Erm. You already posted that info - and in this thread and I replied.
It's competition and that's healthy but it's for 2019 which is a long way off (and it's still only a rumour ;-) ).
Do you think Huawei is resting on its laurels?
As I noted, updated info from depreview.com.
"According to German website AllAboutSamsung, the South Korean manufacturer's upcoming flagship will be the first smartphone to combine a super-wide-angle and a tele-lens with the primary camera. The super-wide-angle is expected to come with a 123-degree angle of view, the tele lens with a 3x magnification, offering a wider zoom range than any other smartphone.
The only current smartphone with triple-camera on the market, Huawei's P20 Pro, doesn't come with a super-wide-angle option and instead opts for a monochrome sensor for increased low light capabilities and a native monochrome shooting mode. The main options for smartphone users who want a built-in super-wide-angle, LG's recent models, have to make do without a tele-zoom.
The rest of the rumored Samsung specifications sound promising, too: the super-wide-angle is expected to come with a 16MP resolution and F1.9 aperture, the primary camera will supposedly feature a 12MP sensor and dual aperture, and the tele uses a 13MP imager and F2.4 lens. No OIS or autofocus will be available on the super-wide-angle but given the angle of view those features might not be missed.
If the rumored specs are close to the real thing and Samsung's engineers manage to merge image information from all three sensors in an efficient way, the new Samsung could be the smartphone for photography in 2019. We will know more in a few months time."
Samsung must really want everyone to know that they have a camera system superior to the P20 Pro on the way with the S10, but yeah just a rumors.
I agree, competition is great.
Just wanted you to know that I agree that Apple didn't spend as much as Huawei did last year on R&D, only $11.58B to $14B, though your would have to acknowledge, that the bulk of Huawei's R&D went to the telecom side, not phones. Good for them.
It is protectionism from January this year where it is widely accepted that political pressure was used on private companies for them to cancel deals with Huawei.
The story is wrong about Huawei exceeding Apple in units sales; Apple sold 216m in 2017.
Perhaps what is wrong is your understanding of the story:
You may think it is protectionism, but the articles point out national security issues.
Sad about Fierce wireless, but that specifically points to national security issues, not protectionism.
Nice try on the data. Huawei jumped ahead of Apple from mid May to July of 2017 and then Apple was ahead again. As I pointed out, yearly sales.
1. Security issues that don't exist (in this context). That is the front for keeping a major competitor out.
2. Sad because the company could go out of business, users will lose a service and to replace it, it will be more expensive but, have no doubt, whatever it is replaced with will be manufactured... in China!
3. Yes, you mentioned yearly sales but - I didn't - and you were responding to me.
avon b7 said: On switching, far from hating Android (EMUI), I liked it a lot and became dependent on certain elements that I now can't live without. None of what iOS users claim to be the hell of Android actually materialised. None of it. The opposite was actually true. I was freed from the chains of iTunes, email attachments actually downloaded to my phone, simple things (or things that should be simple) actually were simple, like attaching documents to mails. I had all the options to do things my way and not Apple's.
Hmm, that's interesting (and maybe reassuring). I haven't had much recent experience with Android, but what I had several years ago (brief as it was) didn't impress me. My friend, who owned both iDevices and the Android devices, clearly favored iOS as well. But, maybe things have changed enough. My impression of it (at the time), was that it was kind of like a rough version of Windows... usable, but kind of a mess.
I'd imagine the main problem with it is determining app safety and avoiding attacks, etc. a bit like the difference between Mac and Windows that still exists, but probably similarly, the gap keeps narrowing. If I end up going PC, mobile has been one concern... so it is good to hear people who know Mac/iOS that don't think Android is awful.
avon b7 said: So there is hope at least and Tim Cook won't be around forever and neither will Jony Ive who I suspect is the person behind some of the latest design decision goofs. I take heart in the fact that there have been rumours about a split within Apple on some projects and notably the MBP.
Same here. My hope is that Apple went through a rough patch due to such massive growth that sucked all their resources onto iOS. Now, they will start to recover from that and put proper resources back into neglected areas.
But, that narrative (which I think is partly true) doesn't match some of the other decisions and statements... and that's the part that worries me. I'm still concerned that at the core of the problem is a fundamental switch in priorities and a short-sighted view of iOS's place in the big-picture (or, actually a lot of their recent expansion into various markets... it seems more shotgun approach, hoping to hit something).
tmay said: So, you just made the case for yourself, turgidly, I might add; you don't really want to be in Apple's ecosystem anymore. Hallelujah!
Or, maybe they want the Apple they remember, in their prime, back?
avon b7 said: ... accept a approx $300 Touchbar even if you don't want it and accept a keyboard that can literally fail at any moment (that is covered for a maximum of four years) and for which Apple hasn't even bothered to tell its users what the problem is (in spite of EVERY SINGLE APPLE BUTTERFLY KEYBOARD EVER MADE being covered) and if you run into problems past those four years it could cost you over 700€ to fix (the replacement having the exact same -unknown- issues) ...
Well, and this wouldn't be so bad, if they hadn't made the non-TouchBar models purposely a poor choice. I had considered buying a non-TouchBar (or 'esc') model until I started reading articles about the actual internal differences. Then I was like, WTF!? They clearly want that extra $300 and to up-sell you.
And, yes, while their solution to the keyboard problems is better than nothing, it seems basically aimed at hoping to hit kind of a (in Apple think, anyway) replacement or resale time-point. It's a non-solution for the typical long-term laptop owner. They probably just calculated that some majority of people will have moved on after about 4 years anyway.
k2kw said: Cooks biggest problem is that he has under invested in important services like Siri and Maps at they don't make money with but still are important to the ecosystem
... Cook's second failure is with respect to Siri. Siri's short comings are well known.
This, unfortunately, isn't all that new, though. Apple has often neglected some of the fundamental apps, especially on iOS, in ways that just don't make sense. Contacts, Calendar, Voice Memos, Podcasts, etc. all seem like they are ultra-low priority with a 'B' or 'C' team working on them. While I suppose one could argue there are 3rd party apps, most of the OS integrations depend on these built-in apps. I've never understood this lack of attention to them.
I think Siri's problem is fundamental to other areas lacking at Apple. For example, just try searching in the App Store or Podcasts, etc. and you'll quickly see what I mean. Apple's search tech is really, really bad. It's like 1990s initial web-search bad, or worse. Much of Siri depends on the ability to search things and find answers. Siri won't get better until Apple puts some meaningful emphasis on search technology.
avon b7 said: On the other hand we have plenty of evidence of failed US intelligence, the NSA interfering with private companies and trying to compromise networking infrastructure worldwide (including Huawei gear). I hope the irony of that is not lost on you.
US 'intelligence' is pathetic, as is Congress and the Judicial branch. If Trump accomplishes nothing more than to stir the cesspool a bit and upset things, that might be more than anyone else would likely have done.
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?
Very hard to say...
Apple just dodged a Japanese antitrust suit that discovered Apple contractually required subsidies from carriers to keep ins-store iPhone prices competitive with other top-line smartphones.
Comments
"According to German website AllAboutSamsung, the South Korean manufacturer's upcoming flagship will be the first smartphone to combine a super-wide-angle and a tele-lens with the primary camera. The super-wide-angle is expected to come with a 123-degree angle of view, the tele lens with a 3x magnification, offering a wider zoom range than any other smartphone.
The only current smartphone with triple-camera on the market, Huawei's P20 Pro, doesn't come with a super-wide-angle option and instead opts for a monochrome sensor for increased low light capabilities and a native monochrome shooting mode. The main options for smartphone users who want a built-in super-wide-angle, LG's recent models, have to make do without a tele-zoom.
The rest of the rumored Samsung specifications sound promising, too: the super-wide-angle is expected to come with a 16MP resolution and F1.9 aperture, the primary camera will supposedly feature a 12MP sensor and dual aperture, and the tele uses a 13MP imager and F2.4 lens. No OIS or autofocus will be available on the super-wide-angle but given the angle of view those features might not be missed.
If the rumored specs are close to the real thing and Samsung's engineers manage to merge image information from all three sensors in an efficient way, the new Samsung could be the smartphone for photography in 2019. We will know more in a few months time."
Samsung must really want everyone to know that they have a camera system superior to the P20 Pro on the way with the S10, but yeah just a rumors.
I agree, competition is great.
Just wanted you to know that I agree that Apple didn't spend as much as Huawei did last year on R&D, only $11.58B to $14B, though your would have to acknowledge, that the bulk of Huawei's R&D went to the telecom side, not phones. Good for them.
Yeah, competition!
2. Sad because the company could go out of business, users will lose a service and to replace it, it will be more expensive but, have no doubt, whatever it is replaced with will be manufactured... in China!
3. Yes, you mentioned yearly sales but - I didn't - and you were responding to me.
I'd imagine the main problem with it is determining app safety and avoiding attacks, etc. a bit like the difference between Mac and Windows that still exists, but probably similarly, the gap keeps narrowing. If I end up going PC, mobile has been one concern... so it is good to hear people who know Mac/iOS that don't think Android is awful.
Same here. My hope is that Apple went through a rough patch due to such massive growth that sucked all their resources onto iOS. Now, they will start to recover from that and put proper resources back into neglected areas.
But, that narrative (which I think is partly true) doesn't match some of the other decisions and statements... and that's the part that worries me. I'm still concerned that at the core of the problem is a fundamental switch in priorities and a short-sighted view of iOS's place in the big-picture (or, actually a lot of their recent expansion into various markets... it seems more shotgun approach, hoping to hit something).
Or, maybe they want the Apple they remember, in their prime, back?
Well, and this wouldn't be so bad, if they hadn't made the non-TouchBar models purposely a poor choice. I had considered buying a non-TouchBar (or 'esc') model until I started reading articles about the actual internal differences. Then I was like, WTF!? They clearly want that extra $300 and to up-sell you.
And, yes, while their solution to the keyboard problems is better than nothing, it seems basically aimed at hoping to hit kind of a (in Apple think, anyway) replacement or resale time-point. It's a non-solution for the typical long-term laptop owner. They probably just calculated that some majority of people will have moved on after about 4 years anyway.
This, unfortunately, isn't all that new, though. Apple has often neglected some of the fundamental apps, especially on iOS, in ways that just don't make sense. Contacts, Calendar, Voice Memos, Podcasts, etc. all seem like they are ultra-low priority with a 'B' or 'C' team working on them. While I suppose one could argue there are 3rd party apps, most of the OS integrations depend on these built-in apps. I've never understood this lack of attention to them.
I think Siri's problem is fundamental to other areas lacking at Apple. For example, just try searching in the App Store or Podcasts, etc. and you'll quickly see what I mean. Apple's search tech is really, really bad. It's like 1990s initial web-search bad, or worse. Much of Siri depends on the ability to search things and find answers. Siri won't get better until Apple puts some meaningful emphasis on search technology.
US 'intelligence' is pathetic, as is Congress and the Judicial branch. If Trump accomplishes nothing more than to stir the cesspool a bit and upset things, that might be more than anyone else would likely have done.