The profits in this quarter in part were lower because "Samsung paid 800 billion during the quarter as a special employee bonus to commemorate 20 years since Chairman Lee Kun-hee announced a management strategy that the company regards as the catalyst to its recent growth. Furthermore, an extra 700 billion won was knocked off by a stronger won." (Link) Smaung overttok Apple as the most profitable company in Q2 2013 (Link)
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.
Samsung's Goals for 2012: 'Beating Apple is #1 Priority'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The profits in this quarter in part were lower because "Samsung paid 800 billion during the quarter as a special employee bonus to commemorate 20 years since Chairman Lee Kun-hee announced a management strategy that the company regards as the catalyst to its recent growth. Furthermore, an extra 700 billion won was knocked off by a stronger won." (Link) Smaung overttok Apple as the most profitable company in Q2 2013 (Link)
There's a big difference though. Apple sees Samsung as a threat because they continue to copy Apple which takes their customers. Samsung sees Apple as a threat because Apple makes such great products and Samsung can't innovate a damn thing to top them.....so they copy them.
Where did you get that from? Nothing in these discovery documents even suggest anything like that.
What you have is two fierce competitors driving each other. Who wins? Consumers. Apple pushes Samsung, Samsung pushes Apple. For the sake of discussion, let's say Samsung products are derivative. Who wins? Again consumers. Android and iOS have borrowed ideas from each other to the betterment of both platforms. Who wins? Consumers.
I have Apple and Samsung products. I don't like/dislike either more than the other. It boils down to what benefits me, as it does for most reasonable people. The only thing these documents reveal is companies want to make more money. When something gets in the way of making money the companies look for ways to combat that. Nothing more.
"I don't care how much I suck I just want them to lose"
Reminds me of the recent Pokemon episode I saw now that it's on Netflix. The girl connoisseur that hates Simon.
Reminds me of the recent Pokemon episode I saw now that it's on Netflix. The girl connoisseur that hates Simon.
"Worth noting a couple of things about those numbers: they are just for phones and do not include the other products both companies sell. Further, precisely because of this, theyre estimates from analysts: this isnt information that the companies themselves provide openly."
How many here put any stock in anything that comes from an analyst?
*crickets*
Didn't think so.
EDIT: Here ya go....
http://cdn1.appleinsider.com/canaccord-131114.jpg
Last edited:
I think that's a bit too simple, for example wouldn't consumers benefit from truly new and different choices, instead all they get is derivatives.
We don't know about the larger screen phone yet, but Jobs itself stated in an email highlighted in a previous article that they have to catch up to the competition in specific areas:
https://www.macrumors.com/2014/04/02/apple-samsung-trial-holy-war-schiller/
Thank you for giving us all of that. But what about any true innovations from Samsung? What contributions have they done in the mobile tech industry that makes them the leader besides offering a bigger screen on their phones? What have they done to make the customer say, WOW?
That's completely unrelated to the article about the screen size, which was referenced in the post I quoted.
People don't do that. Apple does not do that.
Many people make things, companies try things, some the public like, some the public don't like.
Over time, bad ideas are dropped, and good ideas, that sell are improved upon.
If you make something, and someone else makes something that the public love and start buying a lot of. It only makes sense to offer that also.
Why would you as a company ignore what's selling well ?
LMAO, be real about it. The average joe buying a Samsung smartphone isn't buying it because it because the display has 3X resolution over the Apple or wider color gamut or accurate color reproduction or having the first ISOCELL camera sensor in the world. And as far as Samsung having LTE first, who cares? LTE today still doesn't have a ton of coverage. If you're not on Verizon you won't get much with anyone else. Keep trying harder.
It's called "discovery," and it's a legit part of any suit. Both sides must voluntarily give the other side all requested internal documents related to the case.
why does it have to be "wow"?
Samsung is a world leader at developing a whole slew of different technologies, many of which are actually in iPhones too.
From display technologies, Chips and fabrications, and everything associated.
is it "wow factor"? probably not. But there is a giant slew of innovative technologies that Samsung is always developing and advancing.
Just because their mobile devices don't "WOW" you, doesn't make them not innovative.
LMAO, be real about it. The average joe buying a Samsung smartphone isn't buying it because it because the display has 3X resolution over the Apple or wider color gamut or accurate color reproduction or having the first ISOCELL camera sensor in the world. And as far as Samsung having LTE first, who cares? LTE today still doesn't have a ton of coverage. If you're not on Verizon you won't get much with anyone else. Keep trying harder.
I am in US, I am not with Verizon (I am with AT&T) and I can't remember last time when I did not have LTE coverage.
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't understand a word of your question towards me. The tech industry is for the most part an world of entrainment for the customer. WE as consumers should be wowed. We're spending our money after all. Not sure why you feel the need to defend Samsung over that. They are giant who wants the consumers money.
Maybe your money isn't as important to you as mine is to me. If I am spending good money I better damn well be WOW'd if these competitors want a make sale.
A larger screen iPhone will blow Samsung out of the water. It's their only real edge. They'll be begging for mercy soon enough. My dad had an iPhone and switched to Samsung for a simple reason...he's an old fart with bad eye sight and needs the larger screen. No other reason.
The US population is full of aging baby boomers who need big screens. So Apple needs to make a larger iPhone simply as a UI issue. The second they do, I'm recycling his Samsung and getting him an iPhone.
As for a young stud like myself, I'll upgrade to the larger iPhone as well, but simply because I use it heavily as a work tool and the extra screen space will be useful.
The US population is full of aging baby boomers who need big screens. So Apple needs to make a larger iPhone simply as a UI issue. The second they do, I'm recycling his Samsung and getting him an iPhone.
As for a young stud like myself
, I'll upgrade to the larger iPhone as well, but simply because I use it heavily as a work tool and the extra screen space will be useful.
The problem with that is things that are truly new and different are not created every day. I stated for the sake of discussion let's say Samsung's products are derivative, not that they are. I know they are not... now. The earlier iterations of the Galaxy series fell into that category (IMO). Since the GSII, Samsung blazed their own path with design and such, as did Sony, Nokia, HTC and others. Which leads me back to your quote. Consumer have a mulitude of choices outside of Apple and Samsung.
My contract is up in the fall. I will choose between the GS5 (currently on GS3), the HTC One M8, and if Apple brings something between 4.7" and 5" the iPhone will be in the mix as well. Choice is good. Somebody's getting my money. It's not predestined to any company. My use case determines everything.
Exactly, because you've been EVERYWHERE in the U.S. I live in the U.S too and LTE is spotty at best with AT&T. The coverage map shows it. Verizon kicks everyone out of the water on LTE coverage and it's still not great.
The article you cited claimed openly that those are analysts predictions. Not facts based off real numbers.
I'm surprised by the note of urgency in this document.
If they'd uncovered a 'this is what Apple offers' kind of thing - similar to the Apple doc expressing concerns about Android and phones with large screens - I think we'd all have accepted it.
This is on another level.
Not sure why they didn't have on their list to Copy Apple. It's been a huge part of their business practice.
In your opinion
?
A larger screen iPhone will blow Samsung out of the water. It's their only real edge. They'll be begging for mercy soon enough. My dad had an iPhone and switched to Samsung for a simple reason...he's an old fart with bad eye sight and needs the larger screen. No other reason.
The US population is full of aging baby boomers who need big screens. So Apple needs to make a larger iPhone simply as a UI issue. The second they do, I'm recycling his Samsung and getting him an iPhone.
As for a young stud like myself
Re; bolded portion of your comment.
There are probably millions of people who see themselves just as you do. People who use their phones as a work tool and find the extra screen real estate useful. Their all using Samsung's, Motorola's, HTC's, Sony's, Nokia's, etc. If your dad really wants an iPhone he can have one. It has excellent Accessibility features that would cater to his eyesight issues.
Problem solved.I know. You already told us you did that for the sake of discussion and in spirit of that I followed along the same path debunking your claims that no matter what, the consumer always benefits from competition.