muthuk_vanalingam

GeorgeBMac said:

avon b7 said:

Impossible to know of course but there is one aspect that is worth commenting on.

If the iPhone 12 were to ship 'on time', a matter of weeks later, QC would be releasing the next generation of its 5G modem for release in Android phones in early 2021.

Delaying the iPhone 12 release by a full quarter would pit it against the S30 (very likely with that new 5G modem and corresponding SoC) and the P50 series with Huawei's latest 5G modem too. 

From there the speculation can start. Would any rumoured delay be a reaction to not having material time to release the iPhone 12 within Apple’s typical refresh window, or a planned delay to integrate QC's latest modem just before it ships on Android phones, or perhaps a combination of both? Or none of them (should the rumour prove unfounded). 

I wonder if that new release of the 5G modem would be substantial or merely minor technical changes?

So, why should Qualcomm not favor its long term customers like Samsung?

Couple of points here:

1. Qualcomm was unable to integrate the 5G modem into the SoC (which they traditionally do) in the last couple of years. If they are able to integrate the 5G modem with the Snapdragon 875, it would be much more efficient in power consumption than the current generation Snapdragon 865 SoC with external 5G modem.

2. Samsung is a direct competitor to Qualcomm in BOTH SoCs and 5G modem. While Apple designs their own SoCs, they don't "compete" with Qualcomm for SoC business. Huawei is also not competing with Qualcomm for SoC business (like Apple), but can choose to do so anytime under suitable circumstances (which is somewhat unrealistic for Apple to do). As you are already aware, Apple is a HUGE customer for Qualcomm's modems in the "premium" segment, much larger than Huawei/Samsung who have their own solutions as well. Considering all those factors, Qualcomm is better off prioritizing Apple than Samsung/Huawei.

Xed said:

muthuk_vanalingam said:

Xed said:

muthuk_vanalingam said:

Xed said:

KITA said:

Okay, but in India a flagship OnePlus 8 that launched in Q2 2020 is only Rs 41,999 ($556 USD) and an iPhone SE is Rs 42,499 ($562 USD). So it's not much of a surprise when other flagships aren't even in that price bracket.

What exactly is your point about the ultra-premium market segment?

The point is - the line is drawn "arbitrarily" to make Apple's position in India "look" better. It is just pure optics and NOTHING else in the context of smartphone market in India. Despite this, we have people like lkrupp, who keep complaining that Apple get ONLY negative press day in, day out.

Is it drawn arbitrarily or drawn purposely to make Apple’s position look better? It can’t be both.

If you fee there are better demarcation points based on price and device options for the Indian smartphone market I’m sure we’re all open to see them, but $500 and up for luxury and $700 and up for ultra-luxury sounds pretty reasonable to me.

What’s the alternative? We remove these terms and just look at the smartphone market as a whole? Is it really fair to look at $50 smartphones with the same “optics” as $1200 smartphone? Are they really the same buyer to you?

Well, in the context of Indian smartphone market, anything above Rs. 30,000 ($400) is a premium phone. And OnePlus is THE leader in this segment for last couple of years. And IDC definitely has this data as well. In order to make Apple look good, the line is drawn just above the best selling OnePlus phones price point.

Using your previous comment about how shittyApple's sales are in India because “97.8%” of the total smartphone market is Android, how much of the total smartphone market is the $400 OnePlus? Are they not shit since the sales of the OnePlus would be an even smaller percentage of total smartphone sales?

Well, don't you think OnePlus (an underdog in the grand scheme of things) doing "BETTER" than Apple is an achievement in itself, considering that they are selling "premium" phones ONLY like Apple???? And OnePlus is NOT an independent brand. They are a sub-brand of BBK electronics. BBK has about 45%+ share in smartphone sales in India (not bad, right?).

Few more meaningful numbers for you to chew, from the IDC report in the context of smartphone market in India:

1. Total smartphones shipped in India in Q1 2020 - 32.5 million

2. Percentage of smartphones shipped with price > $300 - 5.6% (1.82 million)

3. Percentage of smartphone shipped with price > $500 - 1.8% (585,000)

4. Apple's share of smartphones shipped with price > $500 - 62.7% (366,795).

Just read those numbers and come to your own conclusion on Apple's GREAT achievement that the title of this article is boasting about.

There are lies, damn lies and statistics.

apple ][ said:

fastasleep said:

apple ][ said:

I am more looking forward to the next earnings, so that things can get back on track again and the world can get back to business, once this virus crap is done with.

Not sure why you think this will be over in 3 months. 

Eventually, things are going to have to get back to normal.

When you say "normal", are you referring to the way we lived our lives before COVID-19 impact, say Dec-31-2019? I don't think we are going to return to "that" normal EVER. COVID-19 has already changed the human life FOREVER for BETTER, dare I say. We (humans) WON'T be allowed to mess up with nature as we please, like we have been doing for last few decades. Nature has shown the humans the place where we belong (graveyard) and we have to mend our ways going forward, failing which nature will show us the place where we belong again.

In case you are wondering what I am talking about - I am from india. Few of the recent incidents are real eye openers.

1. In Jalandar (about 220 kms from Himalayas), people are able to see the Himalayas after 25 years. They were unable to see it due to air pollution in the last 25 years and just about 10 days of lockdown has changed it.

2. Yamuna river is running clean, which even the middle aged people do not remember seeing in their lifetime so far. Only old people have seen it before, many years ago.

3. People in Delhi got "good air" to breathe in March/April months after a long long time (few years).

razorpit said:

hentaiboy said:

StrangeDays said:

pscooter63 said:

Rayz2016 said:

That is so pathetic I almost feel sorry for you.  

Every once in a while, I go back and review the Rules of the Troll thread, just to keep my compass aligned...
(Some responses never age. Remember, this is seven years old.)

Ha! Hadn't read that. Funny stuff. A shame its writer went off the deep edge with his own constant nonsense and got himself banned. 

I miss Tallest Skil! And Sog35...

Whatever happened to them?

melgross said:

muthuk_vanalingam said:

melgross said:

I can actually agree with this article. There wasn’t anything in it that was over the top.

Agreed. Surprisingly, DED stuck to largely known facts in the entire article without exaggerating anything over the top. May be it is due to the fact that the editorial is about an technology aspect where Apple is far ahead of competition, so any level of criticism about Apple's competition is valid and would not look out of place.

Only one minor correction required though - Qualcomm is NOT struggling to sell its premium tier SOCs in meaningful numbers. They are being incorporated in MANY Android phones - premium phones (>$600), upper mid-range phones ($400-$600) and even some mid mid-range phones ($300-$400 like Redmi K20 Pro). It is the Android OEMs who are struggling to make Apple like Profits. Qualcomm is generating adequate revenue to keep moving the top tier phone SOC forward in a meaningful way reasonably well. Tablet/Watch SoCs - Yes, DED was spot on. Mobile SoCs - Not really so. Qualcomm has managed to keep up reasonably well despite being late to the 64-bit party by nearly 2 years.

What he pointed out, correctly, is that flagship phones from amdrois]d have been seeing declining sales for several years, not increases. So perhaps sales of these chips, a year later, to OEMs making lower level phones compensate for it. But, that second year, the chip sells for less. Qualcomm also makes a lot of money from modem sales as well, at least as much as from SoC sales.