In an internal Samsung document from December 2008 (above), the company acknowledged that the form factor of Apple's 3.5 inch iPhone 3GS "sets a new standard," but it referenced "concerns expressed by users about its size and overall durability," which it identified as issues "that can be exploited by Samsung in future releases."
The document cited a user in London who remarked that the original iPhone design was "quite monstrously large," and a user in Singapore who said, "I prefer something that can fit into a ladies bag, but the iPhone is too big, it will bulge out."
Curiously, the largest screen size in the study was the 3.5 inch display of Apple's iPhone. Samsung was evaluating that against designs using 3.2 and 2.8 inch screens.
Looks like the next big thing was already there. Good of Samsung to acknowledge that Apple pioneered the large screen touch phone. Then they merely iterated on it by an inch and claimed to be the pioneers.
That wouldn't even hold correct according to the Canaccord chart he provided.
The information I saw had October and November with no data for December. If those are what you refer then I'd say that is accurate until further evidence could be shown that the 5C didn't hold any 2nd place position for any days, weeks or the month of December.
The information I saw had October and November with no data for December. If those are what you refer then I'd say that is accurate until further evidence could be shown that the 5C didn't hold any 2nd place position for any days, weeks or the month of December.
I always pointed this out, it came out bigger the others, now others are jumbo, we've seen some go 1.5 inches to 6 inch, and they always go against the iPhone which went from 3.5 to 4 inch.
This was originally a reply to DED about his accuracy and how, instead of admitting an error, he went on to spin a different web.
Just to be clear, I am acknowledging that with my "but I see your point now." comment.
As far as the 5C is concerned... I think it sold very well... but I still do not believe that it filled the hole that Apple was wishing it would.
Surely it was a highly profitable device for Apple, the question I want to know is whether it sold better than the iPhone 5 would have sold, and if the additional R&D, although minor, was enough to warrant the move to plastic v metal. I think we'll have a general idea if they keep a mid-range plastic version again this year.
And what was the catalyst for turning phones into pocket computers, maybe iOS?
Seeing as how there were 'Pocket PC' devices long before the iPhone I'd say iOS was the catalyst for the mainstream average user which didn't have much use for the limited functionality of those devices.
Surely it was a highly profitable device for Apple, the question I want to know is whether it sold better than the iPhone 5 would have sold, and if the additional R&D, although minor, was enough to warrant the move to plastic v metal. I think we'll have a general idea if they keep a mid-range plastic version again this year.
That would be my thought but you did make a very impressionable comment to another poster when he said that we'll know the 5C didn't sell well if it drops from the line-up entirely.
Your reply was basically to ask if the 5 didn't sell well.
Not the same thing entirely, nor am I making light of your position. Just saying that there is a lot to consider.
I'd like to see a larger screen flagship with the 5S and 5C dropping down a tier. Personally, I think that's the line-up that Apple has had in my mind for a while now (not that particular line-up, but rather, the numbers a line-up like that could produce).
I have to question whether or not keeping the 5 would have killed some 5S sales. This time around though, Apple will have size to differentiate 1st and 2nd tier... or, at least I think so.
...but you did make a very impressionable comment to another poster when he said that we'll know the 5C didn't sell well if it drops from the line-up entirely.
I don't recall that conversation but I may have been referring to selling well enough for Apple to want to continue with the *C naming convention. If that is what I what I was referring to but didn't outright state it then that would be my communication error, but I don't think it can argued that it didn't sell well for the smartphone market in general.
I don't recall that conversation but I may have been referring to selling well enough for Apple to want to continue with the *C naming convention. If that is what I what I was referring to but didn't outright state it then that would be my communication error, but I don't think it can argued that it didn't sell well for the smartphone market in general.
I thought it was a good point because, to me, it said that just because Apple drops something, it doesn't necessarily mean it didn't sell well.
I don't recall that conversation but I may have been referring to selling well enough for Apple to want to continue with the *C naming convention. If that is what I what I was referring to but didn't outright state it then that would be my communication error, but I don't think it can argued that it didn't sell well for the smartphone market in general.
I have to question whether or not keeping the 5 would have killed some 5S sales. This time around though, Apple will have size to differentiate 1st and 2nd tier... or, at least I think so.
1) I wonder if that is why they wanted to do something different, but it sounded to me like the 5C was pushing more people to the 5S which can't be a bad thing (assuming you have enough units for everyone). Their real goal might have been wanting to eat into Android sales but I don't think that's going to happen with a 4" colored device because the mentality of the buyer for a large-screened Android-based device for that price point is probably different. Perhaps with a larger display Apple can do that.
2) Since they have been a 2-year cycle I wonder if a 5C-like product could appear every 2 years to differentiate from having the same casing for the high and mid-range phones as a response of the concern you mention. That would mean they could kill off the 5C and then release a 6C in 2015.
well this year it's not too hard to guess the new iPhone/iPad models and key features:
- a sapphire screen iPhone 6s, otherwise largely unchanged except for some spec bumps.
- a larger screen 6x (whatever it's lettered), super thin like the iPod touch, but otherwise like the 5s with Touch ID.
- a 6c largely unchanged from the 5c except for spec bumps.
- new iPad and iPad mini models with Touch ID and spec bumps.
the pundits will all say "meh," but consumers will jump at them. Touch ID is really popular and many are waiting for it to come to iPad. and the part of the market that wants a bigger screen will rush for the 6x.
but the big news of the year will be the iWatch of course. far too much credible smoke about it that there can not be fire about to appear. in the Fall i suppose unless Apple does a special launch event sooner.
Apple TV is definitely lurking out there too for more attention, maybe some new more capable model coming with the current model dropping in price (but most of all please overhaul the Remote app).
and spec bumps for all the Macs of course. but OS 10.10 will be the real news.
Comments
Looks like the next big thing was already there. Good of Samsung to acknowledge that Apple pioneered the large screen touch phone. Then they merely iterated on it by an inch and claimed to be the pioneers.
I agree with that. He should change that to Holiday quarter, which I think was his intent.
That wouldn't even hold correct according to the Canaccord chart he provided.
The 5C went to 3rd place in October and November and was outsold by the S4.
The information I saw had October and November with no data for December. If those are what you refer then I'd say that is accurate until further evidence could be shown that the 5C didn't hold any 2nd place position for any days, weeks or the month of December.
The information I saw had October and November with no data for December. If those are what you refer then I'd say that is accurate until further evidence could be shown that the 5C didn't hold any 2nd place position for any days, weeks or the month of December.
Then his claim is not supported.
How do you get that conclusion? Oct through Dec is the holiday quarter.
How do you get that conclusion? Oct through Dec is the holiday quarter.
Okay, then, my claim is that it did not outsell every flagship device.
Of course not. Even if the outsold the high-end Samsung device it still wouldn't outsell the iPhone 5S but I see your point now.
How about, "The iPhone 5C was the number selling mid-range device for October and November, according to Canaccord."
Of course not. Even if the outsold the high-end Samsung device it still wouldn't outsell the iPhone 5S but I see your point now.
How about, "The iPhone 5C was the number selling mid-range device for October and November, according to Canaccord."
"
Sorry, DED did say Android flagship. That was in my earlier comment.
Of course not. Even if the outsold the high-end Samsung device it still wouldn't outsell the iPhone 5S but I see your point now.
How about, "The iPhone 5C was the number selling mid-range device for October and November, according to Canaccord."
This was originally a reply to DED about his accuracy and how, instead of admitting an error, he went on to spin a different web.
As far as the 5C is concerned... I think it sold very well... but I still do not believe that it filled the hole that Apple was wishing it would.
Just to be clear, I am acknowledging that with my "but I see your point now." comment.
Surely it was a highly profitable device for Apple, the question I want to know is whether it sold better than the iPhone 5 would have sold, and if the additional R&D, although minor, was enough to warrant the move to plastic v metal. I think we'll have a general idea if they keep a mid-range plastic version again this year.
Seeing as how there were 'Pocket PC' devices long before the iPhone I'd say iOS was the catalyst for the mainstream average user which didn't have much use for the limited functionality of those devices.
Surely it was a highly profitable device for Apple, the question I want to know is whether it sold better than the iPhone 5 would have sold, and if the additional R&D, although minor, was enough to warrant the move to plastic v metal. I think we'll have a general idea if they keep a mid-range plastic version again this year.
That would be my thought but you did make a very impressionable comment to another poster when he said that we'll know the 5C didn't sell well if it drops from the line-up entirely.
Your reply was basically to ask if the 5 didn't sell well.
Not the same thing entirely, nor am I making light of your position. Just saying that there is a lot to consider.
I'd like to see a larger screen flagship with the 5S and 5C dropping down a tier. Personally, I think that's the line-up that Apple has had in my mind for a while now (not that particular line-up, but rather, the numbers a line-up like that could produce).
I have to question whether or not keeping the 5 would have killed some 5S sales. This time around though, Apple will have size to differentiate 1st and 2nd tier... or, at least I think so.
I don't recall that conversation but I may have been referring to selling well enough for Apple to want to continue with the *C naming convention. If that is what I what I was referring to but didn't outright state it then that would be my communication error, but I don't think it can argued that it didn't sell well for the smartphone market in general.
I don't recall that conversation but I may have been referring to selling well enough for Apple to want to continue with the *C naming convention. If that is what I what I was referring to but didn't outright state it then that would be my communication error, but I don't think it can argued that it didn't sell well for the smartphone market in general.
I thought it was a good point because, to me, it said that just because Apple drops something, it doesn't necessarily mean it didn't sell well.
1) I wonder if that is why they wanted to do something different, but it sounded to me like the 5C was pushing more people to the 5S which can't be a bad thing (assuming you have enough units for everyone). Their real goal might have been wanting to eat into Android sales but I don't think that's going to happen with a 4" colored device because the mentality of the buyer for a large-screened Android-based device for that price point is probably different. Perhaps with a larger display Apple can do that.
2) Since they have been a 2-year cycle I wonder if a 5C-like product could appear every 2 years to differentiate from having the same casing for the high and mid-range phones as a response of the concern you mention. That would mean they could kill off the 5C and then release a 6C in 2015.
well this year it's not too hard to guess the new iPhone/iPad models and key features:
- a sapphire screen iPhone 6s, otherwise largely unchanged except for some spec bumps.
- a larger screen 6x (whatever it's lettered), super thin like the iPod touch, but otherwise like the 5s with Touch ID.
- a 6c largely unchanged from the 5c except for spec bumps.
- new iPad and iPad mini models with Touch ID and spec bumps.
the pundits will all say "meh," but consumers will jump at them. Touch ID is really popular and many are waiting for it to come to iPad. and the part of the market that wants a bigger screen will rush for the 6x.
but the big news of the year will be the iWatch of course. far too much credible smoke about it that there can not be fire about to appear. in the Fall i suppose unless Apple does a special launch event sooner.
Apple TV is definitely lurking out there too for more attention, maybe some new more capable model coming with the current model dropping in price (but most of all please overhaul the Remote app).
and spec bumps for all the Macs of course. but OS 10.10 will be the real news.
Touch ID is really popular and many are waiting for it to come to iPad.
The number of times I've tried to lock my iPad with my finger is embarrassing.
…iPhone 6s…
…6x…
a 6c…
Wait… what?
How'd you take a pic of my thumb? Or are you kind of giving a thumbs up to the 4.7"?