What have you been smoking? Galaxy S phones are dirt cheap from day one, at least here in UK.
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.
iPhone 5s Top-Selling Smartphone at All U.S. Carriers, iPhone 5c Takes Third
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What have you been smoking? Galaxy S phones are dirt cheap from day one, at least here in UK.
If you're Samsung and your top phone from early 2013 isn't outselling a phone that's pretty much from late 2012, you might be concerned.
The 5s selling better isn't a shock since every phone gets a bump at release. Samsung got one in the spring, Apple gets one now. But at those places where the 5c is selling better, yikes. Yeah, I know it "came out" a couple of months ago. But it's literally last year's tech. I get it selling to a great number of people who don't care about the top specs and want to save $100, but I'm really surprised at it outselling the S4 on some carriers.
The 5s selling better isn't a shock since every phone gets a bump at release. Samsung got one in the spring, Apple gets one now. But at those places where the 5c is selling better, yikes. Yeah, I know it "came out" a couple of months ago. But it's literally last year's tech. I get it selling to a great number of people who don't care about the top specs and want to save $100, but I'm really surprised at it outselling the S4 on some carriers.
Most carriers around the world do not lock their devices so people buy their phones unlocked which ups the phones price. Here in qatar the iphone 5c is 2200qr ($600)while the 5s is 2700qr ($740). There really isn't a difference in price. If you got 600 bucks to spend a new phone you most likely have 700 to spend.
you'd have to be a fool to buy a 5c over a 5s unless you like the colors.
Because it's still a great phone. It will still be a great phone for the next 4 years for most consumers.
----------
Siri is what it is. Apple maps has only let me down once.
This is the bigger issue for Apple. Not necessarily price, because Apple has always positioned themselves as higher-end, but more so the plain fact that they aren't selling as many iPhones as they could be.
If Apple had kept the iPhone 5 and reduced it $100 next to no one would be complaining. So basically the "high requirement" appears to be a metal case.
----------
Unless you're Google and Wall Street doesn't care if your hardware division makes a profit. I posted something the other day about the likes of Motorola, HTC, Nokia, LG, etc. not being profitable in the smartphone business. The only companies that appear to be making any profit in the smartphone space are Apple and Samsung. Hardware is getting cheaper at the expense of profitability in the chase for market share. I can't see Apple ever joining the race to the bottom crowd. If they start down that path, then it's time to replace Cook as CEO.
Should This Surprise Anyone?
I'm an Apple convert - I guess you can say I'm pro-Apple. But does this article really surprise anyone? And is it really an accurate comparison of sales? The 5S and 5C are new phones in the timeframe being discussed in the article. How long has the S4 been out? Would the 5S outsell a new S series phone during a timeframe surrounding its release? Maybe people are not buying the S4 because they are waiting for the new one. I know I'm passing on the iPhone 5S in the hopes the iPhone 6 (or whatever they call it) will have a larger display, and maybe some other new things thrown in. I guess if you're affiliated with either of these companies, you obviously care about the sales. But it seems like you can manipuate the data by picking a time period where the stats fall in your favor. That said...Go Apple!! lol
I'm an Apple convert - I guess you can say I'm pro-Apple. But does this article really surprise anyone? And is it really an accurate comparison of sales? The 5S and 5C are new phones in the timeframe being discussed in the article. How long has the S4 been out? Would the 5S outsell a new S series phone during a timeframe surrounding its release? Maybe people are not buying the S4 because they are waiting for the new one. I know I'm passing on the iPhone 5S in the hopes the iPhone 6 (or whatever they call it) will have a larger display, and maybe some other new things thrown in. I guess if you're affiliated with either of these companies, you obviously care about the sales. But it seems like you can manipuate the data by picking a time period where the stats fall in your favor. That said...Go Apple!! lol
Developers go where the money is...
First of all market share does not equal profit. Apple has followed this philosophy since the beginning. Many leading technology companies have failed by over reaching for market share and sacrificing profits. They are just ghost names now. Do Compaq, Computer City, Control Data, DEC, Egghead, RCA, Atari, Netscape, Palm, and Gateway sound familiar?
Developers go where they can make money, not where the market share is. That platform is iOS. Surveys show that iOS users are more willing to pay for apps, more willing to pay for in-app purchases, and more likely to follow ads within an app. They are more likely to pay for premium content.
Android users are less likely to pay for an app and when they do they have tools that allow them to share the app without paying additional licensing fees to the developer. They are less likely to pay for premium content.
Once Windows Phone gets more market share more developers will be crossing to that platform but not at the expense of iOS. Android will be the loser. Android is already the second class platform. Developers create apps for it solely because of the user base. When something better comes along Android will be the platform that developers won't bother with.
First of all market share does not equal profit. Apple has followed this philosophy since the beginning. Many leading technology companies have failed by over reaching for market share and sacrificing profits. They are just ghost names now. Do Compaq, Computer City, Control Data, DEC, Egghead, RCA, Atari, Netscape, Palm, and Gateway sound familiar?
Developers go where they can make money, not where the market share is. That platform is iOS. Surveys show that iOS users are more willing to pay for apps, more willing to pay for in-app purchases, and more likely to follow ads within an app. They are more likely to pay for premium content.
Android users are less likely to pay for an app and when they do they have tools that allow them to share the app without paying additional licensing fees to the developer. They are less likely to pay for premium content.
Once Windows Phone gets more market share more developers will be crossing to that platform but not at the expense of iOS. Android will be the loser. Android is already the second class platform. Developers create apps for it solely because of the user base. When something better comes along Android will be the platform that developers won't bother with.
I'm not arguing that this is not the case today. It's the future I'm worried about.
Android will keep getting better, and become less fragmented over time. Android devices will also keep getting better, offering better quality and more powerful devices at cheaper prices than iPhones.
Can Apple really stay far enough ahead, with their premium pricing strategy, to prevent market share erosion? Indefinitely? Or will we eventually reach a point where - despite being a premium brand - the market share is so small that developers begin to lose interest. At some point, something has to give.
Maps probably does work better than Siri. Most would disagree with you about Siri.
Maps has undoubtedly been improving.
Up yours Shamsung!
It's so great when one company has nigh-total control of a market! Yay stagnation!!!!! (this is what you sound like to someone that isn't a fanboy)
I wish Samsung or Nokia or Motorola or SOMEONE could come out with a phone that would knock the iPhone off of its perch, because it would mean the phone was truly innovative. It would also mean Apple would need to be truly innovative to get back on top.
Using a decade old technology is not innovation, it's iteration.
"They made the battery better, that's innovating!"
No, it's iterating. If they invented a new type of battery or a new wave of drawing power, that would be innovating.
TL;DR people on this forum have no idea what innovating means.
"talking about the statistics in the US, where most phones are bought at subsidized price, for which 5c is $99, while S4 is $199"
They are not really subsidized. Because the purchaser still pays the full price, which is extracted via the mandatory two-year contract.
And if you keep your phone for more than two years, and sign a new two year contract, you buy your "subsidized" phone twice.
"Subsidized" is a word whose meaning has been subverted for a marketing purpose.
They are not really subsidized. Because the purchaser still pays the full price, which is extracted via the mandatory two-year contract.
And if you keep your phone for more than two years, and sign a new two year contract, you buy your "subsidized" phone twice.
"Subsidized" is a word whose meaning has been subverted for a marketing purpose.
It is innovation when u take that technology and put into a device the size of an iPhone.
not really.
From the Dictionary.
you're both wrong.
Putting 64bit into an ARM cpu and then getting that into a handheld device is absolutely innovation. it hasn't been done before. This is newly introduced and a new device and method.
Putting a battery in a device isn't innovation. we've been putting batteries in mobile devices for decades.
Now, if a tech company creates a brand new battery for a mobile device thats not been seen or done before? Than that battery is innovative. But just because it's in a phone, doesn't make it innovative
Well put. Does a fingerprint sensor Count I know it's been done before but with poor implementation
overal? i'm iffy.
Have fingerprint scanners been done before? yes. So the very nature of Finger print scanning isn't itself innovative to me.
However......
Apples use of it in the iPhone is pretty innovative. nobody (as far as I can tell) has linked the use of Fingerprint scanning on a mobile device with more than just logging into the device. using it for everything that can use credentials is pretty innovative IMHO. Haven't seen anyone who's done the full blown package like they did on the 5s yes.
And there can be innovative technology used to accomplish a tasks that isn't innovative. Coming up with a brand new technological way of fingerprint scanning could be considered innovative, even if the end result is the same. However, Ot me, The Quality of the implementation is irrelevent to it's innovation.
Sure, the first person to do it might have done it buggy, that crashes and isn't that pleasurable ot use. The second guy doing the exact same thing, without the bugs, and selling millions more, doesn't automatically make the 2nd person doing it "innovative".
thats one of my biggest beefs with the fanboys on this forum. Whenever they throw the innovative buzzword around, and you show them that it really wasn't innovative caus it was done elsewhere, the typical response is "but apple did it better".
Last edited:
The first ever installation of a quadcore into a smartphone is innovation.
slowly increasing the speed of those cores each year isn't
The big pie (the whole smartphone market) has almost reached its peak, if Apple doesn't adjust quickly, as all of the other players in the industry do, it will soon most just lose market share numbers, but also lose total unit sales numbers. When that starts to happen, it will 10x more difficult to reverse it than trying to adjust right now.
By that logic the Smart Car was innovative for no other reason than it was smaller than a Civic.
Taking old technology and putting it in a phone instead of a desktop PC is not innovative. I understand that's how you interpret the definition, but I disagree.