Time and people's tastes are constantly changing. There may be a time again where that holds true. You can't hold SJ or Apple to that statement forever. When SJ said it he was right. However, now people do want big phones. So Apple will make big phones.
Then it falls to the quote in which Apple doesn't give people want they want. My opinion is that Apple painted themselves into a corner with the design of the iPhone 5/5s. How do you improve on it? Had they made it only thinner, with curved edges the gnashing of teeth would've been deafening. Sure it would've sold better than any other phone, but I think that the defectors to Samsung would have greatly increased.
First of all it's 'Tim has the reins', and what kind of answer is 'SJ died'? How does that mean anything?
Meaning Steve Jobs said it, and he is gone. Apple, under Tim, is taking a different approach. He's not trying to deterring what is best for customers, but looking at the competitors, listening to the customers, and delivering what he believes the customers want.
I remember a poll last year that found over 40% of Samsung users would switch to iPhone if it had a bigger screen. iPhone's new larger screens just took away the only advantage that Samsung had. Oh yeah, and iOS don't profit from tracking your every move like Android does. Should be an interesting next 12 months...
Meaning Steve Jobs said it, and he is gone. Apple, under Tim, is taking a different approach. He's not trying to deterring what is best for customers, but looking at the competitors, listening to the customers, and delivering what he believes the customers want.
Now that's a proper answer. Thank you, and I would say that it does seem that Tim Cook is doing things a little differently, and by the sales numbers is correct in doing them that way.
Did you read Samsung's statement carefully? They never claimed that they would SELL 15 million phones, only that they would SHIP that many. One helluva difference.
Thanks, updated, but in the same context, my searches show the numbers I used was for shipments. If I were them, I'd hate to ship 3X as many units if sales expectations were no where close. Even if they're doing that for one press statement to claim a big number, it'll come right back at them to bite them quite quickly.
I see they've switched from copying the 6-year-old design of the second iPhone, and moved on to copying the 4-year-old styling of the iPhone 4. We should see their iPhone 6 knock-off shells appear in 2018 to 2020, then.
The 5.5... I heard more people saying that was too big than I heard anyone saying it's a great size.
Samsung showed that it was a viable size.
Personally, I think the 5.5 was a stupid idea.
"It's the OS!"
While the overall size of the iPhone 6 plus is smaller than the Note, its footprint is larger due to the top, and bottom bezels.
I played with both devices yesterday, and the iPhone 6 is truly a beautiful device. It just felt like a bigger smartphone, whereas the iP 6 plus felt more like a small tablet. In the end it's all about choice, and people are really happy that they have one.
While the overall size of the iPhone 6 plus is smaller than the Note, its footprint is larger due to the top, and bottom bezels.
I played with both devices yesterday, and the iPhone 6 is truly a beautiful device. It just felt like a bigger smartphone, whereas the iP 6 plus felt more like a small tablet. In the end it's all about choice, and people are really happy that they have one.
All about choice?
No it isn't.
It's about sales.
[if it was all about choice then Apple would have made a 4" iP 6]
[if it was all about choice then Apple would have made a 4" iP 6]
Of course it's about sales, I felt no need to state the obvious, but I can't argue with them not offering a 4" version. I will say this though, the iPhone 6 felt better in my hand than the iPhone 5/5s ever did.
But, the thing to keep in mind with conglomerates like this is that the various divisions operate almost as autonomous companies.
It's the reason why Apple can still collaborate with Samsung on chip manufacturing. And why Samsung's mobile division was caught flat-footed when Apple introduced the 64-bit A7 last year. Samsung's semiconductor division was likely more interested in keeping a client happy than losing a contract (and inviting yet another lawsuit, and possibly chasing off other clients) by sharing trade secrets with its mobile division.
Even Samsung's mobile devices include purchased components from competitors, even though the company's own divisions might make a comparable component. Just look at how Samsung still purchases Snapdragon SoCs from Qualcomm, one of their biggest rivals, even though Samsung makes its own SoC line.
You know why they use the competitors product, so they can learn what the competitors are doing. Think about Samsung makes and SOC, so do other companies, they work with the other companies engineers to learn as much as they can, Then they go back to Samsung SOC team and say we need it to do this and that. Indirectly Samsung SOC group gets what they need to make a better product.
I worked for a company which we would not share any technically details about our products with our customers. We did not care if they signed an NDA. Reason being we knew our some of our customers would then go back to the competitors and tell them what they need their product to do in order to win the business. They were not spying they just want to make sure they had competitive options, most time your own customers are your worse enemy.
Comments
Then it falls to the quote in which Apple doesn't give people want they want. My opinion is that Apple painted themselves into a corner with the design of the iPhone 5/5s. How do you improve on it? Had they made it only thinner, with curved edges the gnashing of teeth would've been deafening. Sure it would've sold better than any other phone, but I think that the defectors to Samsung would have greatly increased.
Except of course that they built a device Steve Jobs said no one would ever buy.
http://www.engadget.com/2010/07/16/jobs-no-ones-going-to-buy-a-big-phone/
So what changed?
Steve died, that's what changed. Tim is in the reigns now, so please let us move on.
First of all it's 'Tim has the reins', and what kind of answer is 'SJ died'? How does that mean anything?
But you are not Chinese, female, an artist, a photographer, a 3D/virtual-reality experimenter, and so on . . .
First of all it's 'Tim has the reins', and what kind of answer is 'SJ died'? How does that mean anything?
Meaning Steve Jobs said it, and he is gone. Apple, under Tim, is taking a different approach. He's not trying to deterring what is best for customers, but looking at the competitors, listening to the customers, and delivering what he believes the customers want.
If you haven't figured out that English is not ninuola's first language, then I think you lack mirror neurons.
I should add that he's doing very well, better than some native speakers here.
Now that's a proper answer. Thank you, and I would say that it does seem that Tim Cook is doing things a little differently, and by the sales numbers is correct in doing them that way.
He/she did fine the second time around, but nonetheless I appreciate your input.
But you are not Chinese, female, an artist, a photographer, a 3D/virtual-reality experimenter, and so on . . .
... but I have an opinion.
So none of that shit really has anything to do with anything.
If all of those people add up to 5-8 million units a month... then, great... it was all worth it for Apple.
Battery life? Samsung was insulting its own customers, since the iPhone 5s absolutely trounced the Galaxy S4 on battery life.
No it didn't.
Did you read Samsung's statement carefully? They never claimed that they would SELL 15 million phones, only that they would SHIP that many. One helluva difference.
Thanks, updated, but in the same context, my searches show the numbers I used was for shipments. If I were them, I'd hate to ship 3X as many units if sales expectations were no where close. Even if they're doing that for one press statement to claim a big number, it'll come right back at them to bite them quite quickly.
While the overall size of the iPhone 6 plus is smaller than the Note, its footprint is larger due to the top, and bottom bezels.
I played with both devices yesterday, and the iPhone 6 is truly a beautiful device. It just felt like a bigger smartphone, whereas the iP 6 plus felt more like a small tablet. In the end it's all about choice, and people are really happy that they have one.
While the overall size of the iPhone 6 plus is smaller than the Note, its footprint is larger due to the top, and bottom bezels.
I played with both devices yesterday, and the iPhone 6 is truly a beautiful device. It just felt like a bigger smartphone, whereas the iP 6 plus felt more like a small tablet. In the end it's all about choice, and people are really happy that they have one.
All about choice?
No it isn't.
It's about sales.
[if it was all about choice then Apple would have made a 4" iP 6]
Guys, English is my first Language.
I'm a 'He' btw.
Quote:
He/she did fine the second time around, but nonetheless I appreciate your input.
If you haven't figured out that English is not ninuola's first language, then I think you lack mirror neurons.
I should add that he's doing very well, better than some native speakers here.
Guys, English is my first Language.
I'm a 'He' btw.
Hahahahaha... sorry, not laughing at you.
So many times we get our ass handed to us when we assume things.
Duly noted.
Of course it's about sales, I felt no need to state the obvious, but I can't argue with them not offering a 4" version. I will say this though, the iPhone 6 felt better in my hand than the iPhone 5/5s ever did.
But, the thing to keep in mind with conglomerates like this is that the various divisions operate almost as autonomous companies.
It's the reason why Apple can still collaborate with Samsung on chip manufacturing. And why Samsung's mobile division was caught flat-footed when Apple introduced the 64-bit A7 last year. Samsung's semiconductor division was likely more interested in keeping a client happy than losing a contract (and inviting yet another lawsuit, and possibly chasing off other clients) by sharing trade secrets with its mobile division.
Even Samsung's mobile devices include purchased components from competitors, even though the company's own divisions might make a comparable component. Just look at how Samsung still purchases Snapdragon SoCs from Qualcomm, one of their biggest rivals, even though Samsung makes its own SoC line.
You know why they use the competitors product, so they can learn what the competitors are doing. Think about Samsung makes and SOC, so do other companies, they work with the other companies engineers to learn as much as they can, Then they go back to Samsung SOC team and say we need it to do this and that. Indirectly Samsung SOC group gets what they need to make a better product.
I worked for a company which we would not share any technically details about our products with our customers. We did not care if they signed an NDA. Reason being we knew our some of our customers would then go back to the competitors and tell them what they need their product to do in order to win the business. They were not spying they just want to make sure they had competitive options, most time your own customers are your worse enemy.