Qualcomm only makes the chip for one variant of the S4. Samsung makes it for 2 other S4 variants. I believe Samsung makes all the components for the S4.
What difference does it make? How is this not rellying on an external chip supplier? Even the Galaxy Note 3 has the Snapdragon 800. Samsung is not exclusivly using its own chipsets and that dependency still exists and will even for their GS5...In fact the entire need to have 3 different models defeats me..i can understand heavy and LITE model but to have 2-3 different chips is absurd. I think MOST OF COMPONENTS is rather stretching it as the SOFTWARE is probably the most important form the end user prospective.
Apple designs most of its components..For a consumer/user who designs it has a much bigger bearing on device integration and optimization then who builds it..Who builds it is a function of business strategy and economics and has abslolutely no bearing on the consumer. Apple has tight control on the ability of its processors, the software (perhaps the largest contributer to user expereience) and the overall design. The shape the A7 takes was closely based on the direction IOS is heading towards and this will continue in the future aswell. Samsung should have had an Android competitor by now considering that they are the largest mobile company in the world while apple which is much smaller interms of product lineup and sales still has its own OS even for a one device (essentialy) product line.
So basically what your saying is that Apple will enter markets once they are already established.
Depends what your definition of ESTABLISHED is. The tablet market could be called established by some before the ipad but then once the ipad I dust settled no one could really fathom what size and scope the market would eventually end up having. The Pre-Ipad market was nowhere in scope or size as the post-ipad market, and the ipad was in the sense the innovative device that set the market ablaze..Was it more risky of a gamble than the first tablet? I guess that comes down to what you or I consider as risky investments and market innovation. To each his own !
Which is essentially what I already said.
I think you tried to draw a correlation between risk and innovation with a eye on FIRST TO MARKET ability. In Business first to market is not as important as RIGHT PRODUCT FOR MARKET..If the iPhablet is launched and increases the market size for phablets by 3x the iPhablet would be that innovative product that stood out lit the market on fire. The Note or other devices may be called first to market but if that does happen (iPhablet ignites the market in terms of sales) then the iPhablet would for ever be that ONE DEVICE which would be remembered as the innovative product in the history of phablets. This is how it has always been in the business of consumer electronics. No one cares for statistics and historic facts (although samsung does deserve credit here for showing the ability of phablets) its that one market making device that earns a ton of revenue for its developer that gets all the attention! Just as the iPod did for portable music players, the iPhone did for modern touchscreen smartphones and iPad did for Tablets..None of these were first to market but all three of these are iconic devices that are considered the benchmark for all comparison in their respective product categories...
Risk is a very overrated term and often confused with inovation. Samsung would not like to take any risk whatsoever if they could manage without it. For apple not diversifying into cheaper phones could be considered a big risk going into the future..A lot of OEM's were forced to look at niche market segments and an anti-apple market strategy to combat apple's huge success with just one physical iPhone..Samsung played to its strenghts of offering large selection of phones (Apple was a ONE phone mobile company whereas samsung was an established incumbant with a diverse portfolio and infrastructure to boot)..."
Apple makes One size..So We'll make 3 or even 4"..Apple makes permium smart-phones.."
We'll continue to make feature phones and smartphones for all price points"...This is not RISK and INNOVATION its simply a business strategy...which is different from that of apple. Two completely different business/economic strategies for two different companies. Both are succesfull for the OEM (although samsung just posted less than stellar numbers a few days ago)...Apple has a long and consistant track record of doing a few devices and not worrying about market share..They continued with MAC despite of PC OEM's offering a long diverse product portfolio at various price points..PC market share kept on climbing..Apple did not care..and kept doing what it did well.
One must also remember that Apple is into its 7th year of Mobile phone business..So a lot of its business logistics are ramping up and being ironed out given that each subsequent year they have grown tremendously...If apple decides to diversify its product portfolio in mobile phones, the logistics would take years to fall in place...Thats just the nature of business..It takes time !
I don't think Samsung has a problem with 'massive price fluctuations'. Their approach, for now, is to offer a smartphone in any size you can imagine and see how the consumer reacts to said choices.
Which any businessman would tell you is a strategy best avoided if possible. The best business practice is to have maximum revenue from fewest possible products/devices..This creates the smallest possible logistical footprint and thereby reduces cost and increases profits. If Samsung could cut its product lineup in half and retain revenue they'd do it without blinking. Offering Choices does not = Innovation..Its simply a market strategy to maximize revenue even if that puts pressure on the bottom line in the long run... One may say that the "consumer benefits..so screw samsung's bottom line" however, as an OEM their ability to take large ammount of risk and innovate with market capturing devices may take a severe dent if their bottom line suffers because of a less than optimum bussiness strategy of increasing product portfolio to increase sales.
Price fluctuations will naturally occcur if you keep on changing things around. If someone spent 300$ on a Smartwatch in october and finds out in the media from a samsung exec that it was not very good and a referesh is comming in Feb-march then that person would damn well be pissed
..What value is that smartwatch going to hold? Same with Galaxy S4..Launched in april 2013..Feb 2014 we'll see a GS5 which is totally different..That GS4 is gone interms of price...This may not matter in the lower price brackets but it does to the premium consumer..You want your value to hold for some time..not take a nose dive in 10 months when something totally different comes out...This is why i think apple's 2 year external appearence refresh cycle is smart because premium products need to hold their value...Car makers do the same..
