If Android phones make up 84% of the smartphone market, and Qualcomm chips seem to be in the vast majority of those devices, they're still selling a s**tload more chips than Apple, right?
My interpretation is that Qualcomm is saying that sales of high-end chips are falling. They may be shipping mid- and low-end chips to the hundreds of crap Android OEMs out ther, but their 64-bit chip may have been priced at a premium and destined primarily for the S6. No S6, and they lose .8B.
Back of the envelope: $800,000,000/ $30 per chip may equal an estimated 26,666,667 Galaxy S6 64-bit chips Qualcomm no longer can sell.
The iPhone 6 BOM estimates from teardowns have the CPU part around $35-38, so your estimate for the Galaxy S6 chip is seemingly in the ballpark. Snapdragon 810 would ship in much lower quantities than the Apple SoC since the latter goes in both the iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus, meaning close to 200 million quantity for the Apple part versus 20-27 million for the Snapdragon 810. That's nearly a magnitude of difference.
There is no money on low end components. They have to commit enormous $ to architect a new chip so it needs high end phone manufacturers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carthusia
My interpretation is that Qualcomm is saying that sales of high-end chips are falling. They may be shipping mid- and low-end chips to the hundreds of crap Android OEMs out ther, but their 64-bit chip may have been priced at a premium and destined primarily for the S6. No S6, and they lose .8B.
Back of the envelope: $800,000,000/ $30 per chip may equal an estimated 26,666,667 Galaxy S6 64-bit chips Qualcomm no longer can sell.
That makes sense. What I don't understand though (and I guess what frustrates me with DED's articles putting down the competition) is that the market is big enough for a number of players. Apple makes great high-end chips, as does Qualcomm. Qualcomm also makes mid- to low-end chips to cater to lower price points that Apple doesn't want to mess with. And that's fine, not everyone needs to drive around in a Porsche for Porsche money when a VW will do. I prefer my iPhone 6, but my 65 year old mom is perfectly content with her $19 Lumia 520 (Amazon had a fire sale on them back in December).
It just seems as though DED writes these articles (which do everything to put the competition in the worst possible light) to drive a wedge between those that like Apple products and those of us that like technology in general. I love, love, LOVE Apple products, but that doesn't mean that I want to curb stomp everything else on the market that isn't Apple.
Chipmaker Qualcomm on Wednesday revised its revenue forecast downward for 2015, lopping nearly $1 billion off of its high-end estimate and seemingly blaming the change in part on Apple's annexation of market share with the iPhone 6.
"...Apple's annexation of market share..."
I don't know why, but I find that phrase so amusing.
If Android phones make up 84% of the smartphone market, and Qualcomm chips seem to be in the vast majority of those devices, they're still selling a s**tload more chips than Apple, right?
Qualcomm would sell more chips than Apple if they sold just one. Because Apple isn't in the business of selling its chips.
It just seems as though DED writes these articles (which do everything to put the competition in the worst possible light) to drive a wedge between those that like Apple products and those of us that like technology in general. I love, love, LOVE Apple products, but that doesn't mean that I want to curb stomp everything else on the market that isn't Apple.
DED gets paid to generate pageviews. Slamming non-Apple products on an Apple rumor site works well in generating page views.
This is not a site that attempts a neutral, unbiased assessment of high tech. This is an Apple fanboi site. The site tolerates a large population of haters because those people generate additional page views outside of the editorial mandate with their forum comments.
I have searched for this issue in google and Apple was just part of that, the 810 chip was the majority. Qualcomm mentioned that their sales shifted towards radio chips, presumably because of Apple's large sales but a large part of the drop is because of the "large vendor". thanks alot
It has not been debunked. The reporters who used that LG phone stated that it was pretty hot, hotter than a phone should be. Perhaps Samsung has a different standard for heat output than trailing edge LG does.
I also read that the LG phones ran at lower brightness in the displays to avoid/ mitigate the overheating issue.
That makes sense. What I don't understand though (and I guess what frustrates me with DED's articles putting down the competition) is that the market is big enough for a number of players. Apple makes great high-end chips, as does Qualcomm. Qualcomm also makes mid- to low-end chips to cater to lower price points that Apple doesn't want to mess with. And that's fine, not everyone needs to drive around in a Porsche for Porsche money when a VW will do. I prefer my iPhone 6, but my 65 year old mom is perfectly content with her $19 Lumia 520 (Amazon had a fire sale on them back in December).
It just seems as though DED writes these articles (which do everything to put the competition in the worst possible light) to drive a wedge between those that like Apple products and those of us that like technology in general. I love, love, LOVE Apple products, but that doesn't mean that I want to curb stomp everything else on the market that isn't Apple.
Qualcomm missed the window for a 64 bit processor that would have provided a competitive advantage against Apple, and each other for that matter, for the Android OEM's. That would have been the flagship processor to compete with the iPhones 6 and 6+.
These delays have stalled the uptake of Qualcomm's Snapdragon 810 with 8 month left until Apple shows the A9 and A9X. A couple of months more delay, and it might be that some Android owners will sit on the sidelines and wait for Apple's next generation of iPhones to arrive. Even then, there has to be an assumption that the Snapdragon 810 compares favorably with the A8 for the OEM's to be compete successfully.
A failure of the 810 to cleave back flagship marketshare is not good for Qualcomm.
[QUOTE] If Android phones make up 84% of the smartphone market, and Qualcomm chips seem to be in the vast majority of those devices, they're still selling a s**tload more chips than Apple, right?[/QUOTE]
The vast majority of the low end devices sport MediaTek chips. Qualcomm is in a lawsuit against them but that's going to be a long drawl out battle in Chinese courts. MediaTek is a Chinese company so I doubt Qualcomm is going to prevail.
What I love about Apple and what is earning them this type of power is the simple fact they exist to make the best computing devices in the world.
While everyone else is focused on tapping a market or figuring a clever way to drain money from customers or how to cast doubt on their competitors or to copy them etc.
Apple simply keeps doing what it loves to do: make the best conouting products out there.
Bravo.
Conouting products? I’ll take your word for it.
I'm not sure if Apple include spellcheckers on all their computers yet. Then, they'll be truly excellent.
From MR "On the heels of an earnings call that saw Apple announcing record earnings, rival phone maker Samsung today announced its own results for the October to December period, reporting a 27 percent quarterly decline in earnings."
Haha!!
I figured Apple Insider would have an article up about this!(or DED editorial)
I thought they hadn't reported yet
Maybe they're just not relevant anymore?
I have noticed less and less Sammy articles!! Hahaha.
I've noticed fewer and fewer Samsung articles, too. There are still quite a few, though.
If Android phones make up 84% of the smartphone market, and Qualcomm chips seem to be in the vast majority of those devices, they're still selling a s**tload more chips than Apple, right?
<span style="line-height:1.4em;">It just seems as though DED writes these articles (which do everything to put the competition in the worst possible light) to drive a wedge between those that like Apple products and those of us that like technology in general. I love, love, LOVE Apple products, but that doesn't mean that I want to curb stomp everything else on the market that isn't Apple.</span>
DED gets paid to generate pageviews. Slamming non-Apple products on an Apple rumor site works well in generating page views.
This is not a site that attempts a neutral, unbiased assessment of high tech. This is an Apple fanboi site. The site tolerates a large population of haters because those people generate additional page views outside of the editorial mandate with their forum comments.
I couldn't disagree more.
I think that Mr. Dilger writes very level-headed articles, and that the comments generated are similarly well-reasoned, save those by the Apple haters.
Comments
OK, maybe I'm missing something, but I don't understand the slant of this article.
http://www.cnet.com/news/android-stays-unbeatable-in-smartphone-market-for-now/
If Android phones make up 84% of the smartphone market, and Qualcomm chips seem to be in the vast majority of those devices, they're still selling a s**tload more chips than Apple, right?
My interpretation is that Qualcomm is saying that sales of high-end chips are falling. They may be shipping mid- and low-end chips to the hundreds of crap Android OEMs out ther, but their 64-bit chip may have been priced at a premium and destined primarily for the S6. No S6, and they lose .8B.
Back of the envelope: $800,000,000/ $30 per chip may equal an estimated 26,666,667 Galaxy S6 64-bit chips Qualcomm no longer can sell.
The iPhone 6 BOM estimates from teardowns have the CPU part around $35-38, so your estimate for the Galaxy S6 chip is seemingly in the ballpark. Snapdragon 810 would ship in much lower quantities than the Apple SoC since the latter goes in both the iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus, meaning close to 200 million quantity for the Apple part versus 20-27 million for the Snapdragon 810. That's nearly a magnitude of difference.
There is no money on low end components. They have to commit enormous $ to architect a new chip so it needs high end phone manufacturers
My interpretation is that Qualcomm is saying that sales of high-end chips are falling. They may be shipping mid- and low-end chips to the hundreds of crap Android OEMs out ther, but their 64-bit chip may have been priced at a premium and destined primarily for the S6. No S6, and they lose .8B.
Back of the envelope: $800,000,000/ $30 per chip may equal an estimated 26,666,667 Galaxy S6 64-bit chips Qualcomm no longer can sell.
That makes sense. What I don't understand though (and I guess what frustrates me with DED's articles putting down the competition) is that the market is big enough for a number of players. Apple makes great high-end chips, as does Qualcomm. Qualcomm also makes mid- to low-end chips to cater to lower price points that Apple doesn't want to mess with. And that's fine, not everyone needs to drive around in a Porsche for Porsche money when a VW will do. I prefer my iPhone 6, but my 65 year old mom is perfectly content with her $19 Lumia 520 (Amazon had a fire sale on them back in December).
It just seems as though DED writes these articles (which do everything to put the competition in the worst possible light) to drive a wedge between those that like Apple products and those of us that like technology in general. I love, love, LOVE Apple products, but that doesn't mean that I want to curb stomp everything else on the market that isn't Apple.
Chipmaker Qualcomm on Wednesday revised its revenue forecast downward for 2015, lopping nearly $1 billion off of its high-end estimate and seemingly blaming the change in part on Apple's annexation of market share with the iPhone 6.
"...Apple's annexation of market share..."
I don't know why, but I find that phrase so amusing.
Qualcomm would sell more chips than Apple if they sold just one. Because Apple isn't in the business of selling its chips.
It just seems as though DED writes these articles (which do everything to put the competition in the worst possible light) to drive a wedge between those that like Apple products and those of us that like technology in general. I love, love, LOVE Apple products, but that doesn't mean that I want to curb stomp everything else on the market that isn't Apple.
DED gets paid to generate pageviews. Slamming non-Apple products on an Apple rumor site works well in generating page views.
This is not a site that attempts a neutral, unbiased assessment of high tech. This is an Apple fanboi site. The site tolerates a large population of haters because those people generate additional page views outside of the editorial mandate with their forum comments.
Hi there,
I have searched for this issue in google and Apple was just part of that, the 810 chip was the majority. Qualcomm mentioned that their sales shifted towards radio chips, presumably because of Apple's large sales but a large part of the drop is because of the "large vendor". thanks alot
Fire up the popcorn machine!
It's here!!
http://iphone.appleinsider.com/articles/15/01/28/samsungs-mobile-profits-plunge-642-after-apples-iphone-6-devastates-premium-galaxy-sales
It has not been debunked. The reporters who used that LG phone stated that it was pretty hot, hotter than a phone should be. Perhaps Samsung has a different standard for heat output than trailing edge LG does.
I also read that the LG phones ran at lower brightness in the displays to avoid/ mitigate the overheating issue.
That makes sense. What I don't understand though (and I guess what frustrates me with DED's articles putting down the competition) is that the market is big enough for a number of players. Apple makes great high-end chips, as does Qualcomm. Qualcomm also makes mid- to low-end chips to cater to lower price points that Apple doesn't want to mess with. And that's fine, not everyone needs to drive around in a Porsche for Porsche money when a VW will do. I prefer my iPhone 6, but my 65 year old mom is perfectly content with her $19 Lumia 520 (Amazon had a fire sale on them back in December).
It just seems as though DED writes these articles (which do everything to put the competition in the worst possible light) to drive a wedge between those that like Apple products and those of us that like technology in general. I love, love, LOVE Apple products, but that doesn't mean that I want to curb stomp everything else on the market that isn't Apple.
Qualcomm missed the window for a 64 bit processor that would have provided a competitive advantage against Apple, and each other for that matter, for the Android OEM's. That would have been the flagship processor to compete with the iPhones 6 and 6+.
These delays have stalled the uptake of Qualcomm's Snapdragon 810 with 8 month left until Apple shows the A9 and A9X. A couple of months more delay, and it might be that some Android owners will sit on the sidelines and wait for Apple's next generation of iPhones to arrive. Even then, there has to be an assumption that the Snapdragon 810 compares favorably with the A8 for the OEM's to be compete successfully.
A failure of the 810 to cleave back flagship marketshare is not good for Qualcomm.
Strange it might be, I wish Snapdragon 810 proves to be quite a competitor to A8, only if to make Apple to make A9 even better.
Strange it might be, I wish Snapdragon 810 proves to be quite a competitor to A8, only if to make Apple to make A9 even better.
The A9 has most likely been finalized, but it might have impact on the A10.
The vast majority of the low end devices sport MediaTek chips. Qualcomm is in a lawsuit against them but that's going to be a long drawl out battle in Chinese courts. MediaTek is a Chinese company so I doubt Qualcomm is going to prevail.
Conouting products? I’ll take your word for it.
I'm not sure if Apple include spellcheckers on all their computers yet. Then, they'll be truly excellent.
'Could do better'.
There, saved you the trouble.
I've noticed fewer and fewer Samsung articles, too. There are still quite a few, though.
I'm not so sure about that.
They just announced their biggest profits yet.
I couldn't disagree more.
I think that Mr. Dilger writes very level-headed articles, and that the comments generated are similarly well-reasoned, save those by the Apple haters.