Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Since they still sell the 4S - they have two sized phones now, don't they. That day has "come"

You know what I mean: offering new models in screen sizes comparable to the HTC One X, GSIII, etc.

You didn't respond to the part talking about more choices lead to more marketshare. I take it, that you are admitting, that you were wrong then. :p

No biggie, though ;)
 
How many smartphones does Samsung cutrently sell..? A lot VS. 3 (4,4s,5) that apple is currently selling. How can there possibly be a comparison here?


The number of models Samsung sells compared to Apple is irrelevant. 99% of consumers own one phone. If they choose the iPhone, it's irrelevant how many models Samsung offer. If they choose a Samsung, it doesn't matter how many models they offer because at the end of the day, it still only counts as one.
 
Between unit sales and profit is revenue. If company A sells 5 phones for $100 each, and company B sells 1 phone for $500, the revenue is the same. According to Apple's numbers yesterday, their revenue growth in the smartphone market was 58%, while the overall market revenue grew by 30something% only.

Apple keeps all the fandroids happy by selling only expensive phones, while millions and millions buy the cheapest possible Android phone to make phone calls, never using them as a smartphone. It is quite obvious when you look at the overall phone unit sales that Apple has enormous growth. There is a switch from people buying $100 smart phones instead of $100 feature phones, which gives the fandroids something to cheer, but doesn't affect Apple at all.

I keep seeing people post about "cheap phones" in reference to Samsung, but I can't see where that is coming from. The popular phones by Samsung cost the same or considerably more than an iPhone. The iPhone 4s is free with a two years contract, and the iPhone 5 is typically $199 (us)... the same as most new Samsung smartphones. Some, such as the Galaxy Note II are considerably more expensive than iPhone. So how does "cheap" factor in when the iPhone is as cheap or cheaper in most instances.
 
Last edited:
You didn't respond to the part talking about more choices lead to more marketshare. I take it, that you are admitting, that you were wrong then. :p

It's more like more price points lead to more market share. Not everyone can afford an iPhone or are willing to spend a lot for a phone.
 
You know what a mean: offering new models in screen sizes comparable to the HTC One X, GSIII, etc.

You didn't respond to the part talking about more choices lead to more marketshare. I take it, that you are admitting, that you were wrong then. :p

No biggie, though ;)

Well I concede that it matters (to a degree). Although I would argue that for many - the operating system/ecosystem is the bigger deciding factor for a lot.

I think a lot of people go into a store wanting an iPhone. They don't come out with anything but an iPhone. I think some people go in not knowing what they want and will get what appeals to them. And of course, other people go in wanting Android - and then have a varied selection.

I honestly believe that iPhone is more ubiquitous (IE - when when people want an MP3 player - they, most often want an iPod simply because it's the "standard" of MP3 players.)

So when I make that comment about walking into the store - I do believe a lot of the time it's more about iPhone or not iPhone vs specs. Naturally - this is my .02.
 
I keep seeing people post about "cheap phones" in reference to Samsung, but I can't see where that is coming from. The popular phones by Samsung cost the same or considerably more than an iPhone. The iPhone 4s is free with a two years contract, and the iPhone 5 is typically $199 (us)... the same as most new Samsung smartphones. Some, such as the Galaxy Note II are considerable more expensive than iPhone. So how does "cheap" factor in when the iPhone is as cheap or cheaper in most instances.

It's called spin. Some here cannot fathom how another company may make good products. I seems their personal self worth is tied to their consumer electronics choice.
 
It's more like more price points lead to more market share. Not everyone can afford an iPhone or are willing to spend a lot for a phone.

You realize that a lot of Android phones are the same or cost more? And that with earlier models of the iPhone - someone can spend $0 to get an iPhone - just like with a lot of Android phones.

That argument really holds less water now that there are many iterations of the iPhone and entry points.
 
Who told you that?

Shipments don't mean Sales...big difference. Key words from the report...

With Samsung still declining to release official sales number, IDC estimated the company's smartphone shipments at 56.3 million during the quarter,

When companies refuse to report sales numbers but instead report 'shipments'...all that means is that they shipped a bunch of phones to retailers...doesn't mean the retailers SOLD them and the retailers can return unsold units.

Perfect example was the HP Touchpad that shipped 1+ million...in truth, they sold something like 30K before the firesale took place.

----------

It's called spin. Some here cannot fathom how another company may make good products. I seems their personal self worth is tied to their consumer electronics choice.

Samsung makes tons of 'cheap' phones...just check out the pay as you go section.
 
Well I concede that it matters (to a degree). Although I would argue that for many - the operating system/ecosystem is the bigger deciding factor for a lot.

I think a lot of people go into a store wanting an iPhone. They don't come out with anything but an iPhone. I think some people go in not knowing what they want and will get what appeals to them. And of course, other people go in wanting Android - and then have a varied selection.

I honestly believe that iPhone is more ubiquitous (IE - when when people want an MP3 player - they, most often want an iPod simply because it's the "standard" of MP3 players.)

So when I make that comment about walking into the store - I do believe a lot of the time it's more about iPhone or not iPhone vs specs. Naturally - this is my .02.

Fair enough. Some valid points.
 
Mainstream Android user does not care about "the latest release of the OS". They don't even know the difference. Only geeks care.

Also, Android OS is initially more mature and 2-3 years ahead of iOS so Android upgrades are not as importnat as iOS upgrades.

For instance Android had such important features - Copy/Paste, multitasking, resolution independent UI, notifications, voice command, folders - since version 1.0.
iOS is on the other hand always half-baked. Apple made big deal of these OS features releasing some of them as late as iOS6.


Main stream users do care when they try to download an app but can't because their OS version is too old. I've had many friends with brand new Android phones that couldn't play Angry Birds or some other app. They cared and were upset that they couldn't upgrade their phones.

iOS might not have had all features from version 1, but the OS was never considered half-baked. It always run smoothly and ran well.


But if you want to talk about half-baked / half-assed features...

Android's copy and paste originally only worked in editable text fields.
Touch input only worked in parts of the OS and multi-touch didn't come until later.

Android 3.x was a complete dud, it only ever appeared on a handful of devices that no one used.

The entire user interface was scrapped and redone after the iPhone was introduced. Before becoming an iPhone knock-off, it was a Blackberry knock-off.

And... The first product that shipped with Android did so a year and a half after the iPhone.


But yeah, iOS is years behind because Android had a notification manager first. Whatever.

If you're going to brag about who had what first... Apple had a device on the market running their OS first, so Google pretty much had to catch up to Apple from the very beginning and it took them 18 months to do so with a half-assed attempt at best. Yeah, that T-Mobile G1 set the world on fire! It took another 18 months before Android based devices started selling in any real numbers. And it only took off because Microsoft and Nokia were lumbering dinosaurs that moved too damned slow to update their operating systems.
 
My 2-1/2 year old IP4 with iOS6 has a hell of a lot more of the current features than ANY 1 year or older 2.X Android.

thats not a fair comparison

a better comparison would be a an android phone that is 2 years old that has been upgraded to ICS/JB (the latest software, samme as you are comparing)

Galaxy SIII I think came out with ICS, when the Galaxy SII got ICS, what features where missing from it

But I am curious, what has iOS6 on iPhone 4 got that android 2.x hasn't
 
Shipments don't mean Sales...big difference. Key words from the report...

With Samsung still declining to release official sales number, IDC estimated the company's smartphone shipments at 56.3 million during the quarter,

When companies refuse to report sales numbers but instead report 'shipments'...all that means is that they shipped a bunch of phones to retailers...doesn't mean the retailers SOLD them and the retailers can return unsold units.

Perfect example was the HP Touchpad that shipped 1+ million...in truth, they sold something like 30K before the firesale took place.

----------



Samsung makes tons of 'cheap' phones...just check out the pay as you go section.

We're talking about smartphones here. Where are the cheap ones? And are the cheapest cheaper than Free?
 
IPhone selling very bad in Korea. Oriental know how to fighting by hitting you in pocket book. Look at Japan and China. Chinese fight by not buying Japeses products. Doing much damage to Japan economy. This only small sample but if all China not buy they will taking long time recover. Apple should carefully decide better to negotiate then to suing.

Clearly you are unbiased..

:rolleyes:
 
You are cherry-picking "tests". In any case, when Android phone "plastic cover go flying off", typically the phone does not crack. An iPhone 4 would crack most of the time.

They were the only tests I could find and one of them was posted by an android site ;)

In pretty much all the tests the iphone never cracked until they slammed it down multiple times
 
Clearly they are doing something right.

Bingo, I'm all Apple with phones and tablets, IOS is fine to me.

Obviously Apple "knows better" than me regarding screen size...... right?

I would dump my 5 in a heart beat for a larger screen. Clearly folks are speaking with their pocket books, and it seems like they are preferring Samsung even though the OS isn't even the current Android version.

On one hand Apple says that the iPhone must be able to operate with one hand to justify the tall skinny form, then they say the iPad Mini is the right size to operate with one hand.... sheeze. We'll see what the 6 looks like.
 
Since they still sell the 4S - they have two sized phones now, don't they. That day has "come"

Sort of... Apple offers have TINY and MINI.

iPhone 5 has the same screen size/RAM size as Galaxy Mini.
 
Last edited:
Do you have a point? Are you really suggesting that people should only post in Mac threads because they don't have or like the iPhone?

Yes I have a point, he posted that he doesn't care about anything on this site other than mac products, yet he was caring enough to post on an iphone thread.

Are you happy that I gave you my point now?
 
Makes me wonder if you're actually a developer.

Whilst I can't speak for iOS development, the way on Android is that you develop for the lowest API version that supports all the features your app needs, which gives you the broadest level of compatibility. There's no need to target Jelly Bean if you don't use any Jelly Bean features. You can target say Gingerbread and have your app run on anything.

And that's why I wouldn't use an Android phone. It's so fragmented that developers have incentive to target the lowest common denominator.
 
Don't manipulate the facts. It is not cheaper in most instances.

Just checked Amazon (UK):

Samsung Galaxy SIII - 379.00 GBP
iPhone 4S - 450.00 GBP.

And I'm not even talking about iPhone 5.

Are you kidding me? Talk about manipulating the facts! First, I can't find a Galaxy S3 on amazon less than $550. Aside from that, are we now talking about apple's cut or how much the consumer pays? If I buy an iPhone5 on contract, I the same as I do for a Galaxy S3. If I buy off-contract, then it's all up in the air. And again, it goes up from there. A galaxy note II is almost $700 if I go that route.
 
Last edited:
I have to agree with most of the other posts. Apple makes a really good looking product but iOS is dated. It has looked the same since day one and is just dated!

I agree that iOS doesn't do everything I need it to do!

^^ this

I have a 4S and my contract is up in March 2013. I am debating whether or not to try an Android device. The only reason I'm even considering that is because iOS looks so very dated compared to the cool things that are happening on the Android side of things.
 
Main stream users do care when they try to download an app but can't because their OS version is too old. I've had many friends with brand new Android phones that couldn't play Angry Birds or some other app. They cared and were upset that they couldn't upgrade their phones.

iOS might not have had all features from version 1, but the OS was never considered half-baked. It always run smoothly and ran well.


But if you want to talk about half-baked / half-assed features...

Android's copy and paste originally only worked in editable text fields.
Touch input only worked in parts of the OS and multi-touch didn't come until later.

Android 3.x was a complete dud, it only ever appeared on a handful of devices that no one used.

The entire user interface was scrapped and redone after the iPhone was introduced. Before becoming an iPhone knock-off, it was a Blackberry knock-off.

And... The first product that shipped with Android did so a year and a half after the iPhone.


But yeah, iOS is years behind because Android had a notification manager first. Whatever.

If you're going to brag about who had what first... Apple had a device on the market running their OS first, so Google pretty much had to catch up to Apple from the very beginning and it took them 18 months to do so with a half-assed attempt at best. Yeah, that T-Mobile G1 set the world on fire! It took another 18 months before Android based devices started selling in any real numbers. And it only took off because Microsoft and Nokia were lumbering dinosaurs that moved too damned slow to update their operating systems.

Nice try, but Angry birds was pretty much on every phone when it launched a few years ago. My 2x year old Droid X had it. Also his post was about how Android's Feature development is much more quicker than iOS. Good job sidestepping it with some crappy attempt to bash Android as a copy cat OS. Everyone borrows but more features came to Android before they came to iOS.

Keep drinking that Kool-Aid bro, hope it tastes good and enriches your life.
 
So much wrong in the below but I won't bother to school you on the truth. Clearly you have a strong bias.

I would love to know which BRAND NEW phone your MANY friends bought that could not play Angry Birds when it was released.

As for Apple and half-assed first attempts - I'd have to defer you to the many users across the globe who seem to think Apple Maps fit the bill.

Main stream users do care when they try to download an app but can't because their OS version is too old. I've had many friends with brand new Android phones that couldn't play Angry Birds or some other app. They cared and were upset that they couldn't upgrade their phones.

iOS might not have had all features from version 1, but the OS was never considered half-baked. It always run smoothly and ran well.


But if you want to talk about half-baked / half-assed features...

Android's copy and paste originally only worked in editable text fields.
Touch input only worked in parts of the OS and multi-touch didn't come until later.

Android 3.x was a complete dud, it only ever appeared on a handful of devices that no one used.

The entire user interface was scrapped and redone after the iPhone was introduced. Before becoming an iPhone knock-off, it was a Blackberry knock-off.

And... The first product that shipped with Android did so a year and a half after the iPhone.


But yeah, iOS is years behind because Android had a notification manager first. Whatever.

If you're going to brag about who had what first... Apple had a device on the market running their OS first, so Google pretty much had to catch up to Apple from the very beginning and it took them 18 months to do so with a half-assed attempt at best. Yeah, that T-Mobile G1 set the world on fire! It took another 18 months before Android based devices started selling in any real numbers. And it only took off because Microsoft and Nokia were lumbering dinosaurs that moved too damned slow to update their operating systems.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.