That's the advantage Android has, they can jump ship to whatever hardware platforms offers best in class. (Note : I did not see any battery usage benchmarks on the baytrail yet, anyone ?)
I was about to say speed is not everything when you talking mobile platforms. The competition continues to be behind apple every step along the way. Moto RAZR Max had a decent process and a battery almost 3X of the iPhone but its battery life under processor intensive activities does not last as long as the iPhone. The analysis of why this is the case is the fact that apple controls the SOC and the software. They do not auto-route the SOC, it appears they are hand routing the layout of the chip which is giving them speed and efficiency that the others can not achieve. IT also appears that iOS and the associated hardware does not spend as much time doing the same tasks as it Android counter parts which allows the processor not to run as long thus getting power savings.
With that said you a can safely assume that any Android device using a Baytrail will not beat an iPhone in overall performance. It may be better in one benchmark but loses in others since Manufacturers do not control all the pieces. Apple has shown their trade offers balance the end users overall experience. Good display, fast enough, and lasts just long enough.
I was about to say speed is not everything when you talking mobile platforms. The competition continues to be behind apple every step along the way. Moto RAZR Max had a decent process and a battery almost 3X of the iPhone but its battery life under processor intensive activities does not last as long as the iPhone. The analysis of why this is the case is the fact that apple controls the SOC and the software. They do not auto-route the SOC, it appears they are hand routing the layout of the chip which is giving them speed and efficiency that the others can not achieve. IT also appears that iOS and the associated hardware does not spend as much time doing the same tasks as it Android counter parts which allows the processor not to run as long thus getting power savings.
With that said you a can safely assume that any Android device using a Baytrail will not beat an iPhone in overall performance. It may be better in one benchmark but loses in others since Manufacturers do not control all the pieces. Apple has shown their trade offers balance the end users overall experience. Good display, fast enough, and lasts just long enough.
I agree with this 100%. I'm still grappling how much FASTER from a benchmarks perspective the A7 is to the A5X when I upgraded to the Air recently. But to be perfectly blunt, I used both iPad 3rd ten and Air side by side and it's really not a 4x speed increase in practice. It's much more nuanced where you might notice animations are slightly more fluid. Some apps will load quicker like the large Disney Animation application, which is noticeable. And then stuff like Facebook / NYT it's not much of a difference at all.
Even with the more demanding iOS7 it still blows me away how a two year old chip with tacked on graphics cores performs so admirably with Retina and iOS7. My old Droid Bionic would sputter on ICS, and my HP Touchpad would drag its feet on Web OS, all using similar internals to the A5 without high resolution screens.
Apple has done a great job supporting their legacy devices, and the benchmark busting processors they introduce are not exactly making their predecessors obsolete. That's pretty stellar from a customer standpoint.
That Samsung ad that touts how many Galaxy series and Notes sold is very reminiscent of McDonalds boasting that they serve 1,000,000,000 burgers yearly on their marques. Samsung is very McDonalds-esqe as in people do buy some of McDonalds premium 5 dollar burgers, but most buy dollar cheeseburgers or the big mac.
Sammy is like Burger King. See Big King/Big Mac. Copy copy copy.
Which 2013 Samsung Android smartphones can't run apps? Do you have any sales data for these models? Models like the S4 mini certainly can run apps.
You're making assertions without backing them up with any specifics or data.
Yeah maybe it’s an assertion, but it’s tied to Samsung’s official stance that they should sell +/-300mil "smartphones" (200mil "mass-market" + 100mil "premium"). What in their minds is "mass-market" is hard to tell but consensus tends to be that it’s a feature phone with a touch screen, a 3-4 year old OS and parts at a sub $150price tag (unlocked).
Try running apps on that and see how that works out...
Or they simply jump ship to Intel baytrail z3770 and its successors which currently trump the A7 in most benchmarks.
That's the advantage Android has, they can jump ship to whatever hardware platforms offers best in class. (Note : I did not see any battery usage benchmarks on the baytrail yet, anyone ?)
Android is a bloated pig of an OS. Anandtech tested Bay Trail running Windows, which is far more efficient and faster than Android when using the same hardware. Android will never run as fast on an equivalent processor as iOS or Windows.
And please show me where to get Android (officially, not some mod site) for x86. Android can't "jump ship" to a processor outside of ARM until Google releases a version. Then Google will make Android even more fragmented by having to support what will essentially two OS's.
To people asking what low end phones Samsung makes I give you the Galaxy Star.
A brand new phone introduced only a few months ago (summer 2013). It has a 3.0" 240x320 screen, single core processor and runs Jelly Bean. And it's a top seller in many countries.
Please explain how good any Android App is going to look on such a low-res screen. Let alone perform on such a slow processor.
So if Samsung alone is selling 2/3 of Apple's volume in high-end phones, can we all finally agree that high-end Android phones combined outsell the iPhone?
I'm not sure we can. What are the other phones? Who makes them and did their company have any profits? Mostly likely not, given that Samsung is the only profitable android maker right now, I really would like to know.
To the real point, who cares and so what if they are not profitable? Right now, given this latest news from Samsung, Apple is the only high smart phone maker whose highest margin phone is actually expanding in sales significantly.
Apple continues to do well and refine things in the high end limited growth phone market.
Samsung is left unchallenged by Apple in the still growing low end market.
Samsung sells more phones, Apple makes more money.
Samsung makes money from both Apple and Android. They make some money being an Apple supplier, and they make a ton more money supplying Android phones to the market.
Consumers get the benefit of the two companies going at it. Would have liked to see Windows phone or BB do a little better to really drive things but the current 'state of the market' looks okay to me.
I've used an S4 and I didn't get the impression it was "smart phone". I guess somethings are subjective as to me it was far inferior to an iPhone 4s.
Don't worry, I know exactly what has happened. There was nothing wrong with the S4, you just didn't know how to operate it! You see, the phone was "smart". You, not so much!
Which 2013 Samsung Android smartphones can't run apps? Do you have any sales data for these models? Models like the S4 mini certainly can run apps.
You're making assertions without backing them up with any specifics or data.
Galaxy S4 Mini is a "Galaxy S" phone, isn't is?
Look at any carriers' list of "mass market" models and note how many run Android 2.x
Also: you are taking issue with Samsung's own remarks and product category descriptions. I think you missed a "talking points for propaganda trolls" meeting or two.
Look at any carriers' list of "mass market" models and note how many run Android 2.x
Would Verizon be a carrier selling mass-market phones? Well I took your advice and visited Verizon to see all those new Android phones you say they're selling with Android 2.x. You'll have to help me find them because I didn't see any. There are a couple of old pre-owned phones there with Gingerbread, but not anything new that I could find.
Edit: Can't find a new one at ATT either.
Edit2: Here ya go Daniel. Sprint had two running 2.3.
And please show me where to get Android (officially, not some mod site) for x86. Android can't "jump ship" to a processor outside of ARM until Google releases a version. Then Google will make Android even more fragmented by having to support what will essentially two OS's.
All are pretty obscure, but I expect numerous new devices (tablets first) with baytrail and android. Oak trail will optimise for battery usage (from what I read) and would be targeted at phones.
All remains to be seen until we have actual products in hand.
Looks like Samsung earned $3+B less than Apple, not just $1+B less.
Imagine what Samdung's sales would have looked like had they not outspent Apple 6 times over in advertising...!!!
I have no idea how many models of smart phones Samsung has thrown against the wall, trying to get one or two to stick, additionally, all the ways Samsung has tried to look better then Apple in their advertising... None of it has matched Apple's numbers when it comes down to business profit.
Not mentioned in this story, or by Samsung, is the 7 Rockstar suits that may really slice deep into Samsung's profit for years and years of infringement, but Apple's greasing up their huge anal probes based on the multi-touch patents... more lost profits and emasculated smart phones in the near future...
So Android OS is intrinsically less efficient than iOS. The battery life of S4 is significantly less than 5S despite having a much bigger battery.
Apple sells 5C for $99 with contract to make S4 expensive. I think this is the strategy of launching 5C.
While you are right, it is a strategy for launching the 5C, it is not the ONLY strategy Apple did so. Chief among them is Apple's strategy to appeal to a different buyer group with the 5C. Then, next year the 5C will be Apple's only iPhone without the 64 bit processor and Apple can go nuts on some tangent that no one suspects that will leverage the A7 and M7 to and capture even a larger range of smart-phone interested shoppers.
But... but... but Android is winning and Apple is doomed. If Samsung were an American company sitting in Apple's place right now they'd probably have a share price of around $2000. Samsung would be the perfect company for Wall Street investors when it comes to having to have the highest amount of market share possible. Samsung believes in beating rivals to death and eliminating all competition. It would be great to be a shareholder of a company like that. There would never be any worries about any smaller companies coming up and taking away market share because they'd quickly go out of business.
Apple is stupid to just let Samsung do as they please. Apple could have been in the top position in the smartphone and tablet industry and they just let Samsung take it away in about a six months time-frame and Apple shareholders paid dearly for that blunder. Apple still hasn't recovered those lost tens of billions of market cap. Now with Samsung openly gunning for them, Apple shareholders might as well just give up hoping for an Apple rebound.
Apple is simply going to continue on its own path of building high%u2013quality products for the elite and Samsung is going to drown Apple with a massive flood of devices aimed at every consumer on the planet. It will ruin Apple shareholders and drive potential investors away from Apple in droves. Apple will be lucky to be worth anything when this war is over.
Samsung should continue to do as it pleases, but it isn't going to gain more ASP with its strategy and it fights the race to the bottom so Apple doesn't have to.
If rumors are correct, Apple is going to build its own five inch iPhone, maybe even a six inch. That will obviously impact Samsung.
Conversely, has Samsung been able to build a model to compete head to head with the iPhone.?
Uhm, no, and the S4 mini is a mid-range phone so doesn't even compare.
So Android OS is intrinsically less (energy) efficient than iOS. The battery life of S4 is significantly less than 5S despite having a much bigger battery.
Apple sells 5C for $99 with contract to make S4 expensive. I think this is the strategy of launching 5C.
Comments
Or they simply jump ship to Intel baytrail z3770 and its successors which currently trump the A7 in most benchmarks.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7335/the-iphone-5s-review/5
That's the advantage Android has, they can jump ship to whatever hardware platforms offers best in class. (Note : I did not see any battery usage benchmarks on the baytrail yet, anyone ?)
I was about to say speed is not everything when you talking mobile platforms. The competition continues to be behind apple every step along the way. Moto RAZR Max had a decent process and a battery almost 3X of the iPhone but its battery life under processor intensive activities does not last as long as the iPhone. The analysis of why this is the case is the fact that apple controls the SOC and the software. They do not auto-route the SOC, it appears they are hand routing the layout of the chip which is giving them speed and efficiency that the others can not achieve. IT also appears that iOS and the associated hardware does not spend as much time doing the same tasks as it Android counter parts which allows the processor not to run as long thus getting power savings.
With that said you a can safely assume that any Android device using a Baytrail will not beat an iPhone in overall performance. It may be better in one benchmark but loses in others since Manufacturers do not control all the pieces. Apple has shown their trade offers balance the end users overall experience. Good display, fast enough, and lasts just long enough.
I was about to say speed is not everything when you talking mobile platforms. The competition continues to be behind apple every step along the way. Moto RAZR Max had a decent process and a battery almost 3X of the iPhone but its battery life under processor intensive activities does not last as long as the iPhone. The analysis of why this is the case is the fact that apple controls the SOC and the software. They do not auto-route the SOC, it appears they are hand routing the layout of the chip which is giving them speed and efficiency that the others can not achieve. IT also appears that iOS and the associated hardware does not spend as much time doing the same tasks as it Android counter parts which allows the processor not to run as long thus getting power savings.
With that said you a can safely assume that any Android device using a Baytrail will not beat an iPhone in overall performance. It may be better in one benchmark but loses in others since Manufacturers do not control all the pieces. Apple has shown their trade offers balance the end users overall experience. Good display, fast enough, and lasts just long enough.
I agree with this 100%. I'm still grappling how much FASTER from a benchmarks perspective the A7 is to the A5X when I upgraded to the Air recently. But to be perfectly blunt, I used both iPad 3rd ten and Air side by side and it's really not a 4x speed increase in practice. It's much more nuanced where you might notice animations are slightly more fluid. Some apps will load quicker like the large Disney Animation application, which is noticeable. And then stuff like Facebook / NYT it's not much of a difference at all.
Even with the more demanding iOS7 it still blows me away how a two year old chip with tacked on graphics cores performs so admirably with Retina and iOS7. My old Droid Bionic would sputter on ICS, and my HP Touchpad would drag its feet on Web OS, all using similar internals to the A5 without high resolution screens.
Apple has done a great job supporting their legacy devices, and the benchmark busting processors they introduce are not exactly making their predecessors obsolete. That's pretty stellar from a customer standpoint.
Sammy is like Burger King. See Big King/Big Mac. Copy copy copy.
Which 2013 Samsung Android smartphones can't run apps? Do you have any sales data for these models? Models like the S4 mini certainly can run apps.
You're making assertions without backing them up with any specifics or data.
Yeah maybe it’s an assertion, but it’s tied to Samsung’s official stance that they should sell +/-300mil "smartphones" (200mil "mass-market" + 100mil "premium"). What in their minds is "mass-market" is hard to tell but consensus tends to be that it’s a feature phone with a touch screen, a 3-4 year old OS and parts at a sub $150price tag (unlocked).
Try running apps on that and see how that works out...
And please show me where to get Android (officially, not some mod site) for x86. Android can't "jump ship" to a processor outside of ARM until Google releases a version. Then Google will make Android even more fragmented by having to support what will essentially two OS's.
A brand new phone introduced only a few months ago (summer 2013). It has a 3.0" 240x320 screen, single core processor and runs Jelly Bean. And it's a top seller in many countries.
Please explain how good any Android App is going to look on such a low-res screen. Let alone perform on such a slow processor.
So if Samsung alone is selling 2/3 of Apple's volume in high-end phones, can we all finally agree that high-end Android phones combined outsell the iPhone?
I'm not sure we can. What are the other phones? Who makes them and did their company have any profits? Mostly likely not, given that Samsung is the only profitable android maker right now, I really would like to know.
To the real point, who cares and so what if they are not profitable? Right now, given this latest news from Samsung, Apple is the only high smart phone maker whose highest margin phone is actually expanding in sales significantly.
Looks win/win to me.
Apple continues to do well and refine things in the high end limited growth phone market.
Samsung is left unchallenged by Apple in the still growing low end market.
Samsung sells more phones, Apple makes more money.
Samsung makes money from both Apple and Android. They make some money being an Apple supplier, and they make a ton more money supplying Android phones to the market.
Consumers get the benefit of the two companies going at it. Would have liked to see Windows phone or BB do a little better to really drive things but the current 'state of the market' looks okay to me.
I've used an S4 and I didn't get the impression it was "smart phone". I guess somethings are subjective as to me it was far inferior to an iPhone 4s.
Don't worry, I know exactly what has happened. There was nothing wrong with the S4, you just didn't know how to operate it! You see, the phone was "smart". You, not so much!
Galaxy S4 Mini is a "Galaxy S" phone, isn't is?
Look at any carriers' list of "mass market" models and note how many run Android 2.x
Also: you are taking issue with Samsung's own remarks and product category descriptions. I think you missed a "talking points for propaganda trolls" meeting or two.
So Android OS is intrinsically less efficient than iOS. The battery life of S4 is significantly less than 5S despite having a much bigger battery.
Apple sells 5C for $99 with contract to make S4 expensive. I think this is the strategy of launching 5C.
Edit: Can't find a new one at ATT either.
Edit2: Here ya go Daniel. Sprint had two running 2.3.
Looks like Samsung earned $3+B less than Apple, not just $1+B less.
And please show me where to get Android (officially, not some mod site) for x86. Android can't "jump ship" to a processor outside of ARM until Google releases a version. Then Google will make Android even more fragmented by having to support what will essentially two OS's.
http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/smartphones/smartphones.html
All are pretty obscure, but I expect numerous new devices (tablets first) with baytrail and android. Oak trail will optimise for battery usage (from what I read) and would be targeted at phones.
All remains to be seen until we have actual products in hand.
Intel is handling the android port itself.
It's high end due to several factors, none of which relate to how long it's been on the market.
Imagine what Samdung's sales would have looked like had they not outspent Apple 6 times over in advertising...!!!
I have no idea how many models of smart phones Samsung has thrown against the wall, trying to get one or two to stick, additionally, all the ways Samsung has tried to look better then Apple in their advertising... None of it has matched Apple's numbers when it comes down to business profit.
Not mentioned in this story, or by Samsung, is the 7 Rockstar suits that may really slice deep into Samsung's profit for years and years of infringement, but Apple's greasing up their huge anal probes based on the multi-touch patents... more lost profits and emasculated smart phones in the near future...
Look at any carriers' list of "mass market" models and note how many run Android 2.x
Again, you're not giving any specifics. Which carriers? Do you have a link?
Also, Android 2.x is capable of running apps. I think you already knew that though.
While you are right, it is a strategy for launching the 5C, it is not the ONLY strategy Apple did so. Chief among them is Apple's strategy to appeal to a different buyer group with the 5C. Then, next year the 5C will be Apple's only iPhone without the 64 bit processor and Apple can go nuts on some tangent that no one suspects that will leverage the A7 and M7 to and capture even a larger range of smart-phone interested shoppers.
But... but... but Android is winning and Apple is doomed. If Samsung were an American company sitting in Apple's place right now they'd probably have a share price of around $2000. Samsung would be the perfect company for Wall Street investors when it comes to having to have the highest amount of market share possible. Samsung believes in beating rivals to death and eliminating all competition. It would be great to be a shareholder of a company like that. There would never be any worries about any smaller companies coming up and taking away market share because they'd quickly go out of business.
Apple is stupid to just let Samsung do as they please. Apple could have been in the top position in the smartphone and tablet industry and they just let Samsung take it away in about a six months time-frame and Apple shareholders paid dearly for that blunder. Apple still hasn't recovered those lost tens of billions of market cap. Now with Samsung openly gunning for them, Apple shareholders might as well just give up hoping for an Apple rebound.
Apple is simply going to continue on its own path of building high%u2013quality products for the elite and Samsung is going to drown Apple with a massive flood of devices aimed at every consumer on the planet. It will ruin Apple shareholders and drive potential investors away from Apple in droves. Apple will be lucky to be worth anything when this war is over.
Samsung should continue to do as it pleases, but it isn't going to gain more ASP with its strategy and it fights the race to the bottom so Apple doesn't have to.
If rumors are correct, Apple is going to build its own five inch iPhone, maybe even a six inch. That will obviously impact Samsung.
Conversely, has Samsung been able to build a model to compete head to head with the iPhone.?
Uhm, no, and the S4 mini is a mid-range phone so doesn't even compare.
Advantage Apple.
There might be a reason Daniel only shows specific battery tests for Web-browsing over LTE.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7335/the-iphone-5s-review/9