data or information directly from the sample. It is original, project specific and is collected for some specific objective. For our research, we collected the necessary information or data by contacting the students using Smartphone directly and making them fill the questionnaire on the spot. It helped to gather much needed information and that too with relevance and authenticity as we used Primary Data Collection method.

10

Findings and Data Analysis

T-Test
Smartphone users have a important (4) view on security of Smartphone Null H = 4 Alternate H 4 Result p-value (.596) < 0.05 so H0 is accepted. Security is important when buying a Smartphone Usage of Email on Smartphone exceeds 4.0 H0 =4 Ha4 P-value (.001) < .05 so H0 is rejected.

11

 Independent T-Test
Use of social networking on Smartphone has a significant difference between male & female H0= m = f Ha = m f P-value (.601) > .05 so H0 is accepted

Use of Net Banking on Smartphone has a significant difference between male & female
H0= m = f Ha = m f P-value (.008) < .05 so H0 is rejected

Use of Reading E-mail on Smartphone has a significant difference between male & female
H0= m = f Ha = m f P-value (.97) > .05 so H0 is accepted

12

Paired sample T-Test Do the respondents in the pretest are differ in social networking & E mail Usage
H0 = respondents in the pretest are not differ in social networking & E mail Usage Ha = respondents in the pretest are differ in social networking & E mail Usage P-value (.000) < 0.05 so, H0 is rejected.

Do the respondents in the pretest are differ in Net banking & Stock market Usage
H0 = respondents in the pretest are not differ in Net banking & Stock market Usage Ha = respondents in the pretest are differ in Net banking & Stock market Usage P-value (.072) > 0.05 so, H0 is accepted

13

Limitations

Limited Sampling Frame

Small sample size

Non users
We have not considered non users, so we have no data of popularity of smartphones in non-users

14

Appendices
Appendix 1: Questionnaire
What brand of Smartphone you use? 1.) I-phone 2.) Blackberry 3.) Samsung 4.) Nokia 5.) Others What is the most appealing factor in a Smartphone? 1.) Features 2.) Brand/ Status quo 3.) Performance 4.) Operating System 5.) Other if any specify ________________ What influences you in purchase of Smartphone over normal phone? 1.) Friends/Peer group 2.) Family 3.) Internet/Advertisement 4.) Brand Ambassador 5.) Others How important is security in purchase of Smartphone?

Not at all Important

Not so important

Neutral

important

Very Important

How often are you using different types of application on your Smartphone? always Reading e-mail Maps, GPS social networks/BBM/FB Stock Market Tracker Net Banking Watching video (ex. video podcasts, Youtube, etc.) 15 Sometimes Sometimes Seldom Never

Income 1.) Up to 5 Lacs 2.) 5Lacs -8Lacs 3.) 8Lacs -10Lacs 4.) More than 10Lacs Gender 1.) Male 2.) Female

16

Appendix Table 1:-

Statistics

Brand of Most Security Readi inpurch ase 72 0 4.06 ng Email 72 0 3.61 Social

Stock Market Net Inc Gen der 72 0 1.42

Smart appeal Reference phone factor N Valid Missing Mean 72 0 2.47 72 0 2.15 Group 72 0 2.04

Map Networ Tracke Banki Watchin om GPS 72 0 2.18 k 72 0 4.28 r 72 0 2.35 ng 72 0 2.00 g Video 72 0 2.86 e 72 0 2.9 9

Std. Error of Mean Median

.110

.106

.118

.104

.108

.112

.089

.141

.119

.100

.09 0

.059

3.00

2.00

2.00

4.00

4.00

2.00

4.00

2.00

2.00

3.00

3.0 0

1.00

Mode Std. Deviation

3 .934

2 .899

1 .999

5 .886

4 .912

3 .954

5 .755

3 .844

3 .76 0

1 .496

1.200 1.007

Variance

.872

.807

.998

.786

.833

.911

.570

1.441 1.014

.713

.57 7

.246

Skewness

-.237

.289

.525

-.485

-.053

.126

-.514

.447

.511

-.162

.02 3

.345

Std. Error of Skewness Range Minimum Maximum

.283

.283

.283

.283

.283

.283

.283

.283

.283

.283

.28 3

.283

3 1 4

3 1 4

4 1 5

3 2 5

3 2 5

3 1 4

2 3 5

4 1 5

3 1 4

3 1 4

2 2 4

1 1 2

17

Table 2:Brand of Smartphone Cumulative Frequency Valid I-Phone Blackberry Samsung Nokia Total 14 18 32 8 72 Percent 19.4 25.0 44.4 11.1 100.0 Valid Percent 19.4 25.0 44.4 11.1 100.0 Percent 19.4 44.4 88.9 100.0

Table 3:Most appealing factor Cumulative Frequency Valid Features Brand/Satus Quo Performance Operating System Total 19 28 20 5 72 Percent 26.4 38.9 27.8 6.9 100.0 Valid Percent 26.4 38.9 27.8 6.9 100.0 Percent 26.4 65.3 93.1 100.0

Table 4:Refrance Group Cumulative Frequency Valid Friends/Peer group Family Internet/Advertisement Brand Ambassador Others Total 28 18 22 3 1 72 Percent 38.9 25.0 30.6 4.2 1.4 100.0 Valid Percent 38.9 25.0 30.6 4.2 1.4 100.0 Percent 38.9 63.9 94.4 98.6 100.0

18

Table 5:Security in purchase Cumulative Frequency Valid Not so Important Neutral Somewhat Important Very Important Total 3 17 25 27 72 Percent 4.2 23.6 34.7 37.5 100.0 Valid Percent 4.2 23.6 34.7 37.5 100.0 Percent 4.2 27.8 62.5 100.0

Table 6:Reading E-mail Cumulative Frequency Valid Seldom Sometimes Often Always Total 8 25 26 13 72 Percent 11.1 34.7 36.1 18.1 100.0 Valid Percent 11.1 34.7 36.1 18.1 100.0 Percent 11.1 45.8 81.9 100.0

Table 7:Maps, GPS Cumulative Frequency Valid Never Seldom Sometimes Often Total 22 20 25 5 72 Percent 30.6 27.8 34.7 6.9 100.0 Valid Percent 30.6 27.8 34.7 6.9 100.0 Percent 30.6 58.3 93.1 100.0

19

Table 8:Social Network Cumulative Frequency Valid Sometimes Often Always Total 13 26 33 72 Percent 18.1 36.1 45.8 100.0 Valid Percent 18.1 36.1 45.8 100.0 Percent 18.1 54.2 100.0

Table 9:Stock Market Tracker Cumulative Frequency Valid Never Seldom Sometimes Often Always Total 23 18 17 11 3 72 Percent 31.9 25.0 23.6 15.3 4.2 100.0 Valid Percent 31.9 25.0 23.6 15.3 4.2 100.0 Percent 31.9 56.9 80.6 95.8 100.0

Table 10:Net Banking Cumulative Frequency Valid Never Seldom Sometimes Often Total 30 18 18 6 72 Percent 41.7 25.0 25.0 8.3 100.0 Valid Percent 41.7 25.0 25.0 8.3 100.0 Percent 41.7 66.7 91.7 100.0

20

Table 11:Watching Video Cumulative Frequency Valid Never Seldom Sometimes Often Total 3 22 29 18 72 Percent 4.2 30.6 40.3 25.0 100.0 Valid Percent 4.2 30.6 40.3 25.0 100.0 Percent 4.2 34.7 75.0 100.0

Table 12:Income Cumulative Frequency Valid 5 Lacs - 8 Lacs 8 Lacs - 10 Lacs More than 10 Lacs Total 21 31 20 72 Percent 29.2 43.1 27.8 100.0 Valid Percent 29.2 43.1 27.8 100.0 Percent 29.2 72.2 100.0

Table 13:Gender Cumulative Frequency Valid Male Female Total 42 30 72 Percent 58.3 41.7 100.0 Valid Percent 58.3 41.7 100.0 Percent 58.3 100.0

21

Bar Chart Chart No. 1:-

22

Chart No.2:-

23

Chart No.3:-

24

Chart No.4:-

25

Chart No.5:-

26

Chart No.6:-

27

Chart No.7:-

28

Chart No:-8

29

Chart No.9

30

Chart No.10:-

31

Chart No.11:-

32

Chart No.12:-

33

Table 14:Case Processing Summary Cases Valid N Most appealing factor * Brand of Smartphone 72 Percent 100.0% N 0 Missing Percent .0% N 72 Total Percent 100.0%

Table 15:Most appealing factor * Brand of Smartphone Crosstabulation Count Brand of Smartphone I-Phone Most appealing factor Features Brand/Satus Quo Performance Operating System Total 4 8 2 0 14 Blackberry 4 5 7 2 18 Samsung 9 11 9 3 32 Nokia 2 4 2 0 8 Total 19 28 20 5 72

Table 16:Case Processing Summary Cases Valid N Refrance Group * Gender 72 Percent 100.0% N 0 Missing Percent .0% N 72 Total Percent 100.0%

34

Table 17:Refrance Group * Gender Crosstabulation Count Gender Male Refrance Group Friends/Peer group Family Internet/Advertisement Brand Ambassador Others Total 19 10 10 3 0 42 Female 9 8 12 0 1 30 Total 28 18 22 3 1 72

Table 18:Case Processing Summary Cases Valid N Refrance Group * Brand of Smartphone 72 Percent 100.0% N 0 Missing Percent .0% N 72 Total Percent 100.0%

Table 19:Refrance Group * Brand of Smartphone Crosstabulation Count Brand of Smartphone I-Phone Refrance Group Friends/Peer group Family Internet/Advertisement Brand Ambassador Others Total 5 4 1 3 1 14 Blackberry 10 4 4 0 0 18 Samsung 10 8 14 0 0 32 Nokia 3 2 3 0 0 8 Total 28 18 22 3 1 72

35

T-Test 1:One-Sample Statistics N Security in purchase 72 Mean 4.06 Std. Deviation .886 Std. Error Mean .104

One-Sample Test Test Value = 3 95% Confidence Interval of the Mean t Security in purchase 10.105 df 71 Sig. (2-tailed) .000 Difference 1.056 Lower .85 Difference Upper 1.26

T-Test 2:One-Sample Statistics N Social Network 72 Mean 4.28 Std. Deviation .755 Std. Error Mean .089

One-Sample Test Test Value = 4 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference t Social Network 3.123 df 71 Sig. (2-tailed) .003 Mean Difference .278 Lower .10 Upper .46

36

T-Test 3:-

Group Statistics Gender Social Network Male Female N 42 30 Mean 4.24 4.33 Std. Deviation .790 .711 Std. Error Mean .122 .130

Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for Equality of Variances Sig. (2tailed F Social Network Equal variances assumed Equal variances not assumed -.535 66.2 67 .595 -.095 .178 -.451 .260 .633 Sig. .429 t -.525 df 70 ) .601 Mean Difference -.095 t-test for Equality of Means Std. Error Differenc e .181 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower -.457 Upper .266

37

T-Test 4:-

Group Statistics Gender Stock Market Tracker Male Female N 42 30 Mean 2.83 1.67 Std. Deviation 1.248 .711 Std. Error Mean .193 .130

Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means Std. Mean Sig. (2F Stock Market Equal Tracker variances assumed Equal variances not assumed 5.024 67.14 0 .000 1.167 .232 .703 1.630 8.642 Sig. t df 70 tailed) .000 Error 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower .662 Upper 1.672

Differenc Differenc e 1.167 e .253

.004 4.609

38

T-Test 5:-

Group Statistics Gender Net Banking Male Female N 42 30 Mean 2.26 1.63 Std. Deviation 1.061 .809 Std. Error Mean .164 .148

Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means 95% Confidence Std. Mean Sig. (2F Net Equal variances 3.469 Sig. t df 70 tailed) .008 Differenc e .629 Error Differenc e .231 Lower .169 Upper 1.088 Interval of the Difference

.067 2.727

Banking assumed Equal variances not assumed 2.852 69.65 9 .006 .629 .220 .189 1.068

39

T-Test 6:-

Group Statistics Gender Reading E-mail Male Female N 42 30 Mean 3.76 3.40 Std. Deviation .878 .932 Std. Error Mean .136 .170

Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means Std. Mean Sig. (2F Reading E-mail Equal variances assumed Equal variances not assumed 1.664 60.28 6 .101 .362 .218 -.073 .797 .302 Sig. t df 70 tailed) .097 Error 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower -.068 Upper .791

Differenc Differenc e .362 e .215

.585 1.680

T-Test 7:-

Paired Samples Statistics Mean Pair 1 Social Network Reading E-mail 4.28 3.61 N 72 72 Std. Deviation .755 .912 Std. Error Mean .089 .108

Paired Samples Correlations N Pair 1 Social Network & Reading E-mail 72 Correlation .036 Sig. .762

40

Paired Samples Test Paired Differences 95% Confidence Interval Std. Mean Pair 1 Social Network Reading E-mail .667 Deviation 1.163 Std. Error Mean .137 of the Difference Lower .393 Upper .940 t 4.865 df 71 Sig. (2tailed) .000

T-Test 8:-

Paired Samples Statistics Mean Pair 1 Net Banking Stock Market Tracker 2.00 2.35 N 72 72 Std. Deviation 1.007 1.200 Std. Error Mean .119 .141

Paired Samples Correlations N Pair 1 Net Banking & Stock Market Tracker 72 Correlation -.058 Sig. .627

Paired Samples Test Paired Differences 95% Confidence Interval Std. Mean Pair 1 Net Banking - Stock Market Tracker -.347 Deviation 1.611 Std. Error Mean .190 of the Difference Lower -.726 Upper .031 t -1.829 df 71 Sig. (2tailed) .072

41

Bibliography
1. http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/aug/04/smartphones-usage-ofcom-report 2. http://www.infosys.com/finacle/solutions/thought-papers/Documents/SmartphonesLeading-Wealth-Management-Mobility.pdf 3. http://research.nokia.com/files/p905-cui_0.pdf 4. http://testkitchen.colorado.edu/projects/reports/smartphone/ 5. http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2011/Smartphones.aspx 6. http://berkeley.intel-research.net/bgchun/clonecloud-hotos09.pdf 7. http://web.ebscohost.com 8. Research Methodology by Neena Sondhi and Deepak Chawla

42