Keep in mind there was no iPhone release in China et al this year compared with same quarter last year. That launch, in 1 weekend sold 2 million iPhones in China alone, not to mention the next 2 weeks of stock-outs.
Not to mention that the majority of iPhones in China are "stuck" on 2G.
I will state it again for the record. Apple doesn't need an inexpensive iPhone, Apple needs an iPhone that supports China Mobile on 3G (TD-SCDMA) or even 4G (TD-LTE). As soon as Apple releases an iPhone with TD-LTE compatibility on China Mobile, sales will skyrocket in China. Then, one year later as the price is dropped and a new iPhone introduced more people will be able to afford an iPhone with TD-LTE compatibility.
Remember that as this revenue is reported, Samsung is about to release a new device, GS4. They also claim revenue on SHIPMENT into the channel not sales as APPL does. Front loading the channel is good for revenue reporting. -RJ
Has anyone actually used a Galaxy? My friends have them, and like them because they were cheap on contract and it's easy to replace them - because they fail a couple of times during a contract.
The OS is still inconsistent, choppy, kludgy, and basically cheap. There's a lot of the little things I take for granted on iOS are not in Android. Things like how after every web search the page looks like it's done rendering, you press a link, and then the page stutters and finally finishes rendering. Then you end up hitting the wrong link.
The hardware is creaky and cheap too, which is why my friends replace them every 6 - 9 months. Battery life is garbage. Camera sucks if conditions aren't perfect.
I'm not here to just focus on the suckage of Android or anything. I'm just curious how Samsung does so well when their solutions aren't that great. I mean at least Nokia and HTC have decent hardware.
There are a lot of first time buyers entering the market. Maybe it's just a case of Android being training wheels for iOS?
someone on my family plan has one. nice phone, but i'll stick with iphone 5
the plastic is more durable than the iphone 5 but the features are gimicky. the widgets rarely work right and i hate the GUI split of 7 home screens and an app drawer
Remember that as this revenue is reported, Samsung is about to release a new device, GS4. They also claim revenue on SHIPMENT into the channel not sales as APPL does. Front loading the channel is good for revenue reporting. -RJ
Apple also counts revenue from "shipments into the channel" as several others here have noted. I've no idea how the story about Apple only counting sales as devices sold to an end-user ever got started, but apparently there's a lot of people who mistakenly believe that.
Strangely, the only information about Samsung's financial performance I can actually see on their website is their canned press release. Any other page I have attempted to review has timed out despite my having attempted multiple "tricks."
I guess it's you and a few other millions trying to access that page.
Apple also counts revenue from "shipments into the channel" as several others here have noted. I've no idea how the story about Apple only counting sales as devices sold to an end-user ever got started, but apparently there's a lot of people who mistakenly believe that.
a
Not true. Apple acknowleges how many phones are in the channel because inventory factors into their costs and shows availability of supply. On more than one occasion both Cook and Jobs before him explained the difference.
Can we stop making fun of phablets and seriously consider making profitable high end phones with larger screens?
Say 1920x1080 resolution. Next iPhone screen to be at least 4.5" but to be around 4.8" would be nice.
A bigger one for those who like phablets at least 5.5", but around 5.8" also same resolution at 1920x1080. Look the Galaxy Note and Note II are very profitable. You're missing that market completely.
As iPhone 5 (as of X'mas 2012) owner traveling to Asia this Jan 2013, I got screen size envy when seeing bigger screens. Love the iTunes App ecosystem, but 4" screen wasn't enough of an upgrade. Not interested in a low end iPhone, which isn't as profitable. If Apple wants to beat its profit margin and help its stock. Make a bigger screen in addition to a phablet.
Make two (high end) or even three phones (two high end and one low end) isn't spreading one self too thin (unlike HTC does with too many phones). Offering only one type of upgrade phone per year isn't enough for a company of your size. There is no Goldilocks size phone. Instead the market is the three bears which your competitor seems to be satisfying their needs.
Sincerely iPhone 5 owner (previously iPhone 4 , prior to that iPhone3G owner) . Apple stock holder since 2007.
Not true. Apple acknowleges how many phones are in the channel because inventory factors into their costs and shows availability of supply. On more than one occasion both Cook and Jobs before him explained the difference.
Of course it's true. It's such an old and rehashed discussion it's not even worthy of disagreement anymore. Apple's reported sales each quarter include "channel sales", shipments made to retailers and other resellers but not yet sold to an end-user. That Apple will also estimate the existing channel inventory each quarter doesn't change a thing about how Apple officially counts sales, which include channel shipments. That you would say it's not true speaks directly to my comment about some people erroneously believing Apple's reported sales numbers are only to end-users.
Yes it would be interesting to some of us to get channel inventory numbers from other vendors too, as well as returns/refurbs if they really want to be transparent. Apple gets props for reporting estimated channel numbers where others do not.
I don't know that anyone reports the number of devices returned do they, nor break out the revenue/numbers from refurbished sales? I think that would give a hint to the return and failure rates, an area where I suspect Apple also shines compared to others but lacking proof to claim it as a fact.
Because Samsung does not break out its smartphone sales, it's impossible to compare exactly how many high-end handsets the company shipped in comparison to Apple's iPhone.
But soon we'll know exactly how many Apple A7 chips Samsung *didn't* make for Apple.
And how many iPod touch, iPhone, and iPad touchscreen panels Samsung *didn't* make.
Billions cut off to Samsung, billions going to TSMC, Sharp, etc.
"A billion here, a billion there, pretty soon you're talking real money."
Has anyone actually used a Galaxy? My friends have them, and like them because they were cheap on contract and it's easy to replace them - because they fail a couple of times during a contract.
The OS is still inconsistent, choppy, kludgy, and basically cheap. There's a lot of the little things I take for granted on iOS are not in Android. Things like how after every web search the page looks like it's done rendering, you press a link, and then the page stutters and finally finishes rendering. Then you end up hitting the wrong link.
The hardware is creaky and cheap too, which is why my friends replace them every 6 - 9 months. Battery life is garbage. Camera sucks if conditions aren't perfect.
I'm not here to just focus on the suckage of Android or anything. I'm just curious how Samsung does so well when their solutions aren't that great. I mean at least Nokia and HTC have decent hardware.
There are a lot of first time buyers entering the market. Maybe it's just a case of Android being training wheels for iOS?
This is just such crock! You may well prefer iPhones, but you can't just make up facts to rubbish competitors!
I have been using the Galaxy line now for close to 3 years. The original Galaxy S for 2+ years and now the S3 for just under a year. The Galaxy S phones cost just as much as the iPhone on contract. They don't keep failing every 6 months. They are made of plastic, and I have no problem with that since it doesn't break or "creak". The S3's back is very slippery and for the first time, I had to get a case for an Android phone.
Battery life on the Vibrant was rather poor, but since it's replaceable, it's not a problem. When I got the S3, I got 3 extra batteries and an external charger for $10 on ebay. As it turned out, the S3 battery lasts me for the whole day, so I rarely use my extra batteries. But every once in a while if I don't keep the phone for charging overnight, by next morning, my battery has dropped down to the 20s. So I simply replace the battery. BTW, I always have the display at maximum brightness, my GPS enabled, background syncing enabled, 4G enabled etc. There's not much point in having a smartphone if I have to turn everything off and not get Google Now notification for example.
There is nothing wrong with the camera either for what it is - a smartphone camera. Great for casual photography. I'm an amateur photographer and don't even use a P&S, let alone a smartphone camera for any serious photography. I look at smartphone camera photos and they all look awful to me. Either lacking in detail, highlights clipped, over sharpened in software, purple fringes, too much noise in low light conditions. And that's fine. With a small sensor, there's only so much you can do. It's great for taking casual photos and casual sharing on the phone. And nothing wrong with that, but let's not get carried over.
Can we stop making fun of phablets and seriously consider making profitable high end phones with larger screens?
Say 1920x1080 resolution. Next iPhone screen to be at least 4.5" but to be around 4.8" would be nice.
A bigger one for those who like phablets at least 5.5", but around 5.8" also same resolution at 1920x1080. Look the Galaxy Note and Note II are very profitable. You're missing that market completely.
As iPhone 5 (as of X'mas 2012) owner traveling to Asia this Jan 2013, I got screen size envy when seeing bigger screens. Love the iTunes App ecosystem, but 4" screen wasn't enough of an upgrade. Not interested in a low end iPhone, which isn't as profitable. If Apple wants to beat its profit margin and help its stock. Make a bigger screen in addition to a phablet.
Make two (high end) or even three phones (two high end and one low end) isn't spreading one self too thin (unlike HTC does with too many phones). Offering only one type of upgrade phone per year isn't enough for a company of your size. There is no Goldilocks size phone. Instead the market is the three bears which your competitor seems to be satisfying their needs.
Sincerely iPhone 5 owner (previously iPhone 4 , prior to that iPhone3G owner) . Apple stock holder since 2007.
Dear dig48109,
the top selling smartphones have screens the same size as the iPhone 4, 4S and 5, because they ARE the top selling smartphones.
Sincerely Galaxy Nexus, Nexus 4, iPhone 4, iPhone 5, Ford Falcon, Bosch Refrigerator, Blanco stove, X-Box and approximately 42 rolls of Kirkland bath tissue owner.
Remember that as this revenue is reported, Samsung is about to release a new device, GS4. They also claim revenue on SHIPMENT into the channel not sales as APPL does. Front loading the channel is good for revenue reporting. -RJ
This is getting old. It was okay (and perfectly valid) to question shipping numbers vs sold numbers when they first started. But the products are not exactly going into a bit bucket. Resellers are not going to keep ordering new stock if they haven't finished moving earlier stock. Also, it is quite impressive that the quarter before a major release, in which iPhones do poorly due to anticipation of the new model, Samsung has record profits. I expect this speaks to both the possible presence of ill-informed customers and to the advantage of having a breadth of products that appeal to a wide ranging people.
Associated Press is being paid off by Samsung to run sponsored tweets. This story originated with the AP and was picked up by every major and minor news outlet and aggregator. The fact is, it is a by-product of Samsung's campaign to smear Apple!
Comments
Samsung is doomed.
Not to mention that the majority of iPhones in China are "stuck" on 2G.
I will state it again for the record. Apple doesn't need an inexpensive iPhone, Apple needs an iPhone that supports China Mobile on 3G (TD-SCDMA) or even 4G (TD-LTE). As soon as Apple releases an iPhone with TD-LTE compatibility on China Mobile, sales will skyrocket in China. Then, one year later as the price is dropped and a new iPhone introduced more people will be able to afford an iPhone with TD-LTE compatibility.
The article is flame bait. Moving on.
Screw Samsung.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MessagePad2100
Has anyone actually used a Galaxy? My friends have them, and like them because they were cheap on contract and it's easy to replace them - because they fail a couple of times during a contract.
The OS is still inconsistent, choppy, kludgy, and basically cheap. There's a lot of the little things I take for granted on iOS are not in Android. Things like how after every web search the page looks like it's done rendering, you press a link, and then the page stutters and finally finishes rendering. Then you end up hitting the wrong link.
The hardware is creaky and cheap too, which is why my friends replace them every 6 - 9 months. Battery life is garbage. Camera sucks if conditions aren't perfect.
I'm not here to just focus on the suckage of Android or anything. I'm just curious how Samsung does so well when their solutions aren't that great. I mean at least Nokia and HTC have decent hardware.
There are a lot of first time buyers entering the market. Maybe it's just a case of Android being training wheels for iOS?
someone on my family plan has one. nice phone, but i'll stick with iphone 5
the plastic is more durable than the iphone 5 but the features are gimicky. the widgets rarely work right and i hate the GUI split of 7 home screens and an app drawer
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtonrj
Remember that as this revenue is reported, Samsung is about to release a new device, GS4. They also claim revenue on SHIPMENT into the channel not sales as APPL does. Front loading the channel is good for revenue reporting. -RJ
Apple also counts revenue from "shipments into the channel" as several others here have noted. I've no idea how the story about Apple only counting sales as devices sold to an end-user ever got started, but apparently there's a lot of people who mistakenly believe that.
Conspiracy, I Say!
I guess it's you and a few other millions trying to access that page.
Not true. Apple acknowleges how many phones are in the channel because inventory factors into their costs and shows availability of supply. On more than one occasion both Cook and Jobs before him explained the difference.
Dear Apple,
Can we stop making fun of phablets and seriously consider making profitable high end phones with larger screens?
Say 1920x1080 resolution. Next iPhone screen to be at least 4.5" but to be around 4.8" would be nice.
A bigger one for those who like phablets at least 5.5", but around 5.8" also same resolution at 1920x1080. Look the Galaxy Note and Note II are very profitable. You're missing that market completely.
As iPhone 5 (as of X'mas 2012) owner traveling to Asia this Jan 2013, I got screen size envy when seeing bigger screens. Love the iTunes App ecosystem, but 4" screen wasn't enough of an upgrade. Not interested in a low end iPhone, which isn't as profitable. If Apple wants to beat its profit margin and help its stock. Make a bigger screen in addition to a phablet.
Make two (high end) or even three phones (two high end and one low end) isn't spreading one self too thin (unlike HTC does with too many phones). Offering only one type of upgrade phone per year isn't enough for a company of your size. There is no Goldilocks size phone. Instead the market is the three bears which your competitor seems to be satisfying their needs.
Sincerely iPhone 5 owner (previously iPhone 4 , prior to that iPhone3G owner) . Apple stock holder since 2007.
Originally Posted by dig48109
Sincerely iPhone 5 owner (previously iPhone 4 , prior to that iPhone3G owner) . Apple stock holder since 2007.
Rules #4 & 5.
Edit - next post
Quote:
Originally Posted by genovelle
a
Not true. Apple acknowleges how many phones are in the channel because inventory factors into their costs and shows availability of supply. On more than one occasion both Cook and Jobs before him explained the difference.
Of course it's true. It's such an old and rehashed discussion it's not even worthy of disagreement anymore. Apple's reported sales each quarter include "channel sales", shipments made to retailers and other resellers but not yet sold to an end-user. That Apple will also estimate the existing channel inventory each quarter doesn't change a thing about how Apple officially counts sales, which include channel shipments. That you would say it's not true speaks directly to my comment about some people erroneously believing Apple's reported sales numbers are only to end-users.
Yes it would be interesting to some of us to get channel inventory numbers from other vendors too, as well as returns/refurbs if they really want to be transparent. Apple gets props for reporting estimated channel numbers where others do not.
I don't know that anyone reports the number of devices returned do they, nor break out the revenue/numbers from refurbished sales? I think that would give a hint to the return and failure rates, an area where I suspect Apple also shines compared to others but lacking proof to claim it as a fact.
Because Samsung does not break out its smartphone sales, it's impossible to compare exactly how many high-end handsets the company shipped in comparison to Apple's iPhone.
But soon we'll know exactly how many Apple A7 chips Samsung *didn't* make for Apple.
And how many iPod touch, iPhone, and iPad touchscreen panels Samsung *didn't* make.
Billions cut off to Samsung, billions going to TSMC, Sharp, etc.
"A billion here, a billion there, pretty soon you're talking real money."
- Senator Everett Dirksen
Quote:
Originally Posted by MessagePad2100
Has anyone actually used a Galaxy? My friends have them, and like them because they were cheap on contract and it's easy to replace them - because they fail a couple of times during a contract.
The OS is still inconsistent, choppy, kludgy, and basically cheap. There's a lot of the little things I take for granted on iOS are not in Android. Things like how after every web search the page looks like it's done rendering, you press a link, and then the page stutters and finally finishes rendering. Then you end up hitting the wrong link.
The hardware is creaky and cheap too, which is why my friends replace them every 6 - 9 months. Battery life is garbage. Camera sucks if conditions aren't perfect.
I'm not here to just focus on the suckage of Android or anything. I'm just curious how Samsung does so well when their solutions aren't that great. I mean at least Nokia and HTC have decent hardware.
There are a lot of first time buyers entering the market. Maybe it's just a case of Android being training wheels for iOS?
This is just such crock! You may well prefer iPhones, but you can't just make up facts to rubbish competitors!
I have been using the Galaxy line now for close to 3 years. The original Galaxy S for 2+ years and now the S3 for just under a year. The Galaxy S phones cost just as much as the iPhone on contract. They don't keep failing every 6 months. They are made of plastic, and I have no problem with that since it doesn't break or "creak". The S3's back is very slippery and for the first time, I had to get a case for an Android phone.
Battery life on the Vibrant was rather poor, but since it's replaceable, it's not a problem. When I got the S3, I got 3 extra batteries and an external charger for $10 on ebay. As it turned out, the S3 battery lasts me for the whole day, so I rarely use my extra batteries. But every once in a while if I don't keep the phone for charging overnight, by next morning, my battery has dropped down to the 20s. So I simply replace the battery. BTW, I always have the display at maximum brightness, my GPS enabled, background syncing enabled, 4G enabled etc. There's not much point in having a smartphone if I have to turn everything off and not get Google Now notification for example.
There is nothing wrong with the camera either for what it is - a smartphone camera. Great for casual photography. I'm an amateur photographer and don't even use a P&S, let alone a smartphone camera for any serious photography. I look at smartphone camera photos and they all look awful to me. Either lacking in detail, highlights clipped, over sharpened in software, purple fringes, too much noise in low light conditions. And that's fine. With a small sensor, there's only so much you can do. It's great for taking casual photos and casual sharing on the phone. And nothing wrong with that, but let's not get carried over.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dig48109
Dear Apple,
Can we stop making fun of phablets and seriously consider making profitable high end phones with larger screens?
Say 1920x1080 resolution. Next iPhone screen to be at least 4.5" but to be around 4.8" would be nice.
A bigger one for those who like phablets at least 5.5", but around 5.8" also same resolution at 1920x1080. Look the Galaxy Note and Note II are very profitable. You're missing that market completely.
As iPhone 5 (as of X'mas 2012) owner traveling to Asia this Jan 2013, I got screen size envy when seeing bigger screens. Love the iTunes App ecosystem, but 4" screen wasn't enough of an upgrade. Not interested in a low end iPhone, which isn't as profitable. If Apple wants to beat its profit margin and help its stock. Make a bigger screen in addition to a phablet.
Make two (high end) or even three phones (two high end and one low end) isn't spreading one self too thin (unlike HTC does with too many phones). Offering only one type of upgrade phone per year isn't enough for a company of your size. There is no Goldilocks size phone. Instead the market is the three bears which your competitor seems to be satisfying their needs.
Sincerely iPhone 5 owner (previously iPhone 4 , prior to that iPhone3G owner) . Apple stock holder since 2007.
Dear dig48109,
the top selling smartphones have screens the same size as the iPhone 4, 4S and 5, because they ARE the top selling smartphones.
Sincerely Galaxy Nexus, Nexus 4, iPhone 4, iPhone 5, Ford Falcon, Bosch Refrigerator, Blanco stove, X-Box and approximately 42 rolls of Kirkland bath tissue owner.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtonrj
Remember that as this revenue is reported, Samsung is about to release a new device, GS4. They also claim revenue on SHIPMENT into the channel not sales as APPL does. Front loading the channel is good for revenue reporting. -RJ
This is getting old. It was okay (and perfectly valid) to question shipping numbers vs sold numbers when they first started. But the products are not exactly going into a bit bucket. Resellers are not going to keep ordering new stock if they haven't finished moving earlier stock. Also, it is quite impressive that the quarter before a major release, in which iPhones do poorly due to anticipation of the new model, Samsung has record profits. I expect this speaks to both the possible presence of ill-informed customers and to the advantage of having a breadth of products that appeal to a wide ranging people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInvestor
Associated Press is being paid off by Samsung to run sponsored tweets. This story originated with the AP and was picked up by every major and minor news outlet and aggregator. The fact is, it is a by-product of Samsung's campaign to smear Apple!
Paranoia - it looks like this.