Samsung makes some really good products, their low end stuff is garbage though. I like Android as a lot of you know and hate that about me but I only like it when it's on a good product. I really hope these Android producing companies stop making so many phones, HTC get's it now. They are going to only focus on three phones now, the ONE X, S and V, well made and covers every spectrum. Samsung, the only three phones that I like from them is the Note, SGII/SGIII and Nexus, the rest are crap. Same goes for their tablets, the Galaxy 7.7" is the only tablet that is any good, well the 8.9 isn't so bad.
I don't hate you, and I doubt anyone here does. Some of us just think your posts are erratic and/or inaccurate.
Personally, I have always thought Samsung TVs were overrated, appealing to the lower-mid range of the market. Their phones have never impressed me, and in fact, annoy me nowadays because of how blatantly unoriginal they are. I respect their ability to manufacture components for companies that know how to build things though.
McDonalds constantly dominates the burger markets in sales, and that domination stems from availability, affordability & quantity; not because they're making good food.
Can (have?) the boxes in which the products are presented to consumers be presented in this case? I realize that's virtually unprotectable, but it's important to note.
Some of Apple's suits have attack Samsung for "trade dress," which is separate from patents. Trade dress issues relate copying another product to the point of confusing a consumer into thinking the two different products are the same thing. I don't believe this issue is part of the case being discussed in this thread.
McDonalds constantly dominates the burger markets in sales, and that domination stems from availability, affordability & quantity; not because they're making good food.
Like you said, McDonald's is not necessarily good food. What brings a lot of people through the front door is that, good or not, it's predictable. You KNOW what kind of experience you're going to have.
People keep saying that but everywhere I go in the US I see way more iPhones. When on an airplane you can get a very quick survey of phones because as soon as it lands everyone pulls out their phone. Last week I was on a couple flights and overwhelming majority of phones were iPhones. Maybe it is the specific types of places I go or the type of people I know but I'm just not seeing as many Android phones as iPhones.
Yes, if you were to travel USA in a bus, you'd see far fewer iPhones and a lot of bottom-end throw away phones.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slang4Art
You remember that survey that showed that iOS users actually used their devices more? And the one before it? Oh, the one prior to that one as well? Folks may very well claim their free or cheap Android devices, and Galaxy may be off to a strong start, but the lack of security and system updates will inevitably push more folks to iOS on the high end. Android will no doubt rule the murky waters where the BOGO-happy dime chiseler dwells for years to come.
Since iOS users use their phones more, it is more profitable for the carriers to have more iOS customers. Even Google makes more money off of iOS users doing searches than they do from the Android users. It's very possible that the future you suggest will come to be. The more Android fractures into bits, the less it will be talked about as a single OS or user experience. It will become more like the OS used in your microwave or automobile. No one knows or cares what it is because they only expect it to be of limited utility.
iOS may well become the choice of users that expect high utility, high security, and easy immediate synchronization with the rest of their iOS devices. Most markets have room for one to three major players, so the guessing game at present is who might that other player(s) be in addition to Apple?
The "thermonuclear war" is still just reaching the hearings stage and has a long way to go to reach fruition.
Apple sued Motorola and HTC over another six patents in Miami last month.
Yes. The wheels of justice tend to move slowly and not at all like we'd expect a "thermonuclear war" to go. I suspect that Apple has more to gain than just stopping other manufacturers from copying them. They are also serving notice to everyone that is manufacturing anything that MAY be too close to Apple's IP to pause and ask themselves, "Can we afford to have to deal with Apple over this issue?"
Part of what Apple's disruptive presence brought to the iDevice markets is the wholesale copying that had ben going on has been brought up short. Apple is saying loud and clear, "Not with our IP!" Samsung is having the hardest time of "getting" that message. Microsoft has spent going onto 6 years to come to market with an OS that is wholly native to themselves. Steve Jobs expected to have a 5 year window for Apple's iOS to dominate, he underestimated the note-taking ability of the Google spy at the boardroom table. That's one reason why Apple has focused on attacking the manufacturers that rely on Android for their OS>
Apple has won the market cap and profits war. Samsung may be doing ok with smart phones, but they are not going anywhere with tablets, laptops, PCs, content. In the end, the consumer profits will go where there are integrated solutions, i.e., the Apple ecosystem. Apple may find it advantageous to agree to a x-licensing of the non-core features. Also, Apple is able to wean away from Samsung components like display, Flash and even CPU fab outsourcing.
With a $millions spent on lawyers, courts Apple has failed to achieve a decisive victory. Better to spend the money and effort on innovation. I do not want marginal upgrades like the 4S. They need to make disruptive innovations.
Is that why Samsung absolutely dominates the 3D and Smart TV sectors?
In terms of picture quality, I disagree that they "dominate". The correct phrase would be "suit my preferences". Pioneer Elite plasma displays "dominate" picture quality, in my opinion.
McDonalds constantly dominates the burger markets in sales, and that domination stems from availability, affordability & quantity; not because they're making good food.
Samsung is McDonalds with an 82" Touchscreen costing $60,000?
North America last quarter ; 3D TVs they held 53.3%, in Smart TVs they had 47.3%, both exceeded the market share of the next 3 largest competitors combined. In LED they had 48.2% of TVs 40” and higher.
I don't really understand the Samsung sales numbers, anecdotally. I'm constantly in a wide variety of environments, and travel frequently to cities in the US and Canada. Educational institutions, malls, bookstores, coffee shops, out on the street, walmart, business meetings, airports, planes, etc and 7/10 if someone has a smartphone its an iphone. The other 3/10 times it's either a BB or a random Android phone. I can't wrap my my head around these numbers since I hardly see samsung phones in the wild. Where are they all going? Or are they crazy popular in some european/middle-eastern countries or whatever?
Here's another story that must have more to it. Microsoft has an ongoing lawsuit against the B&N Nook for patent infringement, a case that's taken a couple of nasty turns. Today's story from the Associated Press? Microsoft has partnered with Barnes & Noble, making a $300M investment in a new B&N subsidiary to market textbooks. They've also granted B&N a license to Microsoft's applicable patents. My guess is that there must have been some teeth in B&N's counter-claims. Simply WOW!
Apple has won the market cap and profits war. Samsung may be doing ok with smart phones, but they are not going anywhere with tablets, laptops, PCs, content. In the end, the consumer profits will go where there are integrated solutions, i.e., the Apple ecosystem. Apple may find it advantageous to agree to a x-licensing of the non-core features. Also, Apple is able to wean away from Samsung components like display, Flash and even CPU fab outsourcing.
With a $millions spent on lawyers, courts Apple has failed to achieve a decisive victory. Better to spend the money and effort on innovation. I do not want marginal upgrades like the 4S. They need to make disruptive innovations.
Your last statement bears clarification - as it is essentially wrong. If you look carefully at how Apple has conducted its business over the years on Mac, iPod, and so on, you do not see constant disruption - because frankly consumers can't tolerate it. The disruption has to occur first, the early adopters uptake the device, then early mainstream consumers, then mainstream consumers - once the earlys demonstrate the desirability of the product. Once the mainstream is engaged, Apple systematically updates the device incrementally, with new features updates and improvements. Until they feel the market is well-positioned to adopt another disruption. Case in point: the iOS introduction in 2007 was via the iPhone and the new iPod Touch, both disruptive devices, the iPhone to the smartphone market and the iPod Touch to both the family of iPods (previously just PMP devices) and to the whole PMP and PGS markets. The ecosystem was a later development following in the wake of a small set of Apple-only application on the devices. Apple carefully introduced each step in building out the entire ecosystem, hand-holding the average consumer into accepting the improvements over time. To introduce the entire ecosystem all at once at the inception would have been ok for the early adopters but would have overwhelmed the early mainstream and mainstream consumers.
Further to my point, the iPhone and iPod Touch were developed after the iPad was first on the bench at Apple - but introduced first. The intelligence behind this is obvious - give the average consumer a small device that is easy for the average person to get used to, slowly build out its feature set, ecosystem and refine the user interface. Once the average consumer is used (in large enough numbers) to the disruptive device and it's ecosystem, the real disruption can occur via the iPad. The evidence of the success of this approach can be seen by the difference in the market uptake pattern. The iPhone and iPod Touch followed largely the same curve in consumer uptake. The iPad was (if you will) an INSTANT success so much so it caught Apple (and all the assorted pundits, etc) by surprise. They had forgotten the potential effect of the groundwork they had laid for the iPad introduction, in the previous device releases. The 4S is the same sort of incremental upgrade that Apple has done for the entire device series - the disruption occured with the original iPhone - not the later models. So no, they DO NOT need to make disruptive innovations, unless they want to alienate the average consumer - which they obviously don't.
I think that Apple's approach in very intelligent and demonstrates they understand consumer mentality pretty well. In fact how's your multi-billion dollar international corporation doing these days? Is it a match for the vigor of Apple? *wink*
Consumers actually dislike serial disruptions - too much change is not acceptable nor desired.
McDonalds constantly dominates the burger markets in sales, and that domination stems from availability, affordability & quantity; not because they're making good food.
Samsung is McDonalds with an 82" Touchscreen costing $60,000?
No, I think he's saying that Apple is the McDonalds of the tablet market. Availablility, affordability and quantity are all hallmarkks of the iOS ecosystem.
Comments
Samsung makes some really good products, their low end stuff is garbage though. I like Android as a lot of you know and hate that about me but I only like it when it's on a good product. I really hope these Android producing companies stop making so many phones, HTC get's it now. They are going to only focus on three phones now, the ONE X, S and V, well made and covers every spectrum. Samsung, the only three phones that I like from them is the Note, SGII/SGIII and Nexus, the rest are crap. Same goes for their tablets, the Galaxy 7.7" is the only tablet that is any good, well the 8.9 isn't so bad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic
I don't hate you, and I doubt anyone here does. Some of us just think your posts are erratic and/or inaccurate.
Personally, I have always thought Samsung TVs were overrated, appealing to the lower-mid range of the market. Their phones have never impressed me, and in fact, annoy me nowadays because of how blatantly unoriginal they are. I respect their ability to manufacture components for companies that know how to build things though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slang4Art
Personally, I have always thought Samsung TVs were overrated, appealing to the lower-mid range of the market.
Is that why Samsung absolutely dominates the 3D and Smart TV sectors?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tune
Is that why Samsung absolutely dominates the 3D and Smart TV sectors?
Left out LED. All premium baby. If these are McDonalds then little rinky dink iphones and ipads are Sam's Club hot dogs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Can (have?) the boxes in which the products are presented to consumers be presented in this case? I realize that's virtually unprotectable, but it's important to note.
Some of Apple's suits have attack Samsung for "trade dress," which is separate from patents. Trade dress issues relate copying another product to the point of confusing a consumer into thinking the two different products are the same thing. I don't believe this issue is part of the case being discussed in this thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Santoanderson
McDonalds constantly dominates the burger markets in sales, and that domination stems from availability, affordability & quantity; not because they're making good food.
Like you said, McDonald's is not necessarily good food. What brings a lot of people through the front door is that, good or not, it's predictable. You KNOW what kind of experience you're going to have.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
People keep saying that but everywhere I go in the US I see way more iPhones. When on an airplane you can get a very quick survey of phones because as soon as it lands everyone pulls out their phone. Last week I was on a couple flights and overwhelming majority of phones were iPhones. Maybe it is the specific types of places I go or the type of people I know but I'm just not seeing as many Android phones as iPhones.
Yes, if you were to travel USA in a bus, you'd see far fewer iPhones and a lot of bottom-end throw away phones.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slang4Art
You remember that survey that showed that iOS users actually used their devices more? And the one before it? Oh, the one prior to that one as well? Folks may very well claim their free or cheap Android devices, and Galaxy may be off to a strong start, but the lack of security and system updates will inevitably push more folks to iOS on the high end. Android will no doubt rule the murky waters where the BOGO-happy dime chiseler dwells for years to come.
Since iOS users use their phones more, it is more profitable for the carriers to have more iOS customers. Even Google makes more money off of iOS users doing searches than they do from the Android users. It's very possible that the future you suggest will come to be. The more Android fractures into bits, the less it will be talked about as a single OS or user experience. It will become more like the OS used in your microwave or automobile. No one knows or cares what it is because they only expect it to be of limited utility.
iOS may well become the choice of users that expect high utility, high security, and easy immediate synchronization with the rest of their iOS devices. Most markets have room for one to three major players, so the guessing game at present is who might that other player(s) be in addition to Apple?
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
Are you kidding?
The "thermonuclear war" is still just reaching the hearings stage and has a long way to go to reach fruition.
Apple sued Motorola and HTC over another six patents in Miami last month.
Yes. The wheels of justice tend to move slowly and not at all like we'd expect a "thermonuclear war" to go. I suspect that Apple has more to gain than just stopping other manufacturers from copying them. They are also serving notice to everyone that is manufacturing anything that MAY be too close to Apple's IP to pause and ask themselves, "Can we afford to have to deal with Apple over this issue?"
Part of what Apple's disruptive presence brought to the iDevice markets is the wholesale copying that had ben going on has been brought up short. Apple is saying loud and clear, "Not with our IP!" Samsung is having the hardest time of "getting" that message. Microsoft has spent going onto 6 years to come to market with an OS that is wholly native to themselves. Steve Jobs expected to have a 5 year window for Apple's iOS to dominate, he underestimated the note-taking ability of the Google spy at the boardroom table. That's one reason why Apple has focused on attacking the manufacturers that rely on Android for their OS>
Apple has won the market cap and profits war. Samsung may be doing ok with smart phones, but they are not going anywhere with tablets, laptops, PCs, content. In the end, the consumer profits will go where there are integrated solutions, i.e., the Apple ecosystem. Apple may find it advantageous to agree to a x-licensing of the non-core features. Also, Apple is able to wean away from Samsung components like display, Flash and even CPU fab outsourcing.
With a $millions spent on lawyers, courts Apple has failed to achieve a decisive victory. Better to spend the money and effort on innovation. I do not want marginal upgrades like the 4S. They need to make disruptive innovations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AjitMD
I do not want marginal upgrades like the 4S.
Reading, reading, agreeing with most of it, and then I get to this and realize you're not worth listening to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Quote:
Originally Posted by AjitMD
I do not want marginal upgrades like the 4S.
Reading, reading, agreeing with most of it, and then I get to this and realize you're not worth listening to.
You have an interesting litmus test.
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz
You have an interesting litmus test.
Objectivity might seem that way to some.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tune
Is that why Samsung absolutely dominates the 3D and Smart TV sectors?
In terms of picture quality, I disagree that they "dominate". The correct phrase would be "suit my preferences". Pioneer Elite plasma displays "dominate" picture quality, in my opinion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Santoanderson
McDonalds constantly dominates the burger markets in sales, and that domination stems from availability, affordability & quantity; not because they're making good food.
Samsung is McDonalds with an 82" Touchscreen costing $60,000?
North America last quarter ; 3D TVs they held 53.3%, in Smart TVs they had 47.3%, both exceeded the market share of the next 3 largest competitors combined. In LED they had 48.2% of TVs 40” and higher.
I don't really understand the Samsung sales numbers, anecdotally. I'm constantly in a wide variety of environments, and travel frequently to cities in the US and Canada. Educational institutions, malls, bookstores, coffee shops, out on the street, walmart, business meetings, airports, planes, etc and 7/10 if someone has a smartphone its an iphone. The other 3/10 times it's either a BB or a random Android phone. I can't wrap my my head around these numbers since I hardly see samsung phones in the wild. Where are they all going? Or are they crazy popular in some european/middle-eastern countries or whatever?
Here's another story that must have more to it. Microsoft has an ongoing lawsuit against the B&N Nook for patent infringement, a case that's taken a couple of nasty turns. Today's story from the Associated Press? Microsoft has partnered with Barnes & Noble, making a $300M investment in a new B&N subsidiary to market textbooks. They've also granted B&N a license to Microsoft's applicable patents. My guess is that there must have been some teeth in B&N's counter-claims. Simply WOW!
http://techcrunch.com/2012/04/30/microsoft-barnes-noble-partner-up-to-do-battle-with-amazon-and-apple-in-e-books/
Quote:
Originally Posted by AjitMD
Apple has won the market cap and profits war. Samsung may be doing ok with smart phones, but they are not going anywhere with tablets, laptops, PCs, content. In the end, the consumer profits will go where there are integrated solutions, i.e., the Apple ecosystem. Apple may find it advantageous to agree to a x-licensing of the non-core features. Also, Apple is able to wean away from Samsung components like display, Flash and even CPU fab outsourcing.
With a $millions spent on lawyers, courts Apple has failed to achieve a decisive victory. Better to spend the money and effort on innovation. I do not want marginal upgrades like the 4S. They need to make disruptive innovations.
Your last statement bears clarification - as it is essentially wrong. If you look carefully at how Apple has conducted its business over the years on Mac, iPod, and so on, you do not see constant disruption - because frankly consumers can't tolerate it. The disruption has to occur first, the early adopters uptake the device, then early mainstream consumers, then mainstream consumers - once the earlys demonstrate the desirability of the product. Once the mainstream is engaged, Apple systematically updates the device incrementally, with new features updates and improvements. Until they feel the market is well-positioned to adopt another disruption. Case in point: the iOS introduction in 2007 was via the iPhone and the new iPod Touch, both disruptive devices, the iPhone to the smartphone market and the iPod Touch to both the family of iPods (previously just PMP devices) and to the whole PMP and PGS markets. The ecosystem was a later development following in the wake of a small set of Apple-only application on the devices. Apple carefully introduced each step in building out the entire ecosystem, hand-holding the average consumer into accepting the improvements over time. To introduce the entire ecosystem all at once at the inception would have been ok for the early adopters but would have overwhelmed the early mainstream and mainstream consumers.
Further to my point, the iPhone and iPod Touch were developed after the iPad was first on the bench at Apple - but introduced first. The intelligence behind this is obvious - give the average consumer a small device that is easy for the average person to get used to, slowly build out its feature set, ecosystem and refine the user interface. Once the average consumer is used (in large enough numbers) to the disruptive device and it's ecosystem, the real disruption can occur via the iPad. The evidence of the success of this approach can be seen by the difference in the market uptake pattern. The iPhone and iPod Touch followed largely the same curve in consumer uptake. The iPad was (if you will) an INSTANT success so much so it caught Apple (and all the assorted pundits, etc) by surprise. They had forgotten the potential effect of the groundwork they had laid for the iPad introduction, in the previous device releases. The 4S is the same sort of incremental upgrade that Apple has done for the entire device series - the disruption occured with the original iPhone - not the later models. So no, they DO NOT need to make disruptive innovations, unless they want to alienate the average consumer - which they obviously don't.
I think that Apple's approach in very intelligent and demonstrates they understand consumer mentality pretty well. In fact how's your multi-billion dollar international corporation doing these days? Is it a match for the vigor of Apple? *wink*
Consumers actually dislike serial disruptions - too much change is not acceptable nor desired.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tune
Quote:
Originally Posted by Santoanderson
McDonalds constantly dominates the burger markets in sales, and that domination stems from availability, affordability & quantity; not because they're making good food.
Samsung is McDonalds with an 82" Touchscreen costing $60,000?
No, I think he's saying that Apple is the McDonalds of the tablet market. Availablility, affordability and quantity are all hallmarkks of the iOS ecosystem.