or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › J.D. Power ranks Samsung tablets better than iPad entirely due to cost
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

J.D. Power ranks Samsung tablets better than iPad entirely due to cost - Page 5

post #161 of 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


Only rich people can afford cheap windows.

True. But what you can afford and what you buy are not always the same. Current cash availability often trumps long-term cost when you lack cash to pay for the lower long-term cost.
post #162 of 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by elehcdn View Post
 

I think it's important to remember a few factors here:

  1. This is a survey of people who have already bought the product.

  2. Android buyers tend to be techies who have already done a lot of research and know exactly what they are buying. iPad buyers may be techie, but they can just as easily be someone with little technical knowledge. Buyers that have researched and know what they are buying are probably going to be more satisfied than someone who only has a general idea of what a tablet is supposed to do.

  3. These are all relatively new customers - most people aren't going to say that their new toy is too complicated or underperforming, but they may be willing to say that they think it is expensive. There's a little bit of prestige there btw, techies are more likely to be proud that they have done their shopping and didn't overpay, whereas the "bling" factor for non-techies is often that they spent more for the "cool" device.

  4. Again, these are buyers in the first year of ownership. Being techie, more Android purchasers are probably willing to buy a new device every year at the refresh. Non-techies are more likely to buy the device and keep it longer. Who gets the better value? ... the person who hangs on to the device for 2 or 3 years, but they are more likely to think that a tablet is an expensive device as opposed to someone who is conditioned to buy at every refresh.

 

It's easy to see how JD Power could end up with these results even without intentionally screwing with the data. But as I mentioned before, surveys tell more about the questioner and the questions than the answers. If you wanted to get the opposite answer, it would be easy enough to prime the survey by asking how long the purchaser planned to own the device before asking if they thought it was good value. Not only would it provide more accurate data - that iPads tend to be useful longer, but it would also trigger the thought in the respondents that if they had a device that they were going to hold onto longer (or that maintained its resale price better) maybe they wouldn't think it was so expensive.

Techies?  NOPE. Only a small portion of the Android users are techies.  There are only about 5 Million registered XDA Developers and the Android geeks are typically XDA freaks that root their OS.  NONE of the Android users that I know I would classify as a techie geek.  One THOUGHT he was, but even he didn't even know what the latest release of Android was.  I think that assessment is just not a good one.

Most of the Android users fall into one of a couple categories.  1.  They don't have any money and buy the cheapest thing they can get (hence the large user base of outdated 2.X phones (about 30% of the install base)  2.  Want a large screen model.   3.  or just think that market share is the deciding factor on buying a platform.   I see a LOT of these "techies" are actually collectors of Android products, so one of them can actually own 5 or 6 or more phones at a time. So the number of unique Android users is probably a LOT lower than the number of active phones/tablets. Techies are also typically people that don't always use mainstream apps, they are more likely going to hack the OS to do things a normal person wouldn't do, root their phone and throw other OSs on it, and spend more time playing around with the device than a productivity tool.

post #163 of 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mechanic View Post

They don't include the kick back they got under the table.  Part of that 13 billion dollar advertising budget of samsungs.

Yeah, but I don't believe that without some proof. JDP would have to risk their reputation, and their business is based on their reputation.

Their reputation is based on them being cheap though. If they were charging people to read their surveys, they'd lose out to another source of reviews.

J.D Power:
quality 1/5
accuracy 1/5
unbiased 1/5
anything good 1/5
price 5/5
overall 5/5

They are a global marketing firm so they need their click-bait. While price is normally an important consideration, tablet price points are low enough that $100 here and there isn't make or break for buyers and this shows in the sales:

http://thenextweb.com/insider/2013/10/30/idc-apples-ipad-fell-29-6-tablet-share-q3-2013-samsung-took-second-20-4-asus-third-7-4/

If price was all that important, Apple wouldn't be outselling Samsung by 45%. The growth rates are something to watch but not conclusive as far as price goes while Apple still outsells Samsung.
post #164 of 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by ceek74 View Post

Huh.  Must be weighted with cost being the biggest factor.  So with that, would a free turd rank best?
No. Turd with stipend attached would rank best actually. Although this goes against the commonly held belief that, "you couldn't pay me to use that shit!"

We've always been at war with Eastasia...

Reply

We've always been at war with Eastasia...

Reply
post #165 of 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 

Because they weighted the cost more than the other, rather than just using equal weighting, or someone doesn't know how to count.

According to their published methodology, cost was the lowest weighted item.  Looks like, as you say, someone doesn't know how to count.

post #166 of 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

My sadness is for the very few number of trick-or-treaters... End of a very happy tradition...

I saw exactly zero trick or treaters this time. I'm just amazed.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #167 of 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by wstanich View Post
 

According to their published methodology, cost was the lowest weighted item.  Looks like, as you say, someone doesn't know how to count.

If all of the criteria other than cost favors the iPad, and the only area that Samsung was better was price?  The stars showed iPad winning on all of the other criteria, so go figure.

post #168 of 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by wstanich View Post
 

According to their published methodology, cost was the lowest weighted item.  Looks like, as you say, someone doesn't know how to count.

I didn't read the article I just counted the stars given for each criteria.  That's what I counted as did the other person that made a comment.

 

Either way, I wouldn't touch Samsung products.  No great apps. Even the music industry favors iPads due to CoreAudio functionality built in which Android doesn't have.  Ooops.

post #169 of 224

The dots do not represent a 1-5 rating that can be arithmetically averaged. That's not how it works. Nor was cost the biggest factor. Apple got an excellent score, it just wasn't as high as Samsung's (differing by about 0.2%).

 

  • Five dots = Among the best = within 10% of the highest score
  • Four dots = Better than most = at least 10% above the industry average but below the five-dot scores
  • Three dots = About average = between 10% above and 20% below the average
  • Two dots = The rest = 20% below the average

 

The perceived value of a J.D. Power award has dropped significantly over the years, but it still created a lot of agita here. All it says is that Samsung's tablets have improved since last year and they're more cost competitive. Good for them. It should keep Apple working hard to make even better products. Seems like a good thing to me.

 

Also, J.D. Power is a marketing research company but their profits (not revenues) substantially come from allowing companies to use their awards or rankings in advertising. So J.D. Power probably doesn't care who wins, although they have a financial interest in making sure the winner will want to advertise that fact. If awards payments are based on the ad spend of a company that would be an inducement for them to declare the biggest spender a winner. I have no idea if that's the case but if I was a competitor I would call it out in order to discredit the award entirely. I'm not aware of that happening.

post #170 of 224

I think you're right. This is a mistake. Or maybe someone trolling for a laugh. The iPad easily wins this.

post #171 of 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post


My sadness is for the very few number of trick-or-treaters... End of a very happy tradition...

 

research the orgins of Halloween and trick or treat.  Pretty grim stuff

post #172 of 224

To all those asking, the math works out just fine. Someone below noted the stars weren't actual score but assuming they were and Samsung scored well in their range vs. Apple as lower, Samsung can easily come out on top.

 

Score/Weight 0.26 0.22 0.19 0.17 0.16   Where Range
Samsung 3 3 4 4 4   2 20-39
Apple 5 5 5 5 2   3 40-59
Points             4 60-79
Samsung 59 59 79 79 79   5 80-100
Apple 80 80 80 80 20      
Category Total           Final Score    
Samsung 15.34 15.34 20.54 20.54 20.54 92.3    
Apple 20.8 20.8 20.8 20.8 5.2 88.4    
post #173 of 224
Originally Posted by macaholic_1948 View Post
Current cash availability often trumps long-term cost when you lack cash to pay for the lower long-term cost.

 

Yep. Yet the opposite seems to be true in cell phones, for some reason.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #174 of 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prime81 View Post

To all those asking, the math works out just fine. Someone below noted the stars weren't actual score but assuming they were and Samsung scored well in their range vs. Apple as lower, Samsung can easily come out on top.


Nicely contrived but, assuming an unbiased statistical distribution of scores relative to bins, hugely improbable.
post #175 of 224

Completely agree the odds of that happening are very small (and that Apple should have won) but to everyone saying it was impossible that they couldn't score higher without some external bias the math just shows they could. :)

post #176 of 224
I thought I was satisfied with my 10.1 galaxy tab 2, but I hate how laggy it is.. iPads are so much better from people I have borrowed from.
post #177 of 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prime81 View Post
 

To all those asking, the math works out just fine. Someone below noted the stars weren't actual score but assuming they were and Samsung scored well in their range vs. Apple as lower, Samsung can easily come out on top.

 

Score/Weight 0.26 0.22 0.19 0.17 0.16   Where Range
Samsung 3 3 4 4 4   2 20-39
Apple 5 5 5 5 2   3 40-59
Points             4 60-79
Samsung 59 59 79 79 79   5 80-100
Apple 80 80 80 80 20      
Category Total           Final Score    
Samsung 15.34 15.34 20.54 20.54 20.54 92.3    
Apple 20.8 20.8 20.8 20.8 5.2 88.4    

no doubt JDP has contrived some unseen additional methodology for its "Power Circle Ratings" that can produce such an apparently logically absurd outcome (aka "cooking the books"). but the outcome is still absurd on its face.

 

had JDP presented its findings as "satisfaction" = "value" (aka "bang for the buck"), that would have made more sense. if Samsung's overall score was 70% of Apple's but its price was only 50% as much, then one could say it had a higher ratio of satisfaction per dollar spent. put another way, if a SS tablet is "good enough" for what you want to do, why spend more on an iPad? you're "satisfied."

 

what this demonstrates beyond question once again is that all these "rankings" of products we see from such outfits like JDP and Consumer Reports et al are inherently subjective, despite their loudly-claimed objectivity, because the bias of the evaluators is fundamentally baked into the choices they make about the methodologies and data sets they choose to use.

 

and when they don't even disclose the full details of the calcs (CR never does), they invite speculation about having "stacked the deck" for other ulterior motives. that serves them right - even if untrue - for their lack of transparency.

post #178 of 224

 

Well, if the logic is correct, Apple wins big.... (uses the weighting someone posted that came from The Verge)


Edited by icoco3 - 11/1/13 at 11:35am
post #179 of 224

Even based on price this makes no sense:

 

  • Galaxy Note 10.1 16GB – $499
  • Galaxy Note 8.0 – $399
  •  
  • iPad mini 16GB – $329
  • iPad 16GB $499

 

So the top of the line full size Galaxy Note is the same price as the iPad.

 

The Galaxy Note 8 is more expensive than the iPadmini.

 

WTF.  You can't count the Galaxy Tab line because those are crap models.  You would need to compare those to iPad2.  And don't be comparing the 7 inch models since those are 40% smaller than the mini.

 

If JD Power was honest they should have given two separate awards:

 

Premium Tablet - Apple

Budget Tablet - Samdung

post #180 of 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post
 

Even based on price this makes no sense:

 

  • Galaxy Note 10.1 16GB – $499
  • Galaxy Note 8.0 – $399
  •  
  • iPad mini 16GB – $329
  • iPad 16GB $499

 

So the top of the line full size Galaxy Note is the same price as the iPad.

 

The Galaxy Note 8 is more expensive than the iPadmini.

 

WTF.  You can't count the Galaxy Tab line because those are crap models.  You would need to compare those to iPad2.  And don't be comparing the 7 inch models since those are 40% smaller than the mini.

 

If JD Power was honest they should have given two separate awards:

 

Premium Tablet - Apple

Budget Tablet - Samdung

I thought the Notes were phablets not tablets.  What did they do change the name of the Tab to the Note tablet?  Even their product name is confusing.

 

I think the JD Powers surveys were from Tab users since that's what they've using over the past year.

post #181 of 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 

I thought the Notes were phablets not tablets.  What did they do change the name of the Tab to the Note tablet?  Even their product name is confusing.

 

I think the JD Powers surveys were from Tab users since that's what they've using over the past year.

 

But the tabs are crap products that use slower chips than the Note.  The Note8 are way too big to be real phablets.  No one is making a phone call on those.

 

Bottom line is JD should be comparing Apples best with Samsungs best.  Stick to the correct price range. 

 

There is ZERO reason to compare a $199 Tab7 that has a horribly slow chipset with the iPadMini that has a 40% larger screen.

 

The Galaxy tab 3 - 10.1 is a total joke compared to the iPad.  The tab is $399 but comes with a pathetic chipset and 1280x800 resolution compared to 2048x1536.  How the Fuk do you compare those two?  The Tab3 is closer to the iPad2 which also cost $399

post #182 of 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr View Post
 

no doubt JDP has contrived some unseen additional methodology for its "Power Circle Ratings" that can produce such an apparently logically absurd outcome (aka "cooking the books"). but the outcome is still absurd on its face.

 

had JDP presented its findings as "satisfaction" = "value" (aka "bang for the buck"), that would have made more sense. if Samsung's overall score was 70% of Apple's but its price was only 50% as much, then one could say it had a higher ratio of satisfaction per dollar spent. put another way, if a SS tablet is "good enough" for what you want to do, why spend more on an iPad? you're "satisfied."

 

what this demonstrates beyond question once again is that all these "rankings" of products we see from such outfits like JDP and Consumer Reports et al are inherently subjective, despite their loudly-claimed objectivity, because the bias of the evaluators is fundamentally baked into the choices they make about the methodologies and data sets they choose to use.

 

and when they don't even disclose the full details of the calcs (CR never does), they invite speculation about having "stacked the deck" for other ulterior motives. that serves them right - even if untrue - for their lack of transparency.

How can something get a 4 star and get the same numerical result if it's weighted differently.

 

By these numbers, a 4 star rating when it's weighted at .16 should be different to a .17 and a .18 weighting, but this weights them the same, even though they are supposed to be done with different weighting per category.   I smell some kind of stupid calculations going on.

post #183 of 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prime81 View Post
 

To all those asking, the math works out just fine. Someone below noted the stars weren't actual score but assuming they were and Samsung scored well in their range vs. Apple as lower, Samsung can easily come out on top.

 

Score/Weight 0.26 0.22 0.19 0.17 0.16   Where Range
Samsung 3 3 4 4 4   2 20-39
Apple 5 5 5 5 2   3 40-59
Points             4 60-79
Samsung 59 59 79 79 79   5 80-100
Apple 80 80 80 80 20      
Category Total           Final Score    
Samsung 15.34 15.34 20.54 20.54 20.54 92.3    
Apple 20.8 20.8 20.8 20.8 5.2 88.4    

How can they arrive 20.54 the same for three categories that have weightings of .19, 17 and .16 respectively and Get final scores of 15.34 with the weightings of .26 and .22 respectively.

 

I think the weightings were calculated properly when arriving at the final scores.

 

Something fishy is going on.

post #184 of 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by wstanich View Post
 

According to their published methodology, cost was the lowest weighted item.  Looks like, as you say, someone doesn't know how to count.

Then if Scamscum got only 4 stars for that category and it was weighted less, then how come the final score of 20.54 was the same as another category that was weighted higher get the same final score of 20.54 and then Apple gets 5 stars for categories weighted much higher and they get a final score of only 20.8?

Sorry, it's how they did these calculations doesn't appear as though the weightings weren't applied.  

post #185 of 224

See my comparison above which is most likely the most we can assume...

post #186 of 224

Using the same standards a white box $59 tablet should win the award if price is so important.

 

Apple is about 50% more expensive than Samdungs 2nd tier offerings.

Samdungs tablets are 200% more expensive than white box offerings.

 

Problem is white box brands will not pay JD's Bullsheet fee

post #187 of 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prime81 View Post
 

To all those asking, the math works out just fine. Someone below noted the stars weren't actual score but assuming they were and Samsung scored well in their range vs. Apple as lower, Samsung can easily come out on top.

 

Score/Weight 0.26 0.22 0.19 0.17 0.16   Where Range
Samsung 3 3 4 4 4   2 20-39
Apple 5 5 5 5 2   3 40-59
Points             4 60-79
Samsung 59 59 79 79 79   5 80-100
Apple 80 80 80 80 20      
Category Total           Final Score    
Samsung 15.34 15.34 20.54 20.54 20.54 92.3    
Apple 20.8 20.8 20.8 20.8 5.2 88.4    

How can they arrive 20.54 the same for three categories that have weightings of .19, 17 and .16 respectively and Get final scores of 15.34 with the weightings of .26 and .22 respectively.

 

I think the weightings were calculated properly when arriving at the final scores.

 

Something fishy is going on.

 

Yes - looks like Prime81 did not apply the weightings properly.  Even with the extremely contrived example above, with the weightings applied the score is Apple 70.4, Samsung 69.4.

post #188 of 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr View Post
 

no doubt JDP has contrived some unseen additional methodology for its "Power Circle Ratings" that can produce such an apparently logically absurd outcome (aka "cooking the books"). but the outcome is still absurd on its face.

 

had JDP presented its findings as "satisfaction" = "value" (aka "bang for the buck"), that would have made more sense. if Samsung's overall score was 70% of Apple's but its price was only 50% as much, then one could say it had a higher ratio of satisfaction per dollar spent. put another way, if a SS tablet is "good enough" for what you want to do, why spend more on an iPad? you're "satisfied."

 

what this demonstrates beyond question once again is that all these "rankings" of products we see from such outfits like JDP and Consumer Reports et al are inherently subjective, despite their loudly-claimed objectivity, because the bias of the evaluators is fundamentally baked into the choices they make about the methodologies and data sets they choose to use.

 

and when they don't even disclose the full details of the calcs (CR never does), they invite speculation about having "stacked the deck" for other ulterior motives. that serves them right - even if untrue - for their lack of transparency.

Here's what I got.

score/weight 0.26 0.22 0.19 0.17 0.16  
Samsung 59 59 79 79 79  
Apple 80 80 80 80 20  
             
             
Samsung 15.34 12.98 15.01 13.43 12.64 69.4
Apple 20.8 17.6 15.2 13.6 3.2 70.4
post #189 of 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post
 

 

Yes - looks like Prime81 did not apply the weightings properly.  Even with the extremely contrived example above, with the weightings applied the score is Apple 70.4, Samsung 69.4.

Yeah, that's what I got.

post #190 of 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post
 

 

Yes - looks like Prime81 did not apply the weightings properly.  Even with the extremely contrived example above, with the weightings applied the score is Apple 70.4, Samsung 69.4.

Apple's Number 1 (middle finger extended)

post #191 of 224

Here is JD Power's Email back to me.

 

Quote:
 Thank you for your interest in the  2013 U.S. Tablet Satisfaction Study--Volume 2. It's important to note that award is given to the brand that has the highest overall index score, not the company with the most Power Circles.  In this study, the index score is comprised of customer's ratings of five key dimensions or factors.

The Power Circles Rankings are something we provide to consumers to understand the relative rank of brands within each of these five dimensions. The Power Circle Rankings  denote the brand that has the highest score within each factor regardless of how much higher their score is.  The Power Circles denote ranges, not the actual index score upon which the factors and overall rankings are based.

In the case of Apple in the tablet study, although it did score higher on four out of five factors measured, its score was only marginally better than Samsung's.  At the same time, however, Apple's score on cost was significantly lower than that of all other brands.  In comparison Apple's ratings on cost was more than 100 points lower than Samsung's.  As such, even though its ratings on other factor was slightly higher than Samsung's,  Apple's performance on cost resulted in an overall lower score than Samsung.

In this cost-conscious environment, cost is a key factor in many products purchase and services they use.  Tablets are no exception, where cost is a key driver of the overall customer experience with their device. Although "cost" has the lowest weight among the five factors that drive satisfaction, the notable difference between Samsung's and Apple's score in the cost factor was enough for Samsung to rank highest in the study.
post #192 of 224

For what it's worth, here's the response I got from their media people:

 

Mr. MacLachlan,

Thank you for your interest in the  2013 U.S. Tablet Satisfaction Study--Volume 2. It's important to note that award is given to the brand that has the highest overall index score, not the company with the most Power Circles.  In this study, the index score is comprised of customer's ratings of five key dimensions or factors.

The Power Circles Rankings are something we provide to consumers to understand the relative rank of brands within each of these five dimensions. The Power Circle Rankings  denote the brand that has the highest score within each factor regardless of how much higher their score is.  The Power Circles denote ranges, not the actual index score upon which the factors and overall rankings are based.

In the case of Apple in the tablet study, although it did score higher on four out of five factors measured, its score was only marginally better than Samsung's.  At the same time, however, Apple's score on cost was significantly lower than that of all other brands.  In comparison Apple's ratings on cost was more than 100 points lower than Samsung's.  As such, even though its ratings on other factor was slightly higher than Samsung's,  Apple's performance on cost resulted in an overall lower score than Samsung.

In this cost-conscious environment, cost is a key factor in many products purchase and services they use.  Tablets are no exception, where cost is a key driver of the overall customer experience with their device. Although "cost" has the lowest weight among the five factors that drive satisfaction, the notable difference between Samsung's and Apple's score in the cost factor was enough for Samsung to rank highest in the study.

Here is a brief explanation of how the Power Circles are calculated:

               Power Circle Ratings are calculated based on the range between the product or service with the highest score and the product or service with the lowest score. J.D. Power generates a Power Circle Rating of five, four, three, or two, as outline follows:

               5 Among the best -- The highest-ranking company or brand in each segment receives five Power Circles*. In highly competitive segments with many companies or brands, multiple companies or models scoring in the top 10 percent of the range from the highest                score can also receive five Power Circles, indicating that consumers rate them "among the best" of all companies or models in the survey. However, J.D. Power awards are based on the product or service with the highest overall index score; therefore, while      more than one company may be classified as "among the best," as both Samsung and Apple are in this case, only the brand with the highest overall index score receives a J.D. Power award.

               4 Better than most -- Brands or models scoring 10 percent of the range above the industry or the segment average but below the scores for 5 Power Circles receive a rating of 4 Power Circles*, indicating a classification of "better than most" among brands or              models in the survey.

               3 About average --  Brands or models scoring between 10 percent of the range above the industry or the segment average but below the scores for 4 Power Circles receive a rating of 3 Power Circles*, indicating a classification of "about average" among all         brands or models in the survey.

               2 The rest--  Brands or models scoring 20 percent of the range below the industry or the segment average receive a rating of 2 Power Circles*, indicating a classification of "the rest" among all brands or models in the survey. J.D. Power does not publish a rating         lower than two Power Circles.

               It is also important to note that the JDPower.com Ratings may not include all information used to determine the overall rankings and J.D. Power awards.

-----Original Message-----
From: DAVID MACLACHLAN [mailto:justadcomics@me.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2013 7:34 PM
To: J.D. Power Media Relations
Subject: Customer satisfaction ratings

Hello,

I am hoping that you can help me understand how Samsung managed to come out ahead of Apple in customer satisfaction rating, where the ONLY category, according to your chart, that Samsung bested Apple was in cost. Apple's ratings were all 5 stars. What kind of weighting did you use to come up with your results?

Dave

The information contained in this message is intended only for the recipient, and may be a confidential attorney-client communication or may otherwise be privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, please be aware that any dissemination or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. McGraw Hill Financial reserves the right, subject to applicable local law, to monitor, review and process the content of any electronic message or information sent to or from McGraw Hill Financial e-mail addresses without informing the sender or recipient of the message. By sending electronic message or information to McGraw Hill Financial e-mail addresses you, as the sender, are consenting to McGraw Hill Financial processing any of your personal data therein.

post #193 of 224
Originally Posted by iPilya View Post

In the case of Apple in the tablet study, although it did score higher on four out of five factors measured, its score was only marginally better than Samsung's.

 

Let’s see… five vs. five, five vs. THREE, five vs. THREE, five vs. FOUR, and five vs. FOUR. So no, J.D. Power is lying through their teeth. If it was actually “marginally better”, Samsung’s score would be higher.

 
 In comparison Apple's ratings on cost was more than 100 points lower than Samsung's.  As such, even though its ratings on other factor was slightly higher than Samsung's,  Apple's performance on cost resulted in an overall lower score than Samsung.

 

Except, by J.D. Power’s own claimed math, the weighting of cost shows that this doesn’t matter.

 
In this cost-conscious environment

 

Demand to know their justification for stating this. On what grounds do they consider this “environment” more “cost-conscious” than the past six years (recession) where Apple beat the snot out of everyone else?

 

I’m glad they replied to you. Now demand from them further explanation on these points.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #194 of 224
at amazon or best buy, a 32 Gb tablet:
Kindle: $480 (but 8.9"); surface2, $480 (but 1920 res); galaxy tab 10.1, 2014 edition: $600; ipad air: $600. So why, even considering price, is Samsung getting better scores?
If for the money of decent dinner you are willing to sacrifice the quality of the device you will be using for at least 3 years... well, you deserve it, dummy.
post #195 of 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by jusephe View Post

So customers are more satisfied with an 199 $ SAMSUNG GALAXY TAB 3 7" than an 399 $ iPad mini with retina display ?
Only because of price ?
REALLY ???

If that is true Apple wouldn't survive every super cheap bloat from competition (ultra cheap iPod clones, netbooks, and now cheap 199$ tablets) and still they are there.

iPad mni with retina display??  not available publicly yet.

post #196 of 224
If the world is "cost conscience", shouldnt every product have a cost category?
post #197 of 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post

If the world is "cost conscience", shouldnt every product have a cost category?

 

The world isn't always cost conscious.  Now, for some people, and companies they will look at a LOT more factors than what is listed in this survey.  Here is a laundry list of the POSSIBLE attributes before someone or a company will buy a platform/ product.  But there might be others that I didn't list. Each person/company puts them in a listing of most important to least important and weights them differently.  Some of this is done in an evaluation survey that some companies WILL DO, or it's done as they go through the decision making process.

 

1.  Number of apps.

2.  Quality of apps.

3.  3rd party hardware.

4.  Quality of 3rd party hardware.

5.  Ease of custom developing apps.

6.  Compatibility with desktops

7.   Size

8.  Weight

9.  Thickness

10.  Battery LIfe

11.  Price

12.  Resale Value

13.  Support (quality)

14.  Extended Server contracts (t's and c's)

15.  security from malware

16.  Security in terms of an enterprise level.

17.  Compatibility with existing s/w and h/w.

18.  Performance options

19.  Esthetics.

20.  OS features

21,  Standard apps.

22.   Is it discounted/on sale

23.  Brand name

24.  Advertisements

25.  Can I buy it from a place that will give me payment terms.

26.  What are my friends/family/schools/work using.

27.  What does some article say about the product.

28.  Who has the biggest market share.

29.  What colors does it come in.

30. Hardware specs

31.  Hardware features.

32.  Ease of use.

33.  Updating policy of the OS. (Do I get it the same day the mfg releases it, or do I have to wait for the OEM to release it)

34.  How many revs does the OS get updated. (Example, some 2.x products won't get upgraded to past 2.x, same with 3.x, 4.0, 4.1 to 4.3) etc. etc.   Apple has their own policy, etc.

35.Build quality

36. Reliability

 

 

NONE OF THESE ARE IN ANY SPECIFIC ORDER.

 

These are just a PORTION of the potential things that goes through people's heads at some point in time during the evaluation period and I'm sure there are more criteria than this.

 

Did JD Powers or Consumer Reports evaluate based on all of the criteria mentioned? NOPE.  The only did the top 5 most OBVIOUS.  But I would evaluate other criteria that they wouldn't and cost wouldn't be that big of a deal since we aren't talking about expensive products to begin with.  Cars have a higher spread in terms of cost, tablets with the same basic specs don't.  Apple isn't 100% more expensive for the same configuration. Some are the same or VERY close in terms of Retail List price.


Edited by drblank - 11/1/13 at 5:06pm
post #198 of 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by wstanich View Post
 

According to their published methodology, cost was the lowest weighted item.  Looks like, as you say, someone doesn't know how to count.

In the actual final scoring it actually was rated at the same level due to the calculations they actually used.  I think someone screwed up at JD Powers is what I think.

post #199 of 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post

If the world is "cost conscience", shouldnt every product have a cost category?

 

The people that are most cost conscious are the people that don't have any money in the first place.  But that's not the majority of people that own a tablet.

 

Some people aren't interested in a tablet at this point in time or they are waiting a little while before jumping in because they don't NEED one yet, or they don't see the benefit of it.

 

But stating that the world is a cost conscious.  That's a fallacy.  Certain percentage of the world's population might be, but I think of the people that are buying tablets, I don't think they are.  Just a certain percentage.

 

I've seen people buy computers and tablets and end up not even using them. They just bought them because their neighbors had them and they just wanted to keep up with the Jones' but in reality, they don't even use them.

post #200 of 224

I'm sorry, but where is this myth that Samsung's tablets are cheap coming from?  The Galaxy Note 10.1 sells for $549, $50 more than a comparable iPad.  The Note 8.0 sells for $399, $70 more than the iPad mini.  If anything Samsung should get a lower rating on price than Apple. Nexus tablets I understand, but Samsung? Yet, that survey makes it seem as if there's such a massive price disparity that it outweighed everything else- combined. Makes no fucking sense. At all. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
  • J.D. Power ranks Samsung tablets better than iPad entirely due to cost
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › J.D. Power ranks Samsung tablets better than iPad entirely due to cost