Quote:
Originally Posted by
jragosta 
That's exactly what I was saying above. Both sources agree on the total number of phones sold by Samsung but they differ by 12 M units on the number of smartphones. The most likely reason is that one of them is counting 'advanced feature phones' as smartphones and the other isn't.
You are apparently very confused. Maybe no one has explained it to you, but Samsung sells a wide variety of phones, unlike Apple who sells only one major type. That's the issue here.
At AT&T's store, the Samsung Galaxy Note is $749 and is discounted to $299. That's exactly the same as the 32 GB iPhone. List $749, discounted to $299. So Samsung is getting exactly the same discount on their high end phones as Apple is and both are subsidized by $450.00.
The problem is that Samsung also sells the Focus Flash with a $389 list price, discounted to $100.00 after subsidy ($289 subsidy). So while Samsung's AVERAGE subsidy is probably lower, when you look only at comparable phones, it appears to be the same.
And that's the issue cited above. All of Apples phones are high end iPhones. Samsung is reporting numbers which include crapware phones that no one wants. If you look at how many people are buying high end phones (which is the only market Apple competes in), Apple is winning hands down. After all, even with iSuppli's numbers (which probably include mid-range phones, but leave out the really low end garbage), Apple is ahead.
That's because Android fans don't believe in facts or reality. They'd rather sling FUD and hope it sticks.
In reality, the Galaxy Note is $749-same as the 32 GB iPhone. It's not quite comparable, but the Note has less internal storage but a larger screen, so it's probably the closest comparison).
I guess I missed the part where anyone claimed that the iPhone was perfect. Maybe try a real argument next time instead of a straw man.
I was repeating the numbers someone else posted.
I think you're the one who's confused. The Galaxy Note is a unique device in a league by itself. It has a freaking 5.3", 1280x800 points screen. It has a Wacom matrix and pen input. It has 4G LTE. It has a 2500 mAh battery. And Samsung choose to sell it for less than $750, as much as a simple iPhone. So, despite that in this case (as with similar high-end Android devices) the carrier offers a comparable subsidy, it's only because the hardware vendor has agreed to lower also the non-contract price, or in other words have lower profit margin.
In the other case -- the lower end devices -- carriers subsidize less, bringing the price close to that of the high-end iPhone. So many OS-agnostic buyers choose the iPhone because they get more value for their money solely from the hardware.
The results are that in the US, where most people buy their phones from the telcos, more people choose to buy iPhone than Android phones partly because they get a higher subsidy. In some European countries, where the actual costs of devices and services are more obvious, Andoid is more popular than iOS. Alternatively, for some high end devices vendors lower their price for the carrier and then get a similar to Apple subsidy, but much lower profits.
Don't get me wrong, I see why Apple would ride their success as long as they can. But at least some of it is dictated by the preferences of the US carriers who influence end-user buying decisions, likely to capitalize on selling more of their services.
