I thought the camera came from Sony, straight out of the Experia line.
I know Apple uses SONY - did not know Samsung did . It is unlabeled, but according to AllD it comes from Samsung. I mean Samsung does have a digital camera line - Hard to see SONY not marking their stuff, but if it is SONY good for them, they need the cash
I wish they had put the iPhone 5 up also just for relative comparison (since that's all this kind of vague info is good for). So I grabbed both. Looks like the display and sensors are the big extra expense.
Apple and Samsung both use custom designed parts that are not available to companies like iSuppli although a Qualcomm equipped LTE S4, could be reproduced.
As far as I know Apple's A and Samsung's Exynos series SOC's are not available for sale.
Hate on brother, hate on. We'll ignore that reviewers seem to love the screen despite the pentile and.. uhm.. blacker than black blacks.
You neglected to mention the redder-than-red reds, greener-than-green greens, and bluer-than-blue blues, too. Of course the pentiles on the S4 are too small for the eye to normally detect, but they're still there, doing their job of making the images look so special.
Yes, Samsung really knows how to blow out color.
It's cheery eye candy for kindergarten sensibilities.
There's a reason why the backgrounds and screen savers on Samsung smartphones are often CGI scenes instead of Nature scenes... because Nature scenes and images of people don't look natural. The Samsung standard image of dandelion seeds against a blue sky background looks so unreal on their phones that the color has to be toned way down for use in advertisements. That's Samsunginnovation!
I believe the cost difference is mostly attributable to the authentic plastic shell of the S4.
Plus it costs good hard cash to manufacture an OLED display with pentiles instead of pixels and poor color accuracy.
Is your other one-liner to do with actual sales vs supply chain I wonder?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpsro
You neglected to mention the redder-than-red reds, greener-than-green greens, and bluer-than-blue blues, too. Of course the pentiles on the S4 are too small for the eye to normally detect, but they're still there, doing their job of making the images look so special.
Yes, Samsung really knows how to blow out color.
It's cheery eye candy for kindergarten sensibilities.
There's a reason why the backgrounds and screen savers on Samsung smartphones are often CGI scenes instead of Nature scenes... because Nature scenes and images of people don't look natural. The Samsung standard image of dandelion seeds against a blue sky background looks so unreal on their phones that the color has to be toned way down for use in advertisements. That's Samsunginnovation!
You haven't actually read any of the technical reviews of the display performance of the S4, have you? Want some links?
Samsung spent $10.3 B on R&D last year while Apple spent $3.38 B
How much of that was on how to build ships, wash clothes, cook food, work out insurance and financial risks or any of the other industries they are involved in?
How much of that was on how to build ships, wash clothes, cook food, work out insurance and financial risks or any of the other industries they are involved in?
R & D for shipbuilding probably isn't cheap.
That R&D was just for Samsung Electronics. They do not build ships.
About a minute's worth of searching would've let you find out what their R&D centers do:
I am quite impressed with the way price break-down has been arrived at. It sure shot that Apple must have invested a much bigger amount in research and development. Anyway, its time to find out who the real winner is and you could find that out on this website I came across, http://www.brandcollage.com/faceoff/apple-iphone5-vs-samsung-galaxy-s4/
Its not easy to beat Samsung in volume game and when you deal in such huge volumes its so much easier to get a better deal. Well the real comparison is happening by the lovers of each of these brands - iPhone5 vs Galaxy S4 at http://www.brandcollage.com/faceoff/apple-iphone5-vs-samsung-galaxy-s4/
You haven't actually read any of the technical reviews of the display performance of the S4, have you? Want some links?
Apparently you don't know how Samsung markets the S4 and how compromising Android users are in order to lay claim to superiority (legends in their own minds),
and you're unwilling to acknowledge Samsung has reaped huge profits by infringing Apple IP, with said profits being used to further bolster its market position.
Samsung Electronics does not build ships, so none of their $10 B of R&D that cnocbui was talking about in Post #30... and you replied about in Post #31... was used to design them.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
I thought the camera came from Sony, straight out of the Experia line.
I know Apple uses SONY - did not know Samsung did . It is unlabeled, but according to AllD it comes from Samsung. I mean Samsung does have a digital camera line - Hard to see SONY not marking their stuff, but if it is SONY good for them, they need the cash
http://allthingsd.com/20130508/samsung-galaxy-s4-costs-237-to-build-teardown-analysis-shows/
Are some man-made materials cost more and are of better quality than you find in nature? Do you pay, as the old saying, for what you get?
I wish they had put the iPhone 5 up also just for relative comparison (since that's all this kind of vague info is good for). So I grabbed both. Looks like the display and sensors are the big extra expense.
deleted
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez
Both the iPhone 5 and the Galaxy S4 use Samsung components.
Both the iPhone 5 and the Galaxy S4 use Apple designs.
Cheers
As far as I know Apple's A and Samsung's Exynos series SOC's are not available for sale.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo42
Hate on brother, hate on. We'll ignore that reviewers seem to love the screen despite the pentile and.. uhm.. blacker than black blacks.
You neglected to mention the redder-than-red reds, greener-than-green greens, and bluer-than-blue blues, too. Of course the pentiles on the S4 are too small for the eye to normally detect, but they're still there, doing their job of making the images look so special.
Yes, Samsung really knows how to blow out color.
It's cheery eye candy for kindergarten sensibilities.
There's a reason why the backgrounds and screen savers on Samsung smartphones are often CGI scenes instead of Nature scenes... because Nature scenes and images of people don't look natural. The Samsung standard image of dandelion seeds against a blue sky background looks so unreal on their phones that the color has to be toned way down for use in advertisements. That's Samsung innovation!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpsro
I believe the cost difference is mostly attributable to the authentic plastic shell of the S4.
Plus it costs good hard cash to manufacture an OLED display with pentiles instead of pixels and poor color accuracy.
Is your other one-liner to do with actual sales vs supply chain I wonder?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpsro
You neglected to mention the redder-than-red reds, greener-than-green greens, and bluer-than-blue blues, too. Of course the pentiles on the S4 are too small for the eye to normally detect, but they're still there, doing their job of making the images look so special.
Yes, Samsung really knows how to blow out color.
It's cheery eye candy for kindergarten sensibilities.
There's a reason why the backgrounds and screen savers on Samsung smartphones are often CGI scenes instead of Nature scenes... because Nature scenes and images of people don't look natural. The Samsung standard image of dandelion seeds against a blue sky background looks so unreal on their phones that the color has to be toned way down for use in advertisements. That's Samsung innovation!
You haven't actually read any of the technical reviews of the display performance of the S4, have you? Want some links?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Apple: $4 billion in R&D costs
Samsung: $3.75 in copies at Kinkos.
Samsung spent $10.3 B on R&D last year while Apple spent $3.38 B
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui
Samsung spent $10.3 B on R&D last year while Apple spent $3.38 B
How much of that was on how to build ships, wash clothes, cook food, work out insurance and financial risks or any of the other industries they are involved in?
R & D for shipbuilding probably isn't cheap.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
How much of that was on how to build ships, wash clothes, cook food, work out insurance and financial risks or any of the other industries they are involved in?
R & D for shipbuilding probably isn't cheap.
That R&D was just for Samsung Electronics. They do not build ships.
About a minute's worth of searching would've let you find out what their R&D centers do:
Originally Posted by MacRulez
Both the iPhone 5 and the Galaxy S4 use Samsung components.
We'll let you know when we give a crap.
Its not easy to beat Samsung in volume game and when you deal in such huge volumes its so much easier to get a better deal. Well the real comparison is happening by the lovers of each of these brands - iPhone5 vs Galaxy S4 at http://www.brandcollage.com/faceoff/apple-iphone5-vs-samsung-galaxy-s4/
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui
You haven't actually read any of the technical reviews of the display performance of the S4, have you? Want some links?
Apparently you don't know how Samsung markets the S4 and how compromising Android users are in order to lay claim to superiority (legends in their own minds),
and you're unwilling to acknowledge Samsung has reaped huge profits by infringing Apple IP, with said profits being used to further bolster its market position.
deleted
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling
They do not build ships.
What is this?
Originally Posted by hill60
What is this?
A sold. Not a ship.
Get it right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
What is this?
Repeat:
Samsung Electronics does not build ships, so none of their $10 B of R&D that cnocbui was talking about in Post #30... and you replied about in Post #31... was used to design them.