or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › IDC data shows 66% of Android's 81% smartphone share are junk phones selling for $215
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

IDC data shows 66% of Android's 81% smartphone share are junk phones selling for $215 - Page 3

post #81 of 164
If this article were Jeopardy, then the answer, or actually the question would be, "when is winning more like losing?"
post #82 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post
 

 

Your list of phones well illustrates the delusion of many Android fans who think the higher end models of HTC, Motorola and LG are representative of the "81% marketshare." If that were the case, Apple’s App Store wouldn’t be dominate, and Google Play wouldn’t be a rummage sale of a bunch of adware. 

 

That’s also the point of the article: the higher end (for Android, anyway) is only 20% of these numbers. And the phones you seem to think are selling in quantity (because none of those companies would dare to say how many they are actually selling!) are actually selling in such low quantities that they hardly even shift the ASP of the Android market. 

 

Where did I say that those phones made up the 81%?  What I said was that those phones are being sold in addition to the phablets, which alone are outselling the iPhone.

post #83 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frood View Post
 

. . . Where's the problem?  If anything I'd accuse the author of rehashing and restating the obvious.  I would bet that neither of those statistics really surprise anyone, including the people that wrote articles about market share in the first place.

 

 

The author's point is not obvious to the tech bloggers who obsess about market share and nothing else.  See here and here for examples.  "Android" is portrayed as an all-consuming, undifferentiated mass, glossing over the significant differences between "Android phones."  The argument of these tech bloggers is that Android's alleged "network effect" will inevitably swamp iOS.  But if 2/3 of the phones aren't part of that "network," because they are not used as smart phones, this argument is really a lot of bunk. 

post #84 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post
 

 

Careful with statistics. IDC says its phablet estimates went from 3% to 21% yoy. That’s 5.6m to 54.8m! Sounds great, but that’s largely due to Samsung taking its Galaxy S3 from 4.7" to 5" with the Galaxy S4. See how one can create phenomenal "growth figures" simply by shifting an arbitrary boundary definition? 

 

That’s also what’s happening when IDC compares iPhones against 172 million cheap phone shipments. What’s next: do we start counting TV shipments in with tablets so the iPad’s share "goes down" even faster in the "screen market?"

 

IDC already includes lots of "toys" (the analyst’s word) in its tablet figures. Don’t willingly be fooled just because you like the sound of Apple losing. It doesn’t make it so.

 

I agree that the way way IDC is counting this is leading to much of this growth, however this still doesn't take away from the fact that large screen phones (>= 5") are seeing significant growth.  No one is forcing a Galaxy SIII user to upgrade to a S4 if they don't like the screen size.    You seem to know Asia and if you've spent time in China, Hong Kong and Taiwan you will have seen the large number of Samsung Note devices in use, and despite what I read routinely, it's nearly always the wealthy who use them.   If wealthy Asians aren't in Apple's strike zone, I don't know who is.

 

I believe Apple is passing up an opportunity by not competing in the large screen smartphone space. Feel free to disagree, but next year, I suspect Apple is going to do very well if they release one or more large phones.  I blame Tim Cook for not getting this done sooner.

post #85 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesMac View Post

I agree that the way way IDC is counting this is leading to much of this growth, however this still doesn't take away from the fact that large screen phones (>= 5") are seeing significant growth.  No one is forcing a Galaxy SIII user to upgrade to a S4 if they don't like the screen size.    You seem to know Asia and if you've spent time in China, Hong Kong and Taiwan you will have seen the large number of Samsung Note devices in use, and despite what I read routinely, it's nearly always the wealthy who use them.   If wealthy Asians aren't in Apple's strike zone, I don't know who is.

I believe Apple is passing up an opportunity by not competing in the large screen smartphone space. Feel free to disagree, but next year, I suspect Apple is going to do very well if they release one or more large phones.  I blame Tim Cook for not getting this done sooner.

Here's the thing, if you want a flagship Sammy, you have to get a 5" one and not because you want it for the size.

Blaming Cook is pointless. Apple releases devices on its schedule and when the products are ready.
post #86 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post


Here's the thing, if you want a flagship Sammy, you have to get a 5" one and not because you want it for the size.

Blaming Cook is pointless. Apple releases devices on its schedule and when the products are ready.

 

That really goes both ways.  If you want a flagship iOS phone (not that there's any other type...) you have to get a 4" screen.  I fully expect the larger iPhone models to outsell the 4" models when they go on sale.

post #87 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakefinance View Post

That really goes both ways.  If you want a flagship iOS phone (not that there's any other type...) you have to get a 4" screen.  I fully expect the larger iPhone models to outsell the 4" models when they go on sale.

As long as they release a 5" as a complement to the 4", I'll be fine. Also note the Note didn't outsell the GS3 so I don't think a larger iPhone will outsell the 4" iPhone, all things being equal.
post #88 of 164

Doing some quick math, that means high end Androids make up 34% of their 81% market share, or 27.5% of the overall market...  Still higher than iOS.

post #89 of 164
do i smell jealousy?

post #90 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikeb85 View Post

Doing some quick math, that means high end Androids make up 34% of their 81% market share, or 27.5% of the overall market...  Still higher than iOS.

So any Android selling > $215 is high-end now?
post #91 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post


So any Android selling > $215 is high-end now?

 

Does the article say that's the cut off point for low to high end?  Furthermore, the ASPs in the article are the prices the manufacturer receives, not the retail prices.  

 

Android manufacturers take less profit than Apple as well (due to more competition in the space), so that drives ASPs down.  A high-end Android phone can have an ASP of $350-500 (Nexus 5 has high end specs but Google sells for only $350), whereas low-end Android phones drive the average down due to their sub-$200 cost...  

 

Maybe take a statistics or math course, and then you'll be able to deduce that the $215 spoken of isn't the price where low end becomes high end, but rather the average when you factor in the 66% of phones which cost around $100-$150....

post #92 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikeb85 View Post

Does the article say that's the cut off point for low to high end?  Furthermore, the ASPs in the article are the prices the manufacturer receives, not the retail prices.  

Android manufacturers take less profit than Apple as well (due to more competition in the space), so that drives ASPs down.  A high-end Android phone can have an ASP of $350-500 (Nexus 5 has high end specs but Google sells for only $350), whereas low-end Android phones drive the average down due to their sub-$200 cost...  

Maybe take a statistics or math course, and then you'll be able to deduce that the $215 spoken of isn't the price where low end becomes high end, but rather the average when you factor in the 66% of phones which cost around $100-$150....

So basically you're saying there is no mid range and only high/low end. Interesting deduction there.
post #93 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post


So basically you're saying there is no mid range and only high/low end. Interesting deduction there.

 

I don't know the last time you went shopping, but the mid-range is rather small, at least in the West.  High end phones are so subsidized that mid-range phones hardly make sense, and their presence in the market is minimal.  Non-subsidized 'high-end' Android phones can be had for $350 (Nexus 5) to $500 (multiple Chinese phones).  

post #94 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikeb85 View Post

I don't know the last time you went shopping, but the mid-range is rather small, at least in the West.  High end phones are so subsidized that mid-range phones hardly make sense, and their presence in the market is minimal.  Non-subsidized 'high-end' Android phones can be had for $350 (Nexus 5) to $500 (multiple Chinese phones).  

So what defines these market segments? Price? Spec list?
post #95 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post

So what defines these market segments? Price? Spec list?

DED 1wink.gif
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #96 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post


So what defines these market segments? Price? Spec list?

 

Spec list is likely the closest we can come, since some manufacturers sell at a loss (Google Nexus on the Play Store), and some sell at a huge margin (Apple).  I'd prefer to define it as the component cost, but those numbers aren't always available, and you can approximate it by comparing spec sheets. 

post #97 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikeb85 View Post

Spec list is likely the closest we can come, since some manufacturers sell at a loss (Google Nexus on the Play Store), and some sell at a huge margin (Apple).  I'd prefer to define it as the component cost, but those numbers aren't always available, and you can approximate it by comparing spec sheets. 

I doubt analysts use spec lists to define a smartphone let alone high-end vs low- end.
post #98 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikeb85 View Post
 

 

Spec list is likely the closest we can come, since some manufacturers sell at a loss (Google Nexus on the Play Store), and some sell at a huge margin (Apple).  I'd prefer to define it as the component cost, but those numbers aren't always available, and you can approximate it by comparing spec sheets. 

 

Google isn't the major player, Samsung is, the Nexus is a poor representation, Galaxy S4's and Note 3's sell for the same price as iPhones, apart from discounts as the S4 approaches end of life.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #99 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by KristianT View Post

do i smell jealousy?

I can't help but note

1->The android thing looks like a garbage can

2->The apple sign is inverted...like a mirror image....guess who mirrors apple move for move(hint:It's samsung)

post #100 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by bananaman View Post

I can't help but note
The android thing looks like a garbage can

Wow. . . you're right. I'm surprised no one else noticed /s.

Not sure it's an observation I'd trumpet. What's being put in the "garbage can"? Probably better to ignore obvious click-bait rather than point it out.
Edited by Gatorguy - 11/15/13 at 5:21am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #101 of 164
Heres' a link to a pretty interesting article I just finished perusing (kudos to 9to5). For those that don't venture beyond Apple-friendly sites you might have missed the news of a new Moto smartphone, the MotoG, at a shocking price... $179 off-contract! You could buy three of those for the price of one 5S.

Before you think the management at Motorola has gone completely nuts have a read for yourself.
http://www.mobileindustryreview.com/2013/11/moto-g-google-executing-nokias-strategy-better-even-nokia.html
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #102 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

[bland product placement] the MotoG, at a shocking price... $179 off-contract! You could buy three of those for the price of one 5S.

 

...or four of them for one Note 3.

 

Too bad Motorola are so bad with their hardware they are almost dead, reminds me of last ditch dumping of Blackberry PlayBooks and HP Touchpads.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #103 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

...or four of them for one Note 3.

Too bad Motorola are so bad with their hardware they are almost dead, reminds me of last ditch dumping of Blackberry PlayBooks and HP Touchpads.

The hardware is decent just look at the reviews for the Moto X and better than Samsung's they just are being out marketed by them.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #104 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

The hardware is decent just look at the reviews for the Moto X and better than Samsung's they just are being out marketed by them.

Wait until real life usage reveals them for the pieces of junk they are.

You can't price them that low without cutting corners somewhere.

So is Motorola a charity or a product dumper?
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #105 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Wait until real life usage reveals them for the pieces of junk they are.

You can't price them that low without cutting corners somewhere.

So is Motorola a charity or a product dumper?

Actually the positive reviews didn't start pouring in until after real life usage. The initial reviews were ho-hum.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #106 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Wait until real life usage reveals them for the pieces of junk they are.

You can't price them that low without cutting corners somewhere.

So is Motorola a charity or a product dumper?

A top of the line iPhone 64GB iPhone 5s is estimated at just $218 to build and that includes the manufacturing costs. The Moto G is probably more comparable to a two-year old 4s with a few of the more recent 5 components. With 16GB base memory, no expensive fingerprint reader, a less expensive display, less expensive processor and no LTE it's not hard to fathom a Moto G build cost in the $120 range or so IMO. Maybe even less. A classic case of making it up in volume?
Edited by Gatorguy - 11/15/13 at 6:51pm
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #107 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

Actually the positive reviews didn't start pouring in until after real life usage. The initial reviews were ho-hum.

For the money the HW is excellent. In many, many ways it's not on par with Apple's offerings but they aren't designed to compete directly with them. The quality is good enough that the main difference is the lack of profit they others get, which is unfortunate since it gives a poor idea of value.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

A top of the line iPhone 64GB iPhone 5s is estimated at just $218 to build and that includes the manufacturing costs. The Moto G is probably more comparable to a two-year old 4s with a few of the more recent 5 components. With 16GB base memory, no expensive fingerprint reader, a less expensive display, less expensive processor and no LTE it's not hard to fathom a Moto G build cost in the $120 range or so IMO. Maybe even less. A classic case of making it up in volume?

I really wish people didn't use those estimates. Have they ever included tye long term investments for getting mass market Retina IPS displays, Touch ID, or Apple's own chip design talent and IP?
post #108 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by akqies View Post


I really wish people didn't use those estimates. Have they ever included tye long term investments for getting mass market Retina IPS displays, Touch ID, or Apple's own chip design talent and IP?

Those things aren't specific to the iPhone are they? Wouldn't they figure into the broad category of R&D to be deducted from gross profits? Dunno.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #109 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

A top of the line iPhone 64GB iPhone 5s is estimated at just $218 to build and that includes the manufacturing costs

I'll give you $300, enough to cover your costs with a small profit.

When can I expect delivery?
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #110 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

I'll give you $300, enough to cover your costs with a small profit.

When can I expect delivery?

Hon Hai might be really happy to if Apple let 'em. $300 could be a lot more than Apple is buying them for.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #111 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Those things aren't specific to the iPhone are they? Wouldn't they figure into the broad category of R&D to be deducted from gross profits? Dunno.

In 2010 Retina was only on the iPhone 4 after a couple years of rumors about Apple investing in display vendors. That same year was the first year of an Apple A-chip years after buying PA Semi. This year the iPhone 5S is the only device with Touch ID.

Eventually this trickles down to other devices and the per unit cost for that initial investment approaches zero but that's what a good investment does. This is what Apple excels at and a big reason for their ability to produce higher quality items at a lower cost than comparable products while still making a healthy profit.
post #112 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Those things aren't specific to the iPhone are they? Wouldn't they figure into the broad category of R&D to be deducted from gross profits? Dunno.

It's like saying drugs cost < $1 to make, why are they so expensive? Testing, development, etc. who wants to pay $30 MM for the first pill.
post #113 of 164
The One+1 retails for $300, and has specs better than the best iPhone. How exactly are you people defining "Junk" phones? By Android standards, most iPhones are junk phones, since they are using 2 year old technology.

http://www.theverge.com/2014/4/25/5653254/spec-sheet-oneplus-one-smartphone-compared-nexus-5-oppo-n1-blu

2.5ghz Quad Core CPU
3 GIGs RAM
Retina-annihilating 1080p display
6 lens 13MP sony-sensor camera and 5MP front camera

$300 for 16 gigs, $350 for 64gig storage (they are not going to screw you over on storage like Apple does)

This will outperform the Nexus 5, and the Nexus 5 already outperforms the best iPhone. And for half the price.

Apple people seem to confuse "cheap" with "bad" and they are not necessarily the same thing. Apple way overcharges for the performance and features they deliver.
Edited by JeffDenver - 5/22/14 at 8:12am
post #114 of 164
Originally Posted by JeffDenver View Post
The One+1 retails for $300, and has specs better than the best iPhone. How exactly are you people defining "Junk" phones?

 

Phones that have to use their specs to be sold.

 
By Android standards, most iPhones are junk phones, since they are using 2 year old technology.

 

No, you don’t get it at all.

 
2.5ghz Quad Core CPU

 

And it will still lag. :lol:

 
3 GIGs RAM

 

So long, battery!

 
Retina-annihilating 1080p display

 

Annihilating in the sense that you can’t see the pixels anyway, and so therefore they’re completely and utterly useless and only serve to waste battery life and processing power, you mean?

 
6 lens 13MP sony-sensor camera and 5MP front camera

 

So… how big are the sensors? Megapixels are meaningless.

 
(they are not going to screw you over on storage like Apple does)

 

Years of studies show that consumers consistently report Apple’s upgrade pricing is affordable. Take your FUD and shove it.

 
This will outperform the Nexus 5, and the Nexus 5 already outperforms the best iPhone.

 

No, but keep the fantasy alive, I guess. 

 
Apple people seem to confuse "cheap" with "bad" and they are not necessarily the same thing. Apple way overcharges for the performance and features they deliver. 

 

No, but again, enjoy the fantasy world in which you live.

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 #115 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDenver View Post

The One+1 retails for $300, and has specs better than the best iPhone. How exactly are you people defining "Junk" phones? By Android standards, most iPhones are junk phones, since they are using 2 year old technology.

Apple people seem to confuse "cheap" with "bad" and they are not necessarily the same thing. Apple way overcharges for the performance and features they deliver.

Hi Jeff - do you understand the concept of an "average selling price"? A $300 phone does not really contribute to the plunging ASP of Android phones being $215 and falling.

The volume of Android phones are selling for much less than $215, counteracting the price of higher end models like Samsung's Galaxy S & Note, the best selling (by far) premium phones Android has, with retail prices that are more expensive than Apple's IPhones.

You might like the Nexus 5, but it isn't selling in any sort of meaningful volume. It's made by LG, a company that's losing money and selling relatively poor shipments.

HTC is similarly losing money and failing to ship in significant numbers.

In fact, the only real volume Android is seeing is in super cheap, low end junk phones that cost significantly less than $200. Enough less to counteract the 100M high end Samsung phones that are priced $500-$800.

Also: what about Apple's iPhone 5s is "two year old tech"?

Its ARMv8 64-bit A7, unmatched by any Android vendor at any price?
Touch ID that works, unlike anything on Android?
A camera with sophisticated flash that regularly beats all high end Android cameras in every pro review?
Its ability to run real apps and exclusive games, rather than just the wallpapers, spyware and second hand ports found in Google Play?

You really have it backward. Most Android phones are stuck running 2 year old versions of Android.
post #116 of 164
Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Phones that have to use their specs to be sold.

Yeah, how stupid of people to want more for their money. Whats wrong with them?

 

Quote:
No, you don’t get it at all.

The shiny logo is certainly worth all that extra money. Phones should be used primarily for jewelry and status, so it makes sense to have the shiniest logo. 

 

Quote:
And it will still lag.

Um...where? Where did you see lag in that video? It opened apps faster than the iPhone did. 

 

The processor in the Oneplus is faster than the one in the Nexus. And the Nexus is already spanking the iPhone. 

 

Quote:
So long, battery!

Because the iPhone has the longest battery life right? Oh....wait a minute

 

 

The Oneplus will have a 3100mAh battery, comparable to the G2 and M8 and S5. 

 

Quote:
Annihilating in the sense that you can’t see the pixels anyway, and so therefore they’re completely and utterly useless and only serve to waste battery life and processing power, you mean?

It has a big battery to compensate, and maybe you can't see pixels on the Retina display...I can see them just fine. But if you are satisfied with less, good for you. I am sure the fact that the iPhone has a teeny tiny display helps. 

 

Quote:
Years of studies show that consumers consistently report Apple’s upgrade pricing is affordable. 

LOL "It's ok to screw them over...people can afford it!"

 

Quote:
No, but keep the fantasy alive, I guess. 

It's right there in the video. You don't have to take my word for it. 

post #117 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

Hi Jeff - do you understand the concept of an "average selling price"? A $300 phone does not really contribute to the plunging ASP of Android phones being $215 and falling.

 

Prices fall while performance increases. 

 

"The Moto E is shockingly cheap and surprisingly good" - http://www.theverge.com/2014/5/13/5712900/motorola-moto-e-report

 

Quote:
Also: what about Apple's iPhone 5s is "two year old tech"?

No iPhone even has a 720p display yet. That is now considered low end on Android phones.

 

Quote:
You really have it backward. Most Android phones are stuck running 2 year old versions of Android.

This cracks me up every time I see it...Apple users think because their upgrade says "iOS7" that they are really getting iOS7. 

 

Only the newest phones will get that...older phones will get stripped down versions of the OS with missing features. And it usually runs slow anyway:

 

"ios 7 running slow want to go back" - https://discussions.apple.com/message/23080121#23080121

"iOS 7 on iPhone 4 Is “Unusable,” Customers Say" - http://news.softpedia.com/news/iOS-7-on-iPhone-4-Is-Unusable-Customers-Say-385141.shtml

"iOS 7 on iPhone 4 and 4S: What Features Will You Have?" - http://heavy.com/tech/2013/06/ios-7-download-iphone-4-4s-features/

 

It's just hilarious to us to see desperate attempts like this article to try to dredge up Android stereotypes that have not been true for years. 

post #118 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDenver View Post

The One+1 retails for $300, and has specs better than the best iPhone. How exactly are you people defining "Junk" phones? By Android standards, most iPhones are junk phones, since they are using 2 year old technology.

...
 
Retina-annihilating 1080p display
6 lens 13MP sony-sensor camera and 5MP front camera

 

"Junk" really boils down to "Unfit for purpose". Age doesn't come into it, unless that actually restricts or limits the product in a way that impairs its usefulness.

 

I think the phrase "Retina-annihilating" could more accurately be replaced with "needlessly over-specified". The point about the Retina display is that it is beyond the average person's detail resolving ability so still higher resolution is a waste of effort. If all you're interested in is bigger numbers then you will no doubt get really annoyed when manufacturer X comes out with a 2550p display and rains on your parade. Of course the fetishisation of raw numbers is an important draw for some purchasers, and bigger is always better ...

 

With a 6 lens, 13MP camera does it actually take better pictures? Or does this simply refer back to my previous point? Again, if numbers are the be-all and end-all then you should of course drop everything for the Nokia Lumia 1020 which has a 41MP camera which must mean that it takes pictures at least 3 times better than the phone you mentioned, no?

post #119 of 164
Originally Posted by JeffDenver View Post
Yeah, how stupid of people to want more for their money. Whats wrong with them?

 

What’s wrong with them is they’re not getting more by paying for “higher” specs.

 
The shiny logo is certainly worth all that extra money. Phones should be used primarily for jewelry and status, so it makes sense to have the shiniest logo.

 

Thanks for the psychotic break. Take it to some other website, please.

 

It opened apps faster than the iPhone did. 

 

WOW! GUYS, GUYS, COME QUICK! THIS PHONE… CAN OPEN APPS!

 
The processor in the Oneplus is faster than the one in the Nexus. And the Nexus is already spanking the iPhone. 

 

lol, sure thing. For both sentences.

 
Because the iPhone has the longest battery life right? Oh....wait a minute

 

Yes, we know you don’t have a clue what you’re arguing.

 

I can see them just fine.


Stop using your phone eight inches from your face, then. 20/10 vision can’t see them at normal use distance, so you’re either claiming you have sub-20/10 vision or you’re too close.

 
But if you are satisfied with less, good for you.

 

Seems you’re just fine with it. Enjoy your One+ 1!

 
I am sure the fact that the iPhone has a teeny tiny display helps. 

 

Yes, you’re a troll. We get it.

 
LOL "It's ok to screw them over...people can afford it!"
 

 

You don’t seem to have a clue what the word ‘affordable’ means.

 
It's right there in the video. You don't have to take my word for it.  

 

No. It isn’t.

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 #120 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by KiltedGreen View Post

 

"Junk" really boils down to "Unfit for purpose". Age doesn't come into it, unless that actually restricts or limits the product in a way that impairs its usefulness.

So what objective criteria is the article using to define "junk"? It sounds to me like it comes down to opinion. 

 

Quote:
I think the phrase "Retina-annihilating" could more accurately be replaced with "needlessly over-specified". 

Because getting more for your money is clearly an awful idea. You should get the minimum possible for your money. 

 

Quote:
The point about the Retina display is that it is beyond the average person's detail resolving ability so still higher resolution is a waste of effort.

So tell me, why was Retina needed at all then? Could people not read iPhones before the Retina display was introduced? Were pre-retina iPhones that awful?

 

Quote:
If all you're interested in is bigger numbers then you will no doubt get really annoyed when manufacturer X comes out with a 2550p display and rains on your parade.

Why would I be annoyed by it? Progress is a good thing. Especially if it does not impact performance or cost. I would not be annoyed by it, I would applaud it. 

 

Quote:
Of course the fetishisation of raw numbers is an important draw for some purchasers

...like the ppi claims of the Retina display? Or is it only fetishizaion when it is non-Apple products? Please clarify. 

 

When the retina Display was first introduced, Apple was wetting themselves over it. It was spammed in every article.  I smell a double standard. 

 


Edited by JeffDenver - 5/22/14 at 9:23am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • IDC data shows 66% of Android's 81% smartphone share are junk phones selling for $215
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › IDC data shows 66% of Android's 81% smartphone share are junk phones selling for $215