Originally Posted by dragit
'it didn't feel "cheap" or "plasticky"' no i would hope not as it isn't cheap by any means.
This is the most disappointing release has made in a very long time IMO. They seem to have completely missed the point of "affordable".
They needed to make a phone for half the price of the current iphone, not 10% less... gives a sheet.
A phone that costs much less than what Apple is charging is a money losing product. Apple has to maintain decent margins, otherwise the analysts and shareholders will get pissed off. The problem with these other phone mfg that sell $150 phones aren't making any money and all they are doing is screwing up the industry and ultimately the customer. The reason why Samsung is getting away with it, is because they make it up by the higher end phones and because it's better to run the factories spitting out cheap components and breaking even so they can increase market share, otherwise, they'd have to shut down mfg plants, have less sales, etc. and probably end up dumping chips in landfill.
To expect Apple to make a good $150 is like asking Mercedes Benz to come out with a high quality $15K car. It'll never happen. Mercedes has their branding and their market they go after and it isn't the high volume, low cost, low margin products. The same thing about Apple. If you want a high quality product, you have to pay for it. if all you look at is the price, then you'll end up getting something that is made for that price market. You can't have high quality and cheap. Those two things almost never exist. Market share doesn't pay the bills and allow for growth and to pay for research.
The same thing that's been happening and will continue to happen in the PC market will happen to the Android market. It's just a matter of time. There have already been a few Android players get out of the industry because they can't make money trying to compete. That's not good for the consumer. How would you like it if you bought something based on price only to find out the company exits the industry and you are now high and dry without a company that cares about a product you just paid money for.
Apple's biggest flaws aside from color choices is more that they haven't spit out a larger screen model. It's nice to see them doing 64 Bit processing this early and because Apple has more experience in transitioning from 32 to 64 bit, they'll probably do a much better and faster job than Android.
It'll probably take Apple all of about 5 years to get all of their users over to 64 bit completely. 3 years until Apple sells nothing but 64 bit processors, and then another 2 years afterwards. it'll take Android longer to get the majority of the Android users over to 64 bit. Maybe even as long as 10 years. The reason is these companies want to spit out $150 phones running Gingerbread, which is going on 4 years old. In order for the Android market to move to 64 bit, they would have to first introduce 64 bit, and then they have to get $150 64 bit phones on the market. Yeah, right, that's going to be at least 5 years from now. Apple will have all of their iPhones 64 bit 3 years from now and then another 2 years for everyone to obtain them. How long do you think it's going to take for the Android market to get ALL of the phones sold on the market at 64 bit? A LONG time. Once that happens, then it's about 2 years afterwards.
Samsung MIGHT introduce a 64 bit S5, or whatever they are going to call it next May, MAYBE. But how is Google going to do 64 bit? is that with Kit Kat or with the next major release after that? How long does it take for Android to move to 80% of one OS? They haven't done that yet. They STILL have about 33% 2.x, about 33% using 4.x and then another 33% using 4.1.x and then 1% using 4.2.x. 4.3? Hardly anyone uses 4.3.
Bottom line, $150 are just cheap phones being dumped on the market instead of a cheap traditional cell phone. But that market isn't profitable.