Huawei HiSilicon Kirin 980 more than a year behind Apple's A12 Bionic in performance

12357

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 136
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 3,644member
    spheric said:
    I’m amused that Avon is betting on iPhone X sales having dropped quarter after quarter - after having been released in time for the holiday quarter, and the last quarter being summer, which is known (in any business) as the time when money is spent on vacation, and where everybody is fully aware of new models looming in September/October. 
    That’s some rocket science there. 

    I’m equally amused by the notion that Apple should include a plastic case or a screen protector with their flagship phones, like Huawei is apparently doing in some cases in some markets. Uh, yeah. I design something really nice and immediately encourage people to opt for cheap plastic instead. Do I distrust them, or do I distrust my engineering? 
    “Here’s a luxury leather couch at the upper end of the market. We’re shipping it with a polyester cover — of course. People wouldn’t want to ruin the luxury leather, would they. And it’s not like we’re cheap and want people to think we’re skimping.” 



    I DO get the idea that they should include an analog audio adapter, but from experience, most users never actually connect their phones to anything other than included earphones (and they are still included), with more and more users who want something else going the wireless route. 

    I’m a musician, so I bought two aftermarket D/A stages (Belkin), with one installed in the car, which doesn’t do wireless music, and the other in my bag. The one Apple used to include sounded bad and didn’t allow for charging, so I would not have used that one, anyway.  

    I have not used the second adapter yet, in a month of ownership. At all. 
    I wasn't referring to general iPhone X series sales but the iPhone X (original model, 2017).

    This goes back to Tmay's original comments on Apple's usual blow out quarter and iPhone X being the 'most popular'.

    I said that it would only be possible to evaluate 'possible' (Apple doesn't break them down) sales after a year but that sales would drop off during the year. In fact, recent observations from Gartner (?) Claimed the iPhone X had seen a sharper drop off in sales than previous Apple flagships.

    As for the refreshed phones (2018), it is obviously too early to tell.
  • Reply 82 of 136
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,644member
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:

    This is incorrect:

    "Huawei's expensive new Mate 20 Pro flagship copies Apple's design and price, but sells in a market where Androids are cheap

    Huawei is just now trying to sell devices priced like a Galaxy Note or Apple's iPhone lineup"

    Huawei doesn't copy Apple's design or price. It had plus $1,000 smartphones long before the 1,000 dollar iPhone even existed and still has phones that almost double the price of iPhone X. I don't see the Mate 20 camera setup on any iPhone, nor the hidden speaker grill, nor the ribbed finish, nor the curved screen. 

    This is also incorrect:

    "But despite using the same fab process, Huawei's Kirin 980-powered Mate 20 Pro flagship lags far behind Apple's iPhone XS A12, turning in performance scores well below last year's A11 iPhone X."

    Performance of what? A SoC is many things. The Kirin 980 includes modem and wi-fi, both of which are seemingly far ahead of Apple on 'performance'. It also includes the NPU where the Kirin 970 NPU not only performed better than the A11 Neural Engine, but was put to better use throughout the phone. I haven't seen NPU comparisons for K980/A12 yet.

    What you are talking about is the cores and Huawei is using the very latest ARM CPU/GPU designs and has more than enough speed.

    That said, in spite of being 'slower', the Mate 20 series (and P20 Pro/Mate 10 before it) has managed to 'outperform' Apple literally all over the rest of the phone.

    40W wired ultra fast charging (1% in 30 seconds)
    15W wireless charging
    Reverse charging
    Tri Camera
    3x optical zoom
    5x hybrid zoom
    3D object modelling
    Cat 21 modem
    Ultra fast wi-fi
    Dual frequency GPS
    AIIS 
    Night Mode
    Expandable storage
    True dual SIM
    In screen ultrasonic fingerprint sensor
    Wireless desktop mode
    Balong 5000 compatibility

    The Mate 20 X also uses graphene and vapour chamber cooling. The Mate RS uses micro capsule cooling.

    The new iPhone (A12 included) was basically overshadowed in terms of attention even in Apple circles by ... the Apple Watch. 

    Speed gives you .... speed. The A11 had plenty. I don't remember anyone saying they noticed a lack of it. The A12 brings even more.

    Will most Apple users really notice a dramatic improvement? I very much doubt it. FaceID is faster but no one said it was slow to begin with. Will WhatsApp open faster? 

    Phones are more than speed. It's been that way for a few years now. Phones are about other areas. Areas where Apple is painfully lacking right now (see above), especially in terms of innovation.

    As Counterpoint recently said, 'Apple has been leapfrogged'.

    The Mate 20 Series launched on Tuesday. The new iPhones launched four weeks before. The iPhones will not change for another, and whopping eleven months!

    Next up is Honor and the Magic 2 (October 31st) and before you can say 'S10' the P30 will be on us! The bar has been set high and will go far higher before the next iPhone refresh.

    And the Mate series is the 'boring' series. LOL.

    Apple uses the words 'best', 'fastest', 'most advanced' all over the place but limits comparisons to .... other iPhones!

    While we wait for reviews to corroborate what was presented on Tuesday (essential step) it is clear that Huawei has given the Samsung and Apple cages a good rattling by just presenting what they revealed on Tuesday. I say corroboration is essential as Huawei took  only about 5 minutes to claim the Mate 20 Pro opened the top 50 apps from the Play Store far faster than the iPhone Xs Max (A12 and all). That is a performance metric that does matter.

    ''Performance' (in the context of this article) is the least of Huawei's worries. The goal was to have a well balanced SoC. According to Anandtech, that goal looks to have been largely achieved.

    Focusing on 'performance' and simply ignoring the rest, is 'not seeing the forest for the trees'.

    Looking ahead, far from rumours of a Kirin 990, rumours swirled in June around a Kirin 1020. That in addition to persistent rumours of an in-house GPU.

    Speed itself is simply not enough to be a differentiating factor nowadays, and anyone who thinks otherwise really needs to take a long hard look at what Huawei has put into this new series.

    One analyst said Samsung is now in 'full on panic mode'. I think Apple is in a similar situation and needs to shift up a gear. We need a Schiller moment:

    'Can't innovate, my ass!'

    But please Phil, no cylinder iPhone!

    Competition is the only way these technologies can be realised. We all win.

    Apple has done an amazing job with the A12. The problem is elsewhere.

    As for this piece, something is telling and is summed up here:

    https://www.newsweek.com/rise-huawei-how-smartphone-maker-conquering-tech-world-without-us-1176300

    Which is basically tied to this in some ways

    https://www.newsweek.com/iphone-killer-ditching-apple-new-huawei-p20-pro-887208

    That was on a phone launched in March and little has changed since then on the Apple front. Ironic that the author attempts to paint a picture of Huawei being 'a year behind' when, by the time Apple can catch Huawei's Night Mode for example, it will be well over a year behind. And what about the rest?

    The next step is to simply see how the Mate 20 holds up in real world use. The proof is always in the pudding and we will have wait. I always take PR and marketing at face value but going by the presentation and early full reviews using pre-production software, things don't look too shabby. We will see.










    Blah blah blah. Nobody gives a flying eff about your Huawei shilling, lies or spin.
    So. That's it? That's all you have?

    Wow!

    The spin is in the article. The 'damage control' (as you tried to claim) was also in the article.

    The article only existed to pull attention away from the reality. Huawei was getting a lot of attention for the right reasons. The iPhone Xs Max was used (along with the Samsung S9+) during the presentation to highlight the strengths of the Mate 20 series. Are you surprised?

    Well, the new 2018 iPhone didn't fair too well in front of those thousands who watched the presentation in the hall. Are you surprised?

    As with all presentations - including Apple's - what is NOT said, is often more interesting than what IS said but those details always float to the surface at some point so you can be sure that Huawei will squeeze all it can out of every event. Are you surprised?

    Now, if you offered iPhone users the choice of a new A12 model or an A11 model - but with a Mate 20 Pro feature set - most takers would be for the latter. Of that I am convinced and that is what you should be reflecting on.

    Along with why Apple only ships its new 1,000 dollar phones with 50 cent chargers and without headphone jack adaptors etc. Not even a plastic case or factory applied screen protector (standard on many Huawei phones).
    iPhone is a market in itself, and as part of Apple's ecosystem advantage, Apple doesn't need to expend effort adding all of those features that are needed to differentiate Android OS devices like the Chinese OEM's and Samsung have to do. Apple adds features when it fits their roadmap, and when it can add those same features in volume across its product lines.

    I think that it's fine for Huawei to strive to obtain the best and most features in a device, and I expect that Samsung will response in kind, tit fo tat, but with an expected stronger processor than the Kirin 980.

    Meanwhile, I'm not noticing any substantial advantages to the Mate product line over the iPhone X models, whatever your list, and certainly a heck of a lot of advantages to iOS and Apple's ecosystem over Android OS. You still are in denial about iPhone X sales, and I'm expecting that you will be in denial when Apple announces its financials for this quarter in January. You have yet to acknowledge that Apple's business model is superior to it's competition.

    Still, I find it amusing that every manufacturer has to compare its products to Apple's. Funny how that works.
    Apple's business model is not superior to Huawei's.
    Uh no. Profit is the metric of health and superiority of a business model. Apple was months from bankruptcy, but now has vast holdings due to immense collection of profit. This is all the confirmation that is needed -- they have a superior business model. It's what put them into the position they're in now, not magic pixie dust.
    You are actually completely wrong on that. Profits are a simple indicator of current health.

    The business model - how you generate those profits - is different.

    Why not ask Imagination?

    Apple's business model became heavily weighted to mobile sales. When iPhone sales flattened out, Apple changed its makeup and began to look beyond mobile. We are literally in the middle of this change.
    I'm not wrong because Apple's business model is undeniably healthy. In twenty years it has amassed more profit and wealth than any other public corporation in history. It's not even arguable. Doing so is a troll's errand. No surprise that you're trying to.

    Even Apple's non-iPhone business segments are larger than most other fortune companies. Again, old news. Nobody is interested in pretending they're doing anything but killing it but you, because that's your troll trope agenda. 

    Guess it's easier for you than talking about how shitty your chinese knockoffs keep cloning iPhone and iOS. Cognitive dissonance FTW!


    No one is disputing amassed profits.

    Those profits largely rose off the back of ONE product. A dangerous situation to be in. Again, look at Imagination.

    When sales of that product flattened out, they began to focus more on services (last three years) and try to reduce dependence on iPhone.

    The business model is changing to such a degree that it is investing literally billions into at least two areas where it has no experience at all. Content creation and cars.

    In fact, if the car project turns out to be a software project, the future of Apple might be far more non-hardware related than at any point in the history of the company.
    Read more, post less.
     
    http://www.asymco.com/2018/09/13/lasts-longer/

    "To emphasize the second point she said Apple now strives to design and build durable products that last as long as possible. That means long-lasting hardware coupled with long-lasting software. She pointed out that iOS 12 runs even on iPhone 5S, now five years old. Because iPhones last longer, you can keep using them or pass them on to someone who will continue to use them after you upgrade.

    She said that “keeping iPhones in use” is the best thing for the planet.

    At this point in the presentation I wondered if everyone would rush out of the room and call their broker to sell Apple shares. One premise of investing in durable goods hardware companies is that value depends on frequency of upgrades. If products are not replaced frequently they do not generate revenues and the company selling them ends up growing very slowly if at all after markets saturate. The smartphone business is certainly approaching saturation and the implication of making Apple products more durable would imply lower revenues from replacements. This anxiety around replacement rates and extended lives is used by analysts to discount future cash flows and if those lifespans are extended price targets come down.

    So why would Apple want to do this?  What is the logic of this durability focus as a business model? It may be good for the environment but is it good for the bottom line?

    Of course, there would be not much business without an environment and we should all strive for sustainability.  But this is an existential observation, and it’s defensive. The important call to make is that Apple is making a bet that sustainability is a growth business.

    Fundamentally, Apple is betting on having customers not selling them products.

    The purpose of Apple as a firm is to create and preserve customers and to create and preserve products. This is fundamental and not fully recognized.

    To understand how this works, if you look at the pricing graph below, you can read it as a story of increasing prices for a decreasing market share. But if you understand that each advance in products increases absorbable[1] utility then the cost per use remains steady or declines."



    Hmmmn. Sorry but thar doesn't change anything. Apple has been pushing services hard for the last few years in an attempt to balance its revenue spread. That push shows its importance and services revenue is growing as a result. To maintain revenues Apple widened its product spread and increased prices (iPhone X). 

    The key to Apple's revenues was largely iPhone hardware and continued unit growth. When unit growth flattened out, more focus was put on alternative areas of revenue growth (services and for the future, content creation and 'titan' etc).

    Put simply, the age of the golden goose of iPhone hardware growth seems to have passed and Apple is adapting to this.
    Yes, that age of iPhone growth has passed, at least as long as they don't drive prices down, which would be foolish today.

    Now you know what Huawei has to look forward to, and unlike Apple, they don't have the customer base or the ASP's in the same league as Apple. Whatever growth they get will come out of Samsung's share, A year or two from now, Huawei will be at no growth in Android OS market, and unlike Apple, can't rely on the breadth of its ecosystem to sustain them.

    Surely you would have imagined this.
  • Reply 83 of 136
    sphericspheric Posts: 1,739member
    That is exactly what I was referring to. 

    It doesn’t take Captain Obvious to figure that a flagship phone released in time for the holidays will have its highest sales in that quarter, with successively lower sales in every quarter thereafter, and the lowest sales being in the summer quarter, just before the yearly presentation at which successor models have been released every year for nigh a decade. 
  • Reply 84 of 136
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 3,644member
    spheric said:
    That is exactly what I was referring to. 

    It doesn’t take Captain Obvious to figure that a flagship phone released in time for the holidays will have its highest sales in that quarter, with successively lower sales in every quarter thereafter, and the lowest sales being in the summer quarter, just before the yearly presentation at which successor models have been released every year for nigh a decade. 
    Yes. Agreed. The question was more focused on 'the most popular' claim on Q1 right after a refresh and forecasting a year of success on the basis of Apple's peak quarter which is why I pointed out that the only true evaluation would happen on full year sales as the X was a 'new' addition to the mix (a third phone).

    As I pointed out above, I think it was Gartner that reported a sharper than usual drop off in sales for the X when compared to past Apple flagships in exactly the same situation.

    We might get enough information to take a stab at seeing if that was the case or not during the upcoming earnings call.
  • Reply 85 of 136
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,644member
    avon b7 said:
    spheric said:
    That is exactly what I was referring to. 

    It doesn’t take Captain Obvious to figure that a flagship phone released in time for the holidays will have its highest sales in that quarter, with successively lower sales in every quarter thereafter, and the lowest sales being in the summer quarter, just before the yearly presentation at which successor models have been released every year for nigh a decade. 
    Yes. Agreed. The question was more focused on 'the most popular' claim on Q1 right after a refresh and forecasting a year of success on the basis of Apple's peak quarter which is why I pointed out that the only true evaluation would happen on full year sales as the X was a 'new' addition to the mix (a third phone).

    As I pointed out above, I think it was Gartner that reported a sharper than usual drop off in sales for the X when compared to past Apple flagships in exactly the same situation.

    We might get enough information to take a stab at seeing if that was the case or not during the upcoming earnings call.
    Apple stated explicitly that the iPhone X was it's best selling model for Q1, Q2. and Q3. 

    https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2018/02/apple-reports-first-quarter-results/

    “We’re thrilled to report the biggest quarter in Apple’s history, with broad-based growth that included the highest revenue ever from a new iPhone lineup. iPhone X surpassed our expectations and has been our top-selling iPhone every week since it shipped in November,” said Tim Cook, Apple’s CEO. “We’ve also achieved a significant milestone with our active installed base of devices reaching 1.3 billion in January. That’s an increase of 30 percent in just two years, which is a testament to the popularity of our products and the loyalty and satisfaction of our customers.”

    https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2018/05/apple-reports-second-quarter-results/

    “We’re thrilled to report our best March quarter ever, with strong revenue growth in iPhone, Services and Wearables,” said Tim Cook, Apple’s CEO. “Customers chose iPhone X more than any other iPhone each week in the March quarter, just as they did following its launch in the December quarter. We also grew revenue in all of our geographic segments, with over 20% growth in Greater China and Japan.”

    https://seekingalpha.com/article/4192790-apple-aapl-q3-2018-results-earnings-call-transcript

    "First, iPhone had a very strong quarter. Revenue was up 20% year-over-year and our active installed base grew by double-digits, driven by switchers, first time smartphone buyers and our existing customers whose loyalty we greatly appreciate. iPhone X was the most popular iPhone in the quarter once again, with a customer satisfaction score of 98% according to 451 Research. Based on the latest data from IDC, iPhone grew faster than the global smartphone market, gaining share in many markets including the U.S., Greater China, Canada, Germany, Australia, Russia, Mexico and the Middle East and Africa.


    We'll find out on November 1, but given that the iPhone X had the best sales, worldwide, of any smartphone model, for three quarters in a row, I'm not seeing that Gartner should be given much confidence. Certainly, we'll know with the financial report and earnings call.

    In the meantime, still looking for a blockbuster Q1, but we'll know that with the Q1 financials in January, 2019.

    Still plenty of time to move your goalposts.

    edited October 2018
  • Reply 86 of 136
    The Note 9 shown in the benchmark chart is the non-US Exynos model, which uses Samsungs custom M3 cores not the Cortex A75 as used in  Snapdragon 845. Snapdragon 855 devices in 2019 will have similar CPU performance to the Kirin 980.
    tmay
  • Reply 87 of 136
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,644member
    Auser said:
    The Note 9 shown in the benchmark chart is the non-US Exynos model, which uses Samsungs custom M3 cores not the Cortex A75 as used in  Snapdragon 845. Snapdragon 855 devices in 2019 will have similar CPU performance to the Kirin 980.
    I expect that the next Exynos will be much closer to the A12 in performance than the other 7nm devices, with it's M3 cores and similar 6 wide architecture. 
    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 88 of 136
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 3,644member
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    spheric said:
    That is exactly what I was referring to. 

    It doesn’t take Captain Obvious to figure that a flagship phone released in time for the holidays will have its highest sales in that quarter, with successively lower sales in every quarter thereafter, and the lowest sales being in the summer quarter, just before the yearly presentation at which successor models have been released every year for nigh a decade. 
    Yes. Agreed. The question was more focused on 'the most popular' claim on Q1 right after a refresh and forecasting a year of success on the basis of Apple's peak quarter which is why I pointed out that the only true evaluation would happen on full year sales as the X was a 'new' addition to the mix (a third phone).

    As I pointed out above, I think it was Gartner that reported a sharper than usual drop off in sales for the X when compared to past Apple flagships in exactly the same situation.

    We might get enough information to take a stab at seeing if that was the case or not during the upcoming earnings call.
    Apple stated explicitly that the iPhone X was it's best selling model for Q1, Q2. and Q3. 

    https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2018/02/apple-reports-first-quarter-results/

    “We’re thrilled to report the biggest quarter in Apple’s history, with broad-based growth that included the highest revenue ever from a new iPhone lineup. iPhone X surpassed our expectations and has been our top-selling iPhone every week since it shipped in November,” said Tim Cook, Apple’s CEO. “We’ve also achieved a significant milestone with our active installed base of devices reaching 1.3 billion in January. That’s an increase of 30 percent in just two years, which is a testament to the popularity of our products and the loyalty and satisfaction of our customers.”

    https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2018/05/apple-reports-second-quarter-results/

    “We’re thrilled to report our best March quarter ever, with strong revenue growth in iPhone, Services and Wearables,” said Tim Cook, Apple’s CEO. “Customers chose iPhone X more than any other iPhone each week in the March quarter, just as they did following its launch in the December quarter. We also grew revenue in all of our geographic segments, with over 20% growth in Greater China and Japan.”

    https://seekingalpha.com/article/4192790-apple-aapl-q3-2018-results-earnings-call-transcript

    "First, iPhone had a very strong quarter. Revenue was up 20% year-over-year and our active installed base grew by double-digits, driven by switchers, first time smartphone buyers and our existing customers whose loyalty we greatly appreciate. iPhone X was the most popular iPhone in the quarter once again, with a customer satisfaction score of 98% according to 451 Research. Based on the latest data from IDC, iPhone grew faster than the global smartphone market, gaining share in many markets including the U.S., Greater China, Canada, Germany, Australia, Russia, Mexico and the Middle East and Africa.

    We'll find out on November 1, but given that the iPhone X had the best sales, worldwide, of any smartphone model, for three quarters in a row, I'm not seeing that Gartner should be given much confidence. Certainly, we'll know with the financial report and earnings call.

    In the meantime, still looking for a blockbuster Q1, but we'll know that with the Q1 financials in January, 2019.

    Still plenty of time to move your goalposts.

    Imagine these sales:

    Q1 iPhone 8 - 1,000,000
    Q1 iPhone 8 Plus - 1,000,000
    Q1 iPhone X - 1,000,001

    The X would be the 'most popular'. That really doesn't mean a lot, does it? I'm exaggerating to make the point clear.

    Now, you will use ASP as a counterpoint but that isn't the point and you know it. Apple doesn't break its numbers down so 'most popular' is only a part of the story and we get to the crux of the matter: 'conference call speak' and how it can be operated.

    Well, you are quoting TC so should I be read something into the fact that he didn't say 'most popular by far'? Can we assume, with relative sureness, that it wasn't the most popular, 'by far'? Perhaps that's a balanced observation.

    From Q1 through Q3 the conference calls really didn't shed much light on 'most popular'.

    What if iPhone X sales 'fell off a cliff' this quarter? Apart from not being able to claim the 'most popular' spot we still wouldn't know. I agree that Gartner (or any speculated number) has to be taken lightly, but the claim is curious.

    Did the 1,000 dollar phone run out of steam? The same would apply to Android at some point.

    Is that why the new X line starts far cheaper than last year's model? I'm not talking from a purely hardware perspective now (LCD instead of OLED etc) but from the perspective of how many smartphone users are willing to pay over a 1,000 dollars for a phone.

    Unfortunately, the 'far cheaper' part only applies to areas where no sales tax is applied. In most of the EU, the Xr models are expensive by any standard. Most pricing starts at 859€ and rises sharply. As I said, it's a hard sell.

    BTW, best sales 'by model', in worldwide handset terms, is utterly irrelevant. It would only make sense if all handset makers produced the same amount of models. As that isn't the case there is no base for comparison.

    I don't need to move goalposts. Go back and look at what I said. Nothing has changed. I said right from the beginning that the only viable evaluation of iPhone X would be after a year.
    edited October 2018
  • Reply 89 of 136
    High benchmarks are nice but I believe most consumers are more concerned with what the total package brings them.
    That is why people buy iphones more than android phones (if they have the money and actually can choose)...
    edited October 2018
  • Reply 90 of 136
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,507member
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:

    This is incorrect:

    "Huawei's expensive new Mate 20 Pro flagship copies Apple's design and price, but sells in a market where Androids are cheap

    Huawei is just now trying to sell devices priced like a Galaxy Note or Apple's iPhone lineup"

    Huawei doesn't copy Apple's design or price. It had plus $1,000 smartphones long before the 1,000 dollar iPhone even existed and still has phones that almost double the price of iPhone X. I don't see the Mate 20 camera setup on any iPhone, nor the hidden speaker grill, nor the ribbed finish, nor the curved screen. 

    This is also incorrect:

    "But despite using the same fab process, Huawei's Kirin 980-powered Mate 20 Pro flagship lags far behind Apple's iPhone XS A12, turning in performance scores well below last year's A11 iPhone X."

    Performance of what? A SoC is many things. The Kirin 980 includes modem and wi-fi, both of which are seemingly far ahead of Apple on 'performance'. It also includes the NPU where the Kirin 970 NPU not only performed better than the A11 Neural Engine, but was put to better use throughout the phone. I haven't seen NPU comparisons for K980/A12 yet.

    What you are talking about is the cores and Huawei is using the very latest ARM CPU/GPU designs and has more than enough speed.

    That said, in spite of being 'slower', the Mate 20 series (and P20 Pro/Mate 10 before it) has managed to 'outperform' Apple literally all over the rest of the phone.

    40W wired ultra fast charging (1% in 30 seconds)
    15W wireless charging
    Reverse charging
    Tri Camera
    3x optical zoom
    5x hybrid zoom
    3D object modelling
    Cat 21 modem
    Ultra fast wi-fi
    Dual frequency GPS
    AIIS 
    Night Mode
    Expandable storage
    True dual SIM
    In screen ultrasonic fingerprint sensor
    Wireless desktop mode
    Balong 5000 compatibility

    The Mate 20 X also uses graphene and vapour chamber cooling. The Mate RS uses micro capsule cooling.

    The new iPhone (A12 included) was basically overshadowed in terms of attention even in Apple circles by ... the Apple Watch. 

    Speed gives you .... speed. The A11 had plenty. I don't remember anyone saying they noticed a lack of it. The A12 brings even more.

    Will most Apple users really notice a dramatic improvement? I very much doubt it. FaceID is faster but no one said it was slow to begin with. Will WhatsApp open faster? 

    Phones are more than speed. It's been that way for a few years now. Phones are about other areas. Areas where Apple is painfully lacking right now (see above), especially in terms of innovation.

    As Counterpoint recently said, 'Apple has been leapfrogged'.

    The Mate 20 Series launched on Tuesday. The new iPhones launched four weeks before. The iPhones will not change for another, and whopping eleven months!

    Next up is Honor and the Magic 2 (October 31st) and before you can say 'S10' the P30 will be on us! The bar has been set high and will go far higher before the next iPhone refresh.

    And the Mate series is the 'boring' series. LOL.

    Apple uses the words 'best', 'fastest', 'most advanced' all over the place but limits comparisons to .... other iPhones!

    While we wait for reviews to corroborate what was presented on Tuesday (essential step) it is clear that Huawei has given the Samsung and Apple cages a good rattling by just presenting what they revealed on Tuesday. I say corroboration is essential as Huawei took  only about 5 minutes to claim the Mate 20 Pro opened the top 50 apps from the Play Store far faster than the iPhone Xs Max (A12 and all). That is a performance metric that does matter.

    ''Performance' (in the context of this article) is the least of Huawei's worries. The goal was to have a well balanced SoC. According to Anandtech, that goal looks to have been largely achieved.

    Focusing on 'performance' and simply ignoring the rest, is 'not seeing the forest for the trees'.

    Looking ahead, far from rumours of a Kirin 990, rumours swirled in June around a Kirin 1020. That in addition to persistent rumours of an in-house GPU.

    Speed itself is simply not enough to be a differentiating factor nowadays, and anyone who thinks otherwise really needs to take a long hard look at what Huawei has put into this new series.

    One analyst said Samsung is now in 'full on panic mode'. I think Apple is in a similar situation and needs to shift up a gear. We need a Schiller moment:

    'Can't innovate, my ass!'

    But please Phil, no cylinder iPhone!

    Competition is the only way these technologies can be realised. We all win.

    Apple has done an amazing job with the A12. The problem is elsewhere.

    As for this piece, something is telling and is summed up here:

    https://www.newsweek.com/rise-huawei-how-smartphone-maker-conquering-tech-world-without-us-1176300

    Which is basically tied to this in some ways

    https://www.newsweek.com/iphone-killer-ditching-apple-new-huawei-p20-pro-887208

    That was on a phone launched in March and little has changed since then on the Apple front. Ironic that the author attempts to paint a picture of Huawei being 'a year behind' when, by the time Apple can catch Huawei's Night Mode for example, it will be well over a year behind. And what about the rest?

    The next step is to simply see how the Mate 20 holds up in real world use. The proof is always in the pudding and we will have wait. I always take PR and marketing at face value but going by the presentation and early full reviews using pre-production software, things don't look too shabby. We will see.










    Blah blah blah. Nobody gives a flying eff about your Huawei shilling, lies or spin.
    So. That's it? That's all you have?

    Wow!

    The spin is in the article. The 'damage control' (as you tried to claim) was also in the article.

    The article only existed to pull attention away from the reality. Huawei was getting a lot of attention for the right reasons. The iPhone Xs Max was used (along with the Samsung S9+) during the presentation to highlight the strengths of the Mate 20 series. Are you surprised?

    Well, the new 2018 iPhone didn't fair too well in front of those thousands who watched the presentation in the hall. Are you surprised?

    As with all presentations - including Apple's - what is NOT said, is often more interesting than what IS said but those details always float to the surface at some point so you can be sure that Huawei will squeeze all it can out of every event. Are you surprised?

    Now, if you offered iPhone users the choice of a new A12 model or an A11 model - but with a Mate 20 Pro feature set - most takers would be for the latter. Of that I am convinced and that is what you should be reflecting on.

    Along with why Apple only ships its new 1,000 dollar phones with 50 cent chargers and without headphone jack adaptors etc. Not even a plastic case or factory applied screen protector (standard on many Huawei phones).
    iPhone is a market in itself, and as part of Apple's ecosystem advantage, Apple doesn't need to expend effort adding all of those features that are needed to differentiate Android OS devices like the Chinese OEM's and Samsung have to do. Apple adds features when it fits their roadmap, and when it can add those same features in volume across its product lines.

    I think that it's fine for Huawei to strive to obtain the best and most features in a device, and I expect that Samsung will response in kind, tit fo tat, but with an expected stronger processor than the Kirin 980.

    Meanwhile, I'm not noticing any substantial advantages to the Mate product line over the iPhone X models, whatever your list, and certainly a heck of a lot of advantages to iOS and Apple's ecosystem over Android OS. You still are in denial about iPhone X sales, and I'm expecting that you will be in denial when Apple announces its financials for this quarter in January. You have yet to acknowledge that Apple's business model is superior to it's competition.

    Still, I find it amusing that every manufacturer has to compare its products to Apple's. Funny how that works.
    Apple's business model is not superior to Huawei's.
    Uh no. Profit is the metric of health and superiority of a business model. Apple was months from bankruptcy, but now has vast holdings due to immense collection of profit. This is all the confirmation that is needed -- they have a superior business model. It's what put them into the position they're in now, not magic pixie dust.
    You are actually completely wrong on that. Profits are a simple indicator of current health.

    The business model - how you generate those profits - is different.

    Why not ask Imagination?

    Apple's business model became heavily weighted to mobile sales. When iPhone sales flattened out, Apple changed its makeup and began to look beyond mobile. We are literally in the middle of this change.
    I'm not wrong because Apple's business model is undeniably healthy. In twenty years it has amassed more profit and wealth than any other public corporation in history. It's not even arguable. Doing so is a troll's errand. No surprise that you're trying to.

    Even Apple's non-iPhone business segments are larger than most other fortune companies. Again, old news. Nobody is interested in pretending they're doing anything but killing it but you, because that's your troll trope agenda. 

    Guess it's easier for you than talking about how shitty your chinese knockoffs keep cloning iPhone and iOS. Cognitive dissonance FTW!


    No one is disputing amassed profits.

    Those profits largely rose off the back of ONE product. A dangerous situation to be in. Again, look at Imagination.

    When sales of that product flattened out, they began to focus more on services (last three years) and try to reduce dependence on iPhone.

    The business model is changing to such a degree that it is investing literally billions into at least two areas where it has no experience at all. Content creation and cars.

    In fact, if the car project turns out to be a software project, the future of Apple might be far more non-hardware related than at any point in the history of the company.
    Read more, post less.
     
    http://www.asymco.com/2018/09/13/lasts-longer/

    "To emphasize the second point she said Apple now strives to design and build durable products that last as long as possible. That means long-lasting hardware coupled with long-lasting software. She pointed out that iOS 12 runs even on iPhone 5S, now five years old. Because iPhones last longer, you can keep using them or pass them on to someone who will continue to use them after you upgrade.

    She said that “keeping iPhones in use” is the best thing for the planet.

    At this point in the presentation I wondered if everyone would rush out of the room and call their broker to sell Apple shares. One premise of investing in durable goods hardware companies is that value depends on frequency of upgrades. If products are not replaced frequently they do not generate revenues and the company selling them ends up growing very slowly if at all after markets saturate. The smartphone business is certainly approaching saturation and the implication of making Apple products more durable would imply lower revenues from replacements. This anxiety around replacement rates and extended lives is used by analysts to discount future cash flows and if those lifespans are extended price targets come down.

    So why would Apple want to do this?  What is the logic of this durability focus as a business model? It may be good for the environment but is it good for the bottom line?

    Of course, there would be not much business without an environment and we should all strive for sustainability.  But this is an existential observation, and it’s defensive. The important call to make is that Apple is making a bet that sustainability is a growth business.

    Fundamentally, Apple is betting on having customers not selling them products.

    The purpose of Apple as a firm is to create and preserve customers and to create and preserve products. This is fundamental and not fully recognized.

    To understand how this works, if you look at the pricing graph below, you can read it as a story of increasing prices for a decreasing market share. But if you understand that each advance in products increases absorbable[1] utility then the cost per use remains steady or declines."



    Hmmmn. Sorry but thar doesn't change anything. Apple has been pushing services hard for the last few years in an attempt to balance its revenue spread. That push shows its importance and services revenue is growing as a result. To maintain revenues Apple widened its product spread and increased prices (iPhone X). 

    The key to Apple's revenues was largely iPhone hardware and continued unit growth. When unit growth flattened out, more focus was put on alternative areas of revenue growth (services and for the future, content creation and 'titan' etc).

    Put simply, the age of the golden goose of iPhone hardware growth seems to have passed and Apple is adapting to this.
    Smartphone sales have peaked everywhere. They’ve been falling slightly. Huawei has been doing well, so far, but for how l9ng?
  • Reply 91 of 136
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 3,644member
    melgross said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:

    This is incorrect:

    "Huawei's expensive new Mate 20 Pro flagship copies Apple's design and price, but sells in a market where Androids are cheap

    Huawei is just now trying to sell devices priced like a Galaxy Note or Apple's iPhone lineup"

    Huawei doesn't copy Apple's design or price. It had plus $1,000 smartphones long before the 1,000 dollar iPhone even existed and still has phones that almost double the price of iPhone X. I don't see the Mate 20 camera setup on any iPhone, nor the hidden speaker grill, nor the ribbed finish, nor the curved screen. 

    This is also incorrect:

    "But despite using the same fab process, Huawei's Kirin 980-powered Mate 20 Pro flagship lags far behind Apple's iPhone XS A12, turning in performance scores well below last year's A11 iPhone X."

    Performance of what? A SoC is many things. The Kirin 980 includes modem and wi-fi, both of which are seemingly far ahead of Apple on 'performance'. It also includes the NPU where the Kirin 970 NPU not only performed better than the A11 Neural Engine, but was put to better use throughout the phone. I haven't seen NPU comparisons for K980/A12 yet.

    What you are talking about is the cores and Huawei is using the very latest ARM CPU/GPU designs and has more than enough speed.

    That said, in spite of being 'slower', the Mate 20 series (and P20 Pro/Mate 10 before it) has managed to 'outperform' Apple literally all over the rest of the phone.

    40W wired ultra fast charging (1% in 30 seconds)
    15W wireless charging
    Reverse charging
    Tri Camera
    3x optical zoom
    5x hybrid zoom
    3D object modelling
    Cat 21 modem
    Ultra fast wi-fi
    Dual frequency GPS
    AIIS 
    Night Mode
    Expandable storage
    True dual SIM
    In screen ultrasonic fingerprint sensor
    Wireless desktop mode
    Balong 5000 compatibility

    The Mate 20 X also uses graphene and vapour chamber cooling. The Mate RS uses micro capsule cooling.

    The new iPhone (A12 included) was basically overshadowed in terms of attention even in Apple circles by ... the Apple Watch. 

    Speed gives you .... speed. The A11 had plenty. I don't remember anyone saying they noticed a lack of it. The A12 brings even more.

    Will most Apple users really notice a dramatic improvement? I very much doubt it. FaceID is faster but no one said it was slow to begin with. Will WhatsApp open faster? 

    Phones are more than speed. It's been that way for a few years now. Phones are about other areas. Areas where Apple is painfully lacking right now (see above), especially in terms of innovation.

    As Counterpoint recently said, 'Apple has been leapfrogged'.

    The Mate 20 Series launched on Tuesday. The new iPhones launched four weeks before. The iPhones will not change for another, and whopping eleven months!

    Next up is Honor and the Magic 2 (October 31st) and before you can say 'S10' the P30 will be on us! The bar has been set high and will go far higher before the next iPhone refresh.

    And the Mate series is the 'boring' series. LOL.

    Apple uses the words 'best', 'fastest', 'most advanced' all over the place but limits comparisons to .... other iPhones!

    While we wait for reviews to corroborate what was presented on Tuesday (essential step) it is clear that Huawei has given the Samsung and Apple cages a good rattling by just presenting what they revealed on Tuesday. I say corroboration is essential as Huawei took  only about 5 minutes to claim the Mate 20 Pro opened the top 50 apps from the Play Store far faster than the iPhone Xs Max (A12 and all). That is a performance metric that does matter.

    ''Performance' (in the context of this article) is the least of Huawei's worries. The goal was to have a well balanced SoC. According to Anandtech, that goal looks to have been largely achieved.

    Focusing on 'performance' and simply ignoring the rest, is 'not seeing the forest for the trees'.

    Looking ahead, far from rumours of a Kirin 990, rumours swirled in June around a Kirin 1020. That in addition to persistent rumours of an in-house GPU.

    Speed itself is simply not enough to be a differentiating factor nowadays, and anyone who thinks otherwise really needs to take a long hard look at what Huawei has put into this new series.

    One analyst said Samsung is now in 'full on panic mode'. I think Apple is in a similar situation and needs to shift up a gear. We need a Schiller moment:

    'Can't innovate, my ass!'

    But please Phil, no cylinder iPhone!

    Competition is the only way these technologies can be realised. We all win.

    Apple has done an amazing job with the A12. The problem is elsewhere.

    As for this piece, something is telling and is summed up here:

    https://www.newsweek.com/rise-huawei-how-smartphone-maker-conquering-tech-world-without-us-1176300

    Which is basically tied to this in some ways

    https://www.newsweek.com/iphone-killer-ditching-apple-new-huawei-p20-pro-887208

    That was on a phone launched in March and little has changed since then on the Apple front. Ironic that the author attempts to paint a picture of Huawei being 'a year behind' when, by the time Apple can catch Huawei's Night Mode for example, it will be well over a year behind. And what about the rest?

    The next step is to simply see how the Mate 20 holds up in real world use. The proof is always in the pudding and we will have wait. I always take PR and marketing at face value but going by the presentation and early full reviews using pre-production software, things don't look too shabby. We will see.










    Blah blah blah. Nobody gives a flying eff about your Huawei shilling, lies or spin.
    So. That's it? That's all you have?

    Wow!

    The spin is in the article. The 'damage control' (as you tried to claim) was also in the article.

    The article only existed to pull attention away from the reality. Huawei was getting a lot of attention for the right reasons. The iPhone Xs Max was used (along with the Samsung S9+) during the presentation to highlight the strengths of the Mate 20 series. Are you surprised?

    Well, the new 2018 iPhone didn't fair too well in front of those thousands who watched the presentation in the hall. Are you surprised?

    As with all presentations - including Apple's - what is NOT said, is often more interesting than what IS said but those details always float to the surface at some point so you can be sure that Huawei will squeeze all it can out of every event. Are you surprised?

    Now, if you offered iPhone users the choice of a new A12 model or an A11 model - but with a Mate 20 Pro feature set - most takers would be for the latter. Of that I am convinced and that is what you should be reflecting on.

    Along with why Apple only ships its new 1,000 dollar phones with 50 cent chargers and without headphone jack adaptors etc. Not even a plastic case or factory applied screen protector (standard on many Huawei phones).
    iPhone is a market in itself, and as part of Apple's ecosystem advantage, Apple doesn't need to expend effort adding all of those features that are needed to differentiate Android OS devices like the Chinese OEM's and Samsung have to do. Apple adds features when it fits their roadmap, and when it can add those same features in volume across its product lines.

    I think that it's fine for Huawei to strive to obtain the best and most features in a device, and I expect that Samsung will response in kind, tit fo tat, but with an expected stronger processor than the Kirin 980.

    Meanwhile, I'm not noticing any substantial advantages to the Mate product line over the iPhone X models, whatever your list, and certainly a heck of a lot of advantages to iOS and Apple's ecosystem over Android OS. You still are in denial about iPhone X sales, and I'm expecting that you will be in denial when Apple announces its financials for this quarter in January. You have yet to acknowledge that Apple's business model is superior to it's competition.

    Still, I find it amusing that every manufacturer has to compare its products to Apple's. Funny how that works.
    Apple's business model is not superior to Huawei's.
    Uh no. Profit is the metric of health and superiority of a business model. Apple was months from bankruptcy, but now has vast holdings due to immense collection of profit. This is all the confirmation that is needed -- they have a superior business model. It's what put them into the position they're in now, not magic pixie dust.
    You are actually completely wrong on that. Profits are a simple indicator of current health.

    The business model - how you generate those profits - is different.

    Why not ask Imagination?

    Apple's business model became heavily weighted to mobile sales. When iPhone sales flattened out, Apple changed its makeup and began to look beyond mobile. We are literally in the middle of this change.
    I'm not wrong because Apple's business model is undeniably healthy. In twenty years it has amassed more profit and wealth than any other public corporation in history. It's not even arguable. Doing so is a troll's errand. No surprise that you're trying to.

    Even Apple's non-iPhone business segments are larger than most other fortune companies. Again, old news. Nobody is interested in pretending they're doing anything but killing it but you, because that's your troll trope agenda. 

    Guess it's easier for you than talking about how shitty your chinese knockoffs keep cloning iPhone and iOS. Cognitive dissonance FTW!


    No one is disputing amassed profits.

    Those profits largely rose off the back of ONE product. A dangerous situation to be in. Again, look at Imagination.

    When sales of that product flattened out, they began to focus more on services (last three years) and try to reduce dependence on iPhone.

    The business model is changing to such a degree that it is investing literally billions into at least two areas where it has no experience at all. Content creation and cars.

    In fact, if the car project turns out to be a software project, the future of Apple might be far more non-hardware related than at any point in the history of the company.
    Read more, post less.
     
    http://www.asymco.com/2018/09/13/lasts-longer/

    "To emphasize the second point she said Apple now strives to design and build durable products that last as long as possible. That means long-lasting hardware coupled with long-lasting software. She pointed out that iOS 12 runs even on iPhone 5S, now five years old. Because iPhones last longer, you can keep using them or pass them on to someone who will continue to use them after you upgrade.

    She said that “keeping iPhones in use” is the best thing for the planet.

    At this point in the presentation I wondered if everyone would rush out of the room and call their broker to sell Apple shares. One premise of investing in durable goods hardware companies is that value depends on frequency of upgrades. If products are not replaced frequently they do not generate revenues and the company selling them ends up growing very slowly if at all after markets saturate. The smartphone business is certainly approaching saturation and the implication of making Apple products more durable would imply lower revenues from replacements. This anxiety around replacement rates and extended lives is used by analysts to discount future cash flows and if those lifespans are extended price targets come down.

    So why would Apple want to do this?  What is the logic of this durability focus as a business model? It may be good for the environment but is it good for the bottom line?

    Of course, there would be not much business without an environment and we should all strive for sustainability.  But this is an existential observation, and it’s defensive. The important call to make is that Apple is making a bet that sustainability is a growth business.

    Fundamentally, Apple is betting on having customers not selling them products.

    The purpose of Apple as a firm is to create and preserve customers and to create and preserve products. This is fundamental and not fully recognized.

    To understand how this works, if you look at the pricing graph below, you can read it as a story of increasing prices for a decreasing market share. But if you understand that each advance in products increases absorbable[1] utility then the cost per use remains steady or declines."



    Hmmmn. Sorry but thar doesn't change anything. Apple has been pushing services hard for the last few years in an attempt to balance its revenue spread. That push shows its importance and services revenue is growing as a result. To maintain revenues Apple widened its product spread and increased prices (iPhone X). 

    The key to Apple's revenues was largely iPhone hardware and continued unit growth. When unit growth flattened out, more focus was put on alternative areas of revenue growth (services and for the future, content creation and 'titan' etc).

    Put simply, the age of the golden goose of iPhone hardware growth seems to have passed and Apple is adapting to this.
    Smartphone sales have peaked everywhere. They’ve been falling slightly. Huawei has been doing well, so far, but for how l9ng?
    I wouldn't put any bets on Huawei continuing growth as it has over the last four years. The numbers are just too brutal. This year it expects to ship 40,000,000 units more than last. This is in a saturated market and without real access to the US market. The numbers are simply incredible in that context.

    Smartphone sales haven't necessarily peaked everywhere. There is room for growth in Africa, India, Latin America and China.

    Huawei is just beginning to see the rewards of its push into those areas. The problem is that in places like India, feature phones are sought. The smartphone market is still smaller in terms of actual demand for them but, just as it was in developed areas, the feature phone market will eventually make way for smartphones.

    That is from a smartphone market perspective. From Apple's perspective the market is still huge - in spite of saturation.

    We will not see 2,000 dollar mainstream phones any time soon but 2,000 dollar phones do exist as a niche market. Apple operates in most of the price bands (except luxe premium) and goes quite low on pricing. I can still get an SE for 299€ even though they are not available direct from Apple. The SE is currently being sold 'under the radar' via select resellers and using targeted marketing. Perhaps until stocks run out or perhaps not. The iPhone 6 32GB was sold in the same manner. From there, prices move up to 500€, hundreds of euros cheaper than the cheapest (newest) iPhone with the 8 series sitting in the middle.

    Apple is actively 'dissuading' users from even the 8 series in its 2018 model marketing. Directly pushing the full screen nature if the X series over the heavily bezelled 8 (and earlier) series. I was surprised by this.

    The potential issue is if they can shift older hardware in those middle price bands or if they will end up making new phones for them. Just like everyone else.

    This issue is exacerbated by the very dated look of that hardware. It just looks old. Do people want a big forehead and chin on their 2019 phones when even low priced Androids have gone full screen? And at over 500€?

    We will have to wait and see but these aren't the best conditions to be in. The top end of the line didn't bring much innovation to the market and the lower end just doesn't hold up against stylish phones from other vendors.

    The real carrot iPhone is the Xr. It's just a question of how many will go for that carrot. It might be tempting in the US, but after sales tax is applied in places like the EU, it doesn't look half as attractive.

    I'm sure Apple has had long debates about this situation. How much weight does Services revenue hold with regards to unit sales? Are services the future goal even if handset  prices have to drop? Or are flat sales 'acceptable' as long as they can be kept from dropping?

    Huawei has just opened up 200 job listings for the US. Some speculate that they haven't really given up just yet in spite of saying the Mate 20 won't retail there.




  • Reply 92 of 136
    nhtnht Posts: 4,429member
    Let's turn down the personal invectives, please.
    I would seriously contribute to a gofundme account for you guys to ban some concern trolls and shills for other companies that inhabit these forums.
    edited October 2018
  • Reply 93 of 136
    RabbitkunRabbitkun Posts: 4unconfirmed, member
    Hhhmmmm, I saw comparison videos between Mate 20 Pro and iPhone XS Max and well Mate 20 Pro won. So I dunno if this article is valid or it's just boasting like a true apple fantard :neutral: 
  • Reply 94 of 136
    RabbitkunRabbitkun Posts: 4unconfirmed, member
    High benchmarks are nice but I believe most consumers are more concerned with what the total package brings them.
    That is why people buy iphones more than android phones (if they have the money and actually can choose)...
    Nah, people buy iPhones because it's an Apple, but more and more people nowadays want more flexibility with what they use and given the price the competitors like Samsung or Huawei (which are #1 & #2 in the current market) offers something more of value than what Apple is offering now.
  • Reply 95 of 136
    Rabbitkun said:
    High benchmarks are nice but I believe most consumers are more concerned with what the total package brings them.
    That is why people buy iphones more than android phones (if they have the money and actually can choose)...
    Nah, people buy iPhones because it's an Apple, but more and more people nowadays want more flexibility with what they use and given the price the competitors like Samsung or Huawei (which are #1 & #2 in the current market) offers something more of value than what Apple is offering now.
    Those folks (samsung and Huawei) sell more phones OVERALL, but their flagships are far behind in sales to Apple flagships.  Huawei and Samsung sell both cheap, mid-range, and high end phones.  Most of their sales are in the lower end...in poorer countries.  I think ASP of Samsung is around $225-250.  Huawei is around that or slightly lower than Samsung.  

    And this was why iPhone X was the #1 selling phone in 2017-2018...despite Apple being #3 seller of phones worldwide.

    So, Huawei and Samsung being #1-2 has nothing to do with people wanting “flexibility”...it has more to do with poorer folks in poor countries needing a basic smartphone.  For those who has the means and want “flexibility,” iPhone remains the #1 seller by far.  This is fact.
    edited November 2018
  • Reply 96 of 136
    you can check the comparison of the speed in YouTube and how the huawei mate 20 pro booted faster and launch the apps and games faster as well , I don't believe this result from Geekbench or GFXBENCH.
    TheDude121
  • Reply 97 of 136
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 3,644member
    Madtiger said:
    Rabbitkun said:
    High benchmarks are nice but I believe most consumers are more concerned with what the total package brings them.
    That is why people buy iphones more than android phones (if they have the money and actually can choose)...
    Nah, people buy iPhones because it's an Apple, but more and more people nowadays want more flexibility with what they use and given the price the competitors like Samsung or Huawei (which are #1 & #2 in the current market) offers something more of value than what Apple is offering now.
    Those folks (samsung and Huawei) sell more phones OVERALL, but their flagships are far behind in sales to Apple flagships.  Huawei and Samsung sell both cheap, mid-range, and high end phones.  Most of their sales are in the lower end...in poorer countries.  I think ASP of Samsung is around $225-250.  Huawei is around that or slightly lower than Samsung.  

    And this was why iPhone X was the #1 selling phone in 2017-2018...despite Apple being #3 seller of phones worldwide.

    So, Huawei and Samsung being #1-2 has nothing to do with people wanting “flexibility”...it has more to do with poorer folks in poor countries needing a basic smartphone.  For those who has the means and want “flexibility,” iPhone remains the #1 seller by far.  This is fact.
    This isn't exactly true. Android flagship phones are shipping in ever greater numbers thanks to the likes of Huawei, whose sales largely come from the middle to high end and has little to do with 'poor countries' or 'poorer folks'. Just take a look at  Huawei (and lately Oppo and Xiaomi) in Europe, they also sell low end phones of course but the focus of Huawei is NOT the low end. Apple, on the other hand has largely been flat for three years now.

    https://www.phonearena.com/news/Huawei-leaving-the-low-end-market-focus-is-on-premium-smartphones_id96464

    As for 'most popular' models, that is hogwash as there is no comparison possible. If Huawei or Samsung released two or three models each year, in all likelihood they would have the 'most popular' model but it would still be hogwash. It is irrelevant in most cases.


    https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2018/08/03/reuters-america-update-2-huawei-sees-smartphone-shipments-topping-200-mln-eyes-world-no-1-rank.html

  • Reply 98 of 136
    osamapc said:
    you can check the comparison of the speed in YouTube and how the huawei mate 20 pro booted faster and launch the apps and games faster as well , I don't believe this result from Geekbench or GFXBENCH.
    It's very difficult to do a cross platform comparison of a chips actually. You'll see the same chip gives different results, with a different OS!

    It's really (another) pointless test *shrug* 




  • Reply 99 of 136
    osamapc said:
    you can check the comparison of the speed in YouTube and how the huawei mate 20 pro booted faster and launch the apps and games faster as well , I don't believe this result from Geekbench or GFXBENCH.
    https://youtu.be/vRPxjwgqJKs

    Sorry. 

    Frankly your GPU is trash.  Your cpu is over 2 yrs behind to apple. Sorry. 
    edited December 2018
  • Reply 100 of 136
    avon b7 said:
    Madtiger said:
    Rabbitkun said:
    High benchmarks are nice but I believe most consumers are more concerned with what the total package brings them.
    That is why people buy iphones more than android phones (if they have the money and actually can choose)...
    Nah, people buy iPhones because it's an Apple, but more and more people nowadays want more flexibility with what they use and given the price the competitors like Samsung or Huawei (which are #1 & #2 in the current market) offers something more of value than what Apple is offering now.
    Those folks (samsung and Huawei) sell more phones OVERALL, but their flagships are far behind in sales to Apple flagships.  Huawei and Samsung sell both cheap, mid-range, and high end phones.  Most of their sales are in the lower end...in poorer countries.  I think ASP of Samsung is around $225-250.  Huawei is around that or slightly lower than Samsung.  

    And this was why iPhone X was the #1 selling phone in 2017-2018...despite Apple being #3 seller of phones worldwide.

    So, Huawei and Samsung being #1-2 has nothing to do with people wanting “flexibility”...it has more to do with poorer folks in poor countries needing a basic smartphone.  For those who has the means and want “flexibility,” iPhone remains the #1 seller by far.  This is fact.
    This isn't exactly true. Android flagship phones are shipping in ever greater numbers thanks to the likes of Huawei, whose sales largely come from the middle to high end and has little to do with 'poor countries' or 'poorer folks'. Just take a look at  Huawei (and lately Oppo and Xiaomi) in Europe, they also sell low end phones of course but the focus of Huawei is NOT the low end. Apple, on the other hand has largely been flat for three years now.

    https://www.phonearena.com/news/Huawei-leaving-the-low-end-market-focus-is-on-premium-smartphones_id96464

    As for 'most popular' models, that is hogwash as there is no comparison possible. If Huawei or Samsung released two or three models each year, in all likelihood they would have the 'most popular' model but it would still be hogwash. It is irrelevant in most cases.


    https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2018/08/03/reuters-america-update-2-huawei-sees-smartphone-shipments-topping-200-mln-eyes-world-no-1-rank.html

    Look at ASP. 
Sign In or Register to comment.