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 Passes Nokia and Holds Off Samsung to Become World's Top Smartphone Vendor
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Not surprised at all at both Samsung and Apple. Apple sells 2 iphone models (4/3GS) across 2/1 capacities (16/32/8) running iOS. Samsung sells a boat load of different phones: dumb and smart. Among its smart phones they run Android, Windows Mobile, and some proprietary O/S (pre-Andriod).
Samsung has practically a smartphone for every single price point and most affordability levels as well as phones at competitive Apple prices.
Call me cheap, but 7+ years ago, I refused to pay anymore than $50 for a subsidized phone. I considered anything over $100 subsidized to be expensive! Fast forward a few years, I'm standing in line paying $499 [unsubsidized] for an iPhone 1st gen.
Fast forward again, and it seems $199/$299 [subsidized] on a phone is 'normal' [in the US]. That's crazy!
An analogy: Its like suddenly its normal for everyone to buy a BMW every 3 years instead of that Honda Accord/Toyota Camry every 5-10 years.
After that reflection, $199/$299 though not completely out of reach is not cheap at all! After tax, that is a several days paycheck for most people!
Can't imagine Apple can even grab 10% of the smartphone market share selling phone at these prices.
Samsung has practically a smartphone for every single price point and most affordability levels as well as phones at competitive Apple prices.
Call me cheap, but 7+ years ago, I refused to pay anymore than $50 for a subsidized phone. I considered anything over $100 subsidized to be expensive! Fast forward a few years, I'm standing in line paying $499 [unsubsidized] for an iPhone 1st gen.
Fast forward again, and it seems $199/$299 [subsidized] on a phone is 'normal' [in the US]. That's crazy!
An analogy: Its like suddenly its normal for everyone to buy a BMW every 3 years instead of that Honda Accord/Toyota Camry every 5-10 years.
After that reflection, $199/$299 though not completely out of reach is not cheap at all! After tax, that is a several days paycheck for most people!
Can't imagine Apple can even grab 10% of the smartphone market share selling phone at these prices.
It doesn't except (that Capex is not R&D) and comparing a manufacturing company to a design company is not the same.
Last edited:
You are assuming that I am trying to prove something that I'm not. The post that I responded to was baseless. I provided indirect evidence that it was probably not true.
Which sentence in my second paragraph is not true?
Talk about apples and honey! Obviously, Samsung does make quality products. When did I ever say otherwise? I have several of them.
Good catch! When looking up the numbers, I saw multiple reference to Samsung having an R&D budget of 20x Apple, so when I saw these numbers, I assumed they were in the ballpark. So we are really looking at around $7 billion in R&D investment by Samsung.
Their mobile/telecomm business is around 25% of their revenues. So if we make the (admittedly unsupported) assumption that they divide up there R&D in proportion to revenues, then we are around the same figure as Apple's total R&D budget.
Based on that, I think it is a reasonable guess (not proof) that Samsung spends more on mobile/telecomm R&D than Apple.
No s*it, Sherlock!
Exactly....the iPhone isn't even a phone. Heck, all "smartphones" aren't even phones...their computer devices that let the users do hundreds of things, 1 of them being able to make a phone call. I would bet that if you looked at the average usage of a smartphone was like 10% for actually making a call. So add up all the hours a day/week you use your smartphone and I would say 10% of that time was actually on the phone.
As far as I am aware, the only real smartphones out there have been iPhone, Android, and Blackberry.
I can't see BB lasting...I've never liked it (even years before I got my 3GS)...and I'm no fanboy. My wife has had 2-3 BBs since 2004 and I've never liked them all all...even for making a call.
Android, however, seems really nice. I'd like to get the new iPhone X this fall if the features/price is justified...otherwise I may try Android if there is a better deal.
correct, from those numbers Samsung spends alot more on R&D than Apple, the break down, however, is not shown.
... another way to put it is: Samsung = Apple + Foxconn + component suppliers. What is not shown is how much of Samsung's R&D went into design (specifically of their phones/tablets design).
love it
apple just keeps moving on up
Wait till the fall when IOS 5 hits, gonna be mass hysteria
apple just keeps moving on up
Wait till the fall when IOS 5 hits, gonna be mass hysteria
If I am not mistaken, U.S. sales account for only 30% of total iPhone sales. So your comment is not really accurate.
Rise of the iPhones
nokia droped the ball with smart phones
nokia used to be the king of dumb phones
cant beleive we used to put up with symbian os
iphone is the game changer
survival of the fittest - natural selection
nokia droped the ball with smart phones
nokia used to be the king of dumb phones
cant beleive we used to put up with symbian os
iphone is the game changer
survival of the fittest - natural selection
Only recently true. For the first few years, ATT alone was around half of world sales... which is no doubt why Apple catered to their requests, such as limiting some apps to WiFi at first.
I believe GS2 is just starting to be sold in China. So your statement isn't quite accurate.
The GS2 is not sold in the US, so it's not like Samsung has a big advantage here.
And seriously, the guy who said the iPhone hadn't entered the chinese market was on some kind of good stuff :
http://store.apple.com/cn/browse/home/shop_iphone/family/iphone?mco=MTAyNTQzMjI
The iPhone has been in China for I think a year now.
No, you didnt even provide us with an indication, as it is impossible to draw from the data the amount that either actor pushes into R&D for the technology in question. This is the second time you have forced me to write this. Please, dont make me write it a third time.
From the top of my head you conclude from the data that "Apple is more efficient in their R&D", a conclusion you are not able to make given the data provided. Read that last sentence again so it sticks.
You may not, but others have; and, you have stated that Apple is more efficient in R&D than Samsung, then why rely on their R&D to provide for their hardware? Why not develop it themselves? That, if anything, would give them a true competitive advantage in the market.
Last part not written to me, but i feel the need to comment anyway by saying its nice that you at least recognize that your assumption is indeed baseless (and thus irrelevant speculation).
Those headlines are for a specific period of time... usually during the launch week of the Galaxy S II... vs the iPhone 4 which has been out for almost a year.
Every time a new phone comes out it "outsells" the iPhone. The same thing was said when the original Galaxy S came out.
But if you look at the chart at the top of the page... Apple still sold more smartphones than Samsung in Q2... and they did so in previous quarters as well.
So... those headlines were sensational and short-lived.
Says who? You?
If you think Apple simply suing somehow proves Samsung's guilty of patent infringement, then Apple is guilty of patent infringement, since Samsung is also claiming Apple infringed on Samsung's patents. Now we all know that's not true.
GS1 (yes GS1) outsold iphone4 in Japana
http://phandroid.com/2010/11/04/sam...axy-tab-expected-to-sell-1-million-this-year/
The 3 million was from the LAST 2- 3 months of last year. And that doesn't even include US and China. And about GPS, GPS on SG2 is supposedly the fastest now.
What's even more amazing samsung achieved that # when it's not even being sold in US.
http://www.unwiredview.com/2011/05/27/samsung-galaxy-s-ii-outselling-iphone-4-in-the-uk/
They don't need 10%
Why do you assume marketshare is the most important thing to a company?
The "marketshare race" is something that WE invented.
The side-effect of Android being on so many phones by a dozen manufacturers is that it will gain marketshare by default.
Apple doesn't chase that.
Maybe you should try and understand what I am saying rather than repeating yourself.
Apple doesn't have an advantage in R&D spending over Samsung. However much Samsung chooses to allocate to smartphone research is up to them. Their choice. The poster I responded to said that Apple had an advantage because of the amount of money they could allocate to a single smartphone. As the numbers show, Samsung could do the same thing.
That's all. No offer of proof on who spends more on smartphone R&D.
No, I said Apple is better at R&D than Samsung. That's an opinion. Not a false statement. One that would be hard to argue if we are still limiting the discussion to smartphone R&D.
Because, they don't want to? Is that a trick question?
Circumstantial evidence is not irrelevant. It's just not proof. And the numbers were very relevant to the point that I was trying to make, as opposed to the point that you think I am trying to make.
Last edited:
Really? Samsung's hot new phone can't compete with an iPhone over a year old. ...
ehe well I can say this much: Been here since 2003 and can tell you Apples popularity with the iDevices didn't do this forum any favors. With all the anti and pro arguments re-hash with the same same BS over and over and over and over again.
Show me one post from the past 3 months that actually really contributes anything to any piece of news or argument and I give you $10 because all I can se if too many people looking for excuse to tell someone they are wrong.
Show me one post from the past 3 months that actually really contributes anything to any piece of news or argument and I give you $10 because all I can se if too many people looking for excuse to tell someone they are wrong.
"No one" except Steve Ballmer who is poking Nokia with a stick and not laughing about Apple's iPhone any more. There's a guy who is wishing he'd bought a clue about the smart phone market before it exploded in his face.
Nokia is NOT completely going down the crapper. A real cell phone pioneer and innovator with a deeper patent portfolio in cell phone technology and has been around well before Apple, Microsoft, and Google ever existed will still get paid royalties from Apple.
Nokia has over 10,000 patents.
Rhttp://www.tipb.com/2011/06/14/nokia-apple-lawsuit-settled-apple-pays/
Nokia vs Apple lawsuit settled
It looks as though Nokia and Apple have finally come to an agreement over the lawsuit they have been involved in since late 2009, with Apple agreeing to pay licensing fees for key Nokia patents. Originally, Nokia claimed that Apple had infringed on almost two dozen of their patents for mobile technologies. Apple argued that Nokia was demanding "unfair" licensing fees and didn't want to pay more than other companies licensing the same technology, then counter sued for UI and computer-related patents. Complaints flew back and forth, and now the end result of the lawsuit was that Apple has to pay Nokia a lump some of of cash on top of royalties for the term of the agreement with Nokia.
The financial structure of the agreement consists of a one-time payment payable by Apple and on-going royalties to be paid by Apple to Nokia for the term of the agreement. The specific terms of the contract are confidential.
"We are very pleased to have Apple join the growing number of Nokia licensees," said Stephen Elop, president and chief executive officer of Nokia. "This settlement demonstrates Nokia's industry leading patent portfolio and enables us to focus on further licensing opportunities in the mobile communications market."
Apple having to pay Nokia was never really in question. The argument was over how much. Nokia's patents were in a pool that was supposed to be freely and fairly licensed to everyone. Apple felt Nokia was violating the letter and spirit of that by asking more of Apple. Whether or not Apple eventually got the same terms as other licensees, or whether they did have to pay up more, is still a question.
Apple also remains in litigation with the three top Android makers, HTC, Samsung, and Motorola. For now, Nokia is no longer in litigation with anyone.
UPDATE: Apple has issued a statement to the New York Times [NYT]:
"Apple and Nokia have agreed to drop all of our current lawsuits and enter into a license covering some of each other's patents, but not the majority of the innovation that makes the iPhone unique," Apple said. "We are glad to put this behind us and get back to focusing on our respective businesses."
Nokia has over 10,000 patents.
Rhttp://www.tipb.com/2011/06/14/nokia-apple-lawsuit-settled-apple-pays/
Nokia vs Apple lawsuit settled
It looks as though Nokia and Apple have finally come to an agreement over the lawsuit they have been involved in since late 2009, with Apple agreeing to pay licensing fees for key Nokia patents. Originally, Nokia claimed that Apple had infringed on almost two dozen of their patents for mobile technologies. Apple argued that Nokia was demanding "unfair" licensing fees and didn't want to pay more than other companies licensing the same technology, then counter sued for UI and computer-related patents. Complaints flew back and forth, and now the end result of the lawsuit was that Apple has to pay Nokia a lump some of of cash on top of royalties for the term of the agreement with Nokia.
The financial structure of the agreement consists of a one-time payment payable by Apple and on-going royalties to be paid by Apple to Nokia for the term of the agreement. The specific terms of the contract are confidential.
"We are very pleased to have Apple join the growing number of Nokia licensees," said Stephen Elop, president and chief executive officer of Nokia. "This settlement demonstrates Nokia's industry leading patent portfolio and enables us to focus on further licensing opportunities in the mobile communications market."
Apple having to pay Nokia was never really in question. The argument was over how much. Nokia's patents were in a pool that was supposed to be freely and fairly licensed to everyone. Apple felt Nokia was violating the letter and spirit of that by asking more of Apple. Whether or not Apple eventually got the same terms as other licensees, or whether they did have to pay up more, is still a question.
Apple also remains in litigation with the three top Android makers, HTC, Samsung, and Motorola. For now, Nokia is no longer in litigation with anyone.
UPDATE: Apple has issued a statement to the New York Times [NYT]:
"Apple and Nokia have agreed to drop all of our current lawsuits and enter into a license covering some of each other's patents, but not the majority of the innovation that makes the iPhone unique," Apple said. "We are glad to put this behind us and get back to focusing on our respective businesses."
Fact of the matter is, i dont think you understand what you are saying. It certainly doesnt look like it so far.
They might, but we cannot make any such statements given the accessible data. In fact, it doesnt even allow for an educated guess.
You finally get it. And yet you say things like the following sentence:
No, that is a statement. The statement might be based of your opinion, i.e. pulled out of your ass, but its nonetheless a statement. The statement may not be false, but it has shown to be baseless and the data provided to support the claim are non-indicative and thus irrelevant.
Second, "being better at R&D", and "being more efficient at R&D" aren't really miles apart, are they?
No, i was stupid enough to think that you could fill in the blanks yourself, then the classic quote by Scar came to mind. It usually does when discussing things with people online.
In essence, this is a make-or-buy decision (Google it and you might learn something). In the end, Apple would be retarded not "making" simply "because, they dont want to". More likely, the answer is "because buying is (read: seems like) the better option"; i.e., when simplified, because Samsung is better at what they are doing then Apple is (e.g. producing SSD:s and LCD:s -- Apple buys the latter from LG though i guess, i would too).
It is irrelevant. Both from a scientific point-of-view, and a non-scientific dito. You can not draw any conclusions (relevant to the discussion) from the data in question. Simple as that. If that doesnt make them irrelevant, i dont know what will.
You forgot about all the arguments bout "if you dont like it, leave" as if we - the consumers - are not allowed to have opinions on how to make a device better once we agree to buy it.
I bet some people would back decisions to put a poop dispenser in the iDevice, in place of, say, a hard-drive, as long as Jobs signed off on it. "poop dispensers are the future, no one needs hard-drives anymore! Apple must be right, go buy crappy windows!"
Sigh, having been here just over a month i truly feel for you. Talk about ruined potential.