Samsung overtakes Apple as top 'smart connected device' vendor in 2012

24

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 62


    "Fit in your pocket???" Really? Sounds like a 3rd grade standard.

  • Reply 22 of 62
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 8,688member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post





    "Smart connected device" is so not a real category.


     


    How else would they be able to include Samsung TV's?


     


     


    Enter a New Era of Smart TV


    Experience the next generation of our groundbreaking Smart TVs


     


    http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Electronics-Promotions/Samsung-Smart-TV/pcmcat240000050000.c?id=pcmcat240000050000

  • Reply 23 of 62
    richlrichl Posts: 2,213member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post



    (Of course, we'll get the usual whining that Android isn't used on feature phones - even though I provided over half a dozen examples with just a few minutes searching last time the question came up).


     


    No, you didn't. You found one device that was replacing a feature phone and that never got released.

  • Reply 24 of 62
    nairbnairb Posts: 253member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hill60 View Post


     


    Conversely whether Samsung can maintain it's hit parade of high end devices against the juggernaut of Apple and make a decent return on the low end devices which form the majority of their sales, just ask Nokia where that road leads.


     


    But what the hey, the author of the report had to throw in this fashionable statement denigrating Apple.


     


     


    Technically any Android phone is a "smartphone" just like the Symbian phones they are replacing, the devil in the detail is whether they are being used as such.


     


    Going on usage studies, a lot of them aren't.



     Funny how apple fanboys always equate web usage as to whether they are being used as a smart phone or not. My android spent most of last night crunching some numbers for me. When snow fall caused altered train schedules in mid January, my phone alarm went off to tell me that my usual train wont be running and I had to catch an earlier one if I wanted to be at work on time. To me that is a smart phone.


     


    The fact that I only surf the internet on it once every few weeks does not make it any less smart. Maybe it proves that android users actually have better things to do with their lives.

  • Reply 25 of 62
    habihabi Posts: 317member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Nairb View Post


     Funny how apple fanboys always equate web usage as to whether they are being used as a smart phone or not. My android spent most of last night crunching some numbers for me. When snow fall caused altered train schedules in mid January, my phone alarm went off to tell me that my usual train wont be running and I had to catch an earlier one if I wanted to be at work on time. To me that is a smart phone.


     


    The fact that I only surf the internet on it once every few weeks does not make it any less smart. Maybe it proves that android users actually have better things to do with their lives.



    Funny how ann droid fanns always use their phone instead for tasks that are way better for a computer with adequate cpu power. Or is it just the 0,001% of the users that use that as a desirable feature? I wouldnt even dream of doing exactly the same things on my phone that I can do on a laptop or desktop.


     


    Using the right tool for the job is just common sense. And dont tell me you never surf the web with your smartphone?! The only reason would be that you never leave the house. But hey are you one of those people? Your habits seems to be inline with that picture...

  • Reply 26 of 62
    rayzrayz Posts: 814member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Nairb View Post


     


    Maybe it proves that android users actually have better things to do with their lives.



     


    Or that they reach for their iPads when they want to surf the web.

  • Reply 27 of 62
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hill60 View Post


     


    Conversely whether Samsung can maintain it's hit parade of high end devices against the juggernaut of Apple and make a decent return on the low end devices which form the majority of their sales, just ask Nokia where that road leads.



     


    Of course, Samsung are clearly doomed!


     


    Quote:


    Samsung Electronics Co reported a record quarterly profit of $8.3 billion and kept its 2013 investment plans at the previous year's level, defying expectations that it may reduce spending amid weaker demand for computer chips.


    The South Korean firm said October-December operating profit increased 89 percent from a year ago to 8.84 trillion korean won ($8.3 billion), in line with its earlier estimate.




    http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/24/samsung-earnings-idUSS6E8H100T20130124


     


    Of course being AI, we now have to point out the obvious that it was probably just 'shipped' profit versus Apple's superior 'sales' profit.

  • Reply 28 of 62
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by habi View Post


    Funny how ann droid fanns always use their phone instead for tasks that are way better for a computer with adequate cpu power. Or is it just the 0,001% of the users that use that as a desirable feature? I wouldnt even dream of doing exactly the same things on my phone that I can do on a laptop or desktop.


     


    Using the right tool for the job is just common sense. And dont tell me you never surf the web with your smartphone?! The only reason would be that you never leave the house. But hey are you one of those people? Your habits seems to be inline with that picture...





    That is a rather specious criticism.  Funny how Apple devotees see a problem wher none exists. If his phone managed the task, in a time frame that was acceptable, then by definition it was a suitable tool for the job. And borrowing a truism from photography - the best camera is the one you have with you - the right tool for the job is probably the one you have to hand.

  • Reply 29 of 62

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Constable Odo View Post



    Samsung shareholders had a banner year in 2012. Apple was a major fail for shareholders in 2012. Samsung is seen as a company having a future. Apple is seen as a company having no future. Whatever numbers are being made up by Samsung is paying off in gold. Apple's numbers, on the other hand, are pretty much perceived headed for oblivion. Maybe Apple better start putting out some fabricated PR reports for investors to get excited about. Apple's actual numbers don't impress anyone that matters. In fact, Apple should stop reporting sales numbers altogether. Let Wall Street and the news media continue to make up its own numbers for Apple.


    This is where you are wrong. You and others like you don't matter. The ones that like Apple, love their products and buy them as long as they are the best, matter. That's us, not you and others like you.

  • Reply 30 of 62
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,932member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

    (Of course, we'll get the usual whining that Android isn't used on feature phones - even though I provided over half a dozen examples with just a few minutes searching last time the question came up).


    Bull....


    You provided no examples of an Android feature phone being sold today.  You found one that ran Brew as the OS. You found another using Symbian. You found a rumor of an upcoming Samsung feature phone line that you hoped would be using Android, but as it turns out will apparently be using Tizen according to a recent press release. IF there is an Android feature phone out there somewhere the evidence for one certainly didn't come from you. 


     


    Why you would even write such a thing today already knowing you weren't telling the truth is beyond me. It was proven to you weeks ago that you were mistaken. Today's post isn't a mistake anymore, nor even a simple difference of opinion. You think it's proper to fib about what you dug up. You'd have been better off never bringing it up again.  Geez...


     


    Here's the links for those that wonder how truthful you are. They're your answers from the "last time the question came up".


     


    http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/155756/apples-ios-mobile-web-share-calls-into-question-reports-touting-android-sales-supremacy/40#post_2270277


    http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/155756/apples-ios-mobile-web-share-calls-into-question-reports-touting-android-sales-supremacy/40#post_2270299


    http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/155756/apples-ios-mobile-web-share-calls-into-question-reports-touting-android-sales-supremacy/120#post_2270865. ;


     


    Now back to the topic. My apologies to the other posters for the distraction. Speaking to this article, it doesn't really serve to prove much of anything IMO. It seems more like a creative way to group a set of select data points to form a nice link-bait article.  

  • Reply 31 of 62
    sipsip Posts: 210member


    Shipments does not equal SALES

  • Reply 32 of 62

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Constable Odo View Post



    Samsung shareholders had a banner year in 2012. Apple was a major fail for shareholders in 2012. Samsung is seen as a company having a future. Apple is seen as a company having no future. Whatever numbers are being made up by Samsung is paying off in gold. Apple's numbers, on the other hand, are pretty much perceived headed for oblivion. Maybe Apple better start putting out some fabricated PR reports for investors to get excited about. Apple's actual numbers don't impress anyone that matters. In fact, Apple should stop reporting sales numbers altogether. Let Wall Street and the news media continue to make up its own numbers for Apple.


    you have got to be the dumbest mother f***** ever

  • Reply 33 of 62
    hzchzc Posts: 63member
    And tomorrow it's Apple. And the day after it's Samsung again. And the day after that they're tied. Yeah, yeah, we get the point; give it a rest.
  • Reply 34 of 62

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    ... Why you would even write such a thing today already knowing you weren't telling the truth is beyond me. ...



     


    Pretty ironic stuff from GG.

  • Reply 35 of 62
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    hill60 wrote: »
    Conversely whether Samsung can maintain it's hit parade of high end devices against the juggernaut of Apple and make a decent return on the low end devices which form the majority of their sales, just ask Nokia where that road leads.

    But what the hey, the author of the report had to throw in this fashionable statement denigrating Apple.
     

    Technically any Android phone is a "smartphone" just like the Symbian phones they are replacing, the devil in the detail is whether they are being used as such.
     
    Going on usage studies, a lot of them aren't.

    No, some Android phones are feature phones - as I've shown repeatedly. See below. Typically, the dividing line is if it doesn't run Android Market, it's not considered a smartphone, although different manufacturers may define it differently.
    kdarling wrote: »
    <span style="line-height:1.231;">IDC's website defined the devices as "Desktop PCs, portable PCs, tablets, and smartphones".    That was even mentioned in the first sentence of the thread article.</span>
    galbi wrote: »
    The first sentence in the article gives what the definition of "smart connected devices" is.

    This just tells me that you fail to read the article. Not only that, you also made up your opinion even before you read the details.

    No, it tells me that your reading comprehension matches a second grader. They stated that it included smartphones - but never defined smartphones. There are plenty of examples where different analysts get vastly different numbers simply by defining 'smartphone' differently.
    jfanning wrote: »
    Are those the examples you were told they weren't running android and you wouldn't listen?
    richl wrote: »
    No, you didn't. You found one device that was replacing a feature phone and that never got released.

    Wrong. There was one that was listed as an Android phone but turned out not to be. However, after that, I provided at least a half dozen examples of Android phones that were defined as the manufacturer as being feature phones. I guess I'm condemned to do this for all eternity because the Android shills will keep denying it:

    http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2400017,00.asp
    "The ZTE Chorus ($49.99) is just weird. It's based on Android, but it's not a smartphone."

    http://www.cellaz.com/news/6578/huawei-ascend-android-feature-phone-now-available-on-metropcs/
    "The Huawei Ascend a new Android 2.1 powered feature phone "

    http://betanews.com/2011/08/22/sony-ericsson-keeps-feature-phones-alive-with-android-walkman-line/
    "Sony Ericsson keeps 'feature phones' alive with Android Walkman line"

    That alone should be enough to shut up the naysayers (but, of course, they'll keep denying).
    There are, in addition, many, many articles that establish that Android can easily be used in a feature phone:

    http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/leap-plans-android-feature-phone-wait-what/2011-10-12
    "Garcia, Leap's senior director of business and product management, said the carrier plans to use Android as the platform to power its forthcoming feature phone but will strip away much of what makes Android a smartphone platform"

    http://pocketnow.com/android/lg-adds-android-os-to-env-touch-feature-phone-follow-up

    http://www.androidauthority.com/samsung-rex-156218/
    "Samsung has just done something they haven’t done in what feels like a century or two, they’ve announced a new family of feature phones....Oh right, the recently announced Galaxy Fame, which is in fact an Android phone."

    http://weblogs.java.net/blog/editors/archives/2009/08/poll_google_and.html
  • Reply 36 of 62
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,360member
    Which ever way you slide and dice it you have to admire the South Korean success story. Every other car on the road seems to be from Korea in our town these days and gone is the stigma attached to them as cheap rubbish. It is no wonder Japan is feeling the pinch. I wonder how long can the S. Korean success last and which Asian country will be next?
  • Reply 37 of 62
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Which ever way you slide and dice it you have to admire the South Korean success story. Every other car on the road seems to be from Korea in our town these days and gone is the stigma attached to them as cheap rubbish. It is no wonder Japan is feeling the pinch. I wonder how long can the S. Korean success last and which Asian country will be next?

    I'm guessing Vietnam.
  • Reply 38 of 62


    I really wish you would take the extra couple minutes in your post and tell us how you really feel :P 

  • Reply 39 of 62
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,932member


    Quote:


    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post



    http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2400017,00.asp

    "The ZTE Chorus ($49.99) is just weird. It's based on Android, but it's not a smartphone."


    --Me: The reason your "link" couldn't figure out what version of Android it was running is because it's not running Android. It's a proprietary ZTE OS, perhaps based on open-source Android code, tho I think ZTE would claim it isn't taken from Android.  http://www.gsmarc.com/model-finder/zte/operating-system/proprietary-os/ ;


     



    --Me: Congrats on finding an obscure site with a one-sentence description of the Ascend, and referring to it as a feature phone.  Altho it's long discontinued and no other source refers to it as a feature phone I'll even give you half-a-point for making an attempt. It's the closest you've come yet.  http://www.phonescoop.com/phones/phone.php?p=2886



    http://betanews.com/2011/08/22/sony-ericsson-keeps-feature-phones-alive-with-android-walkman-line/

    "Sony Ericsson keeps 'feature phones' alive with Android Walkman line"


    --Me: Did you actually read that link? It doesn't refer to the Sony as a feature phone. "Today, the joint venture debuted the Sony Ericsson "Live with Walkman" Android smartphone, another device capitalizing on the music player brand Sony popularized nearly 30 years ago.


    The smartphone features a 3.2" touchscreen, a single core 1GHz processor, Android 2.3 (Gingerbread), and a 5 megapixel camera with 720p video capture."




    That alone should be enough to shut up the naysayers (but, of course, they'll keep denying).

    There are, in addition, many, many articles that establish that Android can easily be used in a feature phone:



    http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/leap-plans-android-feature-phone-wait-what/2011-10-12

    "Garcia, Leap's senior director of business and product management, said the carrier plans to use Android as the platform to power its forthcoming feature phone but will strip away much of what makes Android a smartphone platform" (Me: Yet oddly it never happened)



    http://pocketnow.com/android/lg-adds-android-os-to-env-touch-feature-phone-follow-up


    --Me:They don't claim the EnV-Touch is a feature phone in that article from three years ago. Instead they're making the point that entry level smartphones can replace feature phones. READ YOUR LINKS!



    http://www.androidauthority.com/samsung-rex-156218/

    "Samsung has just done something they haven’t done in what feels like a century or two, they’ve announced a new family of feature phones....Oh right, the recently announced Galaxy Fame, which is in fact an Android phone." 


    --Me: The Rex line was officially announced by Samsung a few days ago, using a "Java-based OS" assumed to be Tizen. Further your link doesn't call the Fame a feature phone either. The follow link is in your article. (PLEASE READ YOUR OWN LINKS) http://thenextweb.com/mobile/2013/02/17/samsung-rex/ ;


    http://www.androidauthority.com/samsung-galaxy-young-galaxy-fame-specs-availability-153795/



    http://weblogs.java.net/blog/editors/archives/2009/08/poll_google_and.html


     


    --Me: Another link to a thread posted years ago (2009)? Of course Android could be used for a feature phone. It's very adaptable. It doesn't mean it IS being used today for a feature phone anymore than iOS is ( strangely discussed in that same thread).


     


    Why not drop trying to prove you're right for now instead of trying to dig out of deeper holes that don't speak well for your "Googling" skills. 


     

  • Reply 40 of 62
    richlrichl Posts: 2,213member


     


    A lot of these are just confused journalists. AI's forums make it way too hard to split quotes up so I won't point out every error - just be aware of the accepted definition of a smartphone and notice how you don't link to many mainstream tech websites. However, your last link (above) is the most hilarious. It listed both Android and iOS as feature-phone operating systems. Is this really your proof?

Sign In or Register to comment.