Sure you can, just as people have done with Windows and countless other technology since the industrial revolution. A HW vendor that has no SW chops that has no choice but to use Android as their OS certainly doesn't have the same advantage as Apple, but that doesn't mean it's not possible, and it talks to my larger point about longterm planning and creating a better brand, like Apple choose to do so long ago.
Windows ran its course, and Apple makes most of the profits in PC's. If you don't control the software stack, then you don't control your hardware, nor your destiny. That was a decision that Apple made a long time ago. Someday, Apple will face better competition, but not from any of current Android OEM's.
I don't believe that the Android OEM's ever really had a chance; it was always going to be a race to the bottom. Android was never meant to be anything other than an insurance policy for Google, so the health of the OEM's was never important.
You would be better considering how Samsung might have fared with Tizen OS if it had been a quality product, and had shipped prior to Android OS.
It's been 2 years since HTC moved to that strategy and it hasn't helped. Both LG and Motorola have streamlined their high end offerings as well and continue to lose market share. How much longer should we wait to see if that strategy will be successful?
1) Why do you think some vendors have moved (slightly) away from their "make as many models as possible, sell at a loss, and we'll make it up in volume" plans? Answer: They weren't losing too much.
2a) They didn't really do it, they only moved slightly closer toward it; and I'm not sure that's enough to make it work.
2b) At any rate, starting a mere 2 years ago isn't what I'd call longterm. I'm talking about taking a real risk as a company that has a history of throwing everything a wall to see what sticks by completely changing course on everything in their mobile division and expecting that customer opinion and as a result profits could take 5 years or more (depending on speed of success) before your brand gets seen as a premium brand that customers wait in lines for, and your detractors append "-killer" to the end of your product because they hate that your company has so much mindshare. That is not something that only Apple can do in this space, it's merely that Apple is the only one that was willing to risk the road less traveled to make that a reality.
2c) Those timeframes to change the major of public opinion are really only if you want to keep the current names. If, for example, you create a luxury brand subsidiary like Lexus, Infiniti and Acura, you may be able to knock of a couple years since you're mostly building new brand awareness, not trying to rewrite a previous brand that you soiled for customers through repeated lackluster and half-ass products.
Let's look at Palm, because they were doing exactly what posters here claim will lead a vendor to success. They controlled the HW, and SW plus they had a small number of models. So why did they crash, and burn in spectacular fashion? In the grand scheme of things Apple hasn't really had long term success.
Apple hasn't gotten to where they are overnight. They made a product, and created an ecosystem, and for every subsequent device the ecosystem expanded. At this point there's not one single company that has the time or the money to start from scratch, and do what Apple has done in this space. Hell, I don't think even Apple could beat Apple, so how does anyone else stand a chance? It's moronic to pick one thing that Apple does, and say that other companies would have success if they did that, and it's foolish not to realize that Apple has won. The only hope for the other manufacturers are the people that hate Apple, and current iPhone owners that want to try something different for a change.
So revenue is down only 7.3% but profit is down a massive 37.6%
That simply means Samsung is selling WAY LESS TOP END phones compared to last year. That is why profits are down massively even though overall revenue is mostly flat.
The iPhone is totally dominating the high end
And to add to that, the Androidfansites are announcing an upcoming price "adjustment" for Galaxy S6/S6 Edge. It is not know at this time if it will apply to the current models or the forthcoming models.
Windows ran its course, and Apple makes most of the profits in PC's. If you don't control the software stack, then you don't control your hardware, nor your destiny. That was a decision that Apple made a long time ago.
Again, that decision was abut a quality experience. Apple in no way is the only company allowed to offer a quality CE experience.
Let's look at Palm, because they were doing exactly what posters here claim will lead a vendor to success.
No, no they weren't. Doing one thing (or even multiple things) the same as your competitor is no more doing "exactly the same" as a competitor than a toddler adorably trying to mimic their parent or siblings actions.
A different era where quality allowed success and now it does not? Sure, go with that¡ :no:
- - -
Frankly, these inferences that a company like Apple somehow lucked into their market position instead of it being a result of brilliant planning and a concerted effort to not go after the low hanging fruit are disgusting. Maybe you're trolling or maybe you can't see it, but Apple's success isn't the result of "a different era" or a coin flip against Palm in the market. Furthermore, there will be another Apple. There will be another company sees something in CE that is not serving customers as best as possible, and they will be the ones the take the market lead and by which all other CE category in that category is judged, and it will be because they were smarter, more efficient and patient, not because of the chance.
Sure you can, just as people have done with Windows and countless other technology since the industrial revolution. A HW vendor that has no SW chops that has no choice but to use Android as their OS certainly doesn't have the same advantage as Apple, but that doesn't mean it's not possible, and it talks to my larger point about longterm planning and creating a better brand, like Apple choose to do so long ago.
Different era.
The PC era is totally different from the mobile era. A pure hardware vendor has no chance to have long-term growth and profits in mobile. If you create an amazing hardware design it will just be copied by cheap ass China brands in a matter of months. The courts are not protecting hardware patents so any hardware advantage disappears in a matter of months.
The mobile era is much more PERSONAL. With PC's all we cared about is if the computer ran Office, email, and internet. Any thing else was an extra. In the mobile era we worry about security, mobile banking, messaging apps, maps, streaming music, and thousands of apps, ect. Its a much more custom setup. Thus having top level software and services is important.
Samsung is the ultimate example that a pure hardware player cannot command price power. No other vendor has the manufactering advantages that Samsung has. They are world class chip manufacters, display manufacters, and a massive worldwide distribution. Still they have almost zero pricing power because their software sucks.
So where are the other HW/SW vendors? Dead or dying. Yeah a lot good that did for them.
Let's look at Palm, because they were doing exactly what posters here claim will lead a vendor to success.
No, no they didn't.
You're ignoring the part 'what posters here claim'. There's one poster here claiming that having fewer devices is the way to go, which Palm did, and now Sog35 is claiming that controlling the HW/SW is the road to success. Those aren't the things that made Apple successful, and it's the other things they did that Palm didn't that makes the difference.
Frankly, these inferences that a company like Apple somehow lucked into their market position instead of it being a result of brilliant planning and a concerted effort to not go after the low hanging fruit are disgusting. Maybe you're trolling or maybe you can't see it, but Apple's success isn't the result of "a different era" or a coin flip against Palm in the market. Furthermore, there will be another Apple. There will be another company sees something in CE that is not serving customers as best as possible, and they will be the ones the take the market lead and by which all other CE category in that category is judged, and it will be because they were smarter, more efficient and patient, not because of the chance.
My point mirrors yours up until you make mention that an Android OEM can become an elite brand through thoughtful, careful, and long term planning. I would argue that the Android OS market denies that possibility, and would ask where are the examples of elite brands in other consumer electronics, such as Sony, getting any traction in Android (okay, Sony used to be an elite brand).
It's quite possible to get a bump because your product hit the spot with customers, but I haven't seen any OEM being able to carry through on a brand alone. There just isn't enough real product differentiation.
So where are the other HW/SW vendors? Dead or dying. Yeah a lot good that did for them.
Your facile argument is about as good as showing me one story of a fatal traffic accident and one where they were flown clear nary a scratch as proof that it's less safe to wear your seatbelt.
You need to consider why only Apple is making massive profits and all the other vendors utilizing Android are profitless, and why a short-term attempt at a longterm solution isn't a solution at all. With technology dispassionate and unqualified CEOs running most CE companies, and whose primary goals all revolve around buying numbers on a per quarter basis to appease investors and board members in what seems like rampant CEO ADHD when compared to Tim Cook and Steve Jobs, you're unlikely going to get something great. Imagine if the pharaohs of ancient of Egypt ran their kingdom did the same thing; we'd have pyramids as large as 90 days get you. Real impressive¡
Yes, many of those pre-iPhone hands vendors did have their own mobile OS, but I shouldn't have to tell you just how poorly designed and/or how much hubris they had about their market position that led to their demise in short order. They lost because they didn't think they had to try until it was too late. Fuçk them!
So where are the other HW/SW vendors? Dead or dying. Yeah a lot good that did for them.
You need to make world class Hardware and world class software and world class services.
Apple is the only one who can do all three.
Samsung can make some nice hardware but they suck at software/services.
Google can make some nice services (maps, search) but their OS sucks.
Blackberry's hardware sucked.
LG/Sony/Xiaomi/rest of android army can't make great software.
Its incredibly hard for a company to be GREAT in one of the catergories (hardware, OS, services).
That Apple is great is all THREE is amazing and that's why they dominate.
Apple flatout makes the best hardware - beautiful and high quality
Apple has the best and most secure OS.
Apple is quickly developing the best services - ApplePay, Maps, Spotlight search, AppleMusic, iTunes, AppStore.
With that I can agree. I don't get how [@]SolipsismY[/@] thinks another company can suddenly come in and compete with Apple. Even if something new is invented then Apple can quickly adapt to the paradigm shift and make a even better product/device.
Do you seriously think the PC era and the mobile era is the same?
Microsoft/Intel worked in the PC era because computers were mostly utility devices.
In the mobile era the phone is PERSONAL. And Apple has mastered personal computing.
I never said they were, but your comment suggests that its's simply not possible to be excellent today because the era is different, which then infers that Apple is just lucky and doesn't deserve their success.
Think back during Apple's dark era. They could have taken two easy paths to earn more profits in the 90s than ever before: dtop Mac OS and become a Win OEM, or (the more profitable one) help Comcast, Dell, et al. get out from MS' thumb by licensing Mac OS to them when they wanted it. They never did, even as their company dangerously close to collapsing.
The only shortcuts to success are efficiency through good planning.
My point mirrors yours up until you make mention that an Android OEM can become an elite brand through thoughtful, careful, and long term planning. I would argue that the Android OS market denies that possibility, and would ask where are the examples of elite brands in other consumer electronics, such as Sony, getting any traction in Android (okay, Sony used to be an elite brand).
It's quite possible to get a bump because your product hit the spot with customers, but I haven't seen any OEM being able to carry through on a brand alone. There just isn't enough real product differentiation.
It can, just as we saw Samsung do for a short time. They were to the Android-bassed market what Apple is to the smartphone market. They still have quite a grasp over it as they are being toppled on the top by Apple pulling in more Android users and having their bottom being washed away even up to their flagship devices by less expensive Android-based vendors that offer comparable or better HW with less crapware pre-installed. There is probably a little blowback, at least in the US, from people seeing their shady business practices, but I would wager that accounts for less than 0.01% of reasons people don't choose Samsung.
With that I can agree. I don't get how [@]SolipsismY[/@] thinks another company can suddenly come in and compete with Apple. Even if something new is invented then Apple can quickly adapt to the paradigm shift and make a even better product/device.
What long term success? The mobile market is almost 40 years, and of which Apple has only been dominant for the last 2.
I think you're missing something. The mobile market may be 40 years old, but the smartphone market is really only slightly older than the first iPhone.
Do you remember the WAP browser? Quite frankly, in my opinion, the iPhone picked the low hanging fruit, it addressed the elephant in the room. This was no secret or surprise. Everyone of us that had a smartphone, in the brief time before the iPhone, cursed mightily at the access to the Internet these phones provided. Why was Steve Jobs the one to see it? I don't know, but it was NO secret. When Steve introduced the iPhone, and the entire Internet in your hand, the sun set on a different world. Really, every existing smartphone vendor at that time had to be doing a face-palm.
So where are the other HW/SW vendors? Dead or dying. Yeah a lot good that did for them.
Your facile argument is about as good as showing me one story of a fatal traffic accident and one where they were flown clear nary a scratch as proof that it's less safe to wear your seatbelt.
You need to consider why only Apple is making massive profits and all the other vendors utilizing Android are profitless, and why a short-term attempt at a longterm solution isn't a solution at all. With technology dispassionate and unqualified CEOs running most CE companies, and whose primary goals all revolve around buying numbers on a per quarter basis to appease investors and board members in what seems like rampant CEO ADHD when compared to Tim Cook and Steve Jobs, you're unlikely going to get something great. Imagine if the pharaohs of ancient of Egypt ran their kingdom did the same thing; we'd have pyramids as large as 90 days get you. Real impressive¡
Yes, many of those pre-iPhone hands vendors did have their own mobile OS, but I shouldn't have to tell you just how poorly designed and/or how much hubris they had about their market position that led to their demise in short order. They lost because they didn't think they had to try until it was too late. Fuçk them!
You're making my point for me. It's not as simple as just controlling the HW/SW. WebOS was pretty decent especially compared to Android at that point in time, but the HW was atrocious. One has to excel at both.
... When Steve introduced the iPhone, and the entire Internet in your hand, the sun set on a different world. Really, every existing smartphone vendor at that time had to be doing a face-palm.
But they still insisted that everyone wanted a physical keyboard. They had no vision to look beyond that and still didn't see it when the iPhone was introduced. Thank BlackBerry users for that...remember them???? " src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
With that I can agree. I don't get how [@]SolipsismY[/@] thinks another company can suddenly come in and compete with Apple. Even if something new is invented then Apple can quickly adapt to the paradigm shift and make a even better product/device.
Since when does longterm equate to suddenly? :no:
By that I meant the sudden appearance of a new player in the space. Bad wording on my part. Time and time again we've seen Apple adopt an idea, and blow it away. You want to put a fingerprint scanner? We'll show you the proper way to do it, and then we'll incorporate it into a secure payment system using a NFC chip. You want to go with a bigger screen? We'll show you the proper way to do that as well. Apple has the money, and the personnel to eliminate all threats.
Comments
Sure you can, just as people have done with Windows and countless other technology since the industrial revolution. A HW vendor that has no SW chops that has no choice but to use Android as their OS certainly doesn't have the same advantage as Apple, but that doesn't mean it's not possible, and it talks to my larger point about longterm planning and creating a better brand, like Apple choose to do so long ago.
Windows ran its course, and Apple makes most of the profits in PC's. If you don't control the software stack, then you don't control your hardware, nor your destiny. That was a decision that Apple made a long time ago. Someday, Apple will face better competition, but not from any of current Android OEM's.
I don't believe that the Android OEM's ever really had a chance; it was always going to be a race to the bottom. Android was never meant to be anything other than an insurance policy for Google, so the health of the OEM's was never important.
You would be better considering how Samsung might have fared with Tizen OS if it had been a quality product, and had shipped prior to Android OS.
Let's look at Palm, because they were doing exactly what posters here claim will lead a vendor to success. They controlled the HW, and SW plus they had a small number of models. So why did they crash, and burn in spectacular fashion? In the grand scheme of things Apple hasn't really had long term success.
Apple hasn't gotten to where they are overnight. They made a product, and created an ecosystem, and for every subsequent device the ecosystem expanded. At this point there's not one single company that has the time or the money to start from scratch, and do what Apple has done in this space. Hell, I don't think even Apple could beat Apple, so how does anyone else stand a chance? It's moronic to pick one thing that Apple does, and say that other companies would have success if they did that, and it's foolish not to realize that Apple has won. The only hope for the other manufacturers are the people that hate Apple, and current iPhone owners that want to try something different for a change.
So revenue is down only 7.3% but profit is down a massive 37.6%
That simply means Samsung is selling WAY LESS TOP END phones compared to last year. That is why profits are down massively even though overall revenue is mostly flat.
The iPhone is totally dominating the high end
And to add to that, the Android fansites are announcing an upcoming price "adjustment" for Galaxy S6/S6 Edge. It is not know at this time if it will apply to the current models or the forthcoming models.
Have I ever denied it?
Seriously?
Similar to the USA and the Soviet Union? James Bond and [insert name here]?
Again, that decision was abut a quality experience. Apple in no way is the only company allowed to offer a quality CE experience.
No, no they weren't. Doing one thing (or even multiple things) the same as your competitor is no more doing "exactly the same" as a competitor than a toddler adorably trying to mimic their parent or siblings actions.
A different era where quality allowed success and now it does not? Sure, go with that¡ :no:
- - -
Frankly, these inferences that a company like Apple somehow lucked into their market position instead of it being a result of brilliant planning and a concerted effort to not go after the low hanging fruit are disgusting. Maybe you're trolling or maybe you can't see it, but Apple's success isn't the result of "a different era" or a coin flip against Palm in the market. Furthermore, there will be another Apple. There will be another company sees something in CE that is not serving customers as best as possible, and they will be the ones the take the market lead and by which all other CE category in that category is judged, and it will be because they were smarter, more efficient and patient, not because of the chance.
So where are the other HW/SW vendors? Dead or dying. Yeah a lot good that did for them.
You're ignoring the part 'what posters here claim'. There's one poster here claiming that having fewer devices is the way to go, which Palm did, and now Sog35 is claiming that controlling the HW/SW is the road to success. Those aren't the things that made Apple successful, and it's the other things they did that Palm didn't that makes the difference.
My point mirrors yours up until you make mention that an Android OEM can become an elite brand through thoughtful, careful, and long term planning. I would argue that the Android OS market denies that possibility, and would ask where are the examples of elite brands in other consumer electronics, such as Sony, getting any traction in Android (okay, Sony used to be an elite brand).
It's quite possible to get a bump because your product hit the spot with customers, but I haven't seen any OEM being able to carry through on a brand alone. There just isn't enough real product differentiation.
You need to make world class Hardware and world class software and world class services.
Apple is the only one who can do all three.
Samsung can make some nice hardware but they suck at software/services.
Google can make some nice services (maps, search) but their OS sucks.
Blackberry's hardware sucked.
LG/Sony/Xiaomi/rest of android army can't make great software.
Its incredibly hard for a company to be GREAT in one of the catergories (hardware, OS, services).
That Apple is great is all THREE is amazing and that's why they dominate.
Apple flatout makes the best hardware - beautiful and high quality
Apple has the best and most secure OS.
Apple is quickly developing the best services - ApplePay, Maps, Spotlight search, AppleMusic, iTunes, AppStore.
I would add that Google is too embedded in advertising to build a decent product;
https://theoverspill.wordpress.com/2015/07/30/the-adblocking-revolution-is-months-away-with-ios-9-with-trouble-for-advertisers-publishers-and-google/
Your facile argument is about as good as showing me one story of a fatal traffic accident and one where they were flown clear nary a scratch as proof that it's less safe to wear your seatbelt.
You need to consider why only Apple is making massive profits and all the other vendors utilizing Android are profitless, and why a short-term attempt at a longterm solution isn't a solution at all. With technology dispassionate and unqualified CEOs running most CE companies, and whose primary goals all revolve around buying numbers on a per quarter basis to appease investors and board members in what seems like rampant CEO ADHD when compared to Tim Cook and Steve Jobs, you're unlikely going to get something great. Imagine if the pharaohs of ancient of Egypt ran their kingdom did the same thing; we'd have pyramids as large as 90 days get you. Real impressive¡
Yes, many of those pre-iPhone hands vendors did have their own mobile OS, but I shouldn't have to tell you just how poorly designed and/or how much hubris they had about their market position that led to their demise in short order. They lost because they didn't think they had to try until it was too late. Fuçk them!
With that I can agree. I don't get how [@]SolipsismY[/@] thinks another company can suddenly come in and compete with Apple. Even if something new is invented then Apple can quickly adapt to the paradigm shift and make a even better product/device.
I never said they were, but your comment suggests that its's simply not possible to be excellent today because the era is different, which then infers that Apple is just lucky and doesn't deserve their success.
Think back during Apple's dark era. They could have taken two easy paths to earn more profits in the 90s than ever before: dtop Mac OS and become a Win OEM, or (the more profitable one) help Comcast, Dell, et al. get out from MS' thumb by licensing Mac OS to them when they wanted it. They never did, even as their company dangerously close to collapsing.
The only shortcuts to success are efficiency through good planning.
It can, just as we saw Samsung do for a short time. They were to the Android-bassed market what Apple is to the smartphone market. They still have quite a grasp over it as they are being toppled on the top by Apple pulling in more Android users and having their bottom being washed away even up to their flagship devices by less expensive Android-based vendors that offer comparable or better HW with less crapware pre-installed. There is probably a little blowback, at least in the US, from people seeing their shady business practices, but I would wager that accounts for less than 0.01% of reasons people don't choose Samsung.
Since when does longterm equate to suddenly? :no:
What long term success? The mobile market is almost 40 years, and of which Apple has only been dominant for the last 2.
I think you're missing something. The mobile market may be 40 years old, but the smartphone market is really only slightly older than the first iPhone.
Do you remember the WAP browser? Quite frankly, in my opinion, the iPhone picked the low hanging fruit, it addressed the elephant in the room. This was no secret or surprise. Everyone of us that had a smartphone, in the brief time before the iPhone, cursed mightily at the access to the Internet these phones provided. Why was Steve Jobs the one to see it? I don't know, but it was NO secret. When Steve introduced the iPhone, and the entire Internet in your hand, the sun set on a different world. Really, every existing smartphone vendor at that time had to be doing a face-palm.
You're making my point for me. It's not as simple as just controlling the HW/SW. WebOS was pretty decent especially compared to Android at that point in time, but the HW was atrocious. One has to excel at both.
What long term success? The mobile market is almost 40 years, and of which Apple has only been dominant for the last 2.
Huh? 40 Years? In what alien world?
"arch nemesis". That's funny. Sounds so sinister.
... When Steve introduced the iPhone, and the entire Internet in your hand, the sun set on a different world. Really, every existing smartphone vendor at that time had to be doing a face-palm.
But they still insisted that everyone wanted a physical keyboard. They had no vision to look beyond that and still didn't see it when the iPhone was introduced. Thank BlackBerry users for that...remember them????
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
By that I meant the sudden appearance of a new player in the space. Bad wording on my part. Time and time again we've seen Apple adopt an idea, and blow it away. You want to put a fingerprint scanner? We'll show you the proper way to do it, and then we'll incorporate it into a secure payment system using a NFC chip. You want to go with a bigger screen? We'll show you the proper way to do that as well. Apple has the money, and the personnel to eliminate all threats.