It is pretty delusional to believe that pricing isn't an issue. It is pretty easy to argue that Apple could have sold a lot more iphones if they didn't price the things so high.
If you're going to participate in comments, don't just show up and throw out a shovel of ignorant, shallow garbage.
Apple set up a range of prices and the most popular weren't oriented to price, they were targeted at new styling and features. Surely you can piece that together.
Android offers tons of cheaper options, but those maker aren't earning any profits and will eventually go out of business just like Nokia, Motorola, HTC, HP, and all the other low end Android makers in China that have already failed.
It's not clear Apple could build phones much faster than it currently is. If it lowered prices to boost demand, how would it build more at a lower price? Right now, Apple can afford to spend on advanced equipment and tooling and shipping to get products to market. How does it lower prices? Why should it? It's already neck and neck with the volume leader. Production has natural limits.
But again, when you offer ideas, make sure they have some value beside cynical snark. And point to some company that's doing better. Google priced its phones very low and couldn't sell them. It then tried to sell phones like Apple, and couldn't sell them. It's not easy.
His comment didn't need to go any deeper.
The 8 and X series were released late last year. There are only two quarters of official results to go by and Apple doesn't break numbers down so no one knows what is really happening. That's where analysts jump in with their numbers (estimates).
Not long ago, analysts were claiming that the low end made up a sizeable chunk of Apple unit sales. More than 20%. That's for old hardware. Not shabby at all and while they may not be the 'most' popular, they seem to be popular nevertheless. Obviously price is a factor.
Apple's sales remain flat. They have been for a long while. That doesn't look like its changing.
People talk about Android discounting but I keep reading about Apple promotions for 2x1 8 series phones. I haven't seen one myself, though. I haven't seen a 2x1 flagship promo for Android flagships.
People talk about small Android handset makers going out of business. That's consolidation. It happens in every mature market. What people don't see so clearly is that there are an unthinkably large amount of those handset makers still in business!
So where are the sales of failed business going? To other handset makers. Android handset makers!
Last year Huawei moved into second spot in unit sales, overtaking Apple. Apple clawed that position back with its peak quarters on its annual release cycle. Last year Huawei shipped 153,000,000 units. This year, their own goal is 200,000,000 units. That is massive growth and will put them into second spot again if they realise that growth.
Widespread opinion places the P20 Pro as the best handset of 2018 at several hundred dollars cheaper than an iPhone X.
You say that Android handset makers aren't making any money but Huawei is selling millions of phones, making billions and producing high quality innovative products.
Rumours point to Apple reducing prices this year. If that happens you'll have to ask yourself why.
FWIW ATT already did an iPhone X BOGO months ago, as has Sprint. TMo did a buy one and get $700 off another. TMo also had equivalent deals for some of the latest LG's and Samsungs. Deals on even new flagships aren't at all uncommon, including Apple's top of the line.
Were those Apple subsidized discounts and BOGO's?
Almost certainly not.; just carrier discounts to pick up a few switchers.
Betcha that Android OS device makers are quite likely to provide carrier incentives to drive share acquisition.
Hang on...
"Almost certainly not.; just carrier discounts to pick up a few switchers."
When did carriers take an interest in switchers?
Surely, carriers couldn't care less about iOS or Android. Any interest would be vendor specific not platform specific.
"Switchers" also applies to those moving between carriers, but you may have another, better, term for it you would like me to use?
It happens so regularly here, the term doesn't even exist. It's normal for people to have had multiple carriers and to have more as time goes by. Also due to price competition and being able to get flagship features for very good prices, lots of people buy their phones outright and unlocked (SIM free). But that isn't the point. Carrier switching is irrelevant. All of them offer phones from both platforms anyway. Carriers get people to switch to them on the offers they provide. Not the phones they offer as they are already offering them, so if I walk into an Orange store I can get an iPhone X, S9 or P20 Pro. Same for Vodafone and all the others. Things were different when there were exclusives but that isn't the case. Nowadays you might see a carrier get a limited colour (not iPhone of course) but that's about it.
Maybe things are different where you are. I've never ever seen a 2x1 on a flagship phone for example. The carriers here haven't used that option.
It is pretty delusional to believe that pricing isn't an issue. It is pretty easy to argue that Apple could have sold a lot more iphones if they didn't price the things so high.
If you're going to participate in comments, don't just show up and throw out a shovel of ignorant, shallow garbage.
Apple set up a range of prices and the most popular weren't oriented to price, they were targeted at new styling and features. Surely you can piece that together.
Android offers tons of cheaper options, but those maker aren't earning any profits and will eventually go out of business just like Nokia, Motorola, HTC, HP, and all the other low end Android makers in China that have already failed.
It's not clear Apple could build phones much faster than it currently is. If it lowered prices to boost demand, how would it build more at a lower price? Right now, Apple can afford to spend on advanced equipment and tooling and shipping to get products to market. How does it lower prices? Why should it? It's already neck and neck with the volume leader. Production has natural limits.
But again, when you offer ideas, make sure they have some value beside cynical snark. And point to some company that's doing better. Google priced its phones very low and couldn't sell them. It then tried to sell phones like Apple, and couldn't sell them. It's not easy.
His comment didn't need to go any deeper.
The 8 and X series were released late last year. There are only two quarters of official results to go by and Apple doesn't break numbers down so no one knows what is really happening. That's where analysts jump in with their numbers (estimates).
Not long ago, analysts were claiming that the low end made up a sizeable chunk of Apple unit sales. More than 20%. That's for old hardware. Not shabby at all and while they may not be the 'most' popular, they seem to be popular nevertheless. Obviously price is a factor.
Apple's sales remain flat. They have been for a long while. That doesn't look like its changing.
People talk about Android discounting but I keep reading about Apple promotions for 2x1 8 series phones. I haven't seen one myself, though. I haven't seen a 2x1 flagship promo for Android flagships.
People talk about small Android handset makers going out of business. That's consolidation. It happens in every mature market. What people don't see so clearly is that there are an unthinkably large amount of those handset makers still in business!
So where are the sales of failed business going? To other handset makers. Android handset makers!
Last year Huawei moved into second spot in unit sales, overtaking Apple. Apple clawed that position back with its peak quarters on its annual release cycle. Last year Huawei shipped 153,000,000 units. This year, their own goal is 200,000,000 units. That is massive growth and will put them into second spot again if they realise that growth.
Widespread opinion places the P20 Pro as the best handset of 2018 at several hundred dollars cheaper than an iPhone X.
You say that Android handset makers aren't making any money but Huawei is selling millions of phones, making billions and producing high quality innovative products.
Rumours point to Apple reducing prices this year. If that happens you'll have to ask yourself why.
You make me laugh, yet again, with your avowed love of all things Huawei.
"Widespread Opinion place the P20 Pro as the best handset of 2018"
That's just fantasy.
Apple low end devices may be 20% of unit sales overall, but likely at about half the ASP, so as a contribution to revenues, about 10%,
Yes. And not only one I'm sure. All opinions are valid but some are not helped by issues with the individuals holding them.
There is an inescapable reality here. The P20 Pro can take images out of the box that no iPhone can. It's a simple question of hardware. The iPhone X for example has an optical zoom of X2. It can't touch the P20 Pro.
You only have to watch the presentations of the Mate 10 and P20 Series to see specific areas pitted against the best Samsung and Apple phones. There was one comment by the head of Huawei during the Mate 10 presentation that showed some photos from winter in Alaska. They were from the Mate 10 but the person who took them was also carrying an iPhone X. Why not compare those photos to the ones from the iPhone X? Because there were none to be had. It couldn't handle the cold and shut down. Same story with night mode on the P20 Pro. It was only compared with Samsung as the iPhone X shot was simply black.
This guy goes off the rails when he calls night mode a gimmick. It isn't but don't take my word for it. Plenty of people have made that observation in their own reviews, only to correct themselves once they'd seen the results and I'd bet my grandmother that Apple will have the exact same feature this September or next year.
He also loses major credibility with his comments on Auto mode. You may not like ALL the results ALL of the time but that's normal. The processing is done to cater to preferences (and the Chinese seem to love all that oversharpened, saturated stuff) but all that is completely optional. He could have simply turned it all off with one master button. He could have shot RAW if he wanted or he could have gone into Pro Mode and done whatever he wanted. A Pro mode that I don't think the iPhone X even has out of the box.
The inescapable reality is that the Huawei P20 Pro has issues, but yeah, great camera system. Not enough by far to make it the "iPhone Killer" that you are looking for, but nice try.
I think that it is fine for people to have their own opinions about what is the best smartphone, but you seem to wrap the Huawei P20 Pro in quite a bit more hyperbole than the market itself sees. If is it a great as you say, they should sell lots of them, but, it won't.
It's priced too high for the Android OS market, hence, why you yourself aren't even planning a purchase.
On the contrary, I normally tone down my responses and let the links do the talking. Then, if there is something truly worth highlighting and is bulletproof I might include it to drive the point home, you know like the Cat 18 modem, dual SIM, fast charging, better battery, VoLTE, x3 optical zoom, night mode etc because in those cases opinion doesn't come into it.
It is pretty delusional to believe that pricing isn't an issue. It is pretty easy to argue that Apple could have sold a lot more iphones if they didn't price the things so high.
If you're going to participate in comments, don't just show up and throw out a shovel of ignorant, shallow garbage.
Apple set up a range of prices and the most popular weren't oriented to price, they were targeted at new styling and features. Surely you can piece that together.
Android offers tons of cheaper options, but those maker aren't earning any profits and will eventually go out of business just like Nokia, Motorola, HTC, HP, and all the other low end Android makers in China that have already failed.
It's not clear Apple could build phones much faster than it currently is. If it lowered prices to boost demand, how would it build more at a lower price? Right now, Apple can afford to spend on advanced equipment and tooling and shipping to get products to market. How does it lower prices? Why should it? It's already neck and neck with the volume leader. Production has natural limits.
But again, when you offer ideas, make sure they have some value beside cynical snark. And point to some company that's doing better. Google priced its phones very low and couldn't sell them. It then tried to sell phones like Apple, and couldn't sell them. It's not easy.
His comment didn't need to go any deeper.
The 8 and X series were released late last year. There are only two quarters of official results to go by and Apple doesn't break numbers down so no one knows what is really happening. That's where analysts jump in with their numbers (estimates).
Not long ago, analysts were claiming that the low end made up a sizeable chunk of Apple unit sales. More than 20%. That's for old hardware. Not shabby at all and while they may not be the 'most' popular, they seem to be popular nevertheless. Obviously price is a factor.
Apple's sales remain flat. They have been for a long while. That doesn't look like its changing.
People talk about Android discounting but I keep reading about Apple promotions for 2x1 8 series phones. I haven't seen one myself, though. I haven't seen a 2x1 flagship promo for Android flagships.
People talk about small Android handset makers going out of business. That's consolidation. It happens in every mature market. What people don't see so clearly is that there are an unthinkably large amount of those handset makers still in business!
So where are the sales of failed business going? To other handset makers. Android handset makers!
Last year Huawei moved into second spot in unit sales, overtaking Apple. Apple clawed that position back with its peak quarters on its annual release cycle. Last year Huawei shipped 153,000,000 units. This year, their own goal is 200,000,000 units. That is massive growth and will put them into second spot again if they realise that growth.
Widespread opinion places the P20 Pro as the best handset of 2018 at several hundred dollars cheaper than an iPhone X.
You say that Android handset makers aren't making any money but Huawei is selling millions of phones, making billions and producing high quality innovative products.
Rumours point to Apple reducing prices this year. If that happens you'll have to ask yourself why.
FWIW ATT already did an iPhone X BOGO months ago, as has Sprint. TMo did a buy one and get $700 off another. TMo also had equivalent deals for some of the latest LG's and Samsungs. Deals on even new flagships aren't at all uncommon, including Apple's top of the line.
Were those Apple subsidized discounts and BOGO's?
Almost certainly not.; just carrier discounts to pick up a few switchers.
Betcha that Android OS device makers are quite likely to provide carrier incentives to drive share acquisition.
Hang on...
"Almost certainly not.; just carrier discounts to pick up a few switchers."
When did carriers take an interest in switchers?
Surely, carriers couldn't care less about iOS or Android. Any interest would be vendor specific not platform specific.
"Switchers" also applies to those moving between carriers, but you may have another, better, term for it you would like me to use?
It happens so regularly here, the term doesn't even exist. It's normal for people to have had multiple carriers and to have more as time goes by. Also due to price competition and being able to get flagship features for very good prices, lots of people buy their phones outright and unlocked (SIM free). But that isn't the point. Carrier switching is irrelevant. All of them offer phones from both platforms anyway. Carriers get people to switch to them on the offers they provide. Not the phones they offer as they are already offering them, so if I walk into an Orange store I can get an iPhone X, S9 or P20 Pro. Same for Vodafone and all the others. Things were different when there were exclusives but that isn't the case. Nowadays you might see a carrier get a limited colour (not iPhone of course) but that's about it.
Maybe things are different where you are. I've never ever seen a 2x1 on a flagship phone for example. The carriers here haven't used that option.
I the U.S., carriers don't often give the same deals to current customers as to people that "switch" from another carrier.
It is pretty delusional to believe that pricing isn't an issue. It is pretty easy to argue that Apple could have sold a lot more iphones if they didn't price the things so high.
If you're going to participate in comments, don't just show up and throw out a shovel of ignorant, shallow garbage.
Apple set up a range of prices and the most popular weren't oriented to price, they were targeted at new styling and features. Surely you can piece that together.
Android offers tons of cheaper options, but those maker aren't earning any profits and will eventually go out of business just like Nokia, Motorola, HTC, HP, and all the other low end Android makers in China that have already failed.
It's not clear Apple could build phones much faster than it currently is. If it lowered prices to boost demand, how would it build more at a lower price? Right now, Apple can afford to spend on advanced equipment and tooling and shipping to get products to market. How does it lower prices? Why should it? It's already neck and neck with the volume leader. Production has natural limits.
But again, when you offer ideas, make sure they have some value beside cynical snark. And point to some company that's doing better. Google priced its phones very low and couldn't sell them. It then tried to sell phones like Apple, and couldn't sell them. It's not easy.
His comment didn't need to go any deeper.
The 8 and X series were released late last year. There are only two quarters of official results to go by and Apple doesn't break numbers down so no one knows what is really happening. That's where analysts jump in with their numbers (estimates).
Not long ago, analysts were claiming that the low end made up a sizeable chunk of Apple unit sales. More than 20%. That's for old hardware. Not shabby at all and while they may not be the 'most' popular, they seem to be popular nevertheless. Obviously price is a factor.
Apple's sales remain flat. They have been for a long while. That doesn't look like its changing.
People talk about Android discounting but I keep reading about Apple promotions for 2x1 8 series phones. I haven't seen one myself, though. I haven't seen a 2x1 flagship promo for Android flagships.
People talk about small Android handset makers going out of business. That's consolidation. It happens in every mature market. What people don't see so clearly is that there are an unthinkably large amount of those handset makers still in business!
So where are the sales of failed business going? To other handset makers. Android handset makers!
Last year Huawei moved into second spot in unit sales, overtaking Apple. Apple clawed that position back with its peak quarters on its annual release cycle. Last year Huawei shipped 153,000,000 units. This year, their own goal is 200,000,000 units. That is massive growth and will put them into second spot again if they realise that growth.
Widespread opinion places the P20 Pro as the best handset of 2018 at several hundred dollars cheaper than an iPhone X.
You say that Android handset makers aren't making any money but Huawei is selling millions of phones, making billions and producing high quality innovative products.
Rumours point to Apple reducing prices this year. If that happens you'll have to ask yourself why.
FWIW ATT already did an iPhone X BOGO months ago, as has Sprint. TMo did a buy one and get $700 off another. TMo also had equivalent deals for some of the latest LG's and Samsungs. Deals on even new flagships aren't at all uncommon, including Apple's top of the line.
Were those Apple subsidized discounts and BOGO's?
Almost certainly not.; just carrier discounts to pick up a few switchers.
Betcha that Android OS device makers are quite likely to provide carrier incentives to drive share acquisition.
Hang on...
"Almost certainly not.; just carrier discounts to pick up a few switchers."
When did carriers take an interest in switchers?
Surely, carriers couldn't care less about iOS or Android. Any interest would be vendor specific not platform specific.
"Switchers" also applies to those moving between carriers, but you may have another, better, term for it you would like me to use?
It happens so regularly here, the term doesn't even exist. It's normal for people to have had multiple carriers and to have more as time goes by. Also due to price competition and being able to get flagship features for very good prices, lots of people buy their phones outright and unlocked (SIM free). But that isn't the point. Carrier switching is irrelevant. All of them offer phones from both platforms anyway. Carriers get people to switch to them on the offers they provide. Not the phones they offer as they are already offering them, so if I walk into an Orange store I can get an iPhone X, S9 or P20 Pro. Same for Vodafone and all the others. Things were different when there were exclusives but that isn't the case. Nowadays you might see a carrier get a limited colour (not iPhone of course) but that's about it.
Maybe things are different where you are. I've never ever seen a 2x1 on a flagship phone for example. The carriers here haven't used that option.
I the U.S., carriers don't often give the same deals to current customers as to people that "switch" from another carrier.
That's the impression I'm getting. The whole competition thing seems to be different there. I see lots of people complaining about carriers/ISPs etc but then following up with they have no other options. It's pretty alien to me in that sense as I suppose I'm spoilt for choice.
It is pretty delusional to believe that pricing isn't an issue. It is pretty easy to argue that Apple could have sold a lot more iphones if they didn't price the things so high.
If you're going to participate in comments, don't just show up and throw out a shovel of ignorant, shallow garbage.
Apple set up a range of prices and the most popular weren't oriented to price, they were targeted at new styling and features. Surely you can piece that together.
Android offers tons of cheaper options, but those maker aren't earning any profits and will eventually go out of business just like Nokia, Motorola, HTC, HP, and all the other low end Android makers in China that have already failed.
It's not clear Apple could build phones much faster than it currently is. If it lowered prices to boost demand, how would it build more at a lower price? Right now, Apple can afford to spend on advanced equipment and tooling and shipping to get products to market. How does it lower prices? Why should it? It's already neck and neck with the volume leader. Production has natural limits.
But again, when you offer ideas, make sure they have some value beside cynical snark. And point to some company that's doing better. Google priced its phones very low and couldn't sell them. It then tried to sell phones like Apple, and couldn't sell them. It's not easy.
His comment didn't need to go any deeper.
The 8 and X series were released late last year. There are only two quarters of official results to go by and Apple doesn't break numbers down so no one knows what is really happening. That's where analysts jump in with their numbers (estimates).
Not long ago, analysts were claiming that the low end made up a sizeable chunk of Apple unit sales. More than 20%. That's for old hardware. Not shabby at all and while they may not be the 'most' popular, they seem to be popular nevertheless. Obviously price is a factor.
Apple's sales remain flat. They have been for a long while. That doesn't look like its changing.
People talk about Android discounting but I keep reading about Apple promotions for 2x1 8 series phones. I haven't seen one myself, though. I haven't seen a 2x1 flagship promo for Android flagships.
People talk about small Android handset makers going out of business. That's consolidation. It happens in every mature market. What people don't see so clearly is that there are an unthinkably large amount of those handset makers still in business!
So where are the sales of failed business going? To other handset makers. Android handset makers!
Last year Huawei moved into second spot in unit sales, overtaking Apple. Apple clawed that position back with its peak quarters on its annual release cycle. Last year Huawei shipped 153,000,000 units. This year, their own goal is 200,000,000 units. That is massive growth and will put them into second spot again if they realise that growth.
Widespread opinion places the P20 Pro as the best handset of 2018 at several hundred dollars cheaper than an iPhone X.
You say that Android handset makers aren't making any money but Huawei is selling millions of phones, making billions and producing high quality innovative products.
Rumours point to Apple reducing prices this year. If that happens you'll have to ask yourself why.
You make me laugh, yet again, with your avowed love of all things Huawei.
"Widespread Opinion place the P20 Pro as the best handset of 2018"
That's just fantasy.
Apple low end devices may be 20% of unit sales overall, but likely at about half the ASP, so as a contribution to revenues, about 10%,
Yes. And not only one I'm sure. All opinions are valid but some are not helped by issues with the individuals holding them.
There is an inescapable reality here. The P20 Pro can take images out of the box that no iPhone can. It's a simple question of hardware. The iPhone X for example has an optical zoom of X2. It can't touch the P20 Pro.
You only have to watch the presentations of the Mate 10 and P20 Series to see specific areas pitted against the best Samsung and Apple phones. There was one comment by the head of Huawei during the Mate 10 presentation that showed some photos from winter in Alaska. They were from the Mate 10 but the person who took them was also carrying an iPhone X. Why not compare those photos to the ones from the iPhone X? Because there were none to be had. It couldn't handle the cold and shut down. Same story with night mode on the P20 Pro. It was only compared with Samsung as the iPhone X shot was simply black.
This guy goes off the rails when he calls night mode a gimmick. It isn't but don't take my word for it. Plenty of people have made that observation in their own reviews, only to correct themselves once they'd seen the results and I'd bet my grandmother that Apple will have the exact same feature this September or next year.
He also loses major credibility with his comments on Auto mode. You may not like ALL the results ALL of the time but that's normal. The processing is done to cater to preferences (and the Chinese seem to love all that oversharpened, saturated stuff) but all that is completely optional. He could have simply turned it all off with one master button. He could have shot RAW if he wanted or he could have gone into Pro Mode and done whatever he wanted. A Pro mode that I don't think the iPhone X even has out of the box.
The inescapable reality is that the Huawei P20 Pro has issues, but yeah, great camera system. Not enough by far to make it the "iPhone Killer" that you are looking for, but nice try.
I think that it is fine for people to have their own opinions about what is the best smartphone, but you seem to wrap the Huawei P20 Pro in quite a bit more hyperbole than the market itself sees. If is it a great as you say, they should sell lots of them, but, it won't.
It's priced too high for the Android OS market, hence, why you yourself aren't even planning a purchase.
On the contrary, I normally tone down my responses and let the links do the talking. Then, if there is something truly worth highlighting and is bulletproof I might include it to drive the point home, you know like the Cat 18 modem, dual SIM, fast charging, better battery, VoLTE, x3 optical zoom, night mode etc because in those cases opinion doesn't come into it.
Hyperbole is this article.
Maybe hyperbole, but accurate, and historically, you do only compare hardware features, leaving out the ecosystem, and that is your fail. You also have been in denial about the success of the X, and iPhone in general, consistently downplaying sales estimates, while at the same time providing your own tainted data to bolster your brand Huawei.
I still cannot fathom why you are here pushing your agenda, especially when your links are generally weak support for your arguments.
It is pretty delusional to believe that pricing isn't an issue. It is pretty easy to argue that Apple could have sold a lot more iphones if they didn't price the things so high.
If you're going to participate in comments, don't just show up and throw out a shovel of ignorant, shallow garbage.
Apple set up a range of prices and the most popular weren't oriented to price, they were targeted at new styling and features. Surely you can piece that together.
Android offers tons of cheaper options, but those maker aren't earning any profits and will eventually go out of business just like Nokia, Motorola, HTC, HP, and all the other low end Android makers in China that have already failed.
It's not clear Apple could build phones much faster than it currently is. If it lowered prices to boost demand, how would it build more at a lower price? Right now, Apple can afford to spend on advanced equipment and tooling and shipping to get products to market. How does it lower prices? Why should it? It's already neck and neck with the volume leader. Production has natural limits.
But again, when you offer ideas, make sure they have some value beside cynical snark. And point to some company that's doing better. Google priced its phones very low and couldn't sell them. It then tried to sell phones like Apple, and couldn't sell them. It's not easy.
His comment didn't need to go any deeper.
The 8 and X series were released late last year. There are only two quarters of official results to go by and Apple doesn't break numbers down so no one knows what is really happening. That's where analysts jump in with their numbers (estimates).
Not long ago, analysts were claiming that the low end made up a sizeable chunk of Apple unit sales. More than 20%. That's for old hardware. Not shabby at all and while they may not be the 'most' popular, they seem to be popular nevertheless. Obviously price is a factor.
Apple's sales remain flat. They have been for a long while. That doesn't look like its changing.
People talk about Android discounting but I keep reading about Apple promotions for 2x1 8 series phones. I haven't seen one myself, though. I haven't seen a 2x1 flagship promo for Android flagships.
People talk about small Android handset makers going out of business. That's consolidation. It happens in every mature market. What people don't see so clearly is that there are an unthinkably large amount of those handset makers still in business!
So where are the sales of failed business going? To other handset makers. Android handset makers!
Last year Huawei moved into second spot in unit sales, overtaking Apple. Apple clawed that position back with its peak quarters on its annual release cycle. Last year Huawei shipped 153,000,000 units. This year, their own goal is 200,000,000 units. That is massive growth and will put them into second spot again if they realise that growth.
Widespread opinion places the P20 Pro as the best handset of 2018 at several hundred dollars cheaper than an iPhone X.
You say that Android handset makers aren't making any money but Huawei is selling millions of phones, making billions and producing high quality innovative products.
Rumours point to Apple reducing prices this year. If that happens you'll have to ask yourself why.
You make me laugh, yet again, with your avowed love of all things Huawei.
"Widespread Opinion place the P20 Pro as the best handset of 2018"
That's just fantasy.
Apple low end devices may be 20% of unit sales overall, but likely at about half the ASP, so as a contribution to revenues, about 10%,
Yes. And not only one I'm sure. All opinions are valid but some are not helped by issues with the individuals holding them.
There is an inescapable reality here. The P20 Pro can take images out of the box that no iPhone can. It's a simple question of hardware. The iPhone X for example has an optical zoom of X2. It can't touch the P20 Pro.
You only have to watch the presentations of the Mate 10 and P20 Series to see specific areas pitted against the best Samsung and Apple phones. There was one comment by the head of Huawei during the Mate 10 presentation that showed some photos from winter in Alaska. They were from the Mate 10 but the person who took them was also carrying an iPhone X. Why not compare those photos to the ones from the iPhone X? Because there were none to be had. It couldn't handle the cold and shut down. Same story with night mode on the P20 Pro. It was only compared with Samsung as the iPhone X shot was simply black.
This guy goes off the rails when he calls night mode a gimmick. It isn't but don't take my word for it. Plenty of people have made that observation in their own reviews, only to correct themselves once they'd seen the results and I'd bet my grandmother that Apple will have the exact same feature this September or next year.
He also loses major credibility with his comments on Auto mode. You may not like ALL the results ALL of the time but that's normal. The processing is done to cater to preferences (and the Chinese seem to love all that oversharpened, saturated stuff) but all that is completely optional. He could have simply turned it all off with one master button. He could have shot RAW if he wanted or he could have gone into Pro Mode and done whatever he wanted. A Pro mode that I don't think the iPhone X even has out of the box.
The inescapable reality is that the Huawei P20 Pro has issues, but yeah, great camera system. Not enough by far to make it the "iPhone Killer" that you are looking for, but nice try.
I think that it is fine for people to have their own opinions about what is the best smartphone, but you seem to wrap the Huawei P20 Pro in quite a bit more hyperbole than the market itself sees. If is it a great as you say, they should sell lots of them, but, it won't.
It's priced too high for the Android OS market, hence, why you yourself aren't even planning a purchase.
On the contrary, I normally tone down my responses and let the links do the talking. Then, if there is something truly worth highlighting and is bulletproof I might include it to drive the point home, you know like the Cat 18 modem, dual SIM, fast charging, better battery, VoLTE, x3 optical zoom, night mode etc because in those cases opinion doesn't come into it.
Hyperbole is this article.
Maybe hyperbole, but accurate, and historically, you do only compare hardware features, leaving out the ecosystem, and that is your fail. You also have been in denial about the success of the X, and iPhone in general, consistently downplaying sales estimates, while at the same time providing your own tainted data to bolster your brand Huawei.
I still cannot fathom why you are here pushing your agenda, especially when your links are generally weak support for your arguments.
Not at all. If you rewind a little, my voice is a voice of reason in the hyperbole. Not the only one here but...
As for X, I said from the very start that it couldn't be judged from one or two quarters, especially from a company that is geared solely to one blowout quarter. I said I was open minded on both the notch and FaceID but that FaceID needed to be tested in the wild. I made a case for a bigger spread of prices and products (something that Apple implemented). The problem is that sales still look like they will be flat again this year. That's due to competition, saturation, commoditisation and Apple's sloth-like dynamics. For phone hardware, Apple has one basket and all its eggs get dumped in it.
iPhone X will see sales drop in each successive quarter from release. This is normal for many reasons but there is no point punching into the air on the back of one or two quarters. It must be judged in January/February to get a more balanced perspective.
Two years ago I said Huawei would be a major competitor to Apple. It has been exactly that. That continues to this day and Apple is no doubt chuffed that it doesn't have them on its home soil (although Huawei has recently moved on to the front foot as result of US actions to keep it out of the US) because Huawei has had a major impact on some of Apple's 'safe' markets and now there is going to be a big push in the UK.
My links are far from weak but that is for readers to decide. I even go to the trouble of citing the same sources included in some articles/posts when possible to provide a greater counterpoint (;-).
Anyone who's paid any attention to iPhone sales will understand that flagship models will always sell better for Apple because the lower-priced models generally are older models -- i.e., the ones upgrade buyers already have and are ready to trade out. Android switchers, too, have no reason to move to iPhone if sub-optimal is good enough for them, so they buy top-end, too. For curiosity, I wonder how well a lower-end but up-to-date model, like an SE with top silicone in it, would sell.
It is pretty delusional to believe that pricing isn't an issue. It is pretty easy to argue that Apple could have sold a lot more iphones if they didn't price the things so high.
One could say that much about any product. Porsches could be as numerous as Toyotas if they were cheaper in price.
The Porsche analogy isn't entirely wrong, but it has a major failing. The average or somewhat above-average American, for example, can afford a Toyota, not a Porsche. But that same person can easily afford even a top-of-the-line iPhone: spread over its average four-year life, $1,000 is only $20/month, much smaller than the service plan required by any smartphone.
The technology press lied and lied about iPhone x sales. Thank you Daniel for setting the record straight.
Why why does the mainstream media hate Apple so much? I think that they are jealous.
Apple hatred is a combination of factors, not least of which is that some people who acclimated to computing in the '90s got a broken record planted in their head that says, "Apple is a weak also-ran compared to Microsoft Windows. So shall it be forever." And so they're going to be forever disgruntled about the way things turned out.
But another big factor is that tech media people are in the business of reporting on tech products. They benefit tremendously from a confusing sea of similar products with no clear choice of which one the consumer should buy. That's the way it was in the '90s — but in the 2000s, Apple ruined it for them.
It is pretty delusional to believe that pricing isn't an issue. It is pretty easy to argue that Apple could have sold a lot more iphones if they didn't price the things so high.
If you're going to participate in comments, don't just show up and throw out a shovel of ignorant, shallow garbage.
Apple set up a range of prices and the most popular weren't oriented to price, they were targeted at new styling and features. Surely you can piece that together.
Android offers tons of cheaper options, but those maker aren't earning any profits and will eventually go out of business just like Nokia, Motorola, HTC, HP, and all the other low end Android makers in China that have already failed.
It's not clear Apple could build phones much faster than it currently is. If it lowered prices to boost demand, how would it build more at a lower price? Right now, Apple can afford to spend on advanced equipment and tooling and shipping to get products to market. How does it lower prices? Why should it? It's already neck and neck with the volume leader. Production has natural limits.
But again, when you offer ideas, make sure they have some value beside cynical snark. And point to some company that's doing better. Google priced its phones very low and couldn't sell them. It then tried to sell phones like Apple, and couldn't sell them. It's not easy.
His comment didn't need to go any deeper.
The 8 and X series were released late last year. There are only two quarters of official results to go by and Apple doesn't break numbers down so no one knows what is really happening. That's where analysts jump in with their numbers (estimates).
Not long ago, analysts were claiming that the low end made up a sizeable chunk of Apple unit sales. More than 20%. That's for old hardware. Not shabby at all and while they may not be the 'most' popular, they seem to be popular nevertheless. Obviously price is a factor.
Apple's sales remain flat. They have been for a long while. That doesn't look like its changing.
People talk about Android discounting but I keep reading about Apple promotions for 2x1 8 series phones. I haven't seen one myself, though. I haven't seen a 2x1 flagship promo for Android flagships.
People talk about small Android handset makers going out of business. That's consolidation. It happens in every mature market. What people don't see so clearly is that there are an unthinkably large amount of those handset makers still in business!
So where are the sales of failed business going? To other handset makers. Android handset makers!
Last year Huawei moved into second spot in unit sales, overtaking Apple. Apple clawed that position back with its peak quarters on its annual release cycle. Last year Huawei shipped 153,000,000 units. This year, their own goal is 200,000,000 units. That is massive growth and will put them into second spot again if they realise that growth.
Widespread opinion places the P20 Pro as the best handset of 2018 at several hundred dollars cheaper than an iPhone X.
You say that Android handset makers aren't making any money but Huawei is selling millions of phones, making billions and producing high quality innovative products.
Rumours point to Apple reducing prices this year. If that happens you'll have to ask yourself why.
You make me laugh, yet again, with your avowed love of all things Huawei.
"Widespread Opinion place the P20 Pro as the best handset of 2018"
That's just fantasy.
Apple low end devices may be 20% of unit sales overall, but likely at about half the ASP, so as a contribution to revenues, about 10%,
Yes. And not only one I'm sure. All opinions are valid but some are not helped by issues with the individuals holding them.
There is an inescapable reality here. The P20 Pro can take images out of the box that no iPhone can. It's a simple question of hardware. The iPhone X for example has an optical zoom of X2. It can't touch the P20 Pro.
You only have to watch the presentations of the Mate 10 and P20 Series to see specific areas pitted against the best Samsung and Apple phones. There was one comment by the head of Huawei during the Mate 10 presentation that showed some photos from winter in Alaska. They were from the Mate 10 but the person who took them was also carrying an iPhone X. Why not compare those photos to the ones from the iPhone X? Because there were none to be had. It couldn't handle the cold and shut down. Same story with night mode on the P20 Pro. It was only compared with Samsung as the iPhone X shot was simply black.
This guy goes off the rails when he calls night mode a gimmick. It isn't but don't take my word for it. Plenty of people have made that observation in their own reviews, only to correct themselves once they'd seen the results and I'd bet my grandmother that Apple will have the exact same feature this September or next year.
He also loses major credibility with his comments on Auto mode. You may not like ALL the results ALL of the time but that's normal. The processing is done to cater to preferences (and the Chinese seem to love all that oversharpened, saturated stuff) but all that is completely optional. He could have simply turned it all off with one master button. He could have shot RAW if he wanted or he could have gone into Pro Mode and done whatever he wanted. A Pro mode that I don't think the iPhone X even has out of the box.
I personally think that all smart phone manufacturers spend too much time on cameras, but I suppose there has to be some differentiation year on year.
For most people a good selfie camera is enough. For a smaller group more interested in photography any top of the line smart phone of the last few years was enough, for serious photographers extra gear is needed. Working in the artic is a nice to have.
Price isn't my prime factor when buying. To me it is quite simple. "How does the device fit my use case?" To me that means my iPhone 7 may well have to be replaced by an 8 and that's it for me with Apple. I wear protective headgear a lot. This is either a motorcycle crash helmet or one similar to a tree surgeon would wear. TouchId (remember that?) allows me to open the phone with a fingerprint. Using FaceID means that I'd have to remove the headgear. This takes time and if a lot lower down the 'Ease of use' list when compared to the older phones. Removing a glove is an order of magnitude easier than removing the helmet. Yes I could enter the passcode but that defeats the whole object of TouchID and FaceID. Sorry Apple, you have lost the plot here as well in many other areas especially wrt the Mac line-up.
Goodbye
Does that mean you would rather see Apple lose users than cater to them?
If Apple hadn't supposedly shipped low end old phones representing 20% of sales do.you really think they would have bitten the bullet and bought a more expensive phone instead?
Apple's sales are flat even with that 20%. Without it, unit sales would be notably down and can imagine the reactions on the markets.
It would be panic stations.
Good job they anticipated a potential drop in unit sales by releasing lower priced models. Apple knows that iPhone users are not upgrading as frequently as before. I do expect some price reductions this year ( albeit not at the top end), and with it I think they have a good chance in fact of breaking out of the 220M a year units because after all, they have a large install base to cater too.
It is pretty delusional to believe that pricing isn't an issue. It is pretty easy to argue that Apple could have sold a lot more iphones if they didn't price the things so high.
If you're going to participate in comments, don't just show up and throw out a shovel of ignorant, shallow garbage.
Apple set up a range of prices and the most popular weren't oriented to price, they were targeted at new styling and features. Surely you can piece that together.
Android offers tons of cheaper options, but those maker aren't earning any profits and will eventually go out of business just like Nokia, Motorola, HTC, HP, and all the other low end Android makers in China that have already failed.
It's not clear Apple could build phones much faster than it currently is. If it lowered prices to boost demand, how would it build more at a lower price? Right now, Apple can afford to spend on advanced equipment and tooling and shipping to get products to market. How does it lower prices? Why should it? It's already neck and neck with the volume leader. Production has natural limits.
But again, when you offer ideas, make sure they have some value beside cynical snark. And point to some company that's doing better. Google priced its phones very low and couldn't sell them. It then tried to sell phones like Apple, and couldn't sell them. It's not easy.
His comment didn't need to go any deeper.
The 8 and X series were released late last year. There are only two quarters of official results to go by and Apple doesn't break numbers down so no one knows what is really happening. That's where analysts jump in with their numbers (estimates).
Not long ago, analysts were claiming that the low end made up a sizeable chunk of Apple unit sales. More than 20%. That's for old hardware. Not shabby at all and while they may not be the 'most' popular, they seem to be popular nevertheless. Obviously price is a factor.
Apple's sales remain flat. They have been for a long while. That doesn't look like its changing.
People talk about Android discounting but I keep reading about Apple promotions for 2x1 8 series phones. I haven't seen one myself, though. I haven't seen a 2x1 flagship promo for Android flagships.
People talk about small Android handset makers going out of business. That's consolidation. It happens in every mature market. What people don't see so clearly is that there are an unthinkably large amount of those handset makers still in business!
So where are the sales of failed business going? To other handset makers. Android handset makers!
Last year Huawei moved into second spot in unit sales, overtaking Apple. Apple clawed that position back with its peak quarters on its annual release cycle. Last year Huawei shipped 153,000,000 units. This year, their own goal is 200,000,000 units. That is massive growth and will put them into second spot again if they realise that growth.
Widespread opinion places the P20 Pro as the best handset of 2018 at several hundred dollars cheaper than an iPhone X.
You say that Android handset makers aren't making any money but Huawei is selling millions of phones, making billions and producing high quality innovative products.
Rumours point to Apple reducing prices this year. If that happens you'll have to ask yourself why.
FWIW ATT already did an iPhone X BOGO months ago, as has Sprint. TMo did a buy one and get $700 off another. TMo also had equivalent deals for some of the latest LG's and Samsungs. Deals on even new flagships aren't at all uncommon, including Apple's top of the line.
Were those Apple subsidized discounts and BOGO's?
Almost certainly not.; just carrier discounts to pick up a few switchers.
Betcha that Android OS device makers are quite likely to provide carrier incentives to drive share acquisition.
Don't be so sure, here in the UK where many people buy the phones outright, the iPhone X 64gb can be found quite easily for around £750-800 brand new & unlocked compared to Apple's £999 rrp. I've also seen refurbs below £700 already on the likes of MusicMagpie. Carrier discount/deals are often not very good in comparison here, often much more expensive than the device + a sim-only deal.
So, you seem to be implying that Apple is providing distributors a 25% discount in the UK, underselling it's own stores, or are you implying that these sellers have grey market devices obtained from other markets?
When the SE was released,it had the then current processor in it. It was equivalent internally to Apple's top of the line handset. It sold well, but didn't outsell the flagship. So, no, Apple selling lower priced handsets with high end internals wouldn't improve their sales.
Price isn't my prime factor when buying. To me it is quite simple. "How does the device fit my use case?" To me that means my iPhone 7 may well have to be replaced by an 8 and that's it for me with Apple. I wear protective headgear a lot. This is either a motorcycle crash helmet or one similar to a tree surgeon would wear. TouchId (remember that?) allows me to open the phone with a fingerprint. Using FaceID means that I'd have to remove the headgear. This takes time and if a lot lower down the 'Ease of use' list when compared to the older phones. Removing a glove is an order of magnitude easier than removing the helmet. Yes I could enter the passcode but that defeats the whole object of TouchID and FaceID. Sorry Apple, you have lost the plot here as well in many other areas especially wrt the Mac line-up.
Goodbye
Does that mean you would rather see Apple lose users than cater to them?
If Apple hadn't supposedly shipped low end old phones representing 20% of sales do.you really think they would have bitten the bullet and bought a more expensive phone instead?
Apple's sales are flat even with that 20%. Without it, unit sales would be notably down and can imagine the reactions on the markets.
It would be panic stations.
Good job they anticipated a potential drop in unit sales by releasing lower priced models. Apple knows that iPhone users are not upgrading as frequently as before. I do expect some price reductions this year ( albeit not at the top end), and with it I think they have a good chance in fact of breaking out of the 220M a year units because after all, they have a large install base to cater too.
Yes, it was a smart move IMO and now they have half a foot in the door of developing markets too. They will have to slog it out with Xiaomi which will be very tough but at least they have an option at that end.
The sole mystery for me was on the super-cycle. Through Apple IDs, Apple has a very clear idea of iPhone cycles. It knows who upgraded and to what (in the case of iPhones) and has a good idea if older phones went to 'new' users or stayed on the same ID.
What would happen if lots of users did in fact upgrade last year (and a longer upgrade cycle wasn't part of the reason for flat sales)? A sort of super-cycle that happened but simply didn't register in the form of a unit sales spike.
Nobody but Apple knows but the first quarter after the refresh should be the best indicator to pick some details out, together with this year's pricing and model options (if the 7 series will take the place of the 6 series at the low end and if they reduce the model spread and if the X has a permanent place in the lineup etc)
The size of the X screen, NOT THE PRICE, is what held back a lot of us big screen fanboys from buying it.
Yup, that's what prevented me from buying it. $1000 is actually not that much for a device you will keep for several years. But these days my phone is my primary book reading device so I need a "plus" model.
I still hear/read people saying the iPhone X has a bigger display than the iPhone Plus models. Unfortunately, very few seem to realize their error when you try to explain it.
I'm certainly in the same boat as you and multimedia, but even then I'm not sure I'll be getting a new iPhone this year (which will mean I'll be using my iPhone 7 Plus for an unprecedented 3 years) since my Apple Watch is helping to offload a lot of what I need my iPhone to do (with my Mac also helping as I use it most of all, including sending and receiving phone calls from it on a regular basis).
I've also got a 7+ (but not a watch). It's going to be super hard not to update to an X+ if it comes out this year!
Have you considered getting a Watch? With watchOS 5 most of the limitations I've had with it will likely go away this Autumn when it finally goes live. Meaning, Spotify and SiriusXM will be able to have full dedicated apps that will be able to stream over WiFi and cellular.
Anecdote Warning: I grew up wearing a watch because it was the most convenience way to keep track of time, but that changed around the time I got my first pocketable cellphone. I thought it would be tough to get back into wearing a watch again but I found it quite easy; the benefits for me are simply too great to not wear one.
What I thought would be even harder to adopt—and it was, but only ever so slightly—was wearing my Watch to bed at night to track my sleep. After a few days it felt weird not to wear my Watch at night. So when do I charge it? I mostly charge it when I bath, which is a couple times a day. I also typically have raise to wake disabled with Theater Mode enabled most of the time, and while I'm in bed I put it in Airplane Mode. This gives me about two days of battery life if I wore it constantly.
Price isn't my prime factor when buying. To me it is quite simple. "How does the device fit my use case?" To me that means my iPhone 7 may well have to be replaced by an 8 and that's it for me with Apple. I wear protective headgear a lot. This is either a motorcycle crash helmet or one similar to a tree surgeon would wear. TouchId (remember that?) allows me to open the phone with a fingerprint. Using FaceID means that I'd have to remove the headgear. This takes time and if a lot lower down the 'Ease of use' list when compared to the older phones. Removing a glove is an order of magnitude easier than removing the helmet. Yes I could enter the passcode but that defeats the whole object of TouchID and FaceID. Sorry Apple, you have lost the plot here as well in many other areas especially wrt the Mac line-up.
Goodbye
Does that mean you would rather see Apple lose users than cater to them?
If Apple hadn't supposedly shipped low end old phones representing 20% of sales do.you really think they would have bitten the bullet and bought a more expensive phone instead?
Apple's sales are flat even with that 20%. Without it, unit sales would be notably down and can imagine the reactions on the markets.
It would be panic stations.
Good job they anticipated a potential drop in unit sales by releasing lower priced models. Apple knows that iPhone users are not upgrading as frequently as before. I do expect some price reductions this year ( albeit not at the top end), and with it I think they have a good chance in fact of breaking out of the 220M a year units because after all, they have a large install base to cater too.
Yeah, they did lower their entry level price, but they have been raising there premium price since the 3 GS. The result is that iPhone ASP's have hovered around $600 for a number of years, but actually went up with the release of the X, to $795. That was at a time when Samsung had a peak ASP at just about $250.
As I stated earlier, that 20% of sales is about 10% of revenue due to the lower ASP.
I do believe the Apple will ship about 220 m iPhones a year for the foreseeable future, based on the increasing average life of devices and the ever expanding user base, thanks to a robust market for used and refurbished iPhones. http://www.asymco.com
Price isn't my prime factor when buying. To me it is quite simple. "How does the device fit my use case?" To me that means my iPhone 7 may well have to be replaced by an 8 and that's it for me with Apple. I wear protective headgear a lot. This is either a motorcycle crash helmet or one similar to a tree surgeon would wear. TouchId (remember that?) allows me to open the phone with a fingerprint. Using FaceID means that I'd have to remove the headgear. This takes time and if a lot lower down the 'Ease of use' list when compared to the older phones. Removing a glove is an order of magnitude easier than removing the helmet. Yes I could enter the passcode but that defeats the whole object of TouchID and FaceID. Sorry Apple, you have lost the plot here as well in many other areas especially wrt the Mac line-up.
Goodbye
Does that mean you would rather see Apple lose users than cater to them?
If Apple hadn't supposedly shipped low end old phones representing 20% of sales do.you really think they would have bitten the bullet and bought a more expensive phone instead?
Apple's sales are flat even with that 20%. Without it, unit sales would be notably down and can imagine the reactions on the markets.
It would be panic stations.
Good job they anticipated a potential drop in unit sales by releasing lower priced models. Apple knows that iPhone users are not upgrading as frequently as before. I do expect some price reductions this year ( albeit not at the top end), and with it I think they have a good chance in fact of breaking out of the 220M a year units because after all, they have a large install base to cater too.
Yes, it was a smart move IMO and now they have half a foot in the door of developing markets too. They will have to slog it out with Xiaomi which will be very tough but at least they have an option at that end.
The sole mystery for me was on the super-cycle. Through Apple IDs, Apple has a very clear idea of iPhone cycles. It knows who upgraded and to what (in the case of iPhones) and has a good idea if older phones went to 'new' users or stayed on the same ID.
What would happen if lots of users did in fact upgrade last year (and a longer upgrade cycle wasn't part of the reason for flat sales)? A sort of super-cycle that happened but simply didn't register in the form of a unit sales spike.
Nobody but Apple knows but the first quarter after the refresh should be the best indicator to pick some details out, together with this year's pricing and model options (if the 7 series will take the place of the 6 series at the low end and if they reduce the model spread and if the X has a permanent place in the lineup etc)
Uhm, if Xiaomi is the low price product, don't you think that all of the other surviving Android OS builders are going to have to compete on price, including Huawei and Samsung? This is a classic race to the bottom scenario, with Apple being much less vulnerable since it doesn't compete in the Android OS device market. Why would you even think that Apple will take the brunt of pricing pressure when Android OS device makers already have relatively low ASP's and hence, revenue and profits?
It is pretty delusional to believe that pricing isn't an issue. It is pretty easy to argue that Apple could have sold a lot more iphones if they didn't price the things so high.
If you're going to participate in comments, don't just show up and throw out a shovel of ignorant, shallow garbage.
Apple set up a range of prices and the most popular weren't oriented to price, they were targeted at new styling and features. Surely you can piece that together.
Android offers tons of cheaper options, but those maker aren't earning any profits and will eventually go out of business just like Nokia, Motorola, HTC, HP, and all the other low end Android makers in China that have already failed.
It's not clear Apple could build phones much faster than it currently is. If it lowered prices to boost demand, how would it build more at a lower price? Right now, Apple can afford to spend on advanced equipment and tooling and shipping to get products to market. How does it lower prices? Why should it? It's already neck and neck with the volume leader. Production has natural limits.
But again, when you offer ideas, make sure they have some value beside cynical snark. And point to some company that's doing better. Google priced its phones very low and couldn't sell them. It then tried to sell phones like Apple, and couldn't sell them. It's not easy.
His comment didn't need to go any deeper.
The 8 and X series were released late last year. There are only two quarters of official results to go by and Apple doesn't break numbers down so no one knows what is really happening. That's where analysts jump in with their numbers (estimates).
Not long ago, analysts were claiming that the low end made up a sizeable chunk of Apple unit sales. More than 20%. That's for old hardware. Not shabby at all and while they may not be the 'most' popular, they seem to be popular nevertheless. Obviously price is a factor.
Apple's sales remain flat. They have been for a long while. That doesn't look like its changing.
People talk about Android discounting but I keep reading about Apple promotions for 2x1 8 series phones. I haven't seen one myself, though. I haven't seen a 2x1 flagship promo for Android flagships.
People talk about small Android handset makers going out of business. That's consolidation. It happens in every mature market. What people don't see so clearly is that there are an unthinkably large amount of those handset makers still in business!
So where are the sales of failed business going? To other handset makers. Android handset makers!
Last year Huawei moved into second spot in unit sales, overtaking Apple. Apple clawed that position back with its peak quarters on its annual release cycle. Last year Huawei shipped 153,000,000 units. This year, their own goal is 200,000,000 units. That is massive growth and will put them into second spot again if they realise that growth.
Widespread opinion places the P20 Pro as the best handset of 2018 at several hundred dollars cheaper than an iPhone X.
You say that Android handset makers aren't making any money but Huawei is selling millions of phones, making billions and producing high quality innovative products.
Rumours point to Apple reducing prices this year. If that happens you'll have to ask yourself why.
You make me laugh, yet again, with your avowed love of all things Huawei.
"Widespread Opinion place the P20 Pro as the best handset of 2018"
That's just fantasy.
Apple low end devices may be 20% of unit sales overall, but likely at about half the ASP, so as a contribution to revenues, about 10%,
Yes. And not only one I'm sure. All opinions are valid but some are not helped by issues with the individuals holding them.
There is an inescapable reality here. The P20 Pro can take images out of the box that no iPhone can. It's a simple question of hardware. The iPhone X for example has an optical zoom of X2. It can't touch the P20 Pro.
You only have to watch the presentations of the Mate 10 and P20 Series to see specific areas pitted against the best Samsung and Apple phones. There was one comment by the head of Huawei during the Mate 10 presentation that showed some photos from winter in Alaska. They were from the Mate 10 but the person who took them was also carrying an iPhone X. Why not compare those photos to the ones from the iPhone X? Because there were none to be had. It couldn't handle the cold and shut down. Same story with night mode on the P20 Pro. It was only compared with Samsung as the iPhone X shot was simply black.
This guy goes off the rails when he calls night mode a gimmick. It isn't but don't take my word for it. Plenty of people have made that observation in their own reviews, only to correct themselves once they'd seen the results and I'd bet my grandmother that Apple will have the exact same feature this September or next year.
He also loses major credibility with his comments on Auto mode. You may not like ALL the results ALL of the time but that's normal. The processing is done to cater to preferences (and the Chinese seem to love all that oversharpened, saturated stuff) but all that is completely optional. He could have simply turned it all off with one master button. He could have shot RAW if he wanted or he could have gone into Pro Mode and done whatever he wanted. A Pro mode that I don't think the iPhone X even has out of the box.
The inescapable reality is that the Huawei P20 Pro has issues, but yeah, great camera system. Not enough by far to make it the "iPhone Killer" that you are looking for, but nice try.
I think that it is fine for people to have their own opinions about what is the best smartphone, but you seem to wrap the Huawei P20 Pro in quite a bit more hyperbole than the market itself sees. If is it a great as you say, they should sell lots of them, but, it won't.
It's priced too high for the Android OS market, hence, why you yourself aren't even planning a purchase.
On the contrary, I normally tone down my responses and let the links do the talking. Then, if there is something truly worth highlighting and is bulletproof I might include it to drive the point home, you know like the Cat 18 modem, dual SIM, fast charging, better battery, VoLTE, x3 optical zoom, night mode etc because in those cases opinion doesn't come into it.
Hyperbole is this article.
Maybe hyperbole, but accurate, and historically, you do only compare hardware features, leaving out the ecosystem, and that is your fail. You also have been in denial about the success of the X, and iPhone in general, consistently downplaying sales estimates, while at the same time providing your own tainted data to bolster your brand Huawei.
I still cannot fathom why you are here pushing your agenda, especially when your links are generally weak support for your arguments.
Not at all. If you rewind a little, my voice is a voice of reason in the hyperbole. Not the only one here but...
As for X, I said from the very start that it couldn't be judged from one or two quarters, especially from a company that is geared solely to one blowout quarter. I said I was open minded on both the notch and FaceID but that FaceID needed to be tested in the wild. I made a case for a bigger spread of prices and products (something that Apple implemented). The problem is that sales still look like they will be flat again this year. That's due to competition, saturation, commoditisation and Apple's sloth-like dynamics. For phone hardware, Apple has one basket and all its eggs get dumped in it.
iPhone X will see sales drop in each successive quarter from release. This is normal for many reasons but there is no point punching into the air on the back of one or two quarters. It must be judged in January/February to get a more balanced perspective.
Two years ago I said Huawei would be a major competitor to Apple. It has been exactly that. That continues to this day and Apple is no doubt chuffed that it doesn't have them on its home soil (although Huawei has recently moved on to the front foot as result of US actions to keep it out of the US) because Huawei has had a major impact on some of Apple's 'safe' markets and now there is going to be a big push in the UK.
My links are far from weak but that is for readers to decide. I even go to the trouble of citing the same sources included in some articles/posts when possible to provide a greater counterpoint (;-).
But the question remains? Why? Why are you here, putting in so much effort to constantly compare Apple to your favored brand? Do you not have a job, a retirement hobby? Can you honestly tell us you have no professional affiliation with Huawei?
Price isn't my prime factor when buying. To me it is quite simple. "How does the device fit my use case?" To me that means my iPhone 7 may well have to be replaced by an 8 and that's it for me with Apple. I wear protective headgear a lot. This is either a motorcycle crash helmet or one similar to a tree surgeon would wear. TouchId (remember that?) allows me to open the phone with a fingerprint. Using FaceID means that I'd have to remove the headgear. This takes time and if a lot lower down the 'Ease of use' list when compared to the older phones. Removing a glove is an order of magnitude easier than removing the helmet. Yes I could enter the passcode but that defeats the whole object of TouchID and FaceID. Sorry Apple, you have lost the plot here as well in many other areas especially wrt the Mac line-up.
Goodbye
Does that mean you would rather see Apple lose users than cater to them?
If Apple hadn't supposedly shipped low end old phones representing 20% of sales do.you really think they would have bitten the bullet and bought a more expensive phone instead?
Apple's sales are flat even with that 20%. Without it, unit sales would be notably down and can imagine the reactions on the markets.
It would be panic stations.
Good job they anticipated a potential drop in unit sales by releasing lower priced models. Apple knows that iPhone users are not upgrading as frequently as before. I do expect some price reductions this year ( albeit not at the top end), and with it I think they have a good chance in fact of breaking out of the 220M a year units because after all, they have a large install base to cater too.
Yes, it was a smart move IMO and now they have half a foot in the door of developing markets too. They will have to slog it out with Xiaomi which will be very tough but at least they have an option at that end.
The sole mystery for me was on the super-cycle. Through Apple IDs, Apple has a very clear idea of iPhone cycles. It knows who upgraded and to what (in the case of iPhones) and has a good idea if older phones went to 'new' users or stayed on the same ID.
What would happen if lots of users did in fact upgrade last year (and a longer upgrade cycle wasn't part of the reason for flat sales)? A sort of super-cycle that happened but simply didn't register in the form of a unit sales spike.
Nobody but Apple knows but the first quarter after the refresh should be the best indicator to pick some details out, together with this year's pricing and model options (if the 7 series will take the place of the 6 series at the low end and if they reduce the model spread and if the X has a permanent place in the lineup etc)
Uhm, if Xiaomi is the low price product, don't you think that all of the other surviving Android OS builders are going to have to compete on price, including Huawei and Samsung? This is a classic race to the bottom scenario, with Apple being much less vulnerable since it doesn't compete in the Android OS device market. Why would you even think that Apple will take the brunt of pricing pressure when Android OS device makers already have relatively low ASP's and hence, revenue and profits?
That's delusional.
No. You misunderstood. I only mentioned Apple because it's a relatively new fish in that part of the pond and swimming in that area will be tough because Xiaomi is putting a special focus on that segment with modern hardware. I didn't mention Huawei or Samsung because they are already there and have been for a while. That isn't to say they aren't in the same situation, they are. In fact Huawei has been having a tough time in India in that particular segment.
I've said for a long time that Apple would have to spread it offering out through the price bands. It's doing just that. There are issues, such as selling years old hardware but I can why they are trying. If it works, it is basically giving them a far higher return on their original investment. If it doesn't work they always have the option of producing new phones with modern designs on those price bands. Of course that would open them up to seeing those phones eat into the top end.
Apple can't control that possibility. The market will decide and although you worship ASP and think marketshare isn't of paramount importance, Apple doesn't want to see its phone line end up like the Mac line in the eighties.
There's no problem with high priced premium offerings (Huawei had that long before Apple and even now has a $2,000 dollar phone on the market) but there has to be a strong supporting cast to keep things moving.
Comments
Maybe things are different where you are. I've never ever seen a 2x1 on a flagship phone for example. The carriers here haven't used that option.
Hyperbole is this article.
Maybe hyperbole, but accurate, and historically, you do only compare hardware features, leaving out the ecosystem, and that is your fail. You also have been in denial about the success of the X, and iPhone in general, consistently downplaying sales estimates, while at the same time providing your own tainted data to bolster your brand Huawei.
I still cannot fathom why you are here pushing your agenda, especially when your links are generally weak support for your arguments.
As for X, I said from the very start that it couldn't be judged from one or two quarters, especially from a company that is geared solely to one blowout quarter. I said I was open minded on both the notch and FaceID but that FaceID needed to be tested in the wild. I made a case for a bigger spread of prices and products (something that Apple implemented). The problem is that sales still look like they will be flat again this year. That's due to competition, saturation, commoditisation and Apple's sloth-like dynamics. For phone hardware, Apple has one basket and all its eggs get dumped in it.
iPhone X will see sales drop in each successive quarter from release. This is normal for many reasons but there is no point punching into the air on the back of one or two quarters. It must be judged in January/February to get a more balanced perspective.
Two years ago I said Huawei would be a major competitor to Apple. It has been exactly that. That continues to this day and Apple is no doubt chuffed that it doesn't have them on its home soil (although Huawei has recently moved on to the front foot as result of US actions to keep it out of the US) because Huawei has had a major impact on some of Apple's 'safe' markets and now there is going to be a big push in the UK.
My links are far from weak but that is for readers to decide. I even go to the trouble of citing the same sources included in some articles/posts when possible to provide a greater counterpoint (;-).
Apple hatred is a combination of factors, not least of which is that some people who acclimated to computing in the '90s got a broken record planted in their head that says, "Apple is a weak also-ran compared to Microsoft Windows. So shall it be forever." And so they're going to be forever disgruntled about the way things turned out.
But another big factor is that tech media people are in the business of reporting on tech products. They benefit tremendously from a confusing sea of similar products with no clear choice of which one the consumer should buy. That's the way it was in the '90s — but in the 2000s, Apple ruined it for them.
For most people a good selfie camera is enough. For a smaller group more interested in photography any top of the line smart phone of the last few years was enough, for serious photographers extra gear is needed. Working in the artic is a nice to have.
Good job they anticipated a potential drop in unit sales by releasing lower priced models. Apple knows that iPhone users are not upgrading as frequently as before. I do expect some price reductions this year ( albeit not at the top end), and with it I think they have a good chance in fact of breaking out of the 220M a year units because after all, they have a large install base to cater too.
So, no, Apple selling lower priced handsets with high end internals wouldn't improve their sales.
The sole mystery for me was on the super-cycle. Through Apple IDs, Apple has a very clear idea of iPhone cycles. It knows who upgraded and to what (in the case of iPhones) and has a good idea if older phones went to 'new' users or stayed on the same ID.
What would happen if lots of users did in fact upgrade last year (and a longer upgrade cycle wasn't part of the reason for flat sales)? A sort of super-cycle that happened but simply didn't register in the form of a unit sales spike.
Nobody but Apple knows but the first quarter after the refresh should be the best indicator to pick some details out, together with this year's pricing and model options (if the 7 series will take the place of the 6 series at the low end and if they reduce the model spread and if the X has a permanent place in the lineup etc)
Anecdote Warning: I grew up wearing a watch because it was the most convenience way to keep track of time, but that changed around the time I got my first pocketable cellphone. I thought it would be tough to get back into wearing a watch again but I found it quite easy; the benefits for me are simply too great to not wear one.
What I thought would be even harder to adopt—and it was, but only ever so slightly—was wearing my Watch to bed at night to track my sleep. After a few days it felt weird not to wear my Watch at night. So when do I charge it? I mostly charge it when I bath, which is a couple times a day. I also typically have raise to wake disabled with Theater Mode enabled most of the time, and while I'm in bed I put it in Airplane Mode. This gives me about two days of battery life if I wore it constantly.
As I stated earlier, that 20% of sales is about 10% of revenue due to the lower ASP.
I do believe the Apple will ship about 220 m iPhones a year for the foreseeable future, based on the increasing average life of devices and the ever expanding user base, thanks to a robust market for used and refurbished iPhones.
http://www.asymco.com
That's delusional.
I've said for a long time that Apple would have to spread it offering out through the price bands. It's doing just that. There are issues, such as selling years old hardware but I can why they are trying. If it works, it is basically giving them a far higher return on their original investment. If it doesn't work they always have the option of producing new phones with modern designs on those price bands. Of course that would open them up to seeing those phones eat into the top end.
Apple can't control that possibility. The market will decide and although you worship ASP and think marketshare isn't of paramount importance, Apple doesn't want to see its phone line end up like the Mac line in the eighties.
There's no problem with high priced premium offerings (Huawei had that long before Apple and even now has a $2,000 dollar phone on the market) but there has to be a strong supporting cast to keep things moving.