Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Again Trails Market in Smartphone Growth, but Closes on Nokia in Overall Mobile Phones
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Intentionally or not you've included tablet in your calculations. This raise the average price of the devices Samsung sells while lowering the average price of the device Apple sells. Almost all iPhones cost more than iPads while except few flagship devices phones by Samsung always cost less than their tablets. You should compare phones to phones.
But what patents does the Galaxy Note 3 breach according to Apple? Because surely if its wireless radios etc then those are in the lower end models too.
Yes, I only see people with Galaxy Notes or S4 or S5 etc. I like to be different with my Nexus 5. But you hardly see people with the cheaper Samsung handsets.
I said that the smartphone hardware is profitable. Can't help it if the companies building them blow it on other expenses, or blow their opportunities by other means.
Look at HTC. They looked like they had it made, but then came out with too many confusing models, too many carrier exclusives, and some wacky failures like the Facebook phone.
Perhaps most importantly, HTC spends a tiny fraction of what Samsung and Apple do on advertising... and even blew that. Good grief, they got Ironman Robert Downey to do ads, and still came out with totally unmemorable ones.
(That's pretty much the same path that Palm took with the Pre: a long exclusive on Sprint (thus blowing the chance for huge Verizon sales), and ads that were expensive and artistic, but otherwise worthless.)
Actually, LG just posted growing profits. Also, 30% of smartphone revenues these days are in China, where companies make slim, but viable, profits.
There's no doubt that average selling prices are going down. Even Apple's ASPs have been historically low (for them) because the iPhone 4S sells well. The high end market has apparently reached saturation, and it appears that growth going forward, is in selling lots of less expensive phones with lower per-unit profits.
Thanks, glad to be of service.
----------
Just trying to share an observation.
----------
It's interesting to hear of groups where most phones are Android, clearly they must exist as the sales statistic show those phones are being sold in large numbers. I just don't know who they are. The two people I know with Android phones, one got the large screen Samsung 'cause they wanted a larger screen and the other wanted the cheapest smart phone he could find. I know one person with a Nokia because he's always had Nokia and is brand loyal. It was also very cheap and he didn't want to spend much as his phones are frequently killed getting wet (professional sailor) so need to be cheap and replaceable. When I was in Asia I saw more Samsung phones but iPhone was still more than 50% of the market that I observed.
The iPhone just isn't for everyone. Some people will always prefer a few things that Apple doesn't have. Personally, I choose Apple for the ease of integration between my Macs, iPhones, iPads and Apple TVs. Not just mine but my daughters. There's no difficulty, they just work.
Wow, you just can't stop flaming your ignorance around here can you?
That quote is from Picasso, and Jobs used it in an interview in 1994. For those of you like apolloa who apparently don't have any background in art history (I've taken 6 art history courses, so I think that's enough qualification for a damn forum) allow me to explain: Picasso's quote meant that like ALL artists before and after him, they borrow from those who came before them. There are elements in all art that have been used before. Nothing is truly 100% new. But the distinction is that great artists are those who run away with (steal) an idea. They take it and make it their own (steal). They transform it into something great and different (it is now theirs, they stole it). Hardly anyone would make the claim that Picasso wasn't a great artist. But he also isn't a thief in the traditional sense. Neither is Steve Jobs. If you can't understand the nuance involved in this quote, then there's nothing else I can do to educate your ignorance of history. However I do hope you choose to read up on it yourself, as it's quite an interesting topic and a great point of discussion among artists for hundreds of years.
Unlike Apple, Samsung took what they saw Apple doing and duplicated it like a counterfeit bill. I conducted a quick search, and here is just a small sampling detailing just a few of the duplicates:
http://www.imore.com/sites/imore.com/files/images/stories/2011/09/TmUj2.jpg
http://macdailynews.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/120601_samsung_ripoff.jpg
http://www.todaysiphone.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/samsung-smart-case-for-galaxy-tab-image-005-e1311015457714.jpg
http://cdn.mactrast.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Samsung-Icons-3.jpeg
And lastly, Samsung has been doing this for quite a while:
http://static2.businessinsider.com/image/4dae0b044bd7c8eb6f200000-480/motorola-q-vs-samsung-blackjack.jpg
I wonder if Tim Cook has been doing the same while sitting on the Nike board of directors? After all, Nike has been in the fitness business in some way shape or form since before Apple existed. And now all of a sudden Apple is coming out with fitness apps and hiring in that area amid strong rumors of a watch with fitness functionality.
Unlike Google, Apple is actually partnering with them. Apple does things on a long-range timeline. For instance, early iPad prototypes were being developed back around 2004 and led to the iPhone project. You don't think Cook has been talking about this with the Nike execs for a long time? The iWatch project likely started 5 years ago. Apple CREATED Nike's fitness platform with their Nike + iPod integration in 2006! It wasn't just Nike, it was a collaboration between the two companies building the hardware, software, and ecosystem using their website to connect users who enjoy running with people who like different types of music. Without Apple Nike wouldn't have likely entered into this space because back then there wasn't another semi-smart device that had the market share of the iPod that they could partner with to send this data. It was only later they came out with a sport band. And now Nike has shut down their wearable hardware division to focus on software integration with other platforms. Hmmm I wonder why? Because they've inked a deal to be a launch partner on the iWatch device. This comparison that you've made is completely ridiculous once you look at this history and circumstantial evidence available today.
You can take 6 or hundreds of art history courses and spin it anyway you want but stealing is stealing. Apple, Samsung, and almost all companies are guilty of stealing.
Of course. It's always different when Apple does what they accuse others of.
But he certainly has made a compelling argument. I suppose if you consider making running shoes as part of the fitness business, even though its not very intuitive before the partnership.
Last edited:
My co-worker just bought a "Smart"phone for $40, and it sucks, so again, a chart of +$450 smartphones would be nice. You don't compare the quality and performance of a $200,000 car to a $20,000 car and ten point out that the $20,000 must be better because they sold more, and still take yourself seriously. Likewise you don't compare premium priced $+450 phone sales to the sales of phones that go for fractions of the price, and suggest that it's a fair and objective comparison. That's the point I made, and it's entirely valid, regardless of how absurd you'd like it to be.
Car analogies never work here.
Also - I would argue that "better" is subjective. Because If Company A sells X number of units and Company B sells Y number of units which is less than X - then the market has decided which is "better" for them. That's regardless of quality of the product. More people wanting your product is a good thing. That's not to discount Apple, their craftsmanship, their price point, etc.
# of sales is also not, unto itself, a deciding factor of success either. A point I brought up earlier in this thread.
Remember Betamax vs VHS? The better format wasn't the most popular and faded into oblivion.
Yes, the market share is way more important to the smartphone industry than the automobile industry, since the majority of the functionality comes from 3rd party apps and website supports. If Apples market share keeps dropping and Windows Phone market share doesnt catch up quickly enough, eventually a lot of the small developers will only produce their free apps for Android and test their mobile websites against Android. By that time, the iPhone experience will become subpar and start to lose even more customer.
Ok... that article I posted was from just 3 months ago. Are all Android handset manufacturers profitable now?
If they build phones... but can't make money selling those phones... that speaks to a larger issue.
Oh... and the iPhone 4S sells well?
All sales estimates I've seen are:
85% iPhone 5S
10% iPhone 5C
5% iPhone 4S
I believe the iPhone ASP is still around $600
iPhone ASP was $577 at the end of last year... but rose to $613 during the first quarter of this year.
With the overwhelming majority of sales being the iPhone 5S ranging from $650 to $850... I can see why.
----------
That's true. Everybody "steals"
But it only becomes a problem when someone steals by infringing patents, copyrights, trademarks or trade dress.
Of course. It's always different when Apple does what they accuse others of.
It is funny isn't it.
It's hilarious just how much some have been brain washed by Apple to an extent.blah blah.... Apple is renowned to copy everyone else's ideas and put them in it's own products, if you can't see that then more fool you.
I guess that good ol Apple RDF is affecting you as you listen to these ridiculous excused from Apple executives:
Apple's Bud Tribble: "If you take something and make it your own ... it's your design and that is the dividing line between copying and stealing. That is part of Apple's DNA."
Yeah right..... when Samsung does the same thing it's copying, when Apple does it it's totally different... yeah right.
http://www.cnet.com/uk/news/what-st...e-said-good-artists-copy-great-artists-steal/
I just laugh at all you lot attempting to twist the meaning of what Jobs said, it's really rather funny....
Do you want me to post links to the actual first smartphone that had slide to unlock? And the news reports how because of this device Apple lost it's claims against HTC copying them because the judge stated Apple had already copied the idea? Or are you going to 'conveniently' forget about that? And that's just one example.
Or perhaps I should post the remarkable similarities between iOS's notification system and Androids notification system, now guess which of those was first, hint it wasn't Apple.
But to be honest, can't be bothered with this argument anymore on this thread, you believe what ever you want, I will know what I know and see what I see. But my opinion is not ignorance just because you refuse to see it any other way which is ignorance.
Last edited:
I doubt it. But I think they're starting to figure out what's popular.
(It's not just inexpensive phones that sell best. Apparently mid-range is quite popular, as people do want something for their money.)
I was going by that oft repeated AI article which claimed the 5C was outselling Android phones and was not a flop. It used these estimated values to "prove" it:
62.5% 5S
25.0% 5C
12.5% 4S
(Funny how estimates are made fun of, unless it supports someone's agenda.)
Or when someone gets a patent or trademark that they shouldn't, and use them as weapons.
Infringing doesn't require any stealing, at least in the case of patents.
Yeah... let's hope they figure it out.
There are 30-40 companies making smartphones... but only 2 or 3 making money. That's not sustainable.
62.5% seems too low for any current iPhone... especially one like the iPhone 5S with stuff like TouchID. The differences between the 5S and 5C are even more pronounced than the models in previous years.
Like I've said... all I've ever seen is about 85% for whatever the current model is. (maybe from Asymco)
But who knows for sure... only Apple does
As for weaponized patents... it's apparently very easy to patent just about anything.
I don't know why everybody doesn't do it.
What kind of statement is that? It demonstrates that even though a $200,000 c is more desirable to most than a $20,000 car, most people don't go around buying them because they can't afford one which is directly synonymous to cell phones in poorer countries. It worked fine.
The market has, in that scenario, determined which phone is more valuable which may be better from a practical economic perspective, particularly in poorer parts of the world, but that doesn't mean that the capacity of the product itself is better, which they clearly aren't. My post clearly stated that I would like to see a chart of the premium phone sales, thus implying that the quality and the capacity of the devices in question were the measures by which I was determining which device was better.
I never said it was. You can certainly make crappy products, or lose money on every sale right into bankruptcy.
Yes. Less market share means less future growth. And I'd say that Samsung competes with Apple more than Audi and Honda compete. It's more like Hyundai vs Mercedes since Hyndai is making knockoff Merecedes cars that are actually in the luxury car market.
----------
AAC vs MP3. AAC is literally just MP3 but better, but somehow people are using MP3.
Apple fans should stop using the ridiculous car analogy. It is just plain stupid.
Firstly the cheapest car cost you more than a few thousands which is much more than the most expensive iphone.
Secondly even if you desire a Ferrari to most people no matter what they do they cannot buy one. Almost anyone can buy an iPhone if they so fanatically desire.
The main reason people don't buy iphone is because to many it is just overpriced for what it is worth and there are better alternatives.
Firstly the cheapest car cost you more than a few thousands which is much more than the most expensive iphone.
Secondly even if you desire a Ferrari to most people no matter what they do they cannot buy one. Almost anyone can buy an iPhone if they so fanatically desire.
The main reason people don't buy iphone is because to many it is just overpriced for what it is worth and there are better alternatives.
Car analogies doesn't work because a premium phone is not like a Ferrari compared to other smartphones.