or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › After crowning Samsung as Apple's heir, analysts now rethinking their math
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

After crowning Samsung as Apple's heir, analysts now rethinking their math - Page 4

post #121 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakefinance View Post


I can't prove what I knew or didn't know because only I know that. But since I know it and you don't, you should trust me on it.

After trying to break down these articles to favor your viewpoint, you went on to say that the other platforms now have fewer exclusive features. If those features were exclusive to other platforms and then Apple added them to iOS, making them no longer exclusive, it would seem to me that Apple borrowed those ideas.

 

Did Apple "borrow" the ideas of, say, MMS or LTE from Symbian or Android? I don't think so. I think they were features Apple didn't implement first (making them temporary 'exclusives' other platforms could offer for a period of time), but were not some novel concepts Apple didn't think of, or infringed upon, or had to look around for vision clues from its competitors.

 

Compare those types of things with the concept and design of iOS as a platform, the iPad as a device, the appearance and design of Apple's original apps and patented features that were clearly unique, new ways to accomplish things. These ideas have been ripped off by Android from head to toe. Illegally infringed.

 

If you've ever accidentally dated a psychopath, you know why Android fans are trying to claim Apple is copying Google. It's an attempt to lie so unashamedly large that their own insanity is overshadowed by a smokescreen of nonsensical horseshit.

 

The most puzzling aspect: Android is supposedly an open source project. How do you "steal" ideas from people who don't believe in intellectual property?

 

And when you look at screen shots of Android's notifications or quick menus for turning off WiFi and other settings, do you really see some sort of inappropriate knockoff behavior in Apple implementing related ideas with far better design and functionality?

 

I fail to see much original thought going into Android's design and features. It's slapped together poorly, perhaps first in some cases, but not with any attention to detail or consideration for real usability.

 

If that's what you think is great, then no problem, run out there and be the guy who buys a new device every three months. But don't fool yourself: you don't represent the biggest fragment of the Android platform in any respect. And that's why you don't get any love from app developers, and never really will.  

post #122 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don108 View Post

A couple of people have claimed that "Shipped means sold unless returns are made." Uh, no.

In the case of some contracts with distributors, they get large discounts when ordered under a non-return agreement. If they can't actually sell a product they may use it as a give-away or as a loss leader. True, selling a product as a loss is still a sale, but if I were to sell 10,000 Toyota autos for $10 each the actual picture is much more apparent. There's aways a price point where second-rate products will sell.

So products shipped or even sold doesn't give a great picture: numbers don't lie, but liars can sure put out numbers. A far more accurate assessment could be obtained by looking at the number of units activated. That would show the number of units actually in end-users' hands.

Curiously, Samesung refuses to give out that information. I wonder why that is.

Exactly, both Apple and Samsung have the activation numbers.  Only Apple applies this knowledge when reporting sold and channel inventory.  For some reason Samsung does not supply sold plus channel inventory, why?  I can only think of one reason why, and that reason doesn't appear likely to reflect well on Samsung.

just waiting to be included in one of Apple's target markets.
Don't get me wrong, I like the flat panel iMac, actually own an iMac, and I like the Mac mini, but...........
Reply
just waiting to be included in one of Apple's target markets.
Don't get me wrong, I like the flat panel iMac, actually own an iMac, and I like the Mac mini, but...........
Reply
post #123 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

These ideas have been ripped off by Android from head to toe. Illegally infringed.

I'm curious, please name a few.
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #124 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


I'm curious, please name a few.

 

I don't care much about features which can be added by future update or third-party as much of OS foundation APIs.  

 

Steve Job's team has created a brand new OS with a new smalltalk-message passing oriented environment on a 33 mhz cpu way before Java and Microsoft C#.  Every core API of OSX and iOS has been written from scratch by Apple staffs and tweak to for one goal: serve Apple product purpose, the software and the hardware is created together for working together. Its pretty hard to compete this level of optimization and this is the reason why five years ago the iPhone has cut off guard both PALM and RIM with something they think unfeasible: a full desktop OS on a phone with a day long charge.

 

Android in other hand is mostly made of borrowed codes with or without its creators consent, created for serving all needs and all products the best they can. With raw power and ressources they achieved to copy Apple device with their own sauce, juste like Microsoft has done it 30 years ago with windows.


Edited by BigMac2 - 6/17/13 at 3:11pm
post #125 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

Hardly. If they were a classic reseller, they couldn't sell their stock at a loss by subsidizing the sale price of the phone like a cell provider does. A third party reseller doesn't do this. Folks like best buy get the items as a reduced cost and sell it for a profit. The cell providers get the buyer to directly pay for the device and they also subsidize the cost of the phone, which is sold at a loss, but they get a return on their investment for the actual service contract over X number of years. Third party resellers do this only when they can't move stock (much like they did when they couldn't sell all of those Apple tablet killers, and had to sell them at a loss to try and recoup their investment). Folks like best buy don't have the option of getting profit back by selling a cell contract for a phone.

They are not the same. A cell phone provider isn't in the business of selling phones. They sell service contracts. Any profit from phone sales is incidental.

If you think that the carriers subsidize iPhones, you're naive. All they do is sell it at a lower price up front, and then recoup the full price through implicit monthly payments that are a part of a customer's bill. Indeed, customers continue paying that implicit price after the (typically) two-year contract is up, a total rip-off.

In any event, I am at a loss to figure out what all this hair-splitting on your part has to do with your original post......
post #126 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

If you think that the carriers subsidize iPhones, you're naive. All they do is sell it at a lower price up front, and then recoup the full price through implicit monthly payments that are a part of a customer's bill. Indeed, customers continue paying that implicit price after the (typically) two-year contract is up, a total rip-off.

In any event, I am at a loss to figure out what all this hair-splitting on your part has to do with your original post......

Because when a new phone is released, and you go to your local AT&T or Verizon store, they put in the order for the iPhone with Apple, and it's sent to your home, or delivered to the local cell provider store. They are never in stock. In short, the phone is sold from Apple. Splitting hairs over the word shipped is not the same thing as Samsung pumping inventory into thousands of Best Buy and similar stores. It's typically 4-6 months after release when any stores contain Apple stock that isn't a direct sale from Apple and just sitting on it's shelves.

Seriously, every time Samsung has a new model, we always get the same story: "Huge numbers shipped", and three months later.."well not as many sold as originally though". How many times does history have to repeat itself before you stop saying Shipped = Sold?
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
post #127 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

If you think that the carriers subsidize iPhones, you're naive. All they do is sell it at a lower price up front, and then recoup the full price through implicit monthly payments that are a part of a customer's bill. Indeed, customers continue paying that implicit price after the (typically) two-year contract is up, a total rip-off.

In any event, I am at a loss to figure out what all this hair-splitting on your part has to do with your original post......

Because when a new phone is released, and you go to your local AT&T or Verizon store, they put in the order for the iPhone with Apple, and it's sent to your home, or delivered to the local cell provider store. They are never in stock. In short, the phone is sold from Apple. Splitting hairs over the word shipped is not the same thing as Samsung pumping inventory into thousands of Best Buy and similar stores. It's typically 4-6 months after release when any stores contain Apple stock that isn't a direct sale from Apple and just sitting on it's shelves.

Seriously, every time Samsung has a new model, we always get the same story: "Huge numbers shipped", and three months later.."well not as many sold as originally though". How many times does history have to repeat itself before you stop saying Shipped = Sold?

If you have been reading my posts on this topic, you'll know that I do not disagree at all that Samsung's 'shipped' numbers (the only such numbers being those available from consulting firms) are likely bogus.

That was not my issue with your post nor my question to you.

I simply asked you if you had a cite or evidence for whether sales via '3rd party resellers' were in the minority for Apple. The answers you've provided me so far suggest that you do have that evidence. That's all.

Let's move along and not bore others to tears......
post #128 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

If you have been reading my posts on this topic, you'll know that I do not disagree at all that Samsung's 'shipped' numbers (the only such numbers being those available from consulting firms) are likely bogus.

That was not my issue with your post nor my question to you.

I simply asked you if you had a cite or evidence for whether sales via '3rd party resellers' were in the minority for Apple. The answers you've provided me so far suggest that you do have that evidence. That's all.

Let's move along and not bore others to tears......

Lol..agreed, although hopefully the debates in here aren't THAT boring. This is one of the few sites left that I frequent where the debates still contain a bit of passion without turning into into shouting contests between 3 year olds.
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
post #129 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by nicksg View Post

Now there's a surprise-analysts got it wrong!!
Just as they did when the Apple share price was up over $700.It is the usual analysts herd mentality-the savvy investor should virtually always act contrary to analysts.

They're called analysts because that's where they pull their numbers...

post #130 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

 

Did Apple "borrow" the ideas of, say, MMS or LTE from Symbian or Android? I don't think so. I think they were features Apple didn't implement first (making them temporary 'exclusives' other platforms could offer for a period of time), but were not some novel concepts Apple didn't think of, or infringed upon, or had to look around for vision clues from its competitors.

 

Compare those types of things with the concept and design of iOS as a platform, the iPad as a device, the appearance and design of Apple's original apps and patented features that were clearly unique, new ways to accomplish things. These ideas have been ripped off by Android from head to toe. Illegally infringed.

 

If you've ever accidentally dated a psychopath, you know why Android fans are trying to claim Apple is copying Google. It's an attempt to lie so unashamedly large that their own insanity is overshadowed by a smokescreen of nonsensical horseshit.

 

The most puzzling aspect: Android is supposedly an open source project. How do you "steal" ideas from people who don't believe in intellectual property?

 

And when you look at screen shots of Android's notifications or quick menus for turning off WiFi and other settings, do you really see some sort of inappropriate knockoff behavior in Apple implementing related ideas with far better design and functionality?

 

I fail to see much original thought going into Android's design and features. It's slapped together poorly, perhaps first in some cases, but not with any attention to detail or consideration for real usability.

 

If that's what you think is great, then no problem, run out there and be the guy who buys a new device every three months. But don't fool yourself: you don't represent the biggest fragment of the Android platform in any respect. And that's why you don't get any love from app developers, and never really will.  

 

So let me get this straight.  When Android, Windows, BlackBerry, etc. does something first, it's expected that Apple will have that feature sometime later because they likely thought of it themselves?  But when Apple does something first, it was likely that nobody else considered doing something like that?  I don't think you even see your bias.

 

I'm not here to tell you that Apple shouldn't be borrowing ideas from the competition or that the competition shouldn't be borrowing them from Apple.  I'm simply telling you that it happened and will happen again.  In iOS 7 (and in iOS 6 and 5) Apple added features that brought it to parity with the features available on other platforms.  Those features existed elsewhere, and Apple made them look like they belonged in iOS and added them.  There is nothing wrong with that at all.  That's how it should work. There's no lying whatsoever in saying that Apple has copied, borrowed, designed in the likeness of, or was inspired by features from other platforms.

 

As far as Android stealing the entirety of iOS, I completely disagree.  Having used both, I can confidently say that the similarities between the two stop at the level of being a touchscreen smartphone interface, something that was around even before the iPhone but not done nearly as well as Apple did it.  I think that you feel threatened by the explosion in popularity of Android in a market that was earlier monopolized by Apple.  At least, that's the only reason I can think of for your irrationality.

 

One thing you are correct about is that even when not first to market with a feature, Apple usually gets it right(er).  I see the tides changing a bit in that regard.  Since Matias Duarte became head of Android user experience (or whatever his title is), Android has gotten a much more cohesive and polished UI.  In no way does Android look as fresh and beautiful as iOS 7, but 5.0 is around the corner, and I expect it to further, if not entirely, close the gap in design and polish.  Of course, even if Android 5.0 comes out this fall, something looking increasingly unlikely, I might still switch to the iPhone to get my hands on what appears to be a beautiful and functional (finally!) iOS 7.  That's because I'm open-minded and have no problem acknowledging the truth when it's staring me in the face.  You should work on that.


Edited by wakefinance - 6/17/13 at 4:55pm
post #131 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

 

Did Apple "borrow" the ideas of, say, MMS or LTE from Symbian or Android? I don't think so. I think they were features Apple didn't implement first (making them temporary 'exclusives' other platforms could offer for a period of time), but were not some novel concepts Apple didn't think of, or infringed upon, or had to look around for vision clues from its competitors.

 

In the case of LTE, Apple didn't implement it until the LTE chip was available that didn't draw down the battery like crazy. Since Apple keeps two older iPhone models in active sales once a new iPhone is released, they need to not put out a dud product that they may still be selling for a three year period and customers using for an additional two years. Samsung, on the other hand, isn't concerned about how a product performs for a customer once they unload it on the market.

post #132 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

Hardly. If they were a classic reseller, they couldn't sell their stock at a loss by subsidizing the sale price of the phone like a cell provider does. 

 

Carriers do not normally sell phones at a loss.   The cost is built into the monthly plan price.

 

Basically, the customer is getting a payment plan from the carrier.  Apple itself is now doing payment plans in places like India and China. 

 

Not that it matters, since what you claimed was that:

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

The bulk of Apple's channels are direct to end users.
 
Which the evidence shows is incorrect as far as phones go.  It looks like carriers are far and away the biggest phone buyers from Apple.
 
Quote:
As a result, when Samsung says it 'sold' 10 million, it just shipped them to a reseller for resale, but it doesn't mean they ended up in a users hands.  The opposite is true for Apple.

 

That's not true either.  Apple's quarterly reported sales numbers for iOS devices have often turned out to be millions greater than what was actually sold through to end users during that quarter.  The opposite happens, too.  Sometimes sales to retailers are low, but end user sales are higher because of past stockpiled store inventories.

 

This is all normal.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickag View Post

Exactly, both Apple and Samsung have the activation numbers.  Only Apple applies this knowledge when reporting sold and channel inventory.  

 

AFAIK, Apple has never used activation numbers in their quarterly reports as far as sold or channel inventory go.


Edited by KDarling - 6/17/13 at 6:31pm
post #133 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakefinance View Post

 

So let me get this straight.  When Android, Windows, BlackBerry, etc. does something first, it's expected that Apple will have that feature sometime later because they likely thought of it themselves?  But when Apple does something first, it was likely that nobody else considered doing something like that?  I don't think you even see your bias.

 

I'm not here to tell you that Apple shouldn't be borrowing ideas from the competition or that the competition shouldn't be borrowing them from Apple.  I'm simply telling you that it happened and will happen again.  In iOS 7 (and in iOS 6 and 5) Apple added features that brought it to parity with the features available on other platforms.  Those features existed elsewhere, and Apple made them look like they belonged in iOS and added them.  There is nothing wrong with that at all.  That's how it should work. There's no lying whatsoever in saying that Apple has copied, borrowed, designed in the likeness of, or was inspired by features from other platforms.

 

As far as Android stealing the entirety of iOS, I completely disagree.  Having used both, I can confidently say that the similarities between the two stop at the level of being a touchscreen smartphone interface, something that was around even before the iPhone but not done nearly as well as Apple did it.  I think that you feel threatened by the explosion in popularity of Android in a market that was earlier monopolized by Apple.  At least, that's the only reason I can think of for your irrationality.

 

One thing you are correct about is that even when not first to market with a feature, Apple usually gets it right(er).  I see the tides changing a bit in that regard.  Since Matias Duarte became head of Android user experience (or whatever his title is), Android has gotten a much more cohesive and polished UI.  In no way does Android look as fresh and beautiful as iOS 7, but 5.0 is around the corner, and I expect it to further, if not entirely, close the gap in design and polish.  Of course, even if Android 5.0 comes out this fall, something looking increasingly unlikely, I might still switch to the iPhone to get my hands on what appears to be a beautiful and functional (finally!) iOS 7.  That's because I'm open-minded and have no problem acknowledging the truth when it's staring me in the face.  You should work on that.

With your first post on this thread you had me wondering.  As another stated, you seemed as though you found a tiny nugget of gold and started jumping up and down.  You were correct, but you seemed to be using it to stir a monumental debate on this thread.  

 

As you had so eloquently put it, yes that is Tim Cook up there next to a big screen showing a metric of "units shipped" and not units sold.  Please read my earlier post.  It was a DEVELOPER conference and he was literally just trying to show the install base of the operating system.  The "shipped" word was purposly used.  This conference had nothing to do with chest thumping sales numbers.  Almost every time Tim mentioned anything about units sold he followed it up with a statement saying "we're not about units sold".

 

Your further posts show that you're a bit more open minded.  If I were to disregard your strange links to evangelists type articles that you decided to share.

 

Please remember that most folk here are, for one reason or another, very defensive about Apple criticism except for Sol.  (I love Sol)  There are very few scientific minds on this site, so evidence vs. post is lost horribly in between posts and most posts used as so called evidence is just another radical opinion.  (which you demonstrated)

 

My advise would be to listen to what some of the educated and longed lived people are posting here.  You'll be able to pick them out.  They're the people who are posting without bias.  Sometimes you'll see heavy criticism in one post and pure apathy in the next.

 

However, just thank who ever you would that the Tallest Shrill is no longer on this site.  I have.  I'm sure he'll pop up somehow, but much deflated.

 

My last statement, you were very close to wrong on mosts of your posts on this thread.  However I think you're just learning.  Apple is not the best at everything and I sure hope they borrow all of the best from everyone out there.  At least for me on a personal level I hope they do.  Some of us know that they're not the best at all things but they are extremely good at a few key things that matter.

 

Please keep an open mind.

 

Edit:  I don't like the icons on iOS7 at all.  The whole speech was about giving the phone a personal touch.  You can not do that on an engineering level.  You can not grid out a personal touch.  Faces are personal, and literally the most commonly recognizable things we see every day on a very personal level.  I can guarantee you that there is nothing symmetrical about a persons face.  Let alone that the color scheme seems like it was a Crayola kindergarden contest on who could color the best icon.  Make an icon without symmetry and people will recognize it within seconds.  That's literally what are brains are built to do.  We see green instead of leaves or trees, but if you put a funky looking tree in there... oh brother!  Everyone sees it! :)


Edited by Vadania - 6/17/13 at 7:37pm
post #134 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vadania View Post

With your first post on this thread you had me wondering.  As another stated, you seemed as though you found a tiny nugget of gold and started jumping up and down.  You were correct, but you seemed to be using it to stir a monumental debate on this thread.  

 

As you had so eloquently put it, yes that is Tim Cook up there next to a big screen showing a metric of "units shipped" and not units sold.  Please read my earlier post.  It was a DEVELOPER conference and he was literally just trying to show the install base of the operating system.  The "shipped" word was purposly used.  This conference had nothing to do with chest thumping sales numbers.  Almost every time Tim mentioned anything about units sold he followed it up with a statement saying "we're not about units sold".

 

Your further posts show that you're a bit more open minded.  If I were to disregard your strange links to evangelists type articles that you decided to share.

 

Please remember that most folk here are, for one reason or another, very defensive about Apple criticism except for Sol.  (I love Sol)  There are very few scientific minds on this site, so evidence vs. post is lost horribly in between posts and most posts used as so called evidence is just another radical opinion.  (which you demonstrated)

 

My advise would be to listen to what some of the educated and longed lived people are posting here.  You'll be able to pick them out.  They're the people who are posting without bias.  Sometimes you'll see heavy criticism in one post and pure apathy in the next.

 

However, just thank who ever you would that the Tallest Shrill is no longer on this site.  I have.  I'm sure he'll pop up somehow, but much deflated.

 

My last statement, you were very close to wrong on mosts of your posts on this thread.  However I think you're just learning.  Apple is not the best at everything and I sure hope they borrow all of the best from everyone out there.  At least for me on a personal level I hope they do.  Some of us know that they're not the best at all things but they are extremely good at a few key things that matter.

 

Please keep an open mind.

 

Edit:  I don't like the icons on iOS7 at all.  The whole speech was about giving the phone a personal touch.  You can not do that on an engineering level.  You can not grid out a personal touch.  Faces are personal, and literally the most commonly recognizable things we see every day on a very personal level.  I can guarantee you that there is nothing symmetrical about a persons face.  Let alone that the color scheme seems like it was a Crayola kindergarden contest on who could color the best icon.  Make an icon without symmetry and people will recognize it within seconds.  That's literally what are brains are built to do.  We see green instead of leaves or trees, but if you put a funky looking tree in there... oh brother!  Everyone sees it! :)

 

Good post.  My mind is always open, and I have a fairly good idea of who here is rational and who isn't.  Even two rational people can disagree on subjective matters.  I wish that more people here would be rational and accept disagreement.

post #135 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakefinance View Post

 

Good post.  My mind is always open, and I have a fairly good idea of who here is rational and who isn't.  Even two rational people can disagree on subjective matters.  I wish that more people here would be rational and accept disagreement.

Thanks.

post #136 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

The most puzzling aspect: Android is supposedly an open source project. How do you "steal" ideas from people who don't believe in intellectual property?  

 

Flawgic?

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • After crowning Samsung as Apple's heir, analysts now rethinking their math
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › After crowning Samsung as Apple's heir, analysts now rethinking their math