Why would I want to throw away a good experience for some Samsung piece of junk? Not to mention all the apps, music, and movies I've purchased. Samsung's sorry service is for PC users.
As someone in the biz who knows iOS and Android backwards, loves most of what Apple do and who has played with an S3 and 4S (and knows the 5 spec), this ad is actually accurate.
The international version of the SIII only has 1GB of RAM and no LTE but it does have a quad core processor.
This ad is inaccurate.
The turn to mute thing was part of HTC's Sense and before that was used by Nokia.
IMO There is only one thing Apple might have made a mistake on with iPhone 5 and that's NFC. I actually like the fact they're bucking the trend on screen size. For me being able to comfortably hold my phone in one hand OS a big selling feature. If I need a bigger screen I'm using my iPad.
I don't think the market for "normal" sized phones has dried up. I ordered my iPhone with AT&T yesterday and the operator I spoke with said they were getting slammed with orders.
Samsung's marketing department could use some help. Still, SIII is an awesome phone and I've been tempted to jump ship (from 4S) numerous times. Pentile screen is probably the factor that will deter me.
(oops, this was supposed to be a reply to the Samsung thread, sorry)
As someone in the biz who knows iOS and Android backwards, loves most of what Apple do and who has played with an S3 and 4S (and knows the 5 spec), this ad is actually accurate. There is a lot to like about the S3 (hence it's popularity) and the ad makes no false claims at all. Further, Samsung are upgrading them all to Jelly Bean soon and that will further improve the value proposition.
Apple fans need to be more honest and make a fair judgement call. There are others capable of coming up with good ideas. Samsung started developing PDAs almost 20 years ago, Google their ALPS project. I visited their industrial and UX design studio in Palo Alto over 15 years ago almost, and even then, they were doing some cool stuff.
I have an iPhone 1/2G (best iPhone industrial design to date) and a Sony Xperia Pro (for the keyboard), and my next phone will be a Galaxy Note 2, because as a creative, I want something for creating content, not consuming it - something I agree, the iPhone 5 will excel at. I use my superb MBA 13" i7 for everything else. And yes, it really is the best notebook in the world and no one, not even Samsung, has it beat yet.
I see that you're in deep into this honesty thingy.
If you're an honest broker of truth, ...and wishes it to be the mainstay of your marketing strategy, and if on top of it you happen to be...as you in deeds are...a 'Samsung/Google' evangelist, wouldn't you stick some 'disclaimer' onto this ad? Such as...
"Survey after survey, year end results after year end results, People's feelings speak falsehood and eccentricities. As you can witness through this layout, we can beat them size-wise on both...falsehood and eccentricities.
Whom would you pick to serve you with a more trustworthy lie? Tag-team slandering, or... Sir Jonathan Ive...?"
My wife just got the Galaxy S 3 and it is very nice but I still think, for a phone it is too damn big. Compared to my son's iPhone 4 the difference is quite striking. I don't want a tablet, I want a phone. I will check out the iPhone 5 as I have to upgrade (from an old Blackberry!) but I like the dimensions of the iPhone 4.
And one other thing. My wife got her Galaxy S3 for free on a new contract at Costco. THAT is something that will attract people more than the type of processor!
It's also utter nonsense. 790 hours? That's 33 days - more than a month on standby! Nobody got that long in the days of dumbphones which only had calls and texts to watch for, let alone on a modern smartphone. I seriously think that it's impossible on the S3 even if you don't use the phone at all.
Apple's figure is about 9.5 days. I once got 6 days out of my iPhone when I only used it for about 2 hours during that period. If you didn't use the phone at all and put it in a strong signal area, I think 9 days is do-able. But 33? No way.
Well, because their power management sucks, and the LTE radio sucks the life out of the battery, they've had to resort to making phablets just so they can fit a battery big enough in the device to power it for more than a couple of hours of use. So, if the screen is off and there is no radio activity (they probably measure "standby time" with the radios off, assuming they don't do it with the device powered off), with a battery that large, you might be able to go a month before it runs out of power. We know from experience that Apple's battery life numbers are real world numbers, and that others' numbers aren't. Under similar conditions, I'd imagine that, at best, the S3 might get equivalent standby time.
You know most of the other stuff no one cares about. Turn over to mute? Flip to zoom? Why? You know what I noticed? They "forgot" how long their phone lasts using the 4G. I bet it's like 2 hours.
That sounds nice and all, but the problem is that Apple's history doesn't provide a shred of evidence to support your premise. I don't recall a time when Apple became 'stale' (minus when Steve Jobs left) because of decreased competition. Was Apple facing competition when it released the original iPhone? No, it wasn't. How about the iPad? No, it wasn't. Those were incredible, innovative, industry changing products, and were created and released irrelevant of competition. Your statement that Apple would have "never released the iPhone 4" if it wasn't for Samsung, is just your random theory, and pretty absurd, since there are no indications whatsoever that this would have been the case. Apple has mostly ignored what the competition is doing through most of its history and its innovative products, which is a good thing. I don't recall a single time where Apple felt 'was on its comfortable laurels' in its entire history. Why don't you enlighten us? When did Apple monopolize an industry then stagnate because of lack of competition? I think Apple has shown itself to be one of the few companies out there that is always willing to challenge itself and radically improve its products, even by cannibalizing its own sales, regardless of what everyone else is doing. All of Apple's most iconic products were not bourne out of competition, and Apple was not being attacked on those fronts. The iPod, iPhone, and iPad were all Apple entering new markets, and creating the best product-by far- in that market. In none of these situations did "competition" play a factor, because there was none. Your theory is nice and all, but really is baseless. Steve Jobs )and his team) wasn't the type to sit back and rest on his laurels, no matter what the industry was doing.
Competition seems to influence Apple very little, as evidenced in the newest iPhone, and screen size. If Apple cared about "catching up" to the competition (as everyone defines it) it would have bowed to the pressure and made a flashy, massive screen like all other flagship phones from other companies. But it didn't. It continues to ignore what the competition is doing, and instead designs products based on its own strong convictions.
It doesn't sound to me like you know much about Apple's history before the iPod... or paid attention to it at the beginning of each of its flagship devices in the separate categories.
Things to consider:
1) The iPod wasn't even close to the first mobile music player. Its main innovation with the iPod was the click wheel and extensive use of Apple's music format. Jobs saw what giants (at the time) like Creative were doing with their NOMAD and decided to trump them. Consumer media players had been around for years before Apple introduced theirs, but by watching all of the failures come first and with the iron fist of Jobs, they made something better. During the life of the individual Pod models, the only things that really changed were the materials used, size changes (physical) and storage changes. Until the third generation, they didn't even use the beloved USB dock connector. This is a six year period when Apple is just releasing new iterations of the same device. Perhaps adding a colored screen here or a pure touch wheel there - until the iPod Touch. Historically, people who own a manufacturer's devices have always had "the other ones". If you owned an iPod during this period, odds are, when the Phone released, you bought one as your next mobile phone. That being said. The Touch was the cheaper alternative for people who were new to the market or already had a phone that they liked. They were given iOS to play with as a bait and switch and Apple used marketing strategies to reel people in, just as they did with the iPod and I'm a PC/I'm a Mac commercials. The marketing was genius, but as far as innovations were concerned, the iPod wasn't one of them.
2) The iPhone was their revolutionary entry (because of iOS), but it wasn't a new idea. Blackberry showed the world the power of PDAs + phones. Palm had been making Pilots and Windows Mobile was already an OS in iPaqs (I'm still not sure why Apple didn't sue Compaq over this. Now owned by HP, HP has released a few other iPaq devices since then) and other "popular" devices. There were major innovations with it like pinch zooming and such, but the device itself was Apple bringing their competitor device to market. Whether they dominated or not is not the question, it was something that already existed and it took them market watching to decide that they wanted to do a phone. Apple rode on Blackberry's success in the market (since they had been the dominant device in smartphones) and then broke the horses back, eventually. This is a great example of them sitting around on their success with the iPod and the new iMacs of this time.
3) The iPad was about 10 years late to the tablet market that had been introduced around the same time as the iPod. The difference was that by this time, all of the iOS software was mature enough for a stable release as opposed to Windows XP Tablet PC, which was the Vista of its time. Slates weren't a new concept in 2010. The iPad is seriously just a blown up iPod Touch with different aesthetics and resolutions. There isn't much to say here since the iPad is the furthest thing from an innovation that Apple has ever made. It was the last to market, even if it dominates. This is a classic example of human "I see it, I need it" values where Apple put out a huge marketing campaign and people chomped down at the bit. Now they're bringing a Mini to market that no matter what size it is, is just a shrunken iPad to fit the market that the Androids have already touched on. The Mini's existence would probably be in question if Jobs were around, too. His philosophy of "iPad is the perfect size" was stalwart. Again this is just classic new product production with any company. Beat the successful companies at what they do.
Understand, I'm not an Android fanboy or a PC lover. I have MBPs, iPods and Touches, but I understand that Apple takes great ideas and perfects them. Other companies come up with wonderful ideas, but Apple is the company that executes properly. Whether it be with Jobs-esque keynotes or commercials starring Justin Long, Apple knows how to reach people. You can't say that all the different generations of devices were new or special because they weren't. Just like anything else, when there's changes in hardware technology, you change the device. Even while they change the physical device, it's still the same device with a faster processor, more RAM, etc... it's still a stale device.
Here's where the true innovation is: iOS
That is Apple's true gift to the world. It's their coup de grace. It is what keeps people coming back to their devices. To put this in perspective with competition, though... How many features were in Android long before iOS added them to the mix? No doubt, Android developed many of its technologies because of iOS, but the same is said in reverse. I'm not saying Android is an innovator, because they're not. Most of its technology was present in BBOS and iOS before Android came along, but it's the healthy competition of the ecosystem that keeps Apple releasing new devices on the clip that they have been.
What was the 3GS for? New hardware. What was the 4S for? New hardware + Siri. Everything else that is seen as an innovation in their new devices is actually just an innovation in their software. The hardware already existed, they just developed a different way to use it. Even the 5 is just new hardware - the innovations are in the Lightning connector and that's about it. Lightning is just another example of Apple knowing its market share power and leveraging it to their advantage. Same thing they tried to do with the Thunderbolt (in collab with Intel) that still hasn't truly gotten off of the ground. Apple releases new products to keep interest, not to innovate. Throw in one or two new working concepts and push a product out the door. You can't possibly tell me turn-by-turn directions weren't in the works prior to iOS6. By controlling the actual release of these technologies, Apple controls the longevity of its device. They wait, historically, one year between devices to give people just another taste of what they've been working on for a handful of years.
It's smart business, not innovation... Steve Jobs was a businessman and a visionary. What you will notice in the history of Apple is that they take very few leaps of faith. No matter how visionary he was, they didn't make rash decisions. They didn't push products to market just to get them out the door. They wait for some other company to do it first so they can capitalize on failures and produce what the people really want. Apple hasn't been the first to jump for decades now. They are playing the smart business game and Samsung's unprofessional nature is feeding them endlessly. Apple doesn't steal ideas, Apple perfects ideas.
So yes, Apple stagnates - because they can. Eventually, all ideas will run out for the rest of the smartphone/pmp/tablet manufacturers and Apple will still be "turtle"ing along with the slow and steady product releases that are powered by iOS. Apple's entire history relies on slumps where they don't have to release new hardware because they're making the best software. It's the same principal that helps Moore's Law drive the computer world. Every other year, there is a hardware boom. Every year after that, Apple releases old components with new software :P
Don't forget, Apple stopped producing its own hardware because it was a lofty engagement to fight true innovators at Intel and to a lesser extent AMD. Apple turned their attention to aesthetics, product control, market control and Mac OS + iOS. Intel gave us USB... Apple gave us operating systems. All this not even mentioning that Samsung makes a great deal of hardware that goes into Apple devices. It's definitely not because Samsung is the cheapest to mass produce. Samsung is a global leader in quality hardware and Apple has to understand that in order to dominate their devices. Without Samsung in the ecosystem, who would step up to give Apple a run for its money? No one.
All this is just to say, you can't fight the truths of economics - without competition, you have a monopoly. When you have a monopoly, you turn into Microsoft and get reamed by the feds. Don't let Apple get reamed by the feds
Well, because their power management sucks, and the LTE radio sucks the life out of the battery, they've had to resort to making phablets just so they can fit a battery big enough in the device to power it for more than a couple of hours of use. So, if the screen is off and there is no radio activity (they probably measure "standby time" with the radios off, assuming they don't do it with the device powered off), with a battery that large, you might be able to go a month before it runs out of power. We know from experience that Apple's battery life numbers are real world numbers, and that others' numbers aren't. Under similar conditions, I'd imagine that, at best, the S3 might get equivalent standby time.
But, yes, 33 days is certainly fiction.
33 days has to be in airplane mode and never touching the lock button...
4 inch display with better pixel density and ability to use with one hand.
Samscum S III
4.8 inch display with ALMOST Retina quality and it's too big to use with one hand for MOST people.
iPhone 5
A6 processor with GPU rendering equal to that of a gaming console.
Samscum S III
We don't sell the same processor all markets because we are STILL trying to sell our old A9 Exynos (you can't even pronounce it) chips OR the Snapdragon S4 which is kinda like an A15 chip, but the GPU suck and it doesn't render graphics as well as the A6.
iPhone 5
1GB of memory. Uh oh, Samscum has 2 GB of RAM. I guess they actually thought people are actually going to NEED that much.
Samscum S III
2GB of memory. WE need it because of WIDGETS, ANIMATION BACKGROUND and FLASH because Android is bloated code.
iPhone 5
ICS LCD screen that is color accurate.
Samscum S III
Super AMOLED Well, we have to admit that AMOLED wasn't that good, but Super AMOLED is SUPER. We still have complaints on screen burn-in, but we don't want to take responsibility for screen burn. So, to avoid screen burn in, DON'T run widgets, or have the brightness turned up.
iPhone 5
One chip for voice/data using the latest technology. Less battery drain
Samscum S III
Two chips for voice/data using older technology, because we have TWO CHIPS, TWO CHIPS, TWO CHIPS IN one phone. It sounds better, so it must BE better.
iPhone 5
Siri (yeah, we'll admit, Siri in iOS 5 was in beta and it didn't work as well as before, but this version should be fixed)
Samscum S III
S Voice We used to S to impress you. Other than that. It gives you voice control, kinda like Siri.
iPhone 5
Passport Don't need a NFC chip, plus most people don't even walk into a store that has it. So, we'll put one in IF there is an actual time when it makes sense to do so.
Samscum S III
NFC chip (We're putting it so it makes us FEEL superior and you can say it has it when you sell against the iPhone, but reality is MOST people don't know it's there or use it, but it sounds better that we have it)
iPhone 5
4G/LTE Yeah, we finally added it because enough carriers actually have it turned on.
Samsung S III
4G/LTE We had it first, even though most of our users couldn't use it.
iPhone 5
Precision Aluminum case (Because we care about the case being well made)
Samsung S III
Molded poly carb case Because if we used metal, it would cost more, weight more and we want our phone to feel as cheap as possible because we're from Korea and that's how we like it. CHEAP. Plus our phone is going to end up as landfill, so it doesn't matter.
iPhone 5
3 microphone and enhanced speaker design so you can hear better and the other person can hear you better.
Samsung S III
Uh. We didn't list anything because we just have 2 microphones and nothing that special to make it better.
iPhone 5
8 hour talk time
Samsung S IIII
We say up to 11.4 hours talk time, but on our web site it says up to 8 hours of talk time, but the reality is that if you use OUR two chip 4G/LTE solution and because of all of the widgets, animation, Flash, etc. you really only get maybe 3 hours if you're lucky, so just get used to charging the phone 2 to 3 times a day, carry around at least one or two extra batteries or just deal with it.
iPhone 5
16, 32, 64 G of SSD storage
Samsung S III
16 or 32 G of SSD. But we have a MicroSD card slot to add an extra 32 G. Why? Because we found out that another Samsung division has a BIG warehouse filled with 32G MicroSD cards since no one is buying them, so instead of managing our inventory or chucking them in landfill, we decided to mislead the consumer by adding these things giving people the illusion that it's just like SSD memory, only cheaper. Yeah, we think that the average consumer is STUPID. But it sounds good because WE can say our phone is upgradeable.
IPhone 5
Lightening connector It's digital and it's WAY better than the 30 pin. We're sorry for confusing everyone, but we just needed to do it at some point in time.
Samsung S III
We change our connectors all of the time, but since no one really has any third party docking stations, or anything else that is really made for our phone, then it doesn't matter if we change it Because you won't know when we do.
Koreans are always great a copying but never can innovate. They are just pissed off they lost the battle to Apple. Stop crying and come out with something better then Apple. I am sorry but as a developer I have tried both Android and iOS. I prefer iOS. All the cheap people get the Android platform and they think they are cool. Samsung has to ditch Android and come up with their own OS. But they can't because they can't innovate. Apple started the smartphone revolution and every other phone manufacture started to copy them
IMO There is only one thing Apple might have made a mistake on with iPhone 5 and that's NFC. ...
NFC is still a mostly useless technology, and adding it to the iPhone would have just been a case of shoving a useless component into an otherwise carefully thought out package. Why? To "future proof" it? Yeah, that's always a great strategy. It's easy, especially with a phablet, to just cram whatever hardware you think might look good on a checklist into a device. Thoughtful design, where you actually consider the utility of each component, what it genuinely adds to the user experience, and not a spec sheet, is more difficult, but results in better products.
Apple has never been one to jump on the useless technology bandwagon -- witness any number of checklist items they've resisted including on Macs over the years -- but they also aren't shy about embracing (or discarding) technologies when there's a compelling case for doing so. There just isn't a compelling case for NFC right now, and there may never be before something better comes along and makes it obsolete.
You know most of the other stuff no one cares about. Turn over to mute? Flip to zoom? Why? You know what I noticed? They "forgot" how long their phone lasts using the 4G. I bet it's like 2 hours.
The founder of Samsung must be muting in his grave.
Most of the Apple iDevices will still have the 30 pin connector, so nothing will really be a problem for at least two more years. The new will slowly crowd out the old...
iPhone 4 (still being sold) - old connector
iPhone 4S (still being sold) - old connector
iPod Touch (previous generation still being sold) - old connector
iPod Classic (still being sold) - old connector
iPod Shuffle (still being sold) - old connector
iPad 2 (still being sold) - old connector
iPad (new - still being sold) ) - old connector
People that want the latest tech micturate on your weak argument...
1) The iPod wasn't even close to the first mobile music player. Its main innovation with the iPod was the click wheel [hey, it only took over the market overnight because it was from Apple (overlooking the fact that Apple then was not the Apple of today, yet) and the iSheep bought it.]
2) The iPhone was their revolutionary entry (because of iOS), but it wasn't a new idea. [Comparison to a bunch of devices that were absolutely nothing like the iPhone.]
3) The iPad was about 10 years late to the tablet market that had been introduced around the same time as the iPod. [...] The iPad is seriously just a blown up iPod Touch with different aesthetics and resolutions. There isn't much to say here since the iPad is the furthest thing from an innovation that Apple has ever made. [bunch of nonsense]
Understand, I'm not an Android fanboy or a PC lover. I have MBPs, iPods and Touches, [ah, the classic denial of bias, where would we be without that]
Here's where the true innovation is: iOS [ok, he may be right there, that's where the real IP theft is occurring, especially if we include UI]
That is Apple's true gift to the world. It's their coup de grace. It is what keeps people coming back to their devices. To put this in perspective with competition, though... [Android apology]
What was the 3GS for? New hardware. What was the 4S for? New hardware + Siri. Everything else that is seen as an innovation in their new devices is actually just an innovation in their software. [right, all the innovation that has nothing to do with hardware is software based, but that's almost a tautology]
[here he seems to lose his narrative thread and start rambling] Apple doesn't steal ideas, Apple perfects ideas. [ok]
So yes, Apple stagnates - because they can. [blah blah blah] Every other year, there is a hardware boom. Every year after that, Apple releases old components with new software :P [except of course for the new components that are included every year, he seems to have forgotten that, for example, the 4S was an entirely new device internally, compared to the 4]
[here we had a propaganda filled paragraph telling us Apple would be nothing without Samsung, so we can guess who tyler755 is working for]
[here we had a paragraph telling us we should be happy that Samsung is ripping off Apple, other wise Apple would have a monopoly, so, really, Samsung's IP theft is helping to keep Apple out of trouble with the feds]
Funny stuff and a heroic attempt at revisionist history (obviously you are paid by the word) but I've edited the quote down to eliminate the fluff and interspersed a few comments.
It's always amusing to see people come on here and try to convince everyone that, "Apple isn't really innovating at all, they're stagnating, in fact, [in this instance] Samsung are the real innovators."
So, basically, tyler755's argument boils down to this: Apple isn't actually innovating, Samsung is, but, we should be glad Samsung is copying Apple, otherwise, Apple would be in trouble. Can't really argue with that, or any other irrational proposition.
That sounds nice and all, but the problem is that Apple's history doesn't provide a shred of evidence to support your premise. I don't recall a time when Apple became 'stale' (minus when Steve Jobs left) because of decreased competition. Was Apple facing competition when it released the original iPhone? No, it wasn't. How about the iPad? No, it wasn't. Those were incredible, innovative, industry changing products, and were created and released irrelevant of competition. Your statement that Apple would have "never released the iPhone 4" if it wasn't for Samsung, is just your random theory, and pretty absurd, since there are no indications whatsoever that this would have been the case. Apple has mostly ignored what the competition is doing through most of its history and its innovative products, which is a good thing. I don't recall a single time where Apple felt 'was on its comfortable laurels' in its entire history. Why don't you enlighten us? When did Apple monopolize an industry then stagnate because of lack of competition? I think Apple has shown itself to be one of the few companies out there that is always willing to challenge itself and radically improve its products, even by cannibalizing its own sales, regardless of what everyone else is doing. All of Apple's most iconic products were not bourne out of competition, and Apple was not being attacked on those fronts. The iPod, iPhone, and iPad were all Apple entering new markets, and creating the best product-by far- in that market. In none of these situations did "competition" play a factor, because there was none. Your theory is nice and all, but really is baseless. Steve Jobs )and his team) wasn't the type to sit back and rest on his laurels, no matter what the industry was doing.
Competition seems to influence Apple very little, as evidenced in the newest iPhone, and screen size. If Apple cared about "catching up" to the competition (as everyone defines it) it would have bowed to the pressure and made a flashy, massive screen like all other flagship phones from other companies. But it didn't. It continues to ignore what the competition is doing, and instead designs products based on its own strong convictions.
Just as one example, the iPod Mini was the best selling mp3 player in the world. All of a sudden one day Apple discontinued it, and replaced it with the iPod Nano. There was absolutely no competition for the Mini - Apple just developed something better.
Just as one example, the iPod Mini was the best selling mp3 player in the world. All of a sudden one day Apple discontinued it, and replaced it with the iPod Nano. There was absolutely no competition for the Mini - Apple just developed something better.
Or, for that matter, why do they continue to innovate at all in the iPod line, since there is no competition, period? Why don't they just keep selling the same iPods year after year? Clearly the theory that it's "competition" (read: "copying") from Samsung, et al. that keeps Apple on its toes is nonsense.
Comments
Why would I want to throw away a good experience for some Samsung piece of junk? Not to mention all the apps, music, and movies I've purchased. Samsung's sorry service is for PC users.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oflife
As someone in the biz who knows iOS and Android backwards, loves most of what Apple do and who has played with an S3 and 4S (and knows the 5 spec), this ad is actually accurate.
The international version of the SIII only has 1GB of RAM and no LTE but it does have a quad core processor.
This ad is inaccurate.
The turn to mute thing was part of HTC's Sense and before that was used by Nokia.
Samsung imitators not innovators.
Quote:
Originally Posted by irnchriz
LOL, only 1 model out of the 4 Samsung Galaxy SIII phones has a quad core CPU. The Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile version all have dual core CPUs
On top of that not a single one of those 4 outperforms the 4S on graphics.
...but the quad core has 1GB of RAM, bit of a quandary as it messes up their ad.
I don't think the market for "normal" sized phones has dried up. I ordered my iPhone with AT&T yesterday and the operator I spoke with said they were getting slammed with orders.
Samsung's marketing department could use some help. Still, SIII is an awesome phone and I've been tempted to jump ship (from 4S) numerous times. Pentile screen is probably the factor that will deter me.
(oops, this was supposed to be a reply to the Samsung thread, sorry)
If you're an honest broker of truth, ...and wishes it to be the mainstay of your marketing strategy, and if on top of it you happen to be...as you in deeds are...a 'Samsung/Google' evangelist, wouldn't you stick some 'disclaimer' onto this ad? Such as...
"Survey after survey, year end results after year end results, People's feelings speak falsehood and eccentricities. As you can witness through this layout, we can beat them size-wise on both...falsehood and eccentricities.
Whom would you pick to serve you with a more trustworthy lie? Tag-team slandering, or... Sir Jonathan Ive...?"
Believe me, reality makes for a killer ad.
And one other thing. My wife got her Galaxy S3 for free on a new contract at Costco. THAT is something that will attract people more than the type of processor!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious
It's also utter nonsense. 790 hours? That's 33 days - more than a month on standby! Nobody got that long in the days of dumbphones which only had calls and texts to watch for, let alone on a modern smartphone. I seriously think that it's impossible on the S3 even if you don't use the phone at all.
Apple's figure is about 9.5 days. I once got 6 days out of my iPhone when I only used it for about 2 hours during that period. If you didn't use the phone at all and put it in a strong signal area, I think 9 days is do-able. But 33? No way.
Well, because their power management sucks, and the LTE radio sucks the life out of the battery, they've had to resort to making phablets just so they can fit a battery big enough in the device to power it for more than a couple of hours of use. So, if the screen is off and there is no radio activity (they probably measure "standby time" with the radios off, assuming they don't do it with the device powered off), with a battery that large, you might be able to go a month before it runs out of power. We know from experience that Apple's battery life numbers are real world numbers, and that others' numbers aren't. Under similar conditions, I'd imagine that, at best, the S3 might get equivalent standby time.
But, yes, 33 days is certainly fiction.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy
That sounds nice and all, but the problem is that Apple's history doesn't provide a shred of evidence to support your premise. I don't recall a time when Apple became 'stale' (minus when Steve Jobs left) because of decreased competition. Was Apple facing competition when it released the original iPhone? No, it wasn't. How about the iPad? No, it wasn't. Those were incredible, innovative, industry changing products, and were created and released irrelevant of competition. Your statement that Apple would have "never released the iPhone 4" if it wasn't for Samsung, is just your random theory, and pretty absurd, since there are no indications whatsoever that this would have been the case. Apple has mostly ignored what the competition is doing through most of its history and its innovative products, which is a good thing. I don't recall a single time where Apple felt 'was on its comfortable laurels' in its entire history. Why don't you enlighten us? When did Apple monopolize an industry then stagnate because of lack of competition? I think Apple has shown itself to be one of the few companies out there that is always willing to challenge itself and radically improve its products, even by cannibalizing its own sales, regardless of what everyone else is doing. All of Apple's most iconic products were not bourne out of competition, and Apple was not being attacked on those fronts. The iPod, iPhone, and iPad were all Apple entering new markets, and creating the best product-by far- in that market. In none of these situations did "competition" play a factor, because there was none. Your theory is nice and all, but really is baseless. Steve Jobs )and his team) wasn't the type to sit back and rest on his laurels, no matter what the industry was doing.
Competition seems to influence Apple very little, as evidenced in the newest iPhone, and screen size. If Apple cared about "catching up" to the competition (as everyone defines it) it would have bowed to the pressure and made a flashy, massive screen like all other flagship phones from other companies. But it didn't. It continues to ignore what the competition is doing, and instead designs products based on its own strong convictions.
It doesn't sound to me like you know much about Apple's history before the iPod... or paid attention to it at the beginning of each of its flagship devices in the separate categories.
Things to consider:
1) The iPod wasn't even close to the first mobile music player. Its main innovation with the iPod was the click wheel and extensive use of Apple's music format. Jobs saw what giants (at the time) like Creative were doing with their NOMAD and decided to trump them. Consumer media players had been around for years before Apple introduced theirs, but by watching all of the failures come first and with the iron fist of Jobs, they made something better. During the life of the individual Pod models, the only things that really changed were the materials used, size changes (physical) and storage changes. Until the third generation, they didn't even use the beloved USB dock connector. This is a six year period when Apple is just releasing new iterations of the same device. Perhaps adding a colored screen here or a pure touch wheel there - until the iPod Touch. Historically, people who own a manufacturer's devices have always had "the other ones". If you owned an iPod during this period, odds are, when the Phone released, you bought one as your next mobile phone. That being said. The Touch was the cheaper alternative for people who were new to the market or already had a phone that they liked. They were given iOS to play with as a bait and switch and Apple used marketing strategies to reel people in, just as they did with the iPod and I'm a PC/I'm a Mac commercials. The marketing was genius, but as far as innovations were concerned, the iPod wasn't one of them.
2) The iPhone was their revolutionary entry (because of iOS), but it wasn't a new idea. Blackberry showed the world the power of PDAs + phones. Palm had been making Pilots and Windows Mobile was already an OS in iPaqs (I'm still not sure why Apple didn't sue Compaq over this. Now owned by HP, HP has released a few other iPaq devices since then) and other "popular" devices. There were major innovations with it like pinch zooming and such, but the device itself was Apple bringing their competitor device to market. Whether they dominated or not is not the question, it was something that already existed and it took them market watching to decide that they wanted to do a phone. Apple rode on Blackberry's success in the market (since they had been the dominant device in smartphones) and then broke the horses back, eventually. This is a great example of them sitting around on their success with the iPod and the new iMacs of this time.
3) The iPad was about 10 years late to the tablet market that had been introduced around the same time as the iPod. The difference was that by this time, all of the iOS software was mature enough for a stable release as opposed to Windows XP Tablet PC, which was the Vista of its time. Slates weren't a new concept in 2010. The iPad is seriously just a blown up iPod Touch with different aesthetics and resolutions. There isn't much to say here since the iPad is the furthest thing from an innovation that Apple has ever made. It was the last to market, even if it dominates. This is a classic example of human "I see it, I need it" values where Apple put out a huge marketing campaign and people chomped down at the bit. Now they're bringing a Mini to market that no matter what size it is, is just a shrunken iPad to fit the market that the Androids have already touched on. The Mini's existence would probably be in question if Jobs were around, too. His philosophy of "iPad is the perfect size" was stalwart. Again this is just classic new product production with any company. Beat the successful companies at what they do.
Understand, I'm not an Android fanboy or a PC lover. I have MBPs, iPods and Touches, but I understand that Apple takes great ideas and perfects them. Other companies come up with wonderful ideas, but Apple is the company that executes properly. Whether it be with Jobs-esque keynotes or commercials starring Justin Long, Apple knows how to reach people. You can't say that all the different generations of devices were new or special because they weren't. Just like anything else, when there's changes in hardware technology, you change the device. Even while they change the physical device, it's still the same device with a faster processor, more RAM, etc... it's still a stale device.
Here's where the true innovation is: iOS
That is Apple's true gift to the world. It's their coup de grace. It is what keeps people coming back to their devices. To put this in perspective with competition, though... How many features were in Android long before iOS added them to the mix? No doubt, Android developed many of its technologies because of iOS, but the same is said in reverse. I'm not saying Android is an innovator, because they're not. Most of its technology was present in BBOS and iOS before Android came along, but it's the healthy competition of the ecosystem that keeps Apple releasing new devices on the clip that they have been.
What was the 3GS for? New hardware. What was the 4S for? New hardware + Siri. Everything else that is seen as an innovation in their new devices is actually just an innovation in their software. The hardware already existed, they just developed a different way to use it. Even the 5 is just new hardware - the innovations are in the Lightning connector and that's about it. Lightning is just another example of Apple knowing its market share power and leveraging it to their advantage. Same thing they tried to do with the Thunderbolt (in collab with Intel) that still hasn't truly gotten off of the ground. Apple releases new products to keep interest, not to innovate. Throw in one or two new working concepts and push a product out the door. You can't possibly tell me turn-by-turn directions weren't in the works prior to iOS6. By controlling the actual release of these technologies, Apple controls the longevity of its device. They wait, historically, one year between devices to give people just another taste of what they've been working on for a handful of years.
It's smart business, not innovation... Steve Jobs was a businessman and a visionary. What you will notice in the history of Apple is that they take very few leaps of faith. No matter how visionary he was, they didn't make rash decisions. They didn't push products to market just to get them out the door. They wait for some other company to do it first so they can capitalize on failures and produce what the people really want. Apple hasn't been the first to jump for decades now. They are playing the smart business game and Samsung's unprofessional nature is feeding them endlessly. Apple doesn't steal ideas, Apple perfects ideas.
So yes, Apple stagnates - because they can. Eventually, all ideas will run out for the rest of the smartphone/pmp/tablet manufacturers and Apple will still be "turtle"ing along with the slow and steady product releases that are powered by iOS. Apple's entire history relies on slumps where they don't have to release new hardware because they're making the best software. It's the same principal that helps Moore's Law drive the computer world. Every other year, there is a hardware boom. Every year after that, Apple releases old components with new software :P
Don't forget, Apple stopped producing its own hardware because it was a lofty engagement to fight true innovators at Intel and to a lesser extent AMD. Apple turned their attention to aesthetics, product control, market control and Mac OS + iOS. Intel gave us USB... Apple gave us operating systems. All this not even mentioning that Samsung makes a great deal of hardware that goes into Apple devices. It's definitely not because Samsung is the cheapest to mass produce. Samsung is a global leader in quality hardware and Apple has to understand that in order to dominate their devices. Without Samsung in the ecosystem, who would step up to give Apple a run for its money? No one.
All this is just to say, you can't fight the truths of economics - without competition, you have a monopoly. When you have a monopoly, you turn into Microsoft and get reamed by the feds. Don't let Apple get reamed by the feds
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
Well, because their power management sucks, and the LTE radio sucks the life out of the battery, they've had to resort to making phablets just so they can fit a battery big enough in the device to power it for more than a couple of hours of use. So, if the screen is off and there is no radio activity (they probably measure "standby time" with the radios off, assuming they don't do it with the device powered off), with a battery that large, you might be able to go a month before it runs out of power. We know from experience that Apple's battery life numbers are real world numbers, and that others' numbers aren't. Under similar conditions, I'd imagine that, at best, the S3 might get equivalent standby time.
But, yes, 33 days is certainly fiction.
33 days has to be in airplane mode and never touching the lock button...
Here's my TRUTHFUL AD.
iPhone 5
4 inch display with better pixel density and ability to use with one hand.
Samscum S III
4.8 inch display with ALMOST Retina quality and it's too big to use with one hand for MOST people.
iPhone 5
A6 processor with GPU rendering equal to that of a gaming console.
Samscum S III
We don't sell the same processor all markets because we are STILL trying to sell our old A9 Exynos (you can't even pronounce it) chips OR the Snapdragon S4 which is kinda like an A15 chip, but the GPU suck and it doesn't render graphics as well as the A6.
iPhone 5
1GB of memory. Uh oh, Samscum has 2 GB of RAM. I guess they actually thought people are actually going to NEED that much.
Samscum S III
2GB of memory. WE need it because of WIDGETS, ANIMATION BACKGROUND and FLASH because Android is bloated code.
iPhone 5
ICS LCD screen that is color accurate.
Samscum S III
Super AMOLED Well, we have to admit that AMOLED wasn't that good, but Super AMOLED is SUPER. We still have complaints on screen burn-in, but we don't want to take responsibility for screen burn. So, to avoid screen burn in, DON'T run widgets, or have the brightness turned up.
iPhone 5
One chip for voice/data using the latest technology. Less battery drain
Samscum S III
Two chips for voice/data using older technology, because we have TWO CHIPS, TWO CHIPS, TWO CHIPS IN one phone. It sounds better, so it must BE better.
iPhone 5
Siri (yeah, we'll admit, Siri in iOS 5 was in beta and it didn't work as well as before, but this version should be fixed)
Samscum S III
S Voice We used to S to impress you. Other than that. It gives you voice control, kinda like Siri.
iPhone 5
Passport Don't need a NFC chip, plus most people don't even walk into a store that has it. So, we'll put one in IF there is an actual time when it makes sense to do so.
Samscum S III
NFC chip (We're putting it so it makes us FEEL superior and you can say it has it when you sell against the iPhone, but reality is MOST people don't know it's there or use it, but it sounds better that we have it)
iPhone 5
4G/LTE Yeah, we finally added it because enough carriers actually have it turned on.
Samsung S III
4G/LTE We had it first, even though most of our users couldn't use it.
iPhone 5
Precision Aluminum case (Because we care about the case being well made)
Samsung S III
Molded poly carb case Because if we used metal, it would cost more, weight more and we want our phone to feel as cheap as possible because we're from Korea and that's how we like it. CHEAP. Plus our phone is going to end up as landfill, so it doesn't matter.
iPhone 5
3 microphone and enhanced speaker design so you can hear better and the other person can hear you better.
Samsung S III
Uh. We didn't list anything because we just have 2 microphones and nothing that special to make it better.
iPhone 5
8 hour talk time
Samsung S IIII
We say up to 11.4 hours talk time, but on our web site it says up to 8 hours of talk time, but the reality is that if you use OUR two chip 4G/LTE solution and because of all of the widgets, animation, Flash, etc. you really only get maybe 3 hours if you're lucky, so just get used to charging the phone 2 to 3 times a day, carry around at least one or two extra batteries or just deal with it.
iPhone 5
16, 32, 64 G of SSD storage
Samsung S III
16 or 32 G of SSD. But we have a MicroSD card slot to add an extra 32 G. Why? Because we found out that another Samsung division has a BIG warehouse filled with 32G MicroSD cards since no one is buying them, so instead of managing our inventory or chucking them in landfill, we decided to mislead the consumer by adding these things giving people the illusion that it's just like SSD memory, only cheaper. Yeah, we think that the average consumer is STUPID. But it sounds good because WE can say our phone is upgradeable.
IPhone 5
Lightening connector It's digital and it's WAY better than the 30 pin. We're sorry for confusing everyone, but we just needed to do it at some point in time.
Samsung S III
We change our connectors all of the time, but since no one really has any third party docking stations, or anything else that is really made for our phone, then it doesn't matter if we change it Because you won't know when we do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
IMO There is only one thing Apple might have made a mistake on with iPhone 5 and that's NFC. ...
NFC is still a mostly useless technology, and adding it to the iPhone would have just been a case of shoving a useless component into an otherwise carefully thought out package. Why? To "future proof" it? Yeah, that's always a great strategy. It's easy, especially with a phablet, to just cram whatever hardware you think might look good on a checklist into a device. Thoughtful design, where you actually consider the utility of each component, what it genuinely adds to the user experience, and not a spec sheet, is more difficult, but results in better products.
Apple has never been one to jump on the useless technology bandwagon -- witness any number of checklist items they've resisted including on Macs over the years -- but they also aren't shy about embracing (or discarding) technologies when there's a compelling case for doing so. There just isn't a compelling case for NFC right now, and there may never be before something better comes along and makes it obsolete.
Yep. This ad has 'false advertising' written all over it. They advertise a phone that doesn't exist (quad core, 2 GB of RAM).
Furthermore, the ad says over 11 hours of talk time, but their web site only says 8.
Finally, they do not recognize Apple's registered trademarks.
This ad will be history by Tuesday.
The founder of Samsung must be muting in his grave.
/s
You failed to detect my sarcasm.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tyler755
...
1) The iPod wasn't even close to the first mobile music player. Its main innovation with the iPod was the click wheel [hey, it only took over the market overnight because it was from Apple (overlooking the fact that Apple then was not the Apple of today, yet) and the iSheep bought it.]
2) The iPhone was their revolutionary entry (because of iOS), but it wasn't a new idea. [Comparison to a bunch of devices that were absolutely nothing like the iPhone.]
3) The iPad was about 10 years late to the tablet market that had been introduced around the same time as the iPod. [...] The iPad is seriously just a blown up iPod Touch with different aesthetics and resolutions. There isn't much to say here since the iPad is the furthest thing from an innovation that Apple has ever made. [bunch of nonsense]
Understand, I'm not an Android fanboy or a PC lover. I have MBPs, iPods and Touches, [ah, the classic denial of bias, where would we be without that]
Here's where the true innovation is: iOS [ok, he may be right there, that's where the real IP theft is occurring, especially if we include UI]
That is Apple's true gift to the world. It's their coup de grace. It is what keeps people coming back to their devices. To put this in perspective with competition, though... [Android apology]
What was the 3GS for? New hardware. What was the 4S for? New hardware + Siri. Everything else that is seen as an innovation in their new devices is actually just an innovation in their software. [right, all the innovation that has nothing to do with hardware is software based, but that's almost a tautology]
[here he seems to lose his narrative thread and start rambling] Apple doesn't steal ideas, Apple perfects ideas. [ok]
So yes, Apple stagnates - because they can. [blah blah blah] Every other year, there is a hardware boom. Every year after that, Apple releases old components with new software :P [except of course for the new components that are included every year, he seems to have forgotten that, for example, the 4S was an entirely new device internally, compared to the 4]
[here we had a propaganda filled paragraph telling us Apple would be nothing without Samsung, so we can guess who tyler755 is working for]
[here we had a paragraph telling us we should be happy that Samsung is ripping off Apple, other wise Apple would have a monopoly, so, really, Samsung's IP theft is helping to keep Apple out of trouble with the feds]
Funny stuff and a heroic attempt at revisionist history (obviously you are paid by the word) but I've edited the quote down to eliminate the fluff and interspersed a few comments.
It's always amusing to see people come on here and try to convince everyone that, "Apple isn't really innovating at all, they're stagnating, in fact, [in this instance] Samsung are the real innovators."
So, basically, tyler755's argument boils down to this: Apple isn't actually innovating, Samsung is, but, we should be glad Samsung is copying Apple, otherwise, Apple would be in trouble. Can't really argue with that, or any other irrational proposition.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy
That sounds nice and all, but the problem is that Apple's history doesn't provide a shred of evidence to support your premise. I don't recall a time when Apple became 'stale' (minus when Steve Jobs left) because of decreased competition. Was Apple facing competition when it released the original iPhone? No, it wasn't. How about the iPad? No, it wasn't. Those were incredible, innovative, industry changing products, and were created and released irrelevant of competition. Your statement that Apple would have "never released the iPhone 4" if it wasn't for Samsung, is just your random theory, and pretty absurd, since there are no indications whatsoever that this would have been the case. Apple has mostly ignored what the competition is doing through most of its history and its innovative products, which is a good thing. I don't recall a single time where Apple felt 'was on its comfortable laurels' in its entire history. Why don't you enlighten us? When did Apple monopolize an industry then stagnate because of lack of competition? I think Apple has shown itself to be one of the few companies out there that is always willing to challenge itself and radically improve its products, even by cannibalizing its own sales, regardless of what everyone else is doing. All of Apple's most iconic products were not bourne out of competition, and Apple was not being attacked on those fronts. The iPod, iPhone, and iPad were all Apple entering new markets, and creating the best product-by far- in that market. In none of these situations did "competition" play a factor, because there was none. Your theory is nice and all, but really is baseless. Steve Jobs )and his team) wasn't the type to sit back and rest on his laurels, no matter what the industry was doing.
Competition seems to influence Apple very little, as evidenced in the newest iPhone, and screen size. If Apple cared about "catching up" to the competition (as everyone defines it) it would have bowed to the pressure and made a flashy, massive screen like all other flagship phones from other companies. But it didn't. It continues to ignore what the competition is doing, and instead designs products based on its own strong convictions.
Just as one example, the iPod Mini was the best selling mp3 player in the world. All of a sudden one day Apple discontinued it, and replaced it with the iPod Nano. There was absolutely no competition for the Mini - Apple just developed something better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by elroth
Just as one example, the iPod Mini was the best selling mp3 player in the world. All of a sudden one day Apple discontinued it, and replaced it with the iPod Nano. There was absolutely no competition for the Mini - Apple just developed something better.
Or, for that matter, why do they continue to innovate at all in the iPod line, since there is no competition, period? Why don't they just keep selling the same iPods year after year? Clearly the theory that it's "competition" (read: "copying") from Samsung, et al. that keeps Apple on its toes is nonsense.