The Finnish mobile firm *mist* now hand the crown to Samsung
Nokia’s 14-year reign as world’s largest handset maker is finished. The Finnish mobile firm must now hand the crown to Samsung following the publication of preliminary market numbers. Samsung will account for 29 per cent of worldwide cellphone shipments for the whole of 2012, putting it atop the global leader board, analyst IHS …
The Finnish mobile firm *mist* now hand the crown to Samsung
Like Miss World it's a short term thing - Samsung may be number 1 for now - but in a year or two it could easily be someone else. Their current phones are pretty decent but they have nothing really that Motorola, Nokia, Asus, Lenovo or [insert anyone] could not do.
The winner with Android is Google.
When you pump out so many cheap handsets. Nokia have gone up market now...
> Samsung may be number 1 for now - but in a year or two it could easily be someone else.
Very true. But probably not Nokia.
Smart move from Sammy would be to buy Foxconn. Then they can use production supporting other firms for their own uses.
Why all the love for soul-less money grubbing, Apple copying Samsung? they don't give a toss about you. They just want your money.
Why would anyone want a less competitive market by letting a company line Samsung reduce market competition by owning Foxconn?
Give it up fanboy, what you say makes no sense.
Foxconn run on very slim margins - if anyone could buy them it would be Apple - but why when you can have access to the huge workforce without all the hassles of actually employing them directly.
Why all the love for soul-less money grubbing, Apple copying Samsung?
Well, once you get past your own brand of fanboi[i?]sm, Samsung makes good kit at good prices.
they don't give a toss about you. They just want your money.
And that's different from Apple, Motorola, Nokia, etc. how?
I don't care about them, either. I just want a good product.
Wow perfectly said.
"Samsung makes good kit at good prices."
BS - they charge as much as they can but a bit less than Apple. They provide a poorer service and don't have the expense of providing iCloud or developing their own OS. But it's ok - the next best ANDROID will probably be Asus, Lenovo, HTC or Motorola and then $amsung will be dropped like a turd.
I can't imagine anyone buys Samsung because they are Samsung - they buy them as currently they make some of the better Android hardware - that's all. I have a Samsung fridge but when it needs replacing I'd be just as happy to buy [insert any decent make at the time].
They are riding a wave but there is little customer loyalty - as was pointed out earlier Google are the winners here as every Android sold is a new Google customer.
"I can't imagine anyone buys Samsung because they are Samsung - they buy them as currently they make some of the better Android hardware - that's all."
Anybody who buys a company's products simply because they are from that company needs to re-evaluate their life.
If it is too much trouble to maintain their own, then they COULD always release an android based iThing. They don't which is fair enough but that is a commercial decision they have and continue to make.
Disagree a bit. I buy a company's products because a) I'm used to their way of working - I don't have to learn new stuff, b) because it's been reliable for me, and c) because their customer service has been satisfactory when I've had a problem.
Now, all my phones have been Nokia. Current Nokia phone is an N8. My current 'fondleslab' is a Samsung Galaxy tab 8.9. Both do their jobs beautifully, and both still surprise me daily with what they are capable of.
Re-evaluate my life? They're both tools I use less than 10% of my life. I've better things to do with the other 90+%.
"I buy a company's products because a) I'm used to their way of working - I don't have to learn new stuff, b) because it's been reliable for me, and c) because their customer service has been satisfactory when I've had a problem."
Then you aren't buying them *simply* because of the company. There are transition costs to changing brand, you have (at least anecdotal) evidence that the brand is reliable, and (again, at least anecdotal) evidence that the customer service is reliable. These are definitely good reasons to choose a particular brand.
> I can't imagine anyone buys Samsung because they are Samsung - they buy them as currently they make some of the better Android hardware - that's all.
So Samsung doesn't generate Apple-like religious fervor, they just make devices that people want to buy. Why is this a bad thing? It's not a personality cult, it's a phone, for Fudd's sake.
Nokia will be back. The Windows Phone 8 launch has been brilliant for them and they've managed to streamline their business and operations leaving them to focus on making high end quality smartphones. iOS and Apple have gone stale resting on their laurels and due to their complacency and the lack of quality Android devices outside of Samsung and Nexus branded devices that leaves a large section of the public who will be seeing the rave reviews of Windows Phone 8 and Nokia handsets and the adverts for Nokia products, which will convince them to switch when their contracts are up
I'm not so sure absolute quality of anything means anything - quality certainly doesn't often equate to popularity - people mostly buy whatever is available on their plan, or the device that fits in their budget.
Look at random tech battles of the past, it's far from clear that the best solution won.
"Windows 8 launch was great for them" really? as far as ive seen the biggest compliment is that thier cameras are good. From what ive read, HTC has out done them on the biuld quality stakes. Plus the fact thats its windows will put off a huge swath of people.
I dont think Windows 8 will save them. Quite the opposite infact
HTC's build quality? HTC's devices leak light, have a coating that damages easily and have rebooted a lot more than Nokia phones.
The 920 is really solidly made, better technology all round.
"The 920 is really solidly made, better technology all round."
It's like the titanic - well made but a fatal flaw - it runs Windows in a market where people are buying iOS and Android. Windows phone and Blackberry are probably going to account for less than 10% between them within 12-18 months.
I literally know no-one who has a Windows phone and plenty with Blackberries but none that 'want' them - most are waiting for contracts to run out to get a iOS or Android device - it's already a 2 horse race.
"... and have rebooted a lot more than Nokia phones."
So Windows phones have to be rebooted regardless of brand but some more than others), just like their main OS?
Good to know their reliability is still just as poor.
Sigh, why does this always come up.
My Android phone reboots too, does that run Windows? Oh hang on I answered that, don't worry.
Bahhahhha, are you serious?
When was the last time you knew of anyone buying a Nokia phone? Windows Phone is totally dead, and they can't even give them away and £10/month contracts.
Windows Phone 8 apps are really disappointing, even more than the OS itself.
Only Nokia and Microsoft say the camera is good. The reality is however, is that they had to fake all the footage (both video and stils) to make it APPEAR like the camera is good.
It's actually a 1 horse race, with iOS as an "also ran".
Think you are counting Apple out way too soon. Considering they are a single brand / manufacturer and have to develop the OS and the hardware and they are selling a device right at the top of the price range they are doing extremely well to be increasing their actual sales substantially - they have never had more than about 10% of the phone market.
if they were to bring out a lower cost phone (rather than just selling the previous models at lower cost) it would be a very serious competitor to Android - for the vast majority of users if the devices were the same price they would probably buy iPhone but the fact is they are not and Android caters to the cheap end of the market. However, a lot of those users don't even have data plans on their 'smart' phones or 'buy' apps so not sure what value they bring longer term.
"It's like the titanic - well made but a fatal flaw - it runs Windows in a market where people are buying iOS and Android."
If you're going to simplify things, people are buying Android full stop - or Android, and a few other minor OSs. With Android at 75%, iphone on 15% and falling, it's misleading to put them on the same level.
Indeed, it's interesting to note that the gap between WP and iphone is much less than the gap between iphone and Android (either by proportion, or absolute numbers of sales). Android really is that much way ahead. Even Samsung Android phones alone outsell iphone by two to one.
"Windows phone and Blackberry are probably going to account for less than 10% between them within 12-18 months."
And iphone are barely above that, so again it's odd to portray iphone on the same level as Android, but write off 10% of nothing.
"it's already a 2 horse race."
No, it's a race won by Android. The only question is how iphone, WP and Blackberry will do competing for the remaining shrinking share. (And it was _never_ a 2 horse race, btw - the "Android and iphone" is a myth; iphone only came 2nd place as late as a year ago, with the demise of Symbian, and at that time, Android was already way ahead and the clear winner.)
Dear Rip, Apple now has a "lower-cost" phone strategy that does not undermine their brand, at least in the United States. You can buy the current, top-of-the-line phone for full price, or the previous model (old shiny) for a discount.
Think in most tests the iPhone 5 camera is the / one of the best on a smartphone - the Nokia Pureview? or whatever is better but it's more like a camera with a phone attached.
Sorry I see these arguments all time and don't agree. A the moment Microsoft is the only OS provider that is a least trying to produce a vertical one all the way from Phone, Tablet, to PC. They WILL gain traction because they have bottomless pockets to try , try again. Secondly HAVE to stop the the PC market potentially being taken from under them which could affect their core business (at the moment the desktop market).
Buying phones is in a way a sentiment decision and based on recommendations/word of mouth, At the moment it is against windows so people perceive it as a duff choice however once the 'fatal flaws' (your words) are ironed out and the tide changes the genuine difference advantage (Tiles, whether you like them or not) will be appreciated as a plus in the market place.
MS has been around to long and to much to lose..
Nokia will be back... only if it makes a flagship Android phone.
With ex-Microsoftie stooge Elop at its helm (and a bribed and muzzled Nokia board), not a chance in hell that's going to happen.
BTW, how well are Win8 phones selling now? What's the global market share of WP8 now? And no, deliberately induced supply-side scarcity does not count as a legitimate reason to brag of 'sold out' claims.
I agree, the Nokia Lumia 920 has great hardware, though a tad too big and pocket-unfriendly.
Too bad, a shame about the software inside it.
> The Windows Phone 8 launch has been brilliant for them and they've managed to streamline their business and operations leaving them to focus on making high end quality smartphones.
Translation: Nokia has dumped the products that made them number one and put all their eggs in a basket that has a lot of hype and 3% market share. They may just survive, but it will be as a much smaller company.
I'm in the IT business, and know only one person with a Windows phone -- and he works for Microsoft. Although I do see them on the TV all the time, accompanied by a "technology provided by Microsoft" credit at the end.
Didn't they do this a year ago? I'm sure I remember seeing this story early 2012, if not before.
"Apple, meanwhile, is limited in its range of phones while Samsung has an array of feature and smartphones."
Indeed - whilst focusing on a limited range may have some advantages (as Apple fans often tell us, e.g., making it easier for developers), it's clear that consumers prefer to have choice, and Samsung's (and still Nokia's) model wins out.
As an aside, the whole "feature" vs "smart" phone is rather ill-defined - feature phones are smartphones by any objective technical definition, albeit it usually lower end, not dumbphones. The term was only ever introduced as a marketing distinction around 2004, when Internet and apps became standard, to distinguish them from more expensive phones. (And the original iphone was marketed as a "smartphone" when it couldn't even run apps, when feature phones could!) But now with all the media hype on smartphones, I wonder why Samsung and Nokia still limit their lower end smartphones with the "feature" phone label. As an example, Nokia's new Full Touch Asha smartphone platform sold a massive 6 million in its first quarter earlier this year (iphone only managed 3 million in the first 6 months, despite vast amounts of advertising and media coverage) - more than their Windows Phone sales - but most reports seem to conveniently ignore it in the "smartphone" stats, because heaven forbid people realise Nokia are still more popular than believed (you would have thought "Nokia doing better on unknown platform than Windows Phone" would make a great anti-MS story, but there you are).
It also makes most sales comparisons unfair, as the media usually focus on "smartphones", which compares 100% of Apple sales, to only a fraction of other companies. This article shows the true picture.
"it's clear that consumers prefer to have choice"
I don't think the average consumer is walking into a phone shop and saying to themselves "well this brand have a far greater range of different models with different features, so i'll get myself one of theirs"
I think it clear, instead, that if you have a wide range of phones covering a wide range of features, then you'll appeal to a wide range of demographics within the public and therefore sell more phones. Consumers don't prefer choice, they like to have the phone they want, not be stuck with indecision. Samsung just have a bigger net to catch many more different types of consumer than other brands.
"I think it clear, instead, that if you have a wide range of phones covering a wide range of features, then you'll appeal to a wide range of demographics within the public and therefore sell more phones. Consumers don't prefer choice"
Well that's exactly what I mean :) If I end up buying Samsung model 23 because that suits me perfectly, where as Apple model 2 doesn't, then I'm glad that Samsung offer the greater range of choice. (Sure, pedantically speaking if Samsung _only_ had model 23, I'd have still have bought it, but that would be luck - I still prefer that they offered me the choice of models.) And it's also clear that that's the stategy that's more successful.
From a mere burning platform, easily fixable, to the fiery pits of hell familiar to all those who deal with them.
4 million phones sold since launch? (a mere 6 or 7 weeks). Hardly a failure is it? 1,500 developer registrations a day.
It is when Apple sell more than that in their first weekend.
The only people I see buying it are people who do not care if it's Android, iOS or Windows - i.e. they just want a phone and they happen to like the look of that one.
Depends who you ask and what vested interests they have. Apple sold 2 million iPhone 5s in China alone at the weekend and that's either brilliant or terrible depending on what sort of fanboy you ask. So selling 4 million in 6 weeks could easily be slanted to suit a fan boy's argument.
Well, 4M is a pretty good sales figure for a relatively 'unknown' platform. And tbh, a lot of people buying phones don't care if it's Android, iOS or Windows. They just want a phone. And Windows phones are comparable in feature set with most others out there, and, as you say, people like the look of them.
Give me 5m in 2 days over 4m in 42 days any day.
Approx. 2.5m/day vs 0.1m/day?
I think AC meant that the iPhone5 sold 5 million in the opening weekend in US, UK, Canada, France, Germany, Australia, Japan, Hong Kong, Singapore. By comparison, 4 million Lumia's in 6 weeks in the same territories isn't very good, unless you're a Nokia fanboy looking at it on a slant.
Apple also quote handsets SOLD to end users - not sure if others do - i.e. is the 4m Nokia handsets the number SHIPPED to disties / telcos who may now have them piling up in a corner as they did with HP tablets etc.
iphone once had poor sales - a million in 76 days for example - yet that was hailed as a great success, even though companies like Nokia sold more than that _every single day_ (not just in the first weekend of a new release).
But when it's someone else selling a few million, that's poor. Right. Same old double standard.
"The only people I see buying it are people who do not care if it's Android, iOS or Windows - i.e. they just want a phone and they happen to like the look of that one."
Which describes most people, then.
Have no fear the market will speak soon enough and Microsoft has proved even they are unable to hide the truth more than a few quarters with channel stuffing and license shenanigans (see Vista). Regardless we won't know its a failure quickly like with the Kin but it will limp on for years losing money but slowly gaining ground and yet still a minority market share ala Bing and Windows Mobile.
The point is about growth. WP has long had the problem that it struggles to get past 4 million a quarter (and often less than that) for all manufacturers. 4 million from one manufacturer, in half that time, is a significant sign of growth.
The same for Apple - for years the sales were terrible, less than 4 million per 6 weeks even for a while, but it showed steady growth. Indeed, I've got to laugh - the media and fans praised Apple for its supposedly good sales, whilst moaning about Nokia because their share was steady or falling (even though sales were actually increasing faster than Apple's).
Well now it's the other way round - Apple's share is falling, and WP shows growth. If you believe that relative growth is a good measure, then that should apply now. If you don't, Apple should never have got all that attention in the years from 2007.
(And I own Android, so don't care about WP. Indeed, it's a bit comical seeing iphone and WP fans argue about who isn't the most unpopular - "iphone, not as unpopular as WP!" - meanwhile, Android goes onto sell hundreds of millions all year round.)
I am an Android fan myself and admit some of the Microsoft hate is due to never wanting to see any company but especially that one, ever largely control computing again. Its a bit irrational considering how Microsoft has done in the phone space for the last decade (fail) but you never know. As bad as Google can be as long as they keep releasing source its a good thing Android is winning. Still all and all choice is a good thing and Microsoft will never be able to dictate computing again anyway so there is always room for another player even if they are proprietary.
I tell you what *most people* do in real life:
They don't care about the Android vs iOS bickering, and get either a device from either camp that best suit their needs. If they don't need a fancy smartphone and its benefits they can always get one of those cheap Nokia feature phones running S40.
But when they see the words 'Microsoft' or 'Windows', they just walk on.
I know and meet a lot of people. None of them has, or are inclined to purchase, a Windows phone.
I go to malls frequently and the telco shops have kiosks with Windows phones for people to try before they buy.. The kiosks with the Windows phones were almost always empty.
And that, in a nutshell, is why the global market share of Windows phones is pathetic, and why developers are less than enthused about the Windows Phone platform, and this vicious cycle loops.