Samsung's Goals for 2012: 'Beating Apple is #1 Priority'

[subsonix]

If your point is only about the screen size example we both agree it's not (yet) supporting the poster's argument. What I wanted to point out that there are other, better examples which definately support the poster's argument.

The poster's argument was that there will be a larger phone. Because market research.

 

[Beautyspin]

The RDF is very strong here

Lol! Apple is no longer the best. Take out the phone subsidies by carriers, it will be extinct - sub MS levels. Let it make a good sale in any country with out carrier subsidies, and maintain its ASP thus the margins, then we can talk about who is best.

Also did not this very site carry a story that Apps crash more on iOS 7.1 than KK.

Apple is very good. I agree to that. But calling it the best when it is lacking in so many areas.. RDF at its best..

 

[HenryDJP]

I think the point the person you quoted was trying to make, was that Apple was paying attention to ALL competitors, whereas Samsung seems to be OBSESSED solely with Apple. They're literally obsessed with Apple, they want what Apple has. They want the products, they want the customers, they want the brand image, they want to be Apple so bad its pathetic.

Couldn't have been said better. That seems to be the M.O of Sammy.

 

[moeafg]

How does all of this relate to the patents? Did Samsung infringe or not?

Is the Pope Catholic?

 

[Gasu E.]

Apple's goals for 2014: Beating Samsung is #1 priority

I highly doubt that. That's not how leaders think; that's how follower companies work. For better or for worse, Apple sees itself completely and totally as a leader.

Apple's 2014 goals may include addressing product gaps that were identified by other companies, including Samsung; but I think we could be sure that those goals are around products, not companies.

Now: Apple is fully aware that in the history of technology, there are winning technologies and losing technologies; so I could see a goal that says "beat Android". Or even "beat Amazon in eBooks", given Amazon's stranglehold on that market. But beat Samsung, a company without a hold on any particular
technology or market? no; totally un-Apple.

 

[Rogifan]

I think the point the person you quoted was trying to make, was that Apple was paying attention to ALL competitors, whereas Samsung seems to be OBSESSED solely with Apple. They're literally obsessed with Apple, they want what Apple has. They want the products, they want the customers, they want the brand image, they want to be Apple so bad its pathetic.

Exactly. I don't think Apple wants to be Samsung.

 

[\-V-/]

Breaking News: Large company wants to beat other large competing company.

 

[Gasu E.]

Shame Apple's #1 priority isn't to beat Samsung/Google.

----------



No, it doesn't.
Commercials bashing competitors *work*. That is why you don't see positive advertisements during political campaigns. Because they don't work.

Except, negative political ads are always from groups with names like "People United for Truth and America." Negative ads taint the advertiser, so candidates never run those under their own names.

 

[samcraig]

Samsung is scared. This explains why all their commercials do is bash Apple products. Maybe they should try promoting their products, instead of just bashing others.

Apple, as per the memo, seemed very concerned about Android. Why else the holy war. If you think it's just about patents, I believe you're wrong.

I think the point the person you quoted was trying to make, was that Apple was paying attention to ALL competitors, whereas Samsung seems to be OBSESSED solely with Apple. They're literally obsessed with Apple, they want what Apple has. They want the products, they want the customers, they want the brand image, they want to be Apple so bad its pathetic.

Well - I think it's more natural for any company to focus on the #1 company as the one to beat. No? In doing so, Samsung managed to also rise above all of the other Android competition, no?

Samsung doesn't want to BE Apple. Samsung wants to be Samsung - and be #1. There's a difference.

 

[Beautyspin]

Except in US and Japan

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.

You will be really surprised. Except in US and Japan and a smattering of other countries, it does not matter. The horse has already bolted. It does not matter what Apple does in the other countries. They have been weaned off Apple permanently. All those who own a previous version of iPhone may start buying but other OS users (except in US and Japan) will not look at it as much as Apple expects them to. They are very expensive and not worth the cost. In US all phones cost $99 or $199 so it is to go for any iPhone but when it costs double the nearest latest Android flagship phone.. It doesn't cut it..

 

[ctdonath]

Shame Apple's #1 priority isn't to beat Samsung/Google.

Apple is skating to where the puck will be, and planning tactics/strategy to get it from there to the goal.

Samsung & Google's stated goals are to skate to where Apple is, thinking that will somehow get the puck into the other goal.

----------

Samsung doesn't want to BE Apple. Samsung wants to be Samsung - and be #1.

Interesting how customers are not mentioned, and are merely a presumed means to an end a la a runner's view of asphalt.

Apple wants to make "insanely great" products customers will want.

 

[Tsuchiya]

I use an S4 but still find it somewhat funny that despite Samsung apparently putting everything iPhone under the microscope they still haven't started using premium materials for their smartphones. If they can squeeze in so many deviations of each Galaxy line (Zoom, Active, Mini) then why not one which uses something other than plastic?

 

[cdmoore74]

Apple's goals for 2014: Beating Samsung is #1 priority

How about beating Android. Samsung could easily be replaced by another android oem. All depends on which way the wind blows. You will never be number one if you focus on one piece of the pie. And from a hardware level a few Nokia phones surpass the iPhone.
I still remember the huge market share HTC and Motorola had. And history will repeat itself with Samsung but the threat might not be from Apple.

 

[bsolar]

The poster's argument was that there will be a larger phone. Because market research.

You are aware of the very recent Macrumors article that Apple is aware of customer wants for larger phones and thus plan on releasing them, right? All companies fall behind in some aspects and then play catch up based on competitors. Sure, apple beat samsung in the areas you listed, but Apple isn't perfect. I know you didn't say that, but it seems an unfair statement to say what you said without mentioning that Apple is "copying" competitors themselves by releasing larger screen phones

To me the screen size issue seem just like an example, the main argument being the bold part, but that's just my interpretation.

 

[samcraig]

Interesting how customers are not mentioned, and are merely a presumed means to an end a la a runner's view of asphalt.

Apple wants to make "insanely great" products customers will want.

Right.


- tie all of our products together, so we further lock customers into our ecosystem

http://cdn2.vox-cdn.com/assets/4244355/DX489_Rev_03-07-14.pdf

----------

I use an S4 but still find it somewhat funny that despite Samsung apparently putting everything iPhone under the microscope they still haven't started using premium materials for their smartphones. If they can squeeze in so many deviations of each Galaxy line (Zoom, Active, Mini) then why not one which uses something other than plastic?

But if they want to be Apple - this can't possibly make sense?!

 

[LordVic]

[/COLOR]

But if they want to be Apple - this can't possibly make sense?!

still a valid concern though.

While we talk about apple being "behind" in providing options in larger phone sizes,

Samsung is behind on making a "quality" feeling device.

There's nothing wrong with their devices. Their choice of materials doesn't make their phones lower quality. There are many advantages to their plastics over metal cases. My note II was anything but a cheap POS and was actually a great device.

However, that feel in hand is something that is hard to get around. the plastics could be the strongest things in the world, But if it feels cheep and looks cheep, people will assume it's cheep and spread FUD about it being cheep.

Samsung's biggest weakness IMHO is just that. They don't make their devices LOOK and FEEL premium quality, Even if they are premium quality.

 

[subsonix]

To me the screen size issue seem just like an example, the main argument being the bold part, but that's just my interpretation.

Well the part I quoted and made a comment about, is this:

You are aware of the very recent Macrumors article that Apple is aware of customer wants for larger phones and thus plan on releasing them, right?

 

[brendu]

Lol! Apple is no longer the best. Take out the phone subsidies by carriers, it will be extinct - sub MS levels. Let it make a good sale in any country with out carrier subsidies, and maintain its ASP thus the margins, then we can talk about who is best.

Also did not this very site carry a story that Apps crash more on iOS 7.1 than KK.

Apple is very good. I agree to that. But calling it the best when it is lacking in so many areas.. RDF at its best..

There isn't a single unsubsidized phone that costs under $500 and isn't old technology or crap. Your argument only works because apple doesn't make ****** cheap phones. I'm glad they don't. I'll happily pay $600 for a phone that is this good. I buy my phones unlocked and I still buy the iPhone. Crazy right??!?

 

[MH01]

Well that's a Dilemma , if they are number one, who are they going to copy??? Failed plan!

 

[samcraig]

still a valid concern though.

While we talk about apple being "behind" in providing options in larger phone sizes,

Samsung is behind on making a "quality" feeling device.

There's nothing wrong with their devices. Their choice of materials doesn't make their phones lower quality. There are many advantages to their plastics over metal cases. My note II was anything but a cheap POS and was actually a great device.

However, that feel in hand is something that is hard to get around. the plastics could be the strongest things in the world, But if it feels cheep and looks cheep, people will assume it's cheep and spread FUD about it being cheep.

Samsung's biggest weakness IMHO is just that. They don't make their devices LOOK and FEEL premium quality, Even if they are premium quality.

Well I agree mostly - but I was being sarcastic. My point is that people are saying Samsung wants to be Apple and is copying/stealing "everything" - yet if Samsung wanted to be exactly like Apple, they would be using different materials.

On the flip side - and I know this all depends on carrier and location - the reception I've had on my Samsung (also RIM, Nokia and Motorola) phones have always been superior than anything I've ever had on my iPhone. Perhaps some of Samsung's manufacturing is related to wanting to keep as much metal out of the equation.

 

[FriednTested]

Anyone notice the core difference between the approach of the 2 companies...? Apple internal meetings acknowledged the competition and spoke about how to IMPROVE their products and beat competition... These guys are just about Marketing marketing marketing... No word of improving products anywhere...

----------

Well I agree mostly - but I was being sarcastic. My point is that people are saying Samsung wants to be Apple and is copying/stealing "everything" - yet if Samsung wanted to be exactly like Apple, they would be using different materials.

On the flip side - and I know this all depends on carrier and location - the reception I've had on my Samsung (also RIM, Nokia and Motorola) phones have always been superior than anything I've ever had on my iPhone. Perhaps some of Samsung's manufacturing is related to wanting to keep as much metal out of the equation.

As I mentioned on the other thread a day or two ago... From all the phones I have used the "call quality (Voice clarity, background noise cancellation, etc.)" has always been the best on my iPhones... Strength has been more or less the same... I would infect place the new Nokias and iPhones on a tie when it comes to call quality...

 

[gotluck]

This explains why as soon as Apple releases Siri, Samsung attempts a Siri clone. As soon as Apple releases a fingerprint sensor, Samsung attempts to release a fingerprint sensor. As soon as Apple releases a gold phone, Samsung releases a gold phone. As soon as Apple releases a 64 bit phone, Samsung releases a... oops need help from Google with that one and Android ain't advanced enough yet!

advanced enough, lol...
what about the functionality possible on android that is impossible on ios due to the sandbox...

there is give and take on both OS's, they are essentially equal at this point

 

[apolloa]

First - I am sure you're "pleased" that MR gave this document fair time. right?

Second - Samsung isn't alone in using carrier incentives. There are two models it appears.

Apple - "forced" a large contract with a guarantee on # of phones purchases.
Other OEM - provide incentives in way of higher commissions, etc.

Personally - I wouldn't like to be a carrier store manager. Thing about it. On one hand - you and your staff can make a lot of money by selling Android and employees are happy. On the flip side, your bottom line is being dictated by the carrier who stands to lose a lot of revenue if they don't make good by selling the contracted Apple products.

I've had this argument on this site recently, how Apple deliberately sets it's prices high then forces the retail market to never drop below those high prices.
People just don't get, or refuse to accept, that Apple plays hard ball for massive profit. And to an extent the consumer looses out at Apples gain. Compared to the competition who reduce prices over time.

 

[afsnyder]

You are aware of the very recent Macrumors article that Apple is aware of customer wants for larger phones and thus plan on releasing them, right? All companies fall behind in some aspects and then play catch up based on competitors. Sure, apple beat samsung in the areas you listed, but Apple isn't perfect. I know you didn't say that, but it seems an unfair statement to say what you said without mentioning that Apple is "copying" competitors themselves by releasing larger screen phones

Slightly different situation here... Apple is noting what the customers want and acting upon them while Samsung is looking at what Apple is doing (look at the slides) and trying to find ways to act upon that.

Honestly, competition is what makes better products so... it's all good.

 

[apolloa]

There isn't a single unsubsidized phone that costs under $500 and isn't old technology or crap. Your argument only works because apple doesn't make ****** cheap phones. I'm glad they don't. I'll happily pay $600 for a phone that is this good. I buy my phones unlocked and I still buy the iPhone. Crazy right??!?

WRONG!

Ever heard of the Nexus range? It wipes the floor with the iPhone 5C and gives the 5S a damn good run for it's money.