I think that practically anybody could design and make a "flagship" Android phone.
Step one is simply deciding upon what kind of specs it will have. Just grab whatever CPU is currently popular for Android phones and use that. Overclock it a little bit. Don't worry if the phone gets somewhat hot. Fandroids can always wear gloves if needed. It's all about having large numbers on your spec sheet, because that's what counts, and anything else is secondary. Give the phone a bit more RAM than what is currently common, since Fandroids will love that, even though they're apparently unable to notice how laggy Android is, even with the most powerful CPU, and no matter how much RAM their phone has. All of the specs in the world won't help the phone perform good, because it's bogged down by a horrible mess of an OS, but the specs will at least be ammunition for the Fandroid phone owner when they are on forums, trying to defend their platform while they are busily deflecting away from other issues.
Give it a fairly large screen, at least 7", the bigger, the better. Always remember who your customer base is. These are obviously people that are trying to compensate for something, because when your phone is almost as big as your head, something is clearly wrong.
Sit down, relax and draw a phone design that is competitive with other Android phones. That should take about 15-20 minutes, including a bathroom break. Use cheap feeling plastic, as we should stick with what Fandroids are used to, and we don't want to push them out of their comfort zone too much.
Get some Asian contractor to throw all of the parts together, and to actually assemble the phone for you. Don't worry about how all of the different components will work together, or if it will have any effect on battery life. If there's any issue with the phone after it's released, just promise that you'll eventually fix it in some future OS update. Fandroids will easily fall for that one. And if you want your phone to stand out even further from other Android phones, then just try to add one more feature on your phone that other Android phones do not have yet. For inspiration, just mimic whatever Apple did last, but hasn't yet made its way to all Android phones yet. Something like a fingerprint ID sensor might be a good idea for your phone. Use a cheap sensor, as it doesn't matter if it works good or not. The main thing that matters is that it's on your phone.
The last step is marketing your newly completed, wonderful Android phone. Don't make any commercials that tout any of the features on your phone, that is taboo. Stick with making fun of other people and brands, Apple is always a good and popular target. A commercial featuring a flock of sheep might be a good idea. Just make sure that your phone is cheap enough to attract the crowd that you are targeting, and you're pretty much set. Lastly, hire a whole bunch of shills to promote your product on various internet forums. Pay them by the post. You too can become a successful Android phone maker if you follow the simple steps outlined in this post.
Does anyone else think this obsession with selling THE MOST phones is bit silly. If a company can make devices, sell them, and stay afloat, isn't that enough?
Blackberry was still selling millions of phones and they got hammered so hard. It seems like, as a society, we can't keep up this outlook on the economy, it isn't sustainable. We can't expect growth to last forever, won't we need to balance out eventually?
That's strictly Wall Street's view of how companies should go about selling products. All Wall Street talks about is growth. Big growth numbers. They claim that once a company stops growing it not worth anything which is about as stupid a way to value a company as anyone can imagine. I'm sure any company will run rather quickly into growth problems due to the finite number of humans on the planet. It would be far better for any company to hold sustained market share for ten years than to have explosive growth over two years. Wall Street is run by a bunch of greedy retards who care very little about the stability of a company the stock market or the economy. These people seem to enjoy market imbalance so that it moves stocks up and down like a roller coaster instead of merely staying relatively level. Samsung shot its entire load last year as far as growth is concerned and now it can only go down because that level of growth absolutely can't be sustained.
You mention BlackBerry, but there was also Nokia and Palm who had explosive growth but both over-reached and couldn't maintain. In most cases huge amounts of market share taxes a company's finances in the long run because they usually have to have low-cost products to grab a lot of market share and it doesn't pay off if the high-end product isn't selling well. That was Nokia's problem. So, whenever the analysts keep calling for Apple to sell low-cost products to gain market share they're just plain stupid. Apple will easily survive without anywhere's near major market share. Apple won't die if another company has a hit product for six months and sells more units. A company's focus should be on long-term survival and not from quarter to quarter.
Staying afloat or a little above that is a fine business model for a company, but not for Wall Street. They're always looking for companies to double down and go all out in spurts but that's just being greedy. As far as I'm concerned, consumers come first. If you offer a good product and services, consumers will eventually come. Maybe not everyone but many will. Google's idea to capture every human on the planet with Android devices is just plain foolish and greedy. I think their goal is too ambitious. The Android platform is really getting out of hand due to all those devices being at so many hardware levels and that's why its so hard for Google to upgrade hundreds of millions of devices within a short a time period like Apple does with the iPhone.
This whole idea of companies having to have major market share doesn't make any sort of sense. Companies need to keep their books balanced, first and foremost. Over-reaching is very risky but apparently the big investors like companies to take big risks to make big gains. Now BlackBerry has to lay off 40% of its workforce and I know Nokia also had to lay off a huge amount of employees when their once huge market share company went bust. Naturally the big investors on Wall Street don't give a damn, but it's really bad business to run the stock market the way it is being run. Companies should never have astronomical P/E ratios because actual money really doesn't exist. It's more like a false sense of growth or maybe it should be called empty growth. As you say, such high market share greed isn't sustainable and that's why our economy is so messed up.
For Apple's sake, they'd best add a larger category and continue producing the 4-inch iPhone, rather than replace it.
Steve Jobs is dead and I know that but he always wanted to keep the product line simple or with as few products as possible. Definitely the 4" iPhone should stay. Adding another iPhone line might be somewhat complicated. Apple might have to realign all their iPhone prices and it adds more consumer confusion as to which model to buy. If a larger iPhone is added at this point then there would be three distinct types of iPhones if you figure in the polycarb iPhone. I'm not sure if Apple should do that. I think two iPhone models should be enough. I'm really not all that keen on Apple having a monster display smartphone. The largest size I think Apple should go is 4.2" or 4.3" but nowhere's near 4.8" or 5". Apple isn't Samsung and I don't think Apple should listen to Wall Street telling them how to design their products. I don't think a larger display is worth it just to grab 10% more market share.
Yep, remember the BMW 318....that was like the yuppie car of the 80's. That's when Cadillacs and Town Cars were all over the place!
It's weird their flagship phones are all jumbo sized. Their smaller models are mid-tiered, or cheap junk. It's like they're trying to associate size with premium-ness. Like America's Big Three once did.
The best anything in the world is not the most common. Think of cars. Best as in high performance, sophistication, functionality, beauty, and luxury. It also comes with higher cost, but quality ir remembered long after price is forgotten. Argg, crash, I fell off my high horse.
I think that practically anybody could design and make a "flagship" Android phone.
Step one is simply deciding upon what kind of specs it will have. Just grab whatever CPU is currently popular for Android phones and use that. Overclock it a little bit. Don't worry if the phone gets somewhat hot. Fandroids can always wear gloves if needed. It's all about having large numbers on your spec sheet, because that's what counts, and anything else is secondary. Give the phone a bit more RAM than what is currently common, since Fandroids will love that, even though they're apparently unable to notice how laggy Android is, even with the most powerful CPU, and no matter how much RAM their phone has. All of the specs in the world won't help the phone perform good, because it's bogged down by a horrible mess of an OS, but the specs will at least be ammunition for the Fandroid phone owner when they are on forums, trying to defend their platform while they are busily deflecting away from other issues.
Give it a fairly large screen, at least 7", the bigger, the better. Always remember who your customer base is. These are obviously people that are trying to compensate for something, because when your phone is almost as big as your head, something is clearly wrong.
Sit down, relax and draw a phone design that is competitive with other Android phones. That should take about 15-20 minutes, including a bathroom break. Use cheap feeling plastic, as we should stick with what Fandroids are used to, and we don't want to push them out of their comfort zone too much.
Get some Asian contractor to throw all of the parts together, and to actually assemble the phone for you. Don't worry about how all of the different components will work together, or if it will have any effect on battery life. If there's any issue with the phone after it's released, just promise that you'll eventually fix it in some future OS update. Fandroids will easily fall for that one. And if you want your phone to stand out even further from other Android phones, then just try to add one more feature on your phone that other Android phones do not have yet. For inspiration, just mimic whatever Apple did last, but hasn't yet made its way to all Android phones yet. Something like a fingerprint ID sensor might be a good idea for your phone. Use a cheap sensor, as it doesn't matter if it works good or not. The main thing that matters is that it's on your phone.
The last step is marketing your newly completed, wonderful Android phone. Don't make any commercials that tout any of the features on your phone, that is taboo. Stick with making fun of other people and brands, Apple is always a good and popular target. A commercial featuring a flock of sheep might be a good idea. Just make sure that your phone is cheap enough to attract the crowd that you are targeting, and you're pretty much set. Lastly, hire a whole bunch of shills to promote your product on various internet forums. Pay them by the post. You too can become a successful Android phone maker if you follow the simple steps outlined in this post.
I agree with your comment. Because Android is free, I think this is how a lot of manufacturers (Blu, Micromax) comes to mind, manufactures their phones.
[QUOTE]For inspiration, just mimic whatever Apple did last, but hasn't yet made its way to all Android phones yet. Something like a fingerprint ID sensor might be a good idea for your phone. Use a cheap sensor, as it doesn't matter if it works good or not. The main thing that matters is that it's on your phone.[/QUOTE]
I suspect you will be spot on there. The reviews will all say: like the iphone sensor.
What this tells us is that Apple is behind the curve. There are a few supply-chain-based rumors on here already claiming a big-screen iPhone is in the works for next year.
Apple usually steps into a market late, after it assesses the lay of the land. Then it comes in and hits a home run. I wouldn't be surprised if we see a bigger-screen iPhone soon.
I'm with you thinking the 6 will be bigger, but disagree that this article/research suggests Apple is behind the curve? Why did Samsung and HTC feel the need to reduce the specs in the mini versions of their flagship? Fear of canabalizing themselves. Something Apple is not afraid of.
If phones like the GS3 and GS4 Mini were actually just smaller versions of the real GS3/GS4 then I think they would have sold. The problem (as mentioned) is the Mini's were junk phones. They had crappy screens, slower processors, poor cameras - everything about them was cheap.
Samsung was trying to capitalize on the success and brand recognition of the GS3/GS4 by implying the Mini was "just as good but smaller" when they clearly weren't.
So, what you're saying is, these Android vendors can't figure out why the size of your cock at an orgy only counts when it's hard.
Who wants a flaccid Android phone that they can't brag about? The high-end Android phones only sell based on specs (bragging rights) and screen sizes.
Meanwhile, the flagship iPhone is what it is. It's a premium, rock-hard dong that's a great performer for its size. You know... it isn't the size of your boat that matters most, it's the motions in the oceans your boat is capable of.
If phones like the GS3 and GS4 Mini were actually just smaller versions of the real GS3/GS4 then I think they would have sold. The problem (as mentioned) is the Mini's were junk phones. They had crappy screens, slower processors, poor cameras - everything about them was cheap.
Samsung was trying to capitalize on the success and brand recognition of the GS3/GS4 by implying the Mini was "just as good but smaller" when they clearly weren't.
The reason Android phones went large in the first place was so a larger battery could be used to get around the problem of poor battery life. Battery life still seems to be an issue because they aren't able to produce a 'mini' version without slowing down the processor and removing memory etc.
If phones like the GS3 and GS4 Mini were actually just smaller versions of the real GS3/GS4 then I think they would have sold. The problem (as mentioned) is the Mini's were junk phones. They had crappy screens, slower processors, poor cameras - everything about them was cheap.
Samsung was trying to capitalize on the success and brand recognition of the GS3/GS4 by implying the Mini was "just as good but smaller" when they clearly weren't.
And yet we have people complaining about the 5C being last years phone as if no other manufacturer does this. And still the 5C would probably wipe the floor with most of these cheaper/smaller Android phones.
People buy the iPhone for iOS and the iPhone build quality.
We are limited to a 4" screen because that is the only thing that Apple offers.
To make this comparison to Android phones based on screen size is silly. What it says is that, given the option, most people prefer a bigger screen.
What this tells us is that Apple is behind the curve. There are a few supply-chain-based rumors on here already claiming a big-screen iPhone is in the works for next year.
Apple usually steps into a market late, after it assesses the lay of the land. Then it comes in and hits a home run. I wouldn't be surprised if we see a bigger-screen iPhone soon.
Personally, I like a smaller phone because of pocket-ability. I'd go for a small Android phone, myself.
I don't think it's quite that simple.
The large screen Android phones have sold reasonably well because that's the only thing that Android makers have to talk about. So they have differentiated their product based on size - and are capturing people who need a reason not to buy iPhones -- or who would never have bought an iPhone, anyway. It's not at all clear that a larger iPhone would sell a lot more (or any more) than the current sizes.
Apple started with only a single phone. When you're a small player breaking into a new market, having a proliferation of products can create problems for you and your customers. It's far easier to focus on a single product and doing it extremely well.
Then, as your business grows, it becomes large enough to support multiple products. The iPad was joined by the iPad Mini. The iPhone line was converted to a 'good, better, best' marketing strategy where last year's phones move down in the hierarchy - and even that was replaced with a strategy where both 'better' and 'best' were new phones.
Eventually, the business gets large enough that even a niche within the market becomes large enough to support a product. I suspect that we're close to that point now. Even if a 4.5-5" iPhone is a small percentage of iPhone sales, it would probably be large enough to support having one. Therefore, I expect to see a larger iPhone as an option in the next year or two, but I don't expect it to replace the current 4" phone (which could conceivably grow to perhaps 4.2" without changing the exterior dimensions).
Esto es lo que importa "iPhone users should be able to operate their devices with just one hand. The screen size of the iPhone 5, 5s, and 5c allows most users to hold the device in one hand and access each part of the screen with a thumb." No es necesario tener una pantalla más grande!
Comments
I think that practically anybody could design and make a "flagship" Android phone.
Step one is simply deciding upon what kind of specs it will have. Just grab whatever CPU is currently popular for Android phones and use that. Overclock it a little bit. Don't worry if the phone gets somewhat hot. Fandroids can always wear gloves if needed. It's all about having large numbers on your spec sheet, because that's what counts, and anything else is secondary. Give the phone a bit more RAM than what is currently common, since Fandroids will love that, even though they're apparently unable to notice how laggy Android is, even with the most powerful CPU, and no matter how much RAM their phone has. All of the specs in the world won't help the phone perform good, because it's bogged down by a horrible mess of an OS, but the specs will at least be ammunition for the Fandroid phone owner when they are on forums, trying to defend their platform while they are busily deflecting away from other issues.
Give it a fairly large screen, at least 7", the bigger, the better. Always remember who your customer base is. These are obviously people that are trying to compensate for something, because when your phone is almost as big as your head, something is clearly wrong.
Sit down, relax and draw a phone design that is competitive with other Android phones. That should take about 15-20 minutes, including a bathroom break. Use cheap feeling plastic, as we should stick with what Fandroids are used to, and we don't want to push them out of their comfort zone too much.
Get some Asian contractor to throw all of the parts together, and to actually assemble the phone for you. Don't worry about how all of the different components will work together, or if it will have any effect on battery life. If there's any issue with the phone after it's released, just promise that you'll eventually fix it in some future OS update. Fandroids will easily fall for that one. And if you want your phone to stand out even further from other Android phones, then just try to add one more feature on your phone that other Android phones do not have yet. For inspiration, just mimic whatever Apple did last, but hasn't yet made its way to all Android phones yet. Something like a fingerprint ID sensor might be a good idea for your phone. Use a cheap sensor, as it doesn't matter if it works good or not. The main thing that matters is that it's on your phone.
The last step is marketing your newly completed, wonderful Android phone. Don't make any commercials that tout any of the features on your phone, that is taboo. Stick with making fun of other people and brands, Apple is always a good and popular target. A commercial featuring a flock of sheep might be a good idea. Just make sure that your phone is cheap enough to attract the crowd that you are targeting, and you're pretty much set. Lastly, hire a whole bunch of shills to promote your product on various internet forums. Pay them by the post. You too can become a successful Android phone maker if you follow the simple steps outlined in this post.
Does anyone else think this obsession with selling THE MOST phones is bit silly. If a company can make devices, sell them, and stay afloat, isn't that enough?
Blackberry was still selling millions of phones and they got hammered so hard. It seems like, as a society, we can't keep up this outlook on the economy, it isn't sustainable. We can't expect growth to last forever, won't we need to balance out eventually?
That's strictly Wall Street's view of how companies should go about selling products. All Wall Street talks about is growth. Big growth numbers. They claim that once a company stops growing it not worth anything which is about as stupid a way to value a company as anyone can imagine. I'm sure any company will run rather quickly into growth problems due to the finite number of humans on the planet. It would be far better for any company to hold sustained market share for ten years than to have explosive growth over two years. Wall Street is run by a bunch of greedy retards who care very little about the stability of a company the stock market or the economy. These people seem to enjoy market imbalance so that it moves stocks up and down like a roller coaster instead of merely staying relatively level. Samsung shot its entire load last year as far as growth is concerned and now it can only go down because that level of growth absolutely can't be sustained.
You mention BlackBerry, but there was also Nokia and Palm who had explosive growth but both over-reached and couldn't maintain. In most cases huge amounts of market share taxes a company's finances in the long run because they usually have to have low-cost products to grab a lot of market share and it doesn't pay off if the high-end product isn't selling well. That was Nokia's problem. So, whenever the analysts keep calling for Apple to sell low-cost products to gain market share they're just plain stupid. Apple will easily survive without anywhere's near major market share. Apple won't die if another company has a hit product for six months and sells more units. A company's focus should be on long-term survival and not from quarter to quarter.
Staying afloat or a little above that is a fine business model for a company, but not for Wall Street. They're always looking for companies to double down and go all out in spurts but that's just being greedy. As far as I'm concerned, consumers come first. If you offer a good product and services, consumers will eventually come. Maybe not everyone but many will. Google's idea to capture every human on the planet with Android devices is just plain foolish and greedy. I think their goal is too ambitious. The Android platform is really getting out of hand due to all those devices being at so many hardware levels and that's why its so hard for Google to upgrade hundreds of millions of devices within a short a time period like Apple does with the iPhone.
This whole idea of companies having to have major market share doesn't make any sort of sense. Companies need to keep their books balanced, first and foremost. Over-reaching is very risky but apparently the big investors like companies to take big risks to make big gains. Now BlackBerry has to lay off 40% of its workforce and I know Nokia also had to lay off a huge amount of employees when their once huge market share company went bust. Naturally the big investors on Wall Street don't give a damn, but it's really bad business to run the stock market the way it is being run. Companies should never have astronomical P/E ratios because actual money really doesn't exist. It's more like a false sense of growth or maybe it should be called empty growth. As you say, such high market share greed isn't sustainable and that's why our economy is so messed up.
For Apple's sake, they'd best add a larger category and continue producing the 4-inch iPhone, rather than replace it.
Steve Jobs is dead and I know that but he always wanted to keep the product line simple or with as few products as possible. Definitely the 4" iPhone should stay. Adding another iPhone line might be somewhat complicated. Apple might have to realign all their iPhone prices and it adds more consumer confusion as to which model to buy. If a larger iPhone is added at this point then there would be three distinct types of iPhones if you figure in the polycarb iPhone. I'm not sure if Apple should do that. I think two iPhone models should be enough. I'm really not all that keen on Apple having a monster display smartphone. The largest size I think Apple should go is 4.2" or 4.3" but nowhere's near 4.8" or 5". Apple isn't Samsung and I don't think Apple should listen to Wall Street telling them how to design their products. I don't think a larger display is worth it just to grab 10% more market share.
This is absolutely proof.
Or, the non-sales could be because of this:
You know what spec-whores some of the trolls are.
It's weird their flagship phones are all jumbo sized. Their smaller models are mid-tiered, or cheap junk. It's like they're trying to associate size with premium-ness. Like America's Big Three once did.
lol. Also to some of the other, but mostly this. Apple is the curve. Is am are was were be being been. The rest are tangent lines.
There’s also still a 2.5” iPhone in the works, because a 3.5” screen is too big.
Why is a 3.5" to big? Because you and I believe our iPhones are perfect for us? Why is it so hard to let the market decide?
Personally I am totally convinced that Apple would strengthen its position in the market strongly by offering a choice.
I agree with your comment. Because Android is free, I think this is how a lot of manufacturers (Blu, Micromax) comes to mind, manufactures their phones.
I suspect you will be spot on there. The reviews will all say: like the iphone sensor.
I'm with you thinking the 6 will be bigger, but disagree that this article/research suggests Apple is behind the curve? Why did Samsung and HTC feel the need to reduce the specs in the mini versions of their flagship? Fear of canabalizing themselves. Something Apple is not afraid of.
Next year I think the 5c becomes free on contract, 5s becomes 5sc with polycarbonate back at $99/$199, and the 6 is the new flagship.
Remember, the polycarbonate backs are easier to manufacture, and ship, which is what is causing the confusion regarding demand for it.
This.
The home button in the picture of the iPhone 5 has caught the light very oddly, it makes it look like brushed metal.
So, what you're saying is, these Android vendors can't figure out why the size of your cock at an orgy only counts when it's hard.
Who wants a flaccid Android phone that they can't brag about? The high-end Android phones only sell based on specs (bragging rights) and screen sizes.
Meanwhile, the flagship iPhone is what it is. It's a premium, rock-hard dong that's a great performer for its size. You know... it isn't the size of your boat that matters most, it's the motions in the oceans your boat is capable of.
The home button in the picture of the iPhone 5 has caught the light very oddly, it makes it look like brushed metal.
It's most likely a button cover.
If phones like the GS3 and GS4 Mini were actually just smaller versions of the real GS3/GS4 then I think they would have sold. The problem (as mentioned) is the Mini's were junk phones. They had crappy screens, slower processors, poor cameras - everything about them was cheap.
Samsung was trying to capitalize on the success and brand recognition of the GS3/GS4 by implying the Mini was "just as good but smaller" when they clearly weren't.
The reason Android phones went large in the first place was so a larger battery could be used to get around the problem of poor battery life. Battery life still seems to be an issue because they aren't able to produce a 'mini' version without slowing down the processor and removing memory etc.
It's most likely a button cover.
Is that a thing? People cover their buttons?
Apple has said that it does not want to "compromise" by making a big screen phone. But does anybody know what it means?
I speculate bigger screen means big battery drain, and requires twice the size of battery.
And I agree, once Apple solves the problem, it is over for big-screen Android phones.
And yet we have people complaining about the 5C being last years phone as if no other manufacturer does this. And still the 5C would probably wipe the floor with most of these cheaper/smaller Android phones.
I don't think it's quite that simple.
The large screen Android phones have sold reasonably well because that's the only thing that Android makers have to talk about. So they have differentiated their product based on size - and are capturing people who need a reason not to buy iPhones -- or who would never have bought an iPhone, anyway. It's not at all clear that a larger iPhone would sell a lot more (or any more) than the current sizes.
Apple started with only a single phone. When you're a small player breaking into a new market, having a proliferation of products can create problems for you and your customers. It's far easier to focus on a single product and doing it extremely well.
Then, as your business grows, it becomes large enough to support multiple products. The iPad was joined by the iPad Mini. The iPhone line was converted to a 'good, better, best' marketing strategy where last year's phones move down in the hierarchy - and even that was replaced with a strategy where both 'better' and 'best' were new phones.
Eventually, the business gets large enough that even a niche within the market becomes large enough to support a product. I suspect that we're close to that point now. Even if a 4.5-5" iPhone is a small percentage of iPhone sales, it would probably be large enough to support having one. Therefore, I expect to see a larger iPhone as an option in the next year or two, but I don't expect it to replace the current 4" phone (which could conceivably grow to perhaps 4.2" without changing the exterior dimensions).