1281 posts • joined Thursday 18th June 2009 13:17 GMT
Well that's it - Apple claims to revolutionise something, and even though it's just as you say in reality, the media and Apple fans also claim it to be revolutionary.
It's true that fans didn't decide to pick on video calling, but they do so with many other examples (3G, apps, Internet, the whole idea of smartphones). And in general, given the huge media hype over Iphone 4, if "Facetime" was the flagship feature advertised by Apple, then that's rather telling.
You're right, each new release is no different to any other phone released. We just wish the media would treat it that way too.
Re: ipod mini phone 5
Indeed - it's a bit depressing when a company has to try to stoke up attention with "announcement of an announcement". We've heard the media harping on about Iphone 5 for over a year, and the Ipad Mini is just speculation. (Even if they are released, they already fit the classic definition of vaporware.) Perhaps the media should focus on actual product releases, with more attention to the leading platforms, rather than Apple Apple Apple all the time (at least the Register does cover the other mobile news, unlike most the mainstream media).
Billions of users
With Android now approaching 70% and rising, with Apple around 16% and falling, with Apple never having been number one, with installed user base of other platforms still large, with the large number of desktop/laptop users, and with desktops, laptops and mobiles selling far more than the one 10" form factor that Apple currently do better in - who cares. Firefox will do just fine without trying to compete on a locked down feature phone. The Register quotes Apple's US figures as if they're supposed to be a lot, but how about given us the comparable total Android sales? (And should probably do it worldwide too, rather than handpicking the one market that is best - or least worst - for Apple.)
Re: "Smart" vs "feature" is just marketing
I don't recall I said that Apple's sales would get lower? I said they had fallen, which is true this year - in fact, both in terms of share and absolute numbers. Though given that the next Iphone isn't out until Q4, and given how seasonal their sales are, it doesn't seem unlikely that their sales will fall yet further in Q3.
Yes, people want Android and Samsung phones - I'm relying on that thing known as "actual facts about sales in the market". I don't see why being cheaper is a problem - if Samsung can deliver what people want, *and* do so at a better price, then more credit to them. However, the success of phones like the S2 and S3 shows that people are buying at the high end too (indeed, I suspect that even with just the high end phones, Android would still outsell Iphone - but it's a poor comparison anyway, as it just rewards Apple for being expensive).
I care about usability. That's why I stayed away from Apple's feature-phone like OS.
Re: All this proves is Samsung have more products, its hardly rocket science
One cake shop sells 100,001 iCakes. Another cake shop sells 100,000 of its cakes, and another 100,000 with a cherry on top.
Only an idiot would claim the former is the more popular - which is sadly what fans and the media are doing for Apple.
Combining product types is only flawed when they're different kinds of products - so yes, your example is flawed because people might buy patisserie and bread. However, as the person you replied to points out, it's ludicrous to suggest that Samsung's sales are only higher because people are out there buying multiple phones from them. (If anything, it's probably more likely to be the Apple users fanatical enough to buy every iPhone "iteration"...)
As for the OP - maybe people are buying Samsung/Android more *because* they like the choice. And we're not interested in something that's merely an "iteration" of a 5 year old phone.
Re: Nonsense fake numbers...
That used to be a sensible definition, but the problem is it's way out of date - around 2004, most phones had the ability to have software added, but instead they were marketed as "feature" phones. Meanwhile, the original Iphone doesn't fit this definition, yet was marketed as a smartphone. And all the smartphone sales stats, such as the ones in this article, ignore the feature phones (even though these days they also have touchscreens, Wifi, GPS, etc) but include Apple.
Personally I'd be happy to include all feature phones as smartphones, and not include the original Iphone. But if instead we wanted to have a definition that distinguished feature phones from smartphones, I think it should be to do with how open and customisable (like a general computer, as with the older traditional definition) versus locked down they are - feature phones don't have the same ability to replace things like the default keyboard, as smartphones do. As the OP suggests, Apple is again the one that needs to be categorised as a feature phone for this to work.
I believe the worldwide Q2 sales for Nokia were roughly 6m Symbian, 4m WP (sites like All About Symbian have stories with links to the stats). I don't know how that relates to the European market, but yes, a surprising amount of their smartphone figures are still coming from Symbian.
Not that there isn't hope for WP - the sales have been increasing significantly since Nokia's support. The question is whether that will tail off, or grow with WP8...
Re: Nonsense fake numbers...
Market share and profit are not the same thing. Just because one company might have a higher share of the profit, doesn't mean it must also have high market share - and it's ridiculous to try to twist the numbers to match, when they are different things.
This is an article about sales, not profits. And as a consumer, who cares about profits? The only people who benefit from the profits are the shareholders - and if you are one of those for Apple, you're a shill with a conflict of interest here. Never in the most heated Windows vs Mac/Linux/Amiga/whatever debate did a Windows fan go "But look how much money Bill Gates makes" - no one cares. We do care about sales, as it shows what people like, and how common various platforms are.
I challenge you to give me a definition of "smartphone" that includes the original Iphone (couldn't even run apps), but not the lower end Android phones? (Or indeed, feature phones, come to that - as I say below, the smartphone definition is contrived anyway.) Discounting phones because they are able to be sold at a lower price is not just spin, but nonsensical - it means you punish companies in your reporting, for delivering things at a better price!
On Android, you don't have to pay money as much, because there's so much available for free. As a user, this is better. As a developer, if you aren't able to offer better value than what people are giving away for free, then you need to rethink your business model.
The only thing I agree with you on is that I too like Symbian and Qt.
"Smart" vs "feature" is just marketing
The whole smart vs feature is just how the companies choose to market the phones - Apple label 100% of their phones as "smart" (even though the original one couldn't even run apps), whilst Nokia and Samsung don't. Whilst "feature" vaguely correlates to lower end, with the low end WP and Android devices the line is blurred. There is no objective distinction between them (feature phones do all the same things smartphones do, just with a different name - they are certainly not the same kind of thing as dumb phones).
So yes, Nokia have lost out to Samsung, though they are still 2nd place. Saying that they are behind Apple, when you compare 100% of Apple sales to only a fraction of Nokia's sales is just spin...
"devices IDC classes as smartphones"
Which is itself a useless definition, although in practice I think the various statmakers just go by what terms the manufacturers themselves use.
"Android now accounts for 65 per of smartphone shipments in the region, its 71 per cent annual growth rate exceeded only by Windows Phone's 874 per cent. But colossal growth is easy when you come from next to nothing"
Indeed (as parodied in a recent XKCD) - but it's worth noting that the media gave the same kind of positive coverage for Android and Iphone. E.g., I remember a BBC article in 2010 falsely spinning it as Iphone having faster grown that Symbian, because they looked at relative growth - even though Symbian had far larger sales, and in fact was growing *faster* in absolute numbers. Nokia also got negative coverage for years due to falling market share (another misleading stat, in a growing market). So I wonder, with WP now having the explosive relative growth, and Apple's share falling, is the media spin going to favour WP over Apple? Or will they just switch the statistics they cover, so that it still benefits Apple?
As for Iphone:
"But this annual update frenzy - and the current-model sales dip that precedes it - is now a traditional feature of the smartphone business."
Except Apple's sales are now dipping all year round, with only an upspike the quarter after the release, whilst Samsung sales are holding up all year round. People are buying Android and Samsung because that's what they want.
Re: Sony the brand
"It was a nightmare to open and I cut my hand in the process."
It's because of the patent on rounded rectangles. To avoid a billion dollar payout, Sony are just making sure everything is as sharp as possible...
Re the last one - so the Government should pay money so that private companies get people to work for free? Instead of having people work for "benefits", why not give them a *job* doing that same work.
Also consider the circular effect where private companies can use this unpaid labour for their work instead of having to employ people, causing more people to be out of work, causing unemployment to go up, welfare costs to go up, with no one but the private companies gaining.
Only Apple could invent a system that doesn't have DRM, but still manages to be a right pain to use, locking you into atrocious software.
Re: Apple Schmapple
It's also a pain to play files on another computer - even if you're willing to install Itunes, it's unclear whether doing so will "sync" with the new computer, which you don't want to happen. I've asked Apple users this, and they don't know the answer. So you're left with looking at the files directly, but they're all scrambled by Apple. Hopeless! It was quicker to simply download the files illegal!
On my Sansa, it just mounts as an external drive, the files are unscrambled, and it Just Works.
Re: Apple Schmapple
If the UI on something as simple as a music player is a life challenge, something's wrong.
Especially if Apple fanatics want to claim Apple are good at UIs!
Indeed, and more generally, there are absolutely loads of places to buy DRM-free mp3s, and has been for years now. All the mainstream stores that sell music also seem to offer mp3s online. If people want to give their money to late-to-the-party patent trolls who have crappy terms and conditions, more fool them.
Re: "Since the Iphone platform has never been the number one platform..."
So what did you mean? The Iphone is a platform, not a single product (and comparing single products is a poor measure, as it just depends on how companies choose to categorise their devices - if one company sells 101 of a product, and another company sells 200, but split between two similar devices they label differently, only an idiot would suggest the former is leading; although it's interesting to note that even by individual models, the S3 alone is now outselling the Iphone 4S in many markets, despite it being only one of many Samsung phones, and many Android phones, compared to Apple's single phone).
Perhaps you mean that Apple lead, but sorry, that was Nokia, and now Samsung. Please try again.
I agree, but just to nitpick, which crown is it that Apple currently has? I believe latest market share figures are Android approaching 70% and increasing, Iphone around 16% and falling. Similarly:
"arguably already slipping away to Samsung in some markets"
Samsung alone now at around 2x Iphone sales, just on their smartphones. In fact, it's now at the stage where even one single model (the S3) is outselling the one single model of Iphone (where Apple only have one single model per generation, unlike Samsung, or the hundreds of Android devices) in some markets.
So yes, you're not only right with your prediction of Android dominance, but we're already long here. :) (And before that, it was Nokia/Symbian, not Apple...)
I agree entirely. It's also interesting to note how the vast amount of media Ipad hype started *before* it was even *announced* (remember the iStale, sorry iSlate?), let along after it was shipped. So this wasn't about the media reacting to a product, it was giving Apple massive free advertising and support from the outset. It's sad that even 2.5 years on, other tablets have been virtually ignored, with the exception of the recent Nexus 7 (and even then, every media coverage of that had to have the obligatory Ipad mention).
Another factor is shops - I note that loads of shops round here have Ipads, it's rare to see any other kind of tablets. People don't go into the shop and choose Apple over a range of tablets. They hear about "Ipads", go into the shop to get "an Ipad", and don't see or hear about anything else.
The media tried to do the same thing with the original Iphone, which for 5 and a half years since its announcement has got constant media hype - thankfully I think the fact that phones/smartphones were already well established, as well as with established distribution through the networks, meant Apple had less of an unfair advantage, and they failed in their attempt to outdo the leading companies like Nokia and Samsung (who are still the top two), or the leading platforms (which was Symbian until 2011, then Android). Though sadly, the media seem to have convinced many people that Apple lead, anyway.
Re: "Is it just me..."
Indeed. OTOH these days I find myself confusing small Apple phones for those old 2005-era feature phones - as well as the similar size, they both had the same grid of icons...
Sorry for modding you down - I think Poe's Law applies here, it's impossible to tell parody from actual arguments that Apple fanatics make :)
Re: Galaxy Note?
And if rumourware of 4" Iphones and Ipad Minis turn out to be true, shouldn't the existing producers of those kinds of devices be able to ban Apple devices?
Since the Iphone platform has never been the number one platform (it was Symbian, then Android), I guess you must be accusing Apple of copying the leading platforms here.
Where as I had a Nokia 5800 and didn't experience any of that...
Didn't hack it compared to other mobile OSs? Well, I didn't have to wait years for basic features like copy/paste or multitasking... Android meanwhile is fine, but I've yet to do anything on that that I couldn't do on Symbian. They're both good OSes, each with their own pluses and minuses.
I've no doubt that versions of Symbian on the earlier Nokia 5800 were flaky, but Android was immature in its earlier versions too, and it was years before IOS had all the basic features implemented, that even feature phones already had had for years. One can pick holes in everything.
(And I'm not speaking as someone who used Symbian years ago - I'm someone who was new to Symbian with the Nokia 5800, in its later popular years.)
Also from what I hear, Symbian^3 (e.g., Nokia N8 onwards) was substantially improved over the OS in the Nokia 5800.
Re: another Poorly researched poorly written Nokia / MS bashing article
Most people don't use an MS OS? News to me. Don't get me wrong, I dual boot Ubuntu, and on phones have run Symbian and now Android. But I'm aware of what OS most people run, and I think Windows these days is as good as any other - personally I prefer Windows 7 to Ubuntu, though each have their pluses and minuses. And I do hope you're not suggesting it's better to run the other mainstream desktop OS, that involves paying money to a patent troll - sorry, with the recent Samsung news, it's no longer cool in geek circles to be running OS X over Windows. Only on Linux or something can you claim to be running something different :)
Re: market support for multiple platforms
Another problem with this argument is that there are still more than two - the difference between "smart" and "feature" phone is arbitrary (vaguely, "feature" is for low end, but with low end Symbian, Android phones etc, that distinction is blurred; feature phones have also always run apps since their introduction in the early 2000s, so the issue of "ecosystem" still applies).
So the stats only cover those counted by the ill-defined category of smartphones. There are still lots of people using other OSs like S40, enough to make these larger than Iphone, and probably comparable to Android, if not larger.
If there are any mechanisms in the market that means two platforms is an ideal stable solution, I don't see how any of those can "know" what we choose to label a smartphone or not. So the reality is that we're still in a state where there are several platforms on the market, all with significant share. I guess in practice the low end will eventually be sucked up by Android as technology advances, especially as Nokia have ditched their plans for a next generation low end smartphone OS to replace S40 ("Meltemi"), but we're not there yet, and it certainly won't be Apple hoovering up the low end.
Re: Swings and roundabouts
"The MarketPlace is very immature and MS don't seem to control it, allowing junk/nonsense apps"
Like Android - but as a developer and user, I think this is a good thing. Better than them banning things they don't like, as Apple do. And I also get infuriated by Nokia's QA, which does more to hinder then help it getting apps distributed for Symbian - on Android, I upload and it's their immediately. (I do love Nokia's automated testing for all their phones, which I wish Google did do - but the manual QA we are better off without.)
"The keyboard isn't as intelligent as my iPhone, not even remotely."
Can you replace it? I use Swype on my Nokia 5800 and now on Android, and it's great. The only way to replace a keyboard on Iphones is to run it as a separate application, and then copy/paste the text(!) If WP is like that, that's bad. If you can install different keyboards, I'd say check some out, and don't worry what the default one is like.
(WP must be bad then, given how atrocious the auto-correct bloopers are that people post for Iphone.)
"The fact we won't be upgraded to WP8 is insane, it's a year old."
Well, it's a negative for you, but I don't think it's an insane decision. You're getting all the benefits in 7.8 that will actually work on WP7 class hardware. And I believe that you don't get all the things in a new IOS release, if you have an older Apple phone anyway - it's just that MS are being more honest about it, rather than giving you a "WP8" update with some things disabled.
Re: market support for multiple platforms
"So why is there any compelling reason to think that the phone market will be comfortable with three?"
Well we've had far more than three. It was Symbian and Android until Nokia dropped Symbian for WP (Symbian number one to 2011, then Android since then). Were you there saying the same thing of Iphone, when it was Symbian and Android? (or "comfortable with four", since BlackBerry also outsold Iphone until recently.)
Evidently the market is fine with three, or even more - although yes, I do wonder if there is some underlying mechanism in the market by which having one main dominant OS, and one niche one around 10-15%, with everyone else far smaller, is some kind of stable long term solution. Nokia have made the switch from Symbian to WP putting themselves significantly out of the picture for now. Apple have the advantage that they'll carry on pushing their own closed systems no matter what, where as other companies are happy to switch to whatever other random OS. But it will be interesting to see what happens in the 5"-10" tablet range, between Windows x86/RT and Android.
Re: Win 8
Interesting that you ignore Android in your list of how things are. Personally I'm happy with my Samsung Galaxy Nexus. Decent OS, powerful hardware, and open rather than locked down and closed. And no, it isn't copying the Iphones, as you claim.
Re: Win 8
Don't most laptops look alike? Or most tablets? Or most phones? I'm not sure why having a single model makes it more exciting - for the media maybe, but in terms of sales, we've seen Symbian and now Android be the number one, not Iphone.
"advanced gear was predicated on a solid bottom line based on dumb-phones, despite their bragging about having had an iPad and iPhone in their labs for years."
Er, in their labs? You do realise Nokia have had smartphones for years before Apple came to the market late. Nokia make things from the lowest end dumbphone to high end smartphones. (Also note that few phones are actually dumbphones - even so-called feature phones are smartphones with a different marketing name - even low end phones have done Internet and apps since 2004, these days they have touchscreens, Wifi, and everything else smartphones have.)
"The game is being played now in an area where Nokia has very little expertise: computing."
Dumb phones died out years ago, and phones have been computers for around ten years. Until 2011, Nokia's Symbian was the number one "smartphone" platform.
The question is whether WP can live up to that. But it's wrong to say Nokia have little expertise in mobile computing.
"please don't speak if you're going to mention the new WinPho8 Samsung models"
Please don't speak if I'm going to mention a fact that counters your claim? If you knew it to be false, why claim it?
I have no idea how WP will turn out with Nokia - it is indeed a risky move - and personally I'm happy with Android now. But the way you talk of Nokia doesn't match up with their actual immensely successful history. Indeed, the big problems they face now is that WP may not give them the immense success they've had in mobile computing previously.
It's not all about market share though - there was a developer bandwagon to support Iphones, even in all the years that it was 3rd, 4th, or 5th place, with tiny market share. Even now, with Android nearing 70%, and Iphone around 16%, we see more developer support for Apple (which is sad). Symbian rarely got support, despite being number one until 2011, then still outselling Iphone for another 6 months until the WP switch, and still probably having a larger installed userbase. Not that this means therefore MS will get support - but it isn't simply about market share.
Whilst I'd love to see OpenGL on WP simply because choice and openess is good, it's not clear to me it's the right decision for them. Whilst WP is harmed by it, they are probably looking at the longer term of the Windows platform as a whole. The idea that Direct X would become the dominant API on computers once seemed mad - the API was a mess, OpenGL was open, industry people like Carmack supported OpenGL, and why would you limit yourself to only Windows for no apparent benefit? Yet look what happened.
Also consider that any competent developer can support DirectX and OpenGL. Remember that the far bigger challenge right now is that mobile platforms use entirely different languages (modified-Java for Android, C# for WP, C++/Qt for Symbian, Objective C for Iphone). So if you're rewriting your entire game anyway, the use of a different API seems secondary to that. Ironically, using C# is one of the few ways to get something that runs on Android and IOS (thanks to Mono), which of course is WP's native language. And many games will use 3rd party libraries/engines, so MS will instead focus on getting them to support DirectX, then it's a non-issue.
Re: developed at Xerox PARC...
And I launched apps from a grid of colour icons on my 1985 Amiga - did Apple license that?
(It also had full screen apps running in their own screen, that you could pull down with a swipe to view both at once; and the "desktop" was just one of those screens. Sound familiar to another new OS...?)
Re: I call bullshit.
You are certainly right that the original Iphone couldn't even run apps.
But I think the OP has some point with how things are these days. It seems almost every company has an "app" for its website or service, but it'll always be Apple catered for first, and often only, despite never having been the number one platform, and being the last platform to be able to run apps. At least we're starting to see Android support (with almost 70% market share), but heaven forbid you run WP, Blackberry or Symbian (the latter still probably has a bigger installed userbase than Apple, having outsold it until the WP switchover). On top of that, the way that companies have tried to convert newspapers and TV to the Internet is to make an "app" that only runs on some devices, often Ipad and Iphone before anything else. Still today, we have that Sky advert on TV, going "Or even on your eyyyyyyePhone", as if we all have Iphones, when in fact most of us don't.
So I think it is reasonable to say that their vision of the future is one where "computing" is to used a closed tablet-only device to read content via an "app", that only works on particular brands of manufacturer (Apple). Yes, it may be that Iphones have a web browser, but given how every website needs to have an "app" for Apple users, it doesn't seem that many are capable of using it.
Does anyone have a reliable source as to what was infringed?
On the one hand there's stuff like "rounded rectangles" and the claim that they looked like Iphones (personally I can't see that Samsung phones look more like Iphones, than any other phones, but I can see that that's an argument specific to Samsung that they made). Then there's the "bounce back on scroll" patent, which I believe is specific to Samsung's TouchWiz.
But then I've read articles talking about "pinch" multitouch zoom gesture, double click to zoom, and click and drag to scroll. All of these are in standard Android (as they should be - they're bog standard UI elements that I find it mad that could be patented). The UIs are indeed completely different - but it's worrying if there are some trivial bog standard patents that Apple have been granted. Anyone know what the actual details are?
About values and spin
I remember when Jobs died, there was some quote going around Twitter/Facebook/etc, something along the lines of "Steve cared about other products, other companies care about making money".
At the time, I saw it as nonsense. To start with, it misleadingly conflated a person with companies. Is it really fair to say that other CEOs don't care about their products? But the idea that Apple - or its CEOs - don't care about making money, is laughable, when you see that everything they do is about making as much money as possible, including through the courts to take it off other companies. They even get praised for it - they're not the largest in their markets, rather, it's let's praise Apple for being the most "valuable", or having the most cash, or having the largest profit margins. The media is rammed full of articles publicising this about Apple, and everytime they are mentioned, they have to remind us - even the Register is at it, as the quote from the Iain Thompson article shows.
I love that Apple are simultaneously praised for making lots of money, and for not caring about money because obviously caring about money is a bad thing, unless you're Apple, then it's a good thing.
Sad that a man's death was used by people to evangelise about a company, and criticise other companies - there are people behind those companies too, but I bet most the Apple fans telling us we should care about Jobs don't even know the name of Samsung's CEO, let alone if he died.
Re: Always amazed at the tech journos......
I agree - depressing we can't get through an article without an obligitary Apple plug.
The bizarre thing is that the criticism it makes is the complete *opposite* point of view of most the commenters/voters here. The consensus seems to be disliking pure tablet devices, and locked down Windows RT[*] - exactly the same reason why people here don't like Ipads. Yet "Tim" criticises it for having a keyboard, and not being "simple". It's as if they intentionally picked a comment that would criticise it, but for reasons completely unrepresentative of what most readers think.
[*] And ppl seem to have missed that many of these devices are running x86 Windows.
If PC sales have "slumped", it's because they've long reached saturation (everyone who wants one, has one), and we're in bad economic times. It's much easier for a market to grow when it's new, and much smaller. That doesn't mean it can be extrapolated to say that tablets will be what everyone uses instead of PCs, as the Register, the media and so-called analysts seem to think. "The PC is dying" is getting old, and the way the media want to push us all to Ipads is worrying.
Plus what is a PC? Why is it a "PC" if it's a tablet only device running Windows RT, but not if it's running Android or IOS, and made by one of the same companies that make laptops...
Re: Do these tanks have the grunt to park on Apple's lawn?
Only one of the devices appears to be Windows RT, the other devices seem to be x86 machines. (Though the article is a bit unclear - but at least one mentions x86 specifically, and in general, lots of the new hybrid machines being announced are x86.)
Re: RE: Obviously!
I'm not sure why only one company can "get away" with something...
But the point the OP was trying to make was that MS aren't doing only this, they're givng us choice. So Windows RT and pure tablets are for people who want a dumbed down Ipad clone, the rest of us can be happy with a device that has keyboard and runs full Windows.
And "Tim" thinks it's the *latter* that's a bad idea - whilst the rest of us here would prefer it. I do find it bizarre that MS offering the choice of either means they end up being criticised from both sides...
Re: RE: Obviously!
Hang on a mo - surely the Windows RT one is a plain tablet without the twisting keyboard thing. The ones with keyboard are x86 machines, which means full Windows 8. (Well, it's hard to tell from the article - though even if these ones aren't, lots of x86 hybrids are being released, with Windows RT really being kept for the low end pure tablets.)
And this also seems to be a case of attacking from completely opposite directions. The article praises Ipads for being simple and criticises this for being complex, but then you come along and criticise Windows RT for being simple.
Re: Link to that article
And with that article, we see where the media go next with their attempts to make Apple look relevant. The stages have been:
"Iphone is number one!" (conveniently ignoring Nokia/Symbian)
"Iphone outsells Android!" (still ignoring Nokia/Symbian)
"Okay, so Android way outsells Iphone, but Apple are still the number one company!" (using an ill-defined "smartphone" definition to compare sales, and ignoring Nokia)
"Okay, so now Samsung outsell Apple even on just their 'smartphones', but the Iphone is still the best selling model!" (ignoring that comparing single models isn't fair, when Apple only have one per generation, and others have loads)
Now we have reached a stage where even just one single Android model, out of thousands, outsells the Iphone. (As an aside, given that this is also just the US, previously one of Apple's strongholds, that's also quite impressive for Samsung.) What do the media do now?:
"But, but ... demand for the next Iphone 5 that hasn't even been announced is through the roof!"
Not sure how demand is measured or is relevant when it hasn't been announced. Media hype may be through the roof, but media bias is nothing to be proud of. They've been harping on about "Iphone 5" for about 18 months now. Give it a rest, already!
This is 2nd hand, not 1st hand
"you might think customers would be rushing to buy up the remaining stock of Samsung devices while they're still on shelves, not unloading the ones they already have"
Surely that's entirely consistent with this (anecdotal) evidence? If I'm a Samsung user deciding to rush out now to get the latest Samsung, I'm likely going to get rid of my old Samsung.
Honestly, I fail to see how 2nd hand sales tells us anything. Plus this is a classic case of "let's pick some anecdotal comment, and twist it to be in Apple's favour". Meanwhile, actual factual news such as Samsung and even Nokia outselling Apple again and again, or Apple's slide in sales on 10 million phones last quarter alone, is conveniently given little press by most the media.
This is good news for Android, as it means these older phones have a chance to remain in use 2nd hand, rather than being dumped in a drawer or thrown away, keeping the installed userbase up.
The US is the largest smartphone market? I assume those figures quoted are the ill-defined Apple-biased ones that compare 100% of Apple's sales to only a fraction of Samsung's (and Nokia's etc). There is no sensible definition of "smartphone" that includes all Iphones, but doesn't include Samsung's "feature" phones. "Smart" vs "feature" is just a marketing term chosen by those companies.
You might as well list who is first in sales of "Phones that start with a lowercase letter in their name".
Re: The tragedy is
It's like anything with Apple really:
"Apple are amazing that they sell millions"
"Apple are amazing for being able to make a product that people want"
"Apple are amazing for being 3rd place in the market"
"Apple sometimes give okay customer service, amazing!"
Apple are like the 9 year old kid in the family that comes 3rd in the egg 'n' spoon race at school. You clap, but it's not better than what other kids have done. For some reason, Apple get ridiculous praise, for doing what's normal for many if not most multinationals do.
Re: Painfully true.
"Its telling that any new laptop/ultrabook/tablet/smartphone that comes out is nearly always directly compared to the equivalent Apple product."
The only thing telling about that is the ridiculous amount of bias and Apple obsession in the media. It's nothing to do with objectivity. The clue is that the hype appears *before* products are even announced, let alone released.
Just look at how even now, the massively successful Nexus 7 has to share story space with "But there'll be an Ipad Mini, honest!" It's sickening, really. This is free marketing that apple get - nothing to do with technology, or OCD.
Re: Apple service
Sorry, but who cares? Load of us could share stories about how we love other companies, either the product, the service, or both. But what relevance does that have?
This is what I don't get - since the Apple vs Samsung story, we've had Apple fanatics using it as an excuse to evangelise - as if they didn't already try to shove Apple Apple Apple down our throats every other day of the year. Sorry, we're not interested. The issue here is Apple's disgraceful behaviour in the courtrooms - and if you want to use that as an excuse to shill about Apple products, giving benefit to them, you're part of the problem.
Re: At the price Apple charges, customer service MUST be superb
There are some deals where an Iphone might match the equivalent other phone, but in general, the range of prices on Iphones is far more expensive than those you can get the equivalent other phones. And which is it - we hear hype all the time about how wonderful special Apple are because they can charge more and make more money? But now you say that Apple are wonderful, because it isn't true?
I don't think there's anything special about Apple being able to make PCs at no more expensive than other companies though. For heaven's sake, most of us could build desktop PCs at a similar price to commercial ones. Small companies like PC Specialist can do great deals on powerful laptops I should think a big multinational can do it!
Re: Interesting stories...
Of course, the people telling negative stories must be telling porkies(!)
Or more likely, there is no magic consistency, and it depends on the shop, the employees, the circumstances and so on - as well a the expectations (e.g., some people may think it amazing that Apple repair something they've paid for with insurance, even though that's normal - apparently because Apple have given it a magic name "Apple Care", it must be something completely different to insurance!).
Re: I just want
" I don't want to spend my life tinkering or re-ROMing or jailbreaking - I want a phone, pad, notebook that works - for that Apple works very well."
Er, you don't have to do any of those things on other platforms. And on the contrary, it's only Apple that you have to jailbreak to do basic things - it's on other platforms you have freedom without doing that.
"having your music (and now films) available in the cloud is a real benefit "
Good for you - you can do this on any platform.
"Mountain Lion is generally 'better' for most people - although Windows 7 is pretty decent these days."
Pure opinion, and not sure why you have scare quotes. I'd say Windows 7 is generally better for most people, though OS X and Ubuntu are pretty decent these days.
"Since using Mac stuff I have a lot more time, my data is more secure"
I have more time with Windows, and have no trouble with data security. No idea about your benchmark, but I hope you tested with identical hardware.
Re: I just want
I share your view - although it's not all bad, most people aren't buying iWhatevers - Android dominates massively over Iphones. I do get annoyed about the absurd and unfair amount of hype and free advertising that Apple get from the media though (The Reg is a rare exception that covers other platforms in a more even manner) - it's like the entire media are trying to steer computing into a vision of something that many of us hate.
- IT bloke publishes comprehensive maps of CALL CENTRE menu HELL
- Nine-year-old Opportunity Mars rover sets NASA distance record
- Analysis Who is the mystery sixth member of LulzSec?
- Prankster 'Superhero' takes on robot traffic warden AND WINS
- Comment Congress: It's not the Glass that's scary - It's the GOOGLE