cloudmobile

blastdoor said:

Samsung? Pfft. They're done. 

The more interesting competitor to TSMC now is Intel, because Intel offers the potential to integrate the cellular modem into the SOC. 

But I wonder if Intel might have waited too long to get serious about going after Apple's business. These fab processes are difficult to assess by marketing name alone -- TSMC's 10nm is as good as Intel's 10nm, for example. But my impression is that the transistor density of TSMC's 10nm is better than Intel's 14 nm, and that TSMC's 7 nm MIGHT beat Intel's 10nm. If so, then Intel might have finally lost its fab process lead. And that would be a very big deal if true. 

But Samsung? Ha. They're done. 

Intel would have to 1) start making ARM SOCs instead of x86 ones and 2) make SOCs that are competitive with the ones made by Samsung and TSMC. Right now, Intel doesn't even have the foundries to make ARM chips, nor the expertise to make them or operate them. Getting that would take years and billions of dollars. That is why Intel spent years and billions trying to get mobile device makers to use their mobile x86 designs instead, and when that failed they decided to exit the mobile business to focus on IoT. Now that Windows runs on ARM nearly as well as it runs on x86, Intel is probably freaking out. And the multiple security issues that have been identified with their chips will only give manufacturers more incentive to switch from x86 to ARM for Windows PCs that don't require professional/workstation type performance. Yes, Samsung is done, but they never really needed Apple's SOC business anyway. They've had 4 straight record quarters without it. Time to let the Samsung thing go. Apple's lawsuit against them was going on 9 years ago, and Samsung has made 20 times as much money supplying Apple with components than Apple would have ever gotten out of that lawsuit anyway. And there is also the not insubstantial fact that Apple has taken far more design ideas for the iPhone X (and 8/7/6S/6) from the Galaxy S and Galaxy Note lines than Samsung ever did from the 1st and 2nd generation iPhone for their iPhone knockoffs that didn't sell anyway.

Rayz2016 said:

bigmushroom said:

It's useful to compare to last year(same data):

https://9to5mac.com/2016/12/27/flurry-analytics-2016-apple-leads-holiday-phone-activations/31911814535_8b3ccec30c_o/

Apple's share of activations stayed the same but Samsung increased by 5% from 21 to 26%.

By taking share from other Android manufacturers rather than from Apple. 

Which shows that Samsung and Apple can coexist profitably in the same marketplace. Which is something that everyone but Apple fans that spent years deluding themselves into thinking that Samsung - and Android itself - were on the verge of imminent collapse (I don't know who was worse ... DED on this site or Jonny Evans of Computerworld or Leo Sun of Motley Fool, but go back to either of their opeds a few years back and they are embarrassing) knew already.

Apple and Android have roughly equal marketshare in the U.S.
Android has a much bigger marketshare globally.
Apple has a clear market majority of devices that cost more than $600, but when it gets to devices that cost more than $300 it evens out a lot more. 
The Android device makers who sell mostly cheap devices are not hurting financially because mobile devices are not their only or even their primary product and revenue source (as is the case for Samsung, LG, Acer, Asustek, Huawei, Sony, Lenovo/Motorola, Xiaomi ... pretty much everyone except HTC who will exit the smartphone business in 2018). 

Has been this way since 2011 and isn't going to change. Take the smart speaker market. How on earth is Google Home going to compete with devices from Amazon and Apple that have more awareness, better marketing and more loyal customer bases (especially Apple)? Simple: they don't have to. Sony, LG and Samsung are going to introduce Google Assistant-powered speakers in 2018 too (Samsung's will have both Google Assistant and Bixby like their phones) to go with Vizio and other devices already on the market that also have Google Assistant: https://www.engadget.com/2017/04/25/vizio-updates-its-soundbar-and-speaker-ranges/ and https://www.androidcentral.com/lg-thinq-speaker-announced-google-assistant. ;

That's the way it is going to be unless something major happens to shake it up. Apple, Samsung and Google are going to keep A) competing with each other while making tons of money off each other for the foreseeable future, and their mutual coexistence will keep the anti-trust hounds at bay. I expect Microsoft - who first buried the hatchet with Apple in 2014 and Google in 2016 and in both cases not by choice but rather grudgingly accepting the new reality by the new CEO - to try to figure out a way to worm their way into this triumvirante eventually, but for now they are settling for making sure that their apps and software are on the Apple, Samsung and Google platforms. 

cornchip said:

Proving Apple is certainly doomed..

Claimed absolutely no one ever at any time since the iPod. But keep it up with that strawman, why don't you?

Do not think that Apple having their smart speaker on the market would have impacted much. You have to remember that this vaunted "Apple ecosystem" thing is mostly hype. The vast majority of people in this alleged "ecosystem" only own 1 Apple device or at most two. Meaning that they may own an iPod or iPad or a MacBook, but few is the household that owns all 3, and even fewer is the household that owns other devices like the Apple Watch and the Apple TV. 

So, most people who own an iPad or iPhone own Windows PCs, not Macs, and access iTunes on Windows 7 or Windows 10. Lots of MacBook owners LOVE Samsung Galaxy devices. Most also own Rokus or smart TVs by Samsung/Sony/Vizio instead of Apple TV boxes ... or they own Playstations, Nintendos or XBox consoles. So the vast majority of the folks who bought the $29-$79 Echo products are like those: people who are Apple device owners but are not Apple ecosystem people. They mix and match devices from various platforms according to their needs and desires. Such people are going to be far more likely to spend $20 for an Echo Dot that they can control with their Alexa app on their iPhone 6s or 7 than spend $350 for an Apple speaker. Only a diehard Apple ecosystem type is going to have an interest in that. 

And by the way ... even a diehard Apple ecosystem type would still not necessarily be against buying an Echo Dot ... just as lots of them have no problem owning a Samsung smart TV.

eskaric said:

Echo is discounted on Amazon already. Dot by 40% and 2nd generation by 20%. If it was selling so well, why would they discount it around the holidays. Something doesn't add up.

Because that always has been and always will be Amazon's business model, which prioritizes market penetration over per device margin. Not everyone uses Apple's business model. There are plenty of other business models out there. You'd think that after spending 10 years predicting Android's failure because Google wasn't getting $100-$300 for every Android device sold like Apple was for every iPhone and iPad, you would have learned that by now.