Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Dec 2, 2012, 03:24 AM   #101
Oletros
macrumors 603
 
Oletros's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Premià de Mar
Quote:
Originally Posted by marksman View Post
Wat![COLOR="#808080"]
Yeah and there are seperate forums and topics for different products so that doesn't explain anything. An android phone owner with a Mac can go to the Mac forums without jumping in iPhone threads it is easy.[COLOR="#808080"]
He said "The fact that Android fans visit this site just as much as Apple fans supports that notion."
Oletros is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2012, 03:28 AM   #102
iMcLovin
macrumors 65816
 
iMcLovin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
I find it strange that samsung has such a huge market share - maybe because they have cheaper products and I keep forgetting that not everyone has a smartphone.. It's also strange the HTC hasnt managed to increase their share of the market.
__________________
27" iMac i7 2012 | 13" MacBook Air - 2013 | iPhone 5s | iPad Air ...etc
iMcLovin is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2012, 03:48 AM   #103
StoneJack
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by iMcLovin View Post
I find it strange that samsung has such a huge market share - maybe because they have cheaper products and I keep forgetting that not everyone has a smartphone.. It's also strange the HTC hasnt managed to increase their share of the market.
Samsung has like millions of different models, Galaxy being only of them. Summed, they have a large share. Apple has only one current model and one last generation model, still they manage to keep a very big chunk of US market and world market too. LG too has like millions of models but was unfortunate to bet on Windows mobile and ended up losing its share (though not much overall one). HTC really has to blame only itself: its quality is simply not good enough, its additions to Android make its phone clunkier. One has to wonder how Apple actually managed to become No 2 in the market full of featurephones with just ONE expensive smartphone model. Is it incredible luck, RDF, Jobs' genius or what, I don't know.
__________________
LC 630, Blue and White G3 350, iPad 1, iPad 2, iPad 3, iPod nano (2), iPodTouch 4, iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4S, iPhone 4, iPhone 5, AppleTV HD, iPad mini
StoneJack is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2012, 04:32 AM   #104
arbitter
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Belgium
I honestly can't say I've ever seen a LG smartphone around in Europe. A few years back you could spot some LG Cookies, don't know whether you can call them smartphones or not, but everyone thought they were crap. Now it's been ages since I've seen one. Also dumbphones from LG aren't seen a lot.
arbitter is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2012, 07:45 AM   #105
NoNothing
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Send a message via AIM to NoNothing
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilo777 View Post
Even if it 10B number was true (which I doubt), Samsung may be doing a type of marketing that Apple does not. Remember that Samsung sells a lot of staff to other companies - not just consumers (like Apple). This includes Apple. Samsung's revenues are much higher than that of Apple. Perhaps b2b activity requires different kind of marketing - I would not know. But as far as comparable numbers are concerned it ought to be advertising and it's 4 vs 1.
Actually revenues between Apple and Sammy are about the same with Apple, perhaps, a bit higher. Both derive the bulk of profits from their cell phones though Apple makes Samsung profits look insignificant. The difference comes from selling a product people want VS selling a product you have to pay billions to sales people push.
NoNothing is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2012, 07:59 AM   #106
doomfront
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by wikus View Post
HTC is heavily underrated, their One series phones are amazing, much better than an iphone and yet Samsung is at the top....
HTC seemed to shoot themselves in the foot. The DNA is amazing except for the not so great battery life and non expandable memory. If it had at least expandable memory I would of gotten it instead of the Note 2
doomfront is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2012, 08:33 AM   #107
adder7712
macrumors 68000
 
adder7712's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Anywhere
Quote:
Originally Posted by doomfront View Post
HTC seemed to shoot themselves in the foot. The DNA is amazing except for the not so great battery life and non expandable memory. If it had at least expandable memory I would of gotten it instead of the Note 2
I would've gone for the One X if it has expandable storage.
__________________
Custom PC (Windows 8.1), MacBook Aluminium (OS X Mavericks), iPad 3, Samsung Galaxy S III, Samsung Galaxy Tab S 8.4
adder7712 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2012, 09:02 AM   #108
blackhand1001
macrumors 68030
 
blackhand1001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by doomfront View Post
HTC seemed to shoot themselves in the foot. The DNA is amazing except for the not so great battery life and non expandable memory. If it had at least expandable memory I would of gotten it instead of the Note 2
I thought the battery would suck on the DNA as well with that screen but the user reviews on Verizon say otherwise. Most people are very pleased with the battery performance. I still do think a larger battery would have been a better choice though. The design of the dna is amazing though. It is a very good looking phone.
__________________
Macbook 2008
HP Dv7t - 2.53 ghz, 9600m GT, WSXGA+, 120gb ssd, 250 gb 7200rpm
Core i7 3770k, 8gb ram, 2x 120gb sdd raid0, 500gb hdd, GTX 460
Moto X Dev Edition (VZW) Nexus 7

Last edited by blackhand1001; Dec 2, 2012 at 09:08 AM.
blackhand1001 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2012, 10:02 AM   #109
doomfront
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackhand1001 View Post
I thought the battery would suck on the DNA as well with that screen but the user reviews on Verizon say otherwise. Most people are very pleased with the battery performance. I still do think a larger battery would have been a better choice though. The design of the dna is amazing though. It is a very good looking phone.
Extremely nice looking phone. I was playing with it while waiting on the Note 2. 5" is easier to handle than 5.5" too. I still love the Note, but I really think HTC could of have the best phone out if it wasn't for the battery and no micro sd slot
doomfront is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2012, 10:03 AM   #110
kdarling
macrumors G4
 
kdarling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Device engineer 30+ yrs, touchscreens 23+.
Quote:
Originally Posted by donileo View Post
...and before you say anything else yes its mostly advertising their cellphone Galaxy line.
Horace Deidu said he was just "imagining" about the Galaxy ad amounts.

We don't know the actual worldwide breakdown, as both the $1B for Apple and the $3B or whatever for Samsung are total ad budgets for everything each company sells.

However, we DO have access to US figures for iOS/Android, so let's look at those. The data comes from Apple revelations at the recent CA trial, and from AdAge reports.

-- Now for some actual Galaxy and iOS ad budgets for the US (phones and tablets) ---

In 2008:
  • Apple - $98 million for iOS ads
  • Samsung - ?
In 2009:
  • Apple - $150 million for iOS out of a $501 million total ad budget
  • Samsung - ?
In 2010:
  • Apple - $346 million for iOS out of $691 million total
  • Samsung -$79 million for Galaxy products
In 2011:
  • Apple - ~$450 million (using 2010 %) for iOS out of $933 million total
  • Samsung - $142 million for all Galaxy devices; of which $64 million was for the SII phone.
In 2012:
  • Apple - ~$500 million (using 2010 %) for iOS out of $1B total
  • Samsung - $300 million + expected for Galaxy advertising out of $3B total

Okay. So while we haven't calculated real figures for the rest of the world, apparently Apple has always outspent Samsung for phone/tablet ads in the USA. (Contrary input with references welcome.)

Last edited by kdarling; Dec 2, 2012 at 10:08 AM.
kdarling is online now   4 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2012, 10:11 AM   #111
donileo
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoNothing View Post
Actually revenues between Apple and Sammy are about the same with Apple, perhaps, a bit higher. Both derive the bulk of profits from their cell phones though Apple makes Samsung profits look insignificant. The difference comes from selling a product people want VS selling a product you have to pay billions to sales people push.
Couldn't have said it better myself. People are spreading word about the iPhone because they love it whereas Sales people, marketers and staff at Verizon AT&T and other mobile operators are "Pushing" samsung phones because they are getting paid to do so.
donileo is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2012, 10:31 AM   #112
donileo
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdarling View Post
Horace Deidu said he was just "imagining" about the Galaxy ad amounts.

We don't know the actual worldwide breakdown, as both the $1B for Apple and the $3B or whatever for Samsung are total ad budgets for everything each company sells.

However, we DO have access to US figures for iOS/Android, so let's look at those. The data comes from Apple revelations at the recent CA trial, and from AdAge reports.

-- Now for some actual Galaxy and iOS ad budgets for the US (phones and tablets) ---

In 2008:
  • Apple - $98 million for iOS ads
  • Samsung - ?
In 2009:
  • Apple - $150 million for iOS out of a $501 million total ad budget
  • Samsung - ?
In 2010:
  • Apple - $346 million for iOS out of $691 million total
  • Samsung -$79 million for Galaxy products
In 2011:
  • Apple - ~$450 million (using 2010 %) for iOS out of $933 million total
  • Samsung - $142 million for all Galaxy devices; of which $64 million was for the SII phone.
In 2012:
  • Apple - ~$500 million (using 2010 %) for iOS out of $1B total
  • Samsung - $300 million + expected for Galaxy advertising out of $3B total

Okay. So while we haven't calculated real figures for the rest of the world, apparently Apple has always outspent Samsung for phone/tablet ads in the USA. (Contrary input with references welcome.)
Hey kdarling it is true that from Samsung's own numbers Horace cant break down how much of that $13B is being spent on pushing the SG3 and their other smartphones. This is specifically because Samsung fails to break down these numbers. However on his podcast "The shoe sellers dilemma" at the 50:25 mark he starts discussing how though he can't see the breakdown he would argue that yes alot of the money is spent on their smartphones. Samsung is not advertising home appliances like TVs, refrigerators and etc- when was the last time you saw an ad for this?. They aren't advertising their microprocessors - these are products other companies buy from them - not people. Then looking at their most profitable business --> smartphones its pretty obvious that they are spending the money on this.. Are you as a company going to spend your advertising money on your lesser profitable businesses ? No..

To see a breakdown of Samsung's profits by division again you can refer to the cost of selling galaxies link i provided before. You will see that in Semiconductors and Tvs and appliances they are making "some" money but their mobile is where is at due to the crazy growth and high margin in comparison to their other products.

It is there where that crazy $13B dollars is being spent. This number wasn't made up, if you pull up Samsung's Financial releases you will see these expenses there.

Last edited by donileo; Dec 2, 2012 at 10:36 AM.
donileo is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2012, 11:16 AM   #113
Thunderhawks
macrumors 68020
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by wikus View Post
HTC is heavily underrated, their One series phones are amazing, much better than an iphone and yet Samsung is at the top....
Obviously many smartphone users have a different opinion, as the chart would illustrate!
__________________
It's ready, when it's ready !
"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." — Benjamin Franklin
Thunderhawks is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2012, 11:48 AM   #114
kdarling
macrumors G4
 
kdarling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Device engineer 30+ yrs, touchscreens 23+.
Quote:
Originally Posted by donileo View Post
Hey kdarling it is true that from Samsung's own numbers Horace cant break down how much of that $13B is being spent on pushing the SG3 and their other smartphones.
You right, he can't. So as he put it, he "imagined" what portion might be for Galaxies.

I instead gave pretty solid figures for US advertising of iOS and Galaxy products over the years.

Quote:
It is there where that crazy $13B dollars is being spent. This number wasn't made up, if you pull up Samsung's Financial releases you will see these expenses there.
I've read Samsung's financial releases. Have you?

Horace was adding in non-advertising sales commissions, cost of promotions (which includes going to industry trade shows), public relations, etc on Samsung's side.... while not doing the same for Apple.

Basically, he was doing what a lot of analysts do: going for the shock headline factor, knowing that most people are too lazy to dig deeper.
kdarling is online now   2 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2012, 11:54 AM   #115
Oletros
macrumors 603
 
Oletros's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Premià de Mar
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdarling View Post
Basically, he was doing what a lot of analysts do: going for the shock headline factor, knowing that most people are too lazy to dig deeper.
This is clear reading the comments he has twitted
Oletros is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2012, 12:26 PM   #116
NoNothing
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Send a message via AIM to NoNothing
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdarling View Post
Horace Deidu said he was just "imagining" about the Galaxy ad amounts.

We don't know the actual worldwide breakdown, as both the $1B for Apple and the $3B or whatever for Samsung are total ad budgets for everything each company sells.

However, we DO have access to US figures for iOS/Android, so let's look at those. The data comes from Apple revelations at the recent CA trial, and from AdAge reports.

-- Now for some actual Galaxy and iOS ad budgets for the US (phones and tablets) ---

In 2008:
  • Apple - $98 million for iOS ads
  • Samsung - ?
In 2009:
  • Apple - $150 million for iOS out of a $501 million total ad budget
  • Samsung - ?
In 2010:
  • Apple - $346 million for iOS out of $691 million total
  • Samsung -$79 million for Galaxy products
In 2011:
  • Apple - ~$450 million (using 2010 %) for iOS out of $933 million total
  • Samsung - $142 million for all Galaxy devices; of which $64 million was for the SII phone.
In 2012:
  • Apple - ~$500 million (using 2010 %) for iOS out of $1B total
  • Samsung - $300 million + expected for Galaxy advertising out of $3B total

Okay. So while we haven't calculated real figures for the rest of the world, apparently Apple has always outspent Samsung for phone/tablet ads in the USA. (Contrary input with references welcome.)
You are comparing Apples's world budget to Samsung's US budget. Kinda proves Samsung is about marketing only.
NoNothing is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2012, 12:44 PM   #117
kdarling
macrumors G4
 
kdarling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Device engineer 30+ yrs, touchscreens 23+.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoNothing View Post
You are comparing Apples's world budget to Samsung's US budget. Kinda proves Samsung is about marketing only.
The total budgets for both companies are for the world and all their products.

The iOS/Galaxy figures are only for the USA.

We know the iOS figures because Apple was trying to prove in a USA trial how much they spent in the USA to advertise the iPhone and iPad. This is important to get trade dress protection.

The Galaxy figures come from AdAge for the USA.
kdarling is online now   2 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2012, 01:47 PM   #118
winston1236
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: ><
Quote:
Originally Posted by wikus View Post
If Blackberry 10 is anywhere near as stable/reliable as Android, their marketshare SHOULD rise.

I just hope whatever phone they release doesnt look ugly. They need to put a phone on store shelves that people won't be embarrassed to hold in public.
Being a former bb user i disagree. The damage done by their slow laggy phones and os is too big. It would take years for me to forget how much bb sucks. Plus the new phone they are coming out with is an iphone 4 clone. People arent going to go for it.
winston1236 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2012, 02:48 PM   #119
nia820
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by AutoUnion39 View Post
I think it's more interesting to note why was LG so high up and at #2? Their smartphones are terrible. No where to the level of Sammy, HTC, Moto, Apple.
ditto!

LG has always had terrible phones. i remember i brought a flip LG phone back in 2005. and within 3 months the screen started acting funky. LG was a piece of junk then and it is a piece of junk now.
nia820 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2012, 03:14 PM   #120
TMay
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Carson City, NV
Quote:
Originally Posted by princigalli View Post
I can see Samsung being N.1, they aso make the best phones, and I can see Apple being number 2 with all their marketing and Iphones that are maybe boring not that bad, but what about LG n.3? I don't know if they make good phones. Haven't seen one yet.
Well, it would seem that the "marketing" that Apple does is a magnitude less than Samsung with all the spiffs and bogo's.

http://www.asymco.com/2012/11/29/the...ling-galaxies/

Whether Apple makes the "best" phones is subjective.

Apple spending more on marketing? Decidedly false.

Apple has brand, product, pricing, and retail advantages over Samsung.

Samsung is buying its market share, fairly, and frankly killing the other Android OEM's.
TMay is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2012, 03:16 PM   #121
donileo
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdarling View Post
You right, he can't. So as he put it, he "imagined" what portion might be for Galaxies.

I instead gave pretty solid figures for US advertising of iOS and Galaxy products over the years.



I've read Samsung's financial releases. Have you?

Horace was adding in non-advertising sales commissions, cost of promotions (which includes going to industry trade shows), public relations, etc on Samsung's side.... while not doing the same for Apple.

Basically, he was doing what a lot of analysts do: going for the shock headline factor, knowing that most people are too lazy to dig deeper.
First things first. The Adage report you are using as a reference for your data is a report using another Sources Data---> Kantor Media. Are they trusted? Who knows. Where are their exact numbers, Do you have them? - I didnt see them in the links you provided. I need factual information from what either Samsung Provides or the Court Trial Factual Data. Do you have a link to the Court Trials Data or a link where Samsung States this in a Financial Report? I wasn't able to find anything on Google so neither of your two sources or links are valid as far as Im concerned.

Finally as far as Samsung's Financial Release. Yes I have seen it. Horace Deidus information matches line for line what is in Samsung's numbers. Korean Won Conversion and all. The numbers he gives are exactly what is Samsungs Financial releases except for where he estimates Samsungs Q4 2012 Marketing Expenses (he discloses that he estimated this). The 2011 data and the 2012 data all the way to Q3 is exact. The Q4 data may be estimate but that shouldn't change the 2012 data much and in fact theres a chance he underestimated that data.

So in other words. No, I disbelieve that data you posted, unless you can give me real references. I guess what we are debating here is not the $13B Samsung spent because we know they spent it but more if they spent it on Galaxies and their other smartphones versus their other products. I say Yes, the majority of all that money was spent on advertising their smartphones. I cant substantially prove it due to Samsung's own Fault in not breaking down the numbers but with my own Eyes I don't see Samsung Advertising Samsung TV's, Refrigerators or Microprocessors. Everywhere I go (malls etc) and on TV everywhere all I see is Samsung Advertising for their Smartphones. That is all.

Last edited by donileo; Dec 2, 2012 at 03:23 PM.
donileo is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2012, 03:39 PM   #122
TMay
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Carson City, NV
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdarling View Post
Easy. Apple had no legacy phones to stay backwards compatible with. Now they do, and it shows in their small upgrade steps.

Starting from scratch is the same reason why a company who sold advertising was able to enter a market with just a smartphone and a few years later become the #1 phone OS in the world.



Market timing.

Notice that Apple didn't try selling a smartphone until Samsung and others had spent billions and decades building up the user base and world infrastructure... something that Apple could not have done on their own.
For Google, what exactly has this market share provided in earnings? It looks like investments in Moto will never amount to earnings returns, and forking of the Android OS by Amazon and ultimately OEM's put a question mark on just what the value of Android is to Google.

As an aside, I wonder how much money Google makes off of Samsung for advertising Galaxies?

It's true that Apple has legacy software and hardware, but really no different and certainly less problematic than any other player except Windows Phone 8. If you factor in the probability of Apple migrating to vector driven graphics and a major iOS revision by 2015 (8-10 years of current iOS evolution) Apple doesn't seem to have any impediments to continue growth.

As for Apple success, there weren't really any barriers to entry, contrary to many competitors and pundits at that time. Yes, Apple did build on the existing infrastructure, but they also changed the paradigm of handset/carrier relationship to be more favorable to the user, something that competitors haven't taken advantage of.

Add to that the fact that Apple iPhone is "sticky" in comparison to all others would almost predict that Apple will continue to maintain the lion's share of profits, and a continuing major share of unit sales.
TMay is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2012, 03:44 PM   #123
Oletros
macrumors 603
 
Oletros's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Premià de Mar
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMay View Post
For Google, what exactly has this market share provided in earnings? It looks like investments in Moto will never amount to earnings returns, and forking of the Android OS by Amazon and ultimately OEM's put a question mark on just what the value of Android is to Google.

The value of Android is not being at the expenses of a competitor, Microsoft when they bought it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by TMay View Post
As an aside, I wonder how much money Google makes off of Samsung for advertising Galaxies?
What?
Oletros is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2012, 03:50 PM   #124
Rogifan
macrumors G3
 
Rogifan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
It's obvious most of Samsung's money is spent advertising their Galaxy series of products. When's the last time you saw a Samsung commercial on TV that wasn't for the Galaxy S3 or the Galaxy note? Samsung was one of the sponsors of the London Olympics and I believe all the athletes were given Galaxy phones to use during the opening and closing ceremonies. Samsung sponsored the prime time Emmy awards and sponsors the Voice (the contestants/judges are seen using Galaxy phones). I see iPhone 5 commercials on TV once in a blue moon. The Samsung Galaxy Note commercial with Dwayne Wade is on American TV all the time.
__________________
"I have a very optimistic view of individuals. As individuals, people are inherently good. I have a somewhat more pessimistic view of people in groups." -- Steve Jobs , Wired interview
Rogifan is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2012, 04:10 PM   #125
sha4000
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by donileo View Post
First things first. The Adage report you are using as a reference for your data is a report using another Sources Data---> Kantor Media. Are they trusted? Who knows. Where are their exact numbers, Do you have them? - I didnt see them in the links you provided. I need factual information from what either Samsung Provides or the Court Trial Factual Data. Do you have a link to the Court Trials Data or a link where Samsung States this in a Financial Report? I wasn't able to find anything on Google so neither of your two sources or links are valid as far as Im concerned.

Finally as far as Samsung's Financial Release. Yes I have seen it. Horace Deidus information matches line for line what is in Samsung's numbers. Korean Won Conversion and all. The numbers he gives are exactly what is Samsungs Financial releases except for where he estimates Samsungs Q4 2012 Marketing Expenses (he discloses that he estimated this). The 2011 data and the 2012 data all the way to Q3 is exact. The Q4 data may be estimate but that shouldn't change the 2012 data much and in fact theres a chance he underestimated that data.

So in other words. No, I disbelieve that data you posted, unless you can give me real references. I guess what we are debating here is not the $13B Samsung spent because we know they spent it but more if they spent it on Galaxies and their other smartphones versus their other products. I say Yes, the majority of all that money was spent on advertising their smartphones. I cant substantially prove it due to Samsung's own Fault in not breaking down the numbers but with my own Eyes I don't see Samsung Advertising Samsung TV's, Refrigerators or Microprocessors. Everywhere I go (malls etc) and on TV everywhere all I see is Samsung Advertising for their Smartphones. That is all.
Why do YOU even care if Samsung spent XXXX amount of dollars on advertising? You sound like your offended. I went from an HTC Evo which I really liked to a Galaxy S2 which made me forget all about the Evo. I have Ipods, Ibooks and Macbook Pros and I prefer the Mac hardware( Even though I do believe it's a bit expensive) and software but I'm typing this reply on an HP desktop which is crappy and I have no problem using windows. I even have an Iphone 4 that my daughter gave after she bought it on CL with a bad ESN. I used it for a while to browse on wifi and ill admit the OS seemed way smoother then my android. Not one reboot but again I have never run stock Android since I root as soon as i get the phone. Apple has more brand recognition and can always count on ppl like you and I to get friends , family and co-workers to get others to try them out. After their in the they are most likely hooked. There is nothing wrong with liking a companies product but the way ppl in this forum make assumptions about what a company did or didn't do and defend their position whether right or wrong just amazes me. So again why does it matter to YOU how much Samsung spent on marketing the galaxy, last time I looked they are still way in the green or am I missing something. I'm pretty sure kdarling will find you the correct facts and links though.
sha4000 is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why isn't Apple store selling T-Mobile phone at $99 Tiger8 iPhone 7 Apr 18, 2013 08:52 PM
Apple Overtakes Samsung to Become Largest Mobile Phone Vendor in U.S. MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 234 Feb 6, 2013 09:30 PM
LG overtakes Apple bobenhaus Alternatives to iOS and iOS Devices 13 Jan 23, 2013 01:52 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:31 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC