Samsung Easily Tops Apple to Become World's Top Smartphone Manufacturer

[*LTD*]

iPhone is a clear leader only as a single phone model. Just like with sales numbers, while iPhone outsells any given Samsung phone,

That's the point. That's why the iPhone and Apple's business model is so impressive. Where are the iPhone killers? All you need is ONE phone, done right. There aren't any. Cant they make a single, premiere phone that stands apart? No. Because the competition simply doesn't know how to make one. The only way to compete its to flood the market and bank on quantity and sheer force of numbers by slamming a universally-licesned OS into the 60-odd boxes they sell.

Not impressive.

all Samsung phones combined trash iPhone easily.

Yes. How is that even remotely impressive? Throw Muhammad Ali into the ring with 30 other guys and he'll go down pretty quick. Sheer force of numbers, even when it's all ****, can nullify any single contender, no matter how good that contender is. Of course, the real victim in such a misadventure is quality, User Experience, and device shelf-life.

Then of course there is an issue whether all iPhones should even be lumped together. There are 3GS, 4 and 4S, black and white (different thickness), 16Gb, 32 GB and 64GB, Verizon and AT&T (and they are different - at least in case of iPhone 4).

Samsung's phones have been lumped together in order to reflect "world's top smartphone manufacturer", ranging from the good, down to the absolute junk/low-end that is priced accordingly.

 

[Taz Mangus]

So if it's obvious - it's obvious. Why are people arguing quality or even denying it's possible Samsung sold more?

Some ardent posters here seem to take it personally if someone beats Apple at something.

That being said - it doesn't matter how many phones Samsung makes. For every person who chooses Samsung for their phone is a sale lost for the iPhone. For that matter - anyone NOT buying an iPhone is a loss of sale of an iPhone. It's simple math and sales.

And different companies have different strategies. Samsung's seems to be working for them. And Apple's is definitely working for them. Apple makes a few phones and a crapload of profit. Samsung makes more phones and makes a good profit and has great marketshare.

I don't see why people are so "sore" about the news item. It doesn't devalue the phone you're using in the slightest. And no one is coming to your door to rip your iPhone out of your hand and force you to use a Samsung because it's sold more.

And the people choosing the iPhone means one less phone sold to Samsung. To think it is as simple as that.

 

[divinox]

And maybe that symbolic value has to do with product reliability and customer service.

no, that is non-symbolic value by definition.

 

[thenerdal]

That's the point. That's why the iPhone and Apple's business model is so impressive. Where are the iPhone killers? All you need is ONE phone, done right. There aren't any. Cant they make a single, premiere phone that stands apart? No. Because the competition simply doesn't know how to make one. The only way to compete its to flood the market and bank on quantity and sheer force of numbers by slamming a universally-licesned OS into the 60-odd boxes they sell.

Galaxy SII was the iPhone 4 killer. Galaxy Nexus is the iPhone 4S Killer as well as the Galaxy SIII

 

[*LTD*]

But Samsung has already made the flexible displays and it's out there on youtube.

Cool story, when's the release date exactly?

 

[thenerdal]

Cool story, when's the release date exactly?

Next year: http://www.pcworld.com/article/242770/samsung_to_sell_phones_with_flexible_screens_next_year.html

 

[divinox]

Galaxy SII was the iPhone 4 killer. Galaxy Nexus is the iPhone 4S Killer as well as the Galaxy SIII

There won't be a killer unless someone does something wicked hardware or service wise. With competition relying on shared platforms, no single device will ever get enough attention or focus, nor will it be able to stand out enough from the crowd by its own force.

That said, we may very well see devices outperforming the iPhone. But for the kill, that is not enough. iPhone will always be good enough to have its crowd, as long as competition stays the same.

 

[samcraig]

That's the point. That's why the iPhone and Apple's business model is so impressive. Where are the iPhone killers? All you need is ONE phone, done right. There aren't any. Cant they make a single, premiere phone that stands apart? No. Because the competition simply doesn't know how to make one. The only way to compete its to flood the market and bank on quantity and sheer force of numbers by slamming a universally-licesned OS into the 60-odd boxes they sell.

Not impressive.


Yes. How is that even remotely impressive? Throw Muhammad Ali into the ring with 30 other guys and he'll go down pretty quick. Sheer force of numbers, even when it's all ****, can nullify any single contender, no matter how good that contender is. Of course, the real victim in such a misadventure is quality, User Experience, and device shelf-life.


Samsung's phones have been lumped together in order to reflect "world's top smartphone manufacturer", ranging from the good, down to the absolute junk/low-end that is priced accordingly.

No one is arguing against Apple's model - so I have no idea why you keep bringing it up. But different companies have different (and successful) models. Just because you don't like their model doesn't make them unsuccessful.

Why does there have to be an iPhone killer anyway? I would think it's not even about the iPhone. This stupid "war" isn't between the iPhone and other phones. It's really about iOS vs Android vs Windows, etc. The better question is - what will or won't be the iOS killer. And right now while iOS is kicking major butt - it doesn't have the marketshare that Android has. And that's ok. The actual percentages will change and fluctuate.

I have no idea why the media and people like you are so wrapped up in something "killing" off something else. Various devices can co-exist in the marketplace.

And the people choosing the iPhone means one less phone sold to Samsung. To think it is as simple as that.

Right. But it appears based on the marketplace that Samsung is selling more. That doesn't make Apple less successful. So I don't know why people are getting so riled.

 

[slinky199]

Yes. How is that even remotely impressive? Throw Muhammad Ali into the ring with 30 other guys and he'll go down pretty quick. Sheer force of numbers, even when it's all ****, can nullify any single contender, no matter how good that contender is. Of course, the real victim in such a misadventure is quality, User Experience, and device shelf-life.

Woah woah, lets compare companies to companies, as your analogies fail. It's more like your company don't know how to diversify, and its tail is starting to show.

 

[nick_elt]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

I dont understand all the ppl jumping on the defence. As an Apple fan this is good news for the consumer as the better the competition the better the iphone will be. I personally will always stick with ios but

 

[*LTD*]

Galaxy SII was the iPhone 4 killer. Galaxy Nexus is the iPhone 4S Killer as well as the Galaxy SIII

Apparently it only sold 30 million units to date (combined with another model.) Apple sells that many iPhones in little more than two quarters. By some peoples' definition around here, lower unit share does not a "killer" make, right?

Where were all the GSII lineups?

The Galaxy Nexus isn't a killer anything because it isn't even on the market until mid-November.

The Galaxy SIII does not exist in the market. It's scheduled for sometime in 2012. It can't kill anything as yet. Unless it time-travels or something.

In the meantime, amid all these wonderful promises by the competition, Apple sold 4 million iPhone 4Ses in a single weekend.

 

[slinky199]

Well, you can't argue with that.

A company that actually focuses on RnD?

 

[thenerdal]

Apparently it only sold 30 million units to date (combined with another model.) Apple sells that many iPhones in little more than two quarters. By some peoples' definition around here, lower unit share does not a "killer" make, right?

Where were all the GSII lineups?

The Galaxy Nexus isn't a killer anything because it isn't even on the market until mid-November.

The Galaxy SIII does not exist in the market. It's scheduled for sometime in 2012. It can't kill anything as yet. Unless it time-travels or something.

In the meantime, amid all these wonderful promises by the competition, Apple sold 4 million iPhone 4Ses in a single weekend.

Just because the iPhone has more sales doesn't make it a killer. A killer to me is the better phone.

I meant to say that Galaxy Nexus and Galaxy SIII will be iPhone 4S killers.

 

[divinox]

Apparently it only sold 30 million units to date (combined with another model.) Apple sells that many iPhones in little more than two quarters. By some peoples' definition around here, lower unit share does not a "killer" make, right?

Where were all the GSII lineups?

The Galaxy Nexus isn't a killer anything because it isn't even on the market until mid-November.

The Galaxy SIII does not exist in the market. It's scheduled for sometime in 2012. It can't kill anything as yet. Unless it time-travels or something.

In the meantime, amid all these wonderful promises by the competition, Apple sold 4 million iPhone 4Ses in a single weekend.

Since you love bringing up that Samsung sells a gazillion models: For obvious reasons having many devices on various price points leads to less higher-end sales. Thats the obvious trade off at play. If Apple were to sell 10 devices you'd see the same effect.

 

[nick_elt]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

I dont understand all the ppl jumping on the defence. As an Apple fan this is good news for the consumer as the better the competition the better the iphone will be. I personally will always stick with ios but Why hate on samsung for having cheaper phones as there is a massive market for them, im suprised apple hasnt come out with an iphone nano, rather than the 3 yo 3gs. even as an apple fan ill prob get rated down with the if ur not with us ur against us attitude on here. Thats my 2cents.

 

[samcraig]

LTD - I am genuinely interested in your response...

Quote:
Originally Posted by *LTD*
If no one can get it, its about as innovative as performing in front of a mirror. Bring it to market and then consumers can decide how innovative it is.


So when Jobs got up in front of an audience and showed off the iPad for the first time - you didn't believe it was innovative?

 

[Benjamins]

nowadays companies really like to brag about their shipping capacity.

 

[*LTD*]

For obvious reasons having many devices on various price points leads to less higher-end sales. Thats the obvious trade off at play. If Apple were to sell 10 devices you'd see the same effect.

Which is why Apple doesn't (thankfully) do that. Which is also why the iPhone leads all the indicators that matter. Which is why they enjoy massive anticipation and line-ups. Which is why they get the kind of mindshare they do.

Apple has enough class not to ship junk, since placing a priority on User Experience precludes getting down and dirty with a horizontal business model.

One company has standards, while the other throws as much at the wall as they can and hope something sticks.

 

[divinox]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

I dont understand all the ppl jumping on the defence. As an Apple fan this is good news for the consumer as the better the competition the better the iphone will be. I personally will always stick with ios but Why hate on samsung for having cheaper phones as there is a massive market for them, im suprised apple hasnt come out with an iphone nano, rather than the 3 yo 3gs. even as an apple fan ill prob get rated down with the if ur not with us ur against us attitude on here. Thats my 2cents.

My guess: it would cannibalize sales of their high-end (higher margin) devices, leading to less profits overall.

----------

Which is why Apple doesn't (thankfully) do that. Which is also why the iPhone leads all the indicators that matter. Apple has enough class not ship junk, since placing a priority on User Experience precludes getting down and dirty with a horizontal business model.

One company has standards, while the other throws as much at the wall as they can and hoe something sticks.

Well, since you realize it - why do you insist on making bogus posts? I get it, you like to troll, but - speaking of class - theres a classier way of doing it.

 

[Savor]

Nokia will come a dramatic back in one year. I can bump this thread to see if I am right. They had a quiet season after the bold transition to WP. Symbian still OUTSELLS Android globally.

As well as Android has sold after only three years, it really is a glorified Symbian with better touchscreen. Both are open source but their legacy support doesn't last longer than 18 months. And Symbian is at least a bit more stable.

Nokia still makes more profit than Samsung when it comes to phones and still have a higher marketshare when it comes to volume sales.

 

[GWagon]

Cool story, when's the release date exactly?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJEHp15Hoo0

If Samsung wanted, they could wipe Apple off the map because Apple rely on their technology. The number one reason why Samsung will always have the upper hand on Apple until they start manufacturing their own components.

When an iPhone is sold, Samsung receive a cut of the profits. When Samsung sell their product, Apple get NOTHING. So in effect, you have to take into account that most of Apple's profit margins go back into supplying their products with Samsung components.

 

[divinox]

nowadays companies really like to brag about their shipping capacity.

You do realize that WSJ doesn't make phones, right?

(That said, I'm sure they brag about how many papers they ship ... or at least did before their industry went to crap ... but thats besides the point :- )

 

[*LTD*]

So when Jobs got up in front of an audience and showed off the iPad for the first time - you didn't believe it was innovative?

If the product doesn't ship, all that innovation is not available for the experiencing. It doesn't matter if it could cure cancer or launch missiles. The whole point is for you and I to use it.

Until it ships, it's smoke, no matter how cool it looks onstage. The proof of the pudding is in the eating.

 

[divinox]

Nokia will come a dramatic back in one year. I can bump this thread to see if I am right. They had a quiet season after the bold transition to WP. Symbian still OUTSELLS Android globally.

As well as Android has sold after only three years, it really is a glorified Symbian with better touchscreen. Both are open source but their legacy support doesn't last longer than 18 months. And Symbian is at least a bit more stable.

Nokia still makes more profit than Samsung when it comes to phones and still have a higher marketshare when it comes to volume sales.

They sure will. Might take until Q1 2013 before production is up to speed though. Tango will introduce Chassi 2 and 3, allowing for more differentiation, but i think they will need Apollo to really start pushing Nokia-volume (assuming that Apollo will introduce Chassi 4, if they don't MSFT needs a big slap).

 

[slinky199]

If the product doesn't ship, all that innovation is not available for the experiencing. It doesn't matter if it could cure cancer or launch missiles. The whole point is for you and I to use it.

Until it ships, it's smoke, no matter how cool it looks onstage. The proof of the pudding is in the eating.

So...now innovation is dependent on marketing?

So curing cancer is not innovative? It needs to be successfully marketed and used in order to be innovative? Have you been to any tech conferences or any idea of how research is actually performed?

Also, your analogies really suck.

Also, can you not directly answer and say that the iPad wasn't innovative?