Samsung has dozens of iterations of the same phones and tablets, with different names marketed worldwide. They could EASILY sell 32 million when you combine them all. Or are you thinking only in terms of the US?
you're thinking of HTC
samsung has their galaxy branded phone that is the same all around the world except in the US. and a few other cheaper models
NeXT not only provided people that had "vision" they also provided people that had a deep understanding of the art of software design and architecture. Be never had this IMO. Apple had lost it.
imo the minute Sculley became CEO Apple became a company of "Yes" men.
The numbers are close. Samsung will beat out Apple for 2011. This is only one company. Imagine the rest of the industry with Android phones sold worldwide. This will be a difficult year for Apple in 2012. Again, Apple is doing exactly what they have done with Mac back in the 80's. Its not sustainable, and will relegate Apple back to small niche market...again.
in the old days to get software for your Mac you had to go to the store and find the corner in the back with Mac software. today we have the app store so that if you have a cool idea it's easy to sell it without trying to win shelf space and put up a lot of money to get it published
in the old days to get software for your Mac you had to go to the store and find the corner in the back with Mac software. today we have the app store so that if you have a cool idea it's easy to sell it without trying to win shelf space and put up a lot of money to get it published
When the telcos give you a "free"smartphone, that's the telcos' rolling the phone cost into the contract, and not any sign that Samsung or Apple or whoever didn't sell the phone to the telco. That would be ridiculous to believe any of these guys really give a bunch of product away to the mobile users.
On the BOGOs they aren't really recouping their phone cost. For iPhones it really does take a whole new separate contract to get the 'free' phone. I don't know anyone with 4 iPhones on a family together plan that got more than one of the phones free. Only a paid for older phone maybe. With the BOGOs how many can you get free on one plan? Can you buy 2 and get 2 free all on one carrier family plan?
Rampant BOGO sales can indicate a distributor having to slash prices in order to move product or a vendor having to slash prices to sell to distributors but in and of themselves they aren't a sign of poor sales. Look at Apple's free iPhone 3GS, which still makes more profit than other vendors premium models at $200-$300 subsidized prices.
We also have a recent and rare example of an iPhone BOGO at BestBuy for a model Apple stopped selling many months ago. This likely got passed around between distributors at slight losses due to a foolish purchase from Apple right before the 4S shipped.
It's only when you see BOGO across many markets and models over an extended period like we saw with RiM that there is an indication of a real issue. I don't think Samsung falls into that category in any sense as they are one of the few making money off Android. Bottom line: Apple is to the smartphone market what Samsung is to the Android OS market.
Rampant BOGO sales is so 2009. I haven't seen many as of late.
Samsung has dozens of iterations of the same phones and tablets, with different names marketed worldwide. They could EASILY sell 32 million when you combine them all. Or are you thinking only in terms of the US?
Actually the SGS 2 comes in 3 different models here in the US and a single different model worldwide.
No they couldn't. We had 3 months of capital before closing the doors. Copland was joke to all internal engineering staff. Taligent was another broken dream.
Really? Then how did Apple come up with $400 M - and then take another couple of years before they were able to release OS X?
Apple clearly had enough to get by for some time. Maybe with some tough decisions, but the fact that they survived for years before releasing OS X shows that they had more than 3 months of capital.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer
BeOS was nowhere near the robust nature and quality APIs of NeXTSTEP. Sorry, but one of the reasons NeXT was quickly agreed to by all parties interested was the massive amount of IP that NeXT had both mature and simmering which actually never was made to market at the time Apple bought the company.
I never said BeOS was as robust as NeXTSTEP. I said that Apple had a number of options they could have chosen from. They could have built their next OS on Linux. Or any other Unix. Or BeOS. Or Copland.
In retrospect, it seems clear that NeXT was the best choice. That doesn't mean it was the ONLY choice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer
Sorry, but being on the inside gives one a perspective you cannot fathom.
The Apple Campus was divided into a couple factions. Within the first year it was clear the deadwood was dragging the company into the ground. The canceling of the sabbatical program was another key move by Steve that protected the company from collapsing in cost.
There were a lot of technically limited folks who were scared out of their minds with UNIX when we arrived.
That's essentially what I said. Someone said that NeXT simply started using the Apple name. That is grossly incorrect. There were a lot of technologies brought from the Apple side, as well. And the biggest problem was the lack of proper management - which is what I said. WIth proper management, you don't have a campus with multiple factions and deadwood dragging the company into the ground.
Apple today is what it is because of a combination of 3 major things:
1. NeXT and NeXT people
2. Steve Jobs
3. Apple technologies and people
It is a mistake to ignore any of those three.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven N.
Apple had lots of interesting stuff going on. From Copland to OpenDoc to Newton. Some cool, disconnected stuff. They had no direction (even less than Google has now). They were a collection of little fiefdoms controlled by people of "power" each having a different vision. The problem was, that vision was all they had. There were no plans on how to actually achieve any of the ideas they had.
NeXT not only provided people that had "vision" they also provided people that had a deep understanding of the art of software design and architecture. Be never had this IMO. Apple had lost it.
NeXT provided people with insight, vision, drive, ambition and some amazingly high technology. It is no accident within 6 months all but 1 of Apple's top 15 manegers were "previously of NeXT".
All you have to do is look at the primary tech:
OS X - NeXT based tech with added goodness.
iPhone - NeXT based tech. You still have all those amazing foundation classes but the GUI classes have been renamed and re-thought out.
XCode - NeXT based tech. PB preceded it for several years but it was headed by many NeXT based guys/OpenStep developers.
QuickTime - OK, you got me. Apple.
iPad - NeXT based tech
iTunes - OK, Another Apple based tech.
It's pretty disingenuous to claim that iPhone and iPad are NeXT-based technologies. They are based on OS X - which is a clear hybrid of NeXT and Apple.
I really love how you claim OS X is 'NeXT based tech with added goodness'. Essentially, it's a pure hybrid. The core is heavily NeXT and the UI is heavily Apple. Neither company by itself could have produced OS X.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven N.
But the point is, NeXT brought much more than Steve Jobs. They brought FILE EXTENSIONS!!!
Adding/promoting File Extensions helped the Mac gain acceptance more than any single other change OS X made.
Probably far less than the transition to Intel.
But the point is that it is wrong to say that Apple today is solely NeXT. It is a hybrid of NeXT, Steve Jobs culture, and Apple stuff.
Google never promised Android would be free forever. What if a few years down the road they see Motorola in trouble and want to help them out. They could give Motorola an exclusive on the newest Android for a few months, or charge other companies to license Android, or any number of things. It doesn't look like there will be many alternatives with RIM almost bankrupt and Windows phone floundering.
What they certainly need to do is limit all the GUI layers companies put on their phones like Blur, Sense, etc.. that causes delays in updates and fragmentation. For Apple's sake I hope Google continues to allow chaos to rule with a lot of fragmentation. I wouldn't be surprised if they clamp down on Amazon's use of Android for the Kindle Fire as a warning shot to others who try and stray too far and try and cut Google's purse strings.
But it looks like it is shaping up to be a two horse race with Samsung and HTC as the main Android players and a lot of smaller players for cheaper low margin phones.
Why are you guys so worried about how many smartphones Samsung sold. If you really love Apple unconditionally and are willing to buy all of their products without a second thought what do you care how many people like Samsung better? Sometimes I think Apple fans are the most insecure people on the planet.
Why are you guys so worried about how many smartphones Samsung sold. If you really love Apple unconditionally and are willing to buy all of their products without a second thought what do you care how many people like Samsung better? Sometimes I think Apple fans are the most insecure people on the planet.
I hope you don't think I'm a bad person. I just want you to like me. What can I do for you to make you happy? Do you want me to change the way I dress? Is my nose too big? It's my hands, isn't it?
Samsung has dozens of iterations of the same phones and tablets, with different names marketed worldwide. They could EASILY sell 32 million when you combine them all. Or are you thinking only in terms of the US?
x high end phones + y mid & low range phones = 32 million.
The x and y breakdown would be interesting, given that a lot of (mainly American) fandroids seem to make the assumption that all these sales are Galaxy II's.
x high end phones + y mid & low range phones = 32 million.
The x and y breakdown would be interesting, given that a lot of (mainly American) fandroids seem to make the assumption that all these sales are Galaxy II's.
According to Canacord channel sell-thru checks at the carriers, it is the Galaxy S2 that's the big Android seller, even knocking last gen iPhone from it's expected second place finish at ATT. The Galaxy S2 has held 2nd place for the past two months there.
It's always denial when it comes to Apple-iOS losing quite a large amount of share in such a short time. I have stated many times that this is inevitable with the success of Android. Yet I'm usually called name and insulted by many users here. Samsung has just proven my point. They will continue to exceed. Along with Amazon and their Kindle devices.
Actually they never "lost" any share, before Android came along it was Symbian with the lion's share of the smartphone OS market.
iOS has plateaued but is still growing.
All that really matters is that Apple continues to sell more phones than they did before and makes more money than they did before.
It's always denial when it comes to Apple-iOS losing quite a large amount of share in such a short time. I have stated many times that this is inevitable with the success of Android. Yet I'm usually called name and insulted by many users here. Samsung has just proven my point. They will continue to exceed. Along with Amazon and their Kindle devices.
So how much share has Apple "lost"?
I'll give you a hint it's zero or a negative number, on the other hand how much share has WinMo, Symbian, RIM and others lost?
The numbers are close. Samsung will beat out Apple for 2011. This is only one company. Imagine the rest of the industry with Android phones sold worldwide. This will be a difficult year for Apple in 2012. Again, Apple is doing exactly what they have done with Mac back in the 80's. Its not sustainable, and will relegate Apple back to small niche market...again.
...because they don't want people to really notice that $500 million of the announced profit was due to a one off i.e. the sale of their hard drive division to Seagate.
Just muddying the waters to make themselves look more like Apple.
According to Canacord channel sell-thru checks at the carriers, it is the Galaxy S2 that's the big Android seller, even knocking last gen iPhone from it's expected second place finish at ATT. The Galaxy S2 has held 2nd place for the past two months there.
Too bad Samsung does not provide any audited data of any kind on their phone or tablet sales.
All we have are estimates put out by consulting-whoevers, and numbers that are wildly inconsistent with collateral data on things such as app sales, web traffic, etc.
Bottom line: I don't believe these sales figures in the least.
Last time I checked, people dont audit sales, they audit financial statements.
Of which Samsung will be releasing once the audit is complete.
Please dont tell me that Korea doesnt have audit companies.
Because they do.
One of my relatives works for one of the biggest firms there.
Comments
Samsung has dozens of iterations of the same phones and tablets, with different names marketed worldwide. They could EASILY sell 32 million when you combine them all. Or are you thinking only in terms of the US?
you're thinking of HTC
samsung has their galaxy branded phone that is the same all around the world except in the US. and a few other cheaper models
NeXT not only provided people that had "vision" they also provided people that had a deep understanding of the art of software design and architecture. Be never had this IMO. Apple had lost it.
imo the minute Sculley became CEO Apple became a company of "Yes" men.
No vision plus "yes" men = Apple 1995
The numbers are close. Samsung will beat out Apple for 2011. This is only one company. Imagine the rest of the industry with Android phones sold worldwide. This will be a difficult year for Apple in 2012. Again, Apple is doing exactly what they have done with Mac back in the 80's. Its not sustainable, and will relegate Apple back to small niche market...again.
http://gigaom.com/apple/2011-smartph...msung-v-apple/
in the old days to get software for your Mac you had to go to the store and find the corner in the back with Mac software. today we have the app store so that if you have a cool idea it's easy to sell it without trying to win shelf space and put up a lot of money to get it published
in the old days to get software for your Mac you had to go to the store and find the corner in the back with Mac software. today we have the app store so that if you have a cool idea it's easy to sell it without trying to win shelf space and put up a lot of money to get it published
It was very similar to buying porn...
When the telcos give you a "free"smartphone, that's the telcos' rolling the phone cost into the contract, and not any sign that Samsung or Apple or whoever didn't sell the phone to the telco. That would be ridiculous to believe any of these guys really give a bunch of product away to the mobile users.
On the BOGOs they aren't really recouping their phone cost. For iPhones it really does take a whole new separate contract to get the 'free' phone. I don't know anyone with 4 iPhones on a family together plan that got more than one of the phones free. Only a paid for older phone maybe. With the BOGOs how many can you get free on one plan? Can you buy 2 and get 2 free all on one carrier family plan?
Rampant BOGO sales can indicate a distributor having to slash prices in order to move product or a vendor having to slash prices to sell to distributors but in and of themselves they aren't a sign of poor sales. Look at Apple's free iPhone 3GS, which still makes more profit than other vendors premium models at $200-$300 subsidized prices.
We also have a recent and rare example of an iPhone BOGO at BestBuy for a model Apple stopped selling many months ago. This likely got passed around between distributors at slight losses due to a foolish purchase from Apple right before the 4S shipped.
It's only when you see BOGO across many markets and models over an extended period like we saw with RiM that there is an indication of a real issue. I don't think Samsung falls into that category in any sense as they are one of the few making money off Android. Bottom line: Apple is to the smartphone market what Samsung is to the Android OS market.
Rampant BOGO sales is so 2009. I haven't seen many as of late.
Samsung has dozens of iterations of the same phones and tablets, with different names marketed worldwide. They could EASILY sell 32 million when you combine them all. Or are you thinking only in terms of the US?
Actually the SGS 2 comes in 3 different models here in the US and a single different model worldwide.
No they couldn't. We had 3 months of capital before closing the doors. Copland was joke to all internal engineering staff. Taligent was another broken dream.
Really? Then how did Apple come up with $400 M - and then take another couple of years before they were able to release OS X?
Apple clearly had enough to get by for some time. Maybe with some tough decisions, but the fact that they survived for years before releasing OS X shows that they had more than 3 months of capital.
BeOS was nowhere near the robust nature and quality APIs of NeXTSTEP. Sorry, but one of the reasons NeXT was quickly agreed to by all parties interested was the massive amount of IP that NeXT had both mature and simmering which actually never was made to market at the time Apple bought the company.
I never said BeOS was as robust as NeXTSTEP. I said that Apple had a number of options they could have chosen from. They could have built their next OS on Linux. Or any other Unix. Or BeOS. Or Copland.
In retrospect, it seems clear that NeXT was the best choice. That doesn't mean it was the ONLY choice.
Sorry, but being on the inside gives one a perspective you cannot fathom.
The Apple Campus was divided into a couple factions. Within the first year it was clear the deadwood was dragging the company into the ground. The canceling of the sabbatical program was another key move by Steve that protected the company from collapsing in cost.
There were a lot of technically limited folks who were scared out of their minds with UNIX when we arrived.
That's essentially what I said. Someone said that NeXT simply started using the Apple name. That is grossly incorrect. There were a lot of technologies brought from the Apple side, as well. And the biggest problem was the lack of proper management - which is what I said. WIth proper management, you don't have a campus with multiple factions and deadwood dragging the company into the ground.
Apple today is what it is because of a combination of 3 major things:
1. NeXT and NeXT people
2. Steve Jobs
3. Apple technologies and people
It is a mistake to ignore any of those three.
Apple had lots of interesting stuff going on. From Copland to OpenDoc to Newton. Some cool, disconnected stuff. They had no direction (even less than Google has now). They were a collection of little fiefdoms controlled by people of "power" each having a different vision. The problem was, that vision was all they had. There were no plans on how to actually achieve any of the ideas they had.
NeXT not only provided people that had "vision" they also provided people that had a deep understanding of the art of software design and architecture. Be never had this IMO. Apple had lost it.
NeXT provided people with insight, vision, drive, ambition and some amazingly high technology. It is no accident within 6 months all but 1 of Apple's top 15 manegers were "previously of NeXT".
All you have to do is look at the primary tech:
OS X - NeXT based tech with added goodness.
iPhone - NeXT based tech. You still have all those amazing foundation classes but the GUI classes have been renamed and re-thought out.
XCode - NeXT based tech. PB preceded it for several years but it was headed by many NeXT based guys/OpenStep developers.
QuickTime - OK, you got me. Apple.
iPad - NeXT based tech
iTunes - OK, Another Apple based tech.
It's pretty disingenuous to claim that iPhone and iPad are NeXT-based technologies. They are based on OS X - which is a clear hybrid of NeXT and Apple.
I really love how you claim OS X is 'NeXT based tech with added goodness'. Essentially, it's a pure hybrid. The core is heavily NeXT and the UI is heavily Apple. Neither company by itself could have produced OS X.
But the point is, NeXT brought much more than Steve Jobs. They brought FILE EXTENSIONS!!!
Adding/promoting File Extensions helped the Mac gain acceptance more than any single other change OS X made.
Probably far less than the transition to Intel.
But the point is that it is wrong to say that Apple today is solely NeXT. It is a hybrid of NeXT, Steve Jobs culture, and Apple stuff.
My question would be why are they doing that?.
Are you seriously expecting a reply from him?
What they certainly need to do is limit all the GUI layers companies put on their phones like Blur, Sense, etc.. that causes delays in updates and fragmentation. For Apple's sake I hope Google continues to allow chaos to rule with a lot of fragmentation. I wouldn't be surprised if they clamp down on Amazon's use of Android for the Kindle Fire as a warning shot to others who try and stray too far and try and cut Google's purse strings.
But it looks like it is shaping up to be a two horse race with Samsung and HTC as the main Android players and a lot of smaller players for cheaper low margin phones.
Why are you guys so worried about how many smartphones Samsung sold. If you really love Apple unconditionally and are willing to buy all of their products without a second thought what do you care how many people like Samsung better? Sometimes I think Apple fans are the most insecure people on the planet.
I hope you don't think I'm a bad person. I just want you to like me. What can I do for you to make you happy? Do you want me to change the way I dress? Is my nose too big? It's my hands, isn't it?
Samsung has dozens of iterations of the same phones and tablets, with different names marketed worldwide. They could EASILY sell 32 million when you combine them all. Or are you thinking only in terms of the US?
They also sell smartphones like these.
x high end phones + y mid & low range phones = 32 million.
The x and y breakdown would be interesting, given that a lot of (mainly American) fandroids seem to make the assumption that all these sales are Galaxy II's.
They also sell smartphones like these.
x high end phones + y mid & low range phones = 32 million.
The x and y breakdown would be interesting, given that a lot of (mainly American) fandroids seem to make the assumption that all these sales are Galaxy II's.
According to Canacord channel sell-thru checks at the carriers, it is the Galaxy S2 that's the big Android seller, even knocking last gen iPhone from it's expected second place finish at ATT. The Galaxy S2 has held 2nd place for the past two months there.
http://www-bgr-com.vimg.net/wp-conte...d-dec-2011.jpg
It's always denial when it comes to Apple-iOS losing quite a large amount of share in such a short time. I have stated many times that this is inevitable with the success of Android. Yet I'm usually called name and insulted by many users here. Samsung has just proven my point. They will continue to exceed. Along with Amazon and their Kindle devices.
Actually they never "lost" any share, before Android came along it was Symbian with the lion's share of the smartphone OS market.
iOS has plateaued but is still growing.
All that really matters is that Apple continues to sell more phones than they did before and makes more money than they did before.
It's always denial when it comes to Apple-iOS losing quite a large amount of share in such a short time. I have stated many times that this is inevitable with the success of Android. Yet I'm usually called name and insulted by many users here. Samsung has just proven my point. They will continue to exceed. Along with Amazon and their Kindle devices.
So how much share has Apple "lost"?
I'll give you a hint it's zero or a negative number, on the other hand how much share has WinMo, Symbian, RIM and others lost?
Besides MONEY is the only measure of true value.
The numbers are close. Samsung will beat out Apple for 2011. This is only one company. Imagine the rest of the industry with Android phones sold worldwide. This will be a difficult year for Apple in 2012. Again, Apple is doing exactly what they have done with Mac back in the 80's. Its not sustainable, and will relegate Apple back to small niche market...again.
http://gigaom.com/apple/2011-smartph...msung-v-apple/
Samsung has ALWAYS sold more phones than Apple ever since Apple entered the market.
Which brings us to the obvious:-
your point?
My question would be why are they doing that?.
...because they don't want people to really notice that $500 million of the announced profit was due to a one off i.e. the sale of their hard drive division to Seagate.
Just muddying the waters to make themselves look more like Apple.
According to Canacord channel sell-thru checks at the carriers, it is the Galaxy S2 that's the big Android seller, even knocking last gen iPhone from it's expected second place finish at ATT. The Galaxy S2 has held 2nd place for the past two months there.
http://www-bgr-com.vimg.net/wp-conte...d-dec-2011.jpg
It's a bit of a leap to assume AT&T sales represent what's happening in the rest of the world.
i.e. AT&T did NOT sell 32 million Samsung smartphones last quarter.
Too bad Samsung does not provide any audited data of any kind on their phone or tablet sales.
All we have are estimates put out by consulting-whoevers, and numbers that are wildly inconsistent with collateral data on things such as app sales, web traffic, etc.
Bottom line: I don't believe these sales figures in the least.
Last time I checked, people dont audit sales, they audit financial statements.
Of which Samsung will be releasing once the audit is complete.
Please dont tell me that Korea doesnt have audit companies.
Because they do.
One of my relatives works for one of the biggest firms there.