It wasn't until April that Samsung was able to deliver its Galaxy 5S with a similar fingerprint scanning feature, but reaction to the new model has been less than enthusiastic.
Why lend legitimacy to Samsung's fingerprint scanning feature by using "similar" as an adjective? It simply doesn't work as well and is inaccurate.
I read that article, and it doesn't give Apple or its apologists an out when Apple follows the rest of the industry to a larger screen. Apple's screen was very large by standards of the day. Those standards prevailed because people had different needs and expected far less from their phones. Since the introduction of the iPhone, people have become more dependent on phones for a wide variety of computing needs and media consumption. Every other manufacturer except Apple realized this trend and acted quickly. Apple was stuck with a legacy mindset as far as screen size goes, and they will finally acknowledge their error this year if the rumors pan out.
Is it me or does everyone else notice that all samsung ever does is make excuses for it's shortcomings and then blames Apple for its demise. Lead by following(copying) is their only way of staying on top of the android market. They say they're outselling Apple but Apple only sells iPhones so a total 4 phones still offered in the US. 4s, 5, 5c and 5s compared to the plethora of samsung phones yet Apple seems to hold its ground.
I attempted to own a GS4 and within 3 weeks I noticed 6 identical charges to my bank account of 149.98 and after 5 weeks the bank traced it all the way back to the phone and the apps I used which were limited.
I read that article, and it doesn't give Apple or its apologists an out when Apple follows the rest of the industry to a larger screen. Apple's screen was very large by standards of the day. Those standards prevailed because people had different needs and expected far less from their phones. Since the introduction of the iPhone, people have become more dependent on phones for a wide variety of computing needs and media consumption. Every other manufacturer except Apple realized this trend and acted quickly. Apple was stuck with a legacy mindset as far as screen size goes, and they will finally acknowledge their error this year if the rumors pan out.
You make good points, but I suggest you consider Apple has been slow to migrate to larger displays because the company wants to minimize the additional burden on developers and ensure legacy apps don't break. Advantages of the iOS ecosystem include not just the number of apps but their consistent behavior. In contrast, Android is known for being a heterogeneous mess. It's advantageous to everyone--Apple, developers and customers--for Apple to make slow, deliberate moves. This is how standards are set and maintained--standards that others will follow.
I attempted to own a GS4 and within 3 weeks I noticed 6 identical charges to my bank account of 149.98 and after 5 weeks the bank traced it all the way back to the phone and the apps I used which were limited. </p><p>Never had that issue with my iPhone </p>
yeah right. Either something went disastrously wrong with the billing system, a pile of steaming bull. I know what I'm leaning to but would need a bit more information than a general the phone did this to me oh woe
I read that article, and it doesn't give Apple or its apologists an out when Apple follows the rest of the industry to a larger screen. Apple's screen was very large by standards of the day. Those standards prevailed because people had different needs and expected far less from their phones. Since the introduction of the iPhone, people have become more dependent on phones for a wide variety of computing needs and media consumption. Every other manufacturer except Apple realized this trend and acted quickly. Apple was stuck with a legacy mindset as far as screen size goes, and they will finally acknowledge their error this year if the rumors pan out.
Like Apple resurrecting the screen size of the Newton or shrinking an iPad screen?
If screen size was worth a damn, apart from something Samsung came up with in their marketing attack plan, then I might use my S4 more, fact is it doesn't so I don't.
Samsung previously worked to sidestep that issue in November when it told its investors that it planned to copy Apple's A7 at some point, but didn't yet have a precise timeline for doing so yet.
Really? That's the word you're using here? "...it planned to copy Apple's A7..."?
That's really nice... denying any type of copying from Apple in court, but then telling your investors that you "planned on copying" Apple A7? Well excuse me, but isn't that called lying in court?
Not that I expect anything else from Samsung to be honest, especially if one of your motto's is "Leads by Following". If you're following trends that means, in my mind at least, that you'ree following the trendsetter which in the tech industry seems to be Apple at the moment.
I'm not glorifying Apple since they also have a history of sometimes copying someone. But for Samsung to deny everything and then telling investors on two occasions that you're following the trend/copying Apple's A7... hypocrites.
Apple was stuck with a legacy mindset as far as screen size goes, and they will finally acknowledge their error this year if the rumors pan out.
Error? Selling 150M phones a year doesn't seem like a failed thing to me. Then again, I don't want a larger phone, so I guess I'm 'on the other side of the camp'.
Really? That's the word you're using here? "...it planned to copy Apple's A7..."?
That's really nice... denying any type of copying from Apple in court, but then telling your investors that you "planned on copying" Apple A7? Well excuse me, but isn't that called lying in court?
Not that I expect anything else from Samsung to be honest, especially if one of your motto's is "Leads by Following". If you're following trends that means, in my mind at least, that you'ree following the trendsetter which in the tech industry seems to be Apple at the moment.
I'm not glorifying Apple since they also have a history of sometimes copying someone. But for Samsung to deny everything and then telling investors on two occasions that you're following the trend/copying Apple's A7... hypocrites.
I don't really like defending Samsung, but in the case of 64bit SoC's it is the right thing (and definitely when the author twists words). Samsung never used that word, it's just DED's interpretation of the moment when Samsung said they were also developing 64bit SoC's after the launch of A7. With the Cortex A53/A57 official presentation (in 2012) Samsung was mentioned as a licensee/partner, to state Samsung copies Apple with 64bit (as DED insinuates) definitely is twisting reality. (Samsung is definitely capable of copying but in this case stating that is ridiculous).
Has Apple ever price-matched the competition? Or done the BOGO deals because their competitors do?
It's not about price matching. But Apple's pricing is driven by consumer affordability, input costs on building a device and yes competitive offerings. There's a reason the iPhone isn't priced at $2,000.
DED I also don't particularly like Samsung, and they definitely are very capable of copying, but what you state here is not correct.
By the time Apple's A7 launched it was already known for a couple of years that 64bit mobile SoC's were in the pipelines. ARM themselves in 2012 estimated the start of the production to be first quarter of 2014. When ARMv8 was launched pretty much every large chip designer/maker licensed it. Samsung was also rumored to use the architecture in its server chips (a rumor that appeared way before the A7).
Apple finished first and they deserve a lot of credit for that, it was quite a feat. But to say everyone who has a 64bit SoC now copies Apple is beyond ridiculous. 64bit SoC's were expected in 2014 with or without a 64bit A7.
Here is f.e. an article of The Verge from 2012 discussing ARM's new 64bit architectures and also mentions the expected 2014 release date. It even mentions Samsung as a partner.
The timeline between releasing something and OEMs actually jumping on it are entirely different things. NOBODY (other than Apple) was prepared to jump on 64-bit until after Apple did it last year. What was that comment from Qualcomm's big guy after the A7 announcement that lead to his demotion? Ah, yeah... hindsight.
Don't you think if Samsung was really preparing for it, they'd have been pushing Google to prep Android way before now? Amazing how logic comes into play.
The timeline between releasing something and OEMs actually jumping on it are entirely different things. NOBODY (other than Apple) was prepared to jump on 64-bit until after Apple did it last year. What was that comment from Qualcomm's big guy after the A7 announcement that lead to his demotion? Ah, yeah... hindsight.
Don't you think if Samsung was really preparing for it, they'd have been pushing Google to prep Android way before now? Amazing how logic comes into play.
It's not just the release to manufacturers but also ARM's own release time line that estimated a 2014 release (early 2014 start production). Why would ARM state that if the chip makers didn't jump on it. Surely that timeline takes into account the time that OEM's needed/the plans of the OEM's. Surely ARM wouldn't make such a prediction if NOBODY jumped on it...
And btw if you take a license that surely means you are interested and want to jump on it.
And how about Intel's Merrifield SoC that was first introduced in June 2013 (not released) that is also 64bit. Yeah I'm sure nobody was thinking about 64bit mobile SoC's....
Samsung is like a technically skilled and socially defective autistic man. The ability to communicate is there, but something just doesn't connect. But then businesses tend to be socially defective on the average... though some have much better self awareness and less brazen willingness to copy, cheat, and lie to the public while knowing everyone sees through it. Actually, my analogy to autism does autistics a disservice. What's really happening is that Samsung is bold enough to lie "openly". Because the "free market" tolerates it (and by "free market" I mean to say there's nowhere near enough regulation to stop unethical abuses by these big corporations who buy politicians by the fistful).
It's not about price matching. But Apple's pricing is driven by consumer affordability, input costs on building a device and yes competitive offerings. There's a reason the iPhone isn't priced at $2,000.
Uhh...what? You're giving Samsung credit for Apple not pricing the iPhone at $2000? Are you kidding? When the iPhone came out it had no peer, but Apple didn't price it at $2000, and they quickly dropped the price by $100, even before any competitors showed up. Samsung doesn't get credit for preventing some made-up hypothetical scenario from not happening.
Comments
It wasn't until April that Samsung was able to deliver its Galaxy 5S with a similar fingerprint scanning feature, but reaction to the new model has been less than enthusiastic.
Why lend legitimacy to Samsung's fingerprint scanning feature by using "similar" as an adjective? It simply doesn't work as well and is inaccurate.
...lots of things I disagree with and won't address a second time...
If you want to understand that, read http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/05/06/before-apples-iphone-was-too-small-it-was-too-monstrously-big
I read that article, and it doesn't give Apple or its apologists an out when Apple follows the rest of the industry to a larger screen. Apple's screen was very large by standards of the day. Those standards prevailed because people had different needs and expected far less from their phones. Since the introduction of the iPhone, people have become more dependent on phones for a wide variety of computing needs and media consumption. Every other manufacturer except Apple realized this trend and acted quickly. Apple was stuck with a legacy mindset as far as screen size goes, and they will finally acknowledge their error this year if the rumors pan out.
It leads by copying everyone else so it doesn't have to pay for the R&D costs. Ripping other companies off so it can make a profit.
Boycott Samsung products.
Is it me or does everyone else notice that all samsung ever does is make excuses for it's shortcomings and then blames Apple for its demise. Lead by following(copying) is their only way of staying on top of the android market. They say they're outselling Apple but Apple only sells iPhones so a total 4 phones still offered in the US. 4s, 5, 5c and 5s compared to the plethora of samsung phones yet Apple seems to hold its ground.
I attempted to own a GS4 and within 3 weeks I noticed 6 identical charges to my bank account of 149.98 and after 5 weeks the bank traced it all the way back to the phone and the apps I used which were limited.
Never had that issue with my iPhone
I read that article, and it doesn't give Apple or its apologists an out when Apple follows the rest of the industry to a larger screen. Apple's screen was very large by standards of the day. Those standards prevailed because people had different needs and expected far less from their phones. Since the introduction of the iPhone, people have become more dependent on phones for a wide variety of computing needs and media consumption. Every other manufacturer except Apple realized this trend and acted quickly. Apple was stuck with a legacy mindset as far as screen size goes, and they will finally acknowledge their error this year if the rumors pan out.
You make good points, but I suggest you consider Apple has been slow to migrate to larger displays because the company wants to minimize the additional burden on developers and ensure legacy apps don't break. Advantages of the iOS ecosystem include not just the number of apps but their consistent behavior. In contrast, Android is known for being a heterogeneous mess. It's advantageous to everyone--Apple, developers and customers--for Apple to make slow, deliberate moves. This is how standards are set and maintained--standards that others will follow.
Like Apple resurrecting the screen size of the Newton or shrinking an iPad screen?
If screen size was worth a damn, apart from something Samsung came up with in their marketing attack plan, then I might use my S4 more, fact is it doesn't so I don't.
That's really nice... denying any type of copying from Apple in court, but then telling your investors that you "planned on copying" Apple A7? Well excuse me, but isn't that called lying in court?
Not that I expect anything else from Samsung to be honest, especially if one of your motto's is "Leads by Following". If you're following trends that means, in my mind at least, that you'ree following the trendsetter which in the tech industry seems to be Apple at the moment.
I'm not glorifying Apple since they also have a history of sometimes copying someone. But for Samsung to deny everything and then telling investors on two occasions that you're following the trend/copying Apple's A7... hypocrites.
Error? Selling 150M phones a year doesn't seem like a failed thing to me. Then again, I don't want a larger phone, so I guess I'm 'on the other side of the camp'.
I don't really like defending Samsung, but in the case of 64bit SoC's it is the right thing (and definitely when the author twists words). Samsung never used that word, it's just DED's interpretation of the moment when Samsung said they were also developing 64bit SoC's after the launch of A7. With the Cortex A53/A57 official presentation (in 2012) Samsung was mentioned as a licensee/partner, to state Samsung copies Apple with 64bit (as DED insinuates) definitely is twisting reality. (Samsung is definitely capable of copying but in this case stating that is ridiculous).
It's not about price matching. But Apple's pricing is driven by consumer affordability, input costs on building a device and yes competitive offerings. There's a reason the iPhone isn't priced at $2,000.
DED I also don't particularly like Samsung, and they definitely are very capable of copying, but what you state here is not correct.
By the time Apple's A7 launched it was already known for a couple of years that 64bit mobile SoC's were in the pipelines. ARM themselves in 2012 estimated the start of the production to be first quarter of 2014. When ARMv8 was launched pretty much every large chip designer/maker licensed it. Samsung was also rumored to use the architecture in its server chips (a rumor that appeared way before the A7).
Apple finished first and they deserve a lot of credit for that, it was quite a feat. But to say everyone who has a 64bit SoC now copies Apple is beyond ridiculous. 64bit SoC's were expected in 2014 with or without a 64bit A7.
Here is f.e. an article of The Verge from 2012 discussing ARM's new 64bit architectures and also mentions the expected 2014 release date. It even mentions Samsung as a partner.
http://mobile.theverge.com/2012/10/30/3576560/arm-cortex-a57-cortex-a53-cpu-core
The timeline between releasing something and OEMs actually jumping on it are entirely different things. NOBODY (other than Apple) was prepared to jump on 64-bit until after Apple did it last year. What was that comment from Qualcomm's big guy after the A7 announcement that lead to his demotion? Ah, yeah... hindsight.
Don't you think if Samsung was really preparing for it, they'd have been pushing Google to prep Android way before now? Amazing how logic comes into play.
And btw if you take a license that surely means you are interested and want to jump on it.
And how about Intel's Merrifield SoC that was first introduced in June 2013 (not released) that is also 64bit. Yeah I'm sure nobody was thinking about 64bit mobile SoC's....
Uhh...what? You're giving Samsung credit for Apple not pricing the iPhone at $2000? Are you kidding? When the iPhone came out it had no peer, but Apple didn't price it at $2000, and they quickly dropped the price by $100, even before any competitors showed up. Samsung doesn't get credit for preventing some made-up hypothetical scenario from not happening.
Because the company isn’t staffed by braindead artichokes?