Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 22nd May 2013 13:38 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless "The Verge has learned that HTC's Chief Product Officer, Kouji Kodera, left the company last week. Kodera was responsible for HTC's overall product strategy, which makes the departure especially notable on the heels of the global launch of the make-or-break One. It's not just Kodera. In the past three-odd months, HTC has lost a number of employees in rapid succession." I really hope HTC pulls it together.
Order by: Score:
Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Wed 22nd May 2013 14:06 UTC
Nelson
Member since:
2005-11-29

This just goes to show that no one OEM can grapple with Samsung's death grip on the Android ecosystem. There is almost no point in even calling it Android, Samsung has taken the entire cake.

This wouldn't be bad if it was a temporary trend, but Samsung has cleverly turned it into a self sustaining dominance. They have an enormous supply chain apparatus allowing for insourcing of components and non-commodity designs that just out class HTC.

HTC's One may be the better phone, but like the others who try, it doesn't really matter if you make the better product when market conditions are irreparably out of whack.

Samsung has a bigger foot print, more money, and more control over the components than their rivals. Pretty much everyone save for Apple is being absolutely crushed by Samsung.

HTC absolutely needs to change direction. They're in Nokia's situation in 2010. To me, the only alternative is to go with Windows Phone in a meaningful manner.

Nokia increased the size of the Windows Phone market, there's no reason why HTC couldn't do the same. There's no lack of will at Microsoft to give out money either, so they could likely negotiate themselves a healthy deal.

With their profits taking a jump off of a cliff, I'm guessing they could need the extra cash.

An HTC/Nokia duopoly on Windows Phone would be the most coherent and formidable answer to Samsung. Microsoft has the pockets to bank roll the assault, it just needs a nice foot soldier like HTC to make the One running Windows Phone.

Had Nokia decided to go the HTC route, they'd be long dead by now. In an ironic twist, Nokia is trending upwards and HTC is trending downwards. And some people still think Nokia made the wrong choice.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by Nelson
by moondevil on Wed 22nd May 2013 14:17 UTC in reply to "Comment by Nelson"
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

And some people still think Nokia made the wrong choice.


Speaking as former employee, it remains to be seen.

Reply Score: 8

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Wed 22nd May 2013 14:54 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Yeah, it's by no means a sure thing in Nokia's case. But from we can see so far, there is limited indication that it is working.

They're not an overnight Samsung, but imho, Nokia is still in the conversation because they took Microsoft's olive branch.

Still it is absolutely fascinating that you worked at Nokia, so you likely have an interesting perspective.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by Nelson
by moondevil on Wed 22nd May 2013 15:19 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Nelson"
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

Not much I can comment on public forums, just that it was the network unit that later became part of NSN.

Edited 2013-05-22 15:20 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by PresentIt on Sun 26th May 2013 17:53 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

"And some people still think Nokia made the wrong choice.

Speaking as former employee, it remains to be seen.
"

It has already been seen. Sales are still terrible. Behind the bragging about "increased sales" you basically have such poor sales it's laughable.

To put it this way: If you sell 1 phone one quarter and 2 the next you have 100% growth. But that doesn't help when your competitors increased their sales by millions.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by Nelson
by windowshasyou on Wed 22nd May 2013 14:21 UTC in reply to "Comment by Nelson"
windowshasyou Member since:
2011-05-14

Nice Microsoft sales pitch. Tell me, does Microsoft pay you by the comment or by the hour?

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Wed 22nd May 2013 14:37 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Nice Microsoft sales pitch. Tell me, does Microsoft pay you by the comment or by the hour?


HTC posted a 37% YoY decrease versus a triple digit 180% YoY growth for Nokia Lumia sales.

Nokia outsold HTC in Q1 2013.

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: Comment by Nelson
by Savior on Wed 22nd May 2013 16:21 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Nelson"
Savior Member since:
2006-09-02

It would be the same, or even better, if Nokia went Android. However badly they reacted to the smart phone revolution, Nokia is still a household name in many parts of the world. People are still talking about the quality of their hardware; so once they could get a nice trendy software on their phones, there was a fair chance they could turn their luck around -- to a degree, at least.

I would argue that choosing MS has actually hurt them. There is, of course, no way to know that now.

Reply Score: 6

RE[3]: Comment by Nelson
by No it isnt on Wed 22nd May 2013 17:36 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Nelson"
No it isnt Member since:
2005-11-14

YOY growth for Lumia devices is entirely pointless, as they have only been on sale for a year and a half.

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Wed 22nd May 2013 22:28 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Nelson"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

They've also been up sequentially for multiple quarters.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Comment by Nelson
by PresentIt on Sun 26th May 2013 17:54 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Nelson"
PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

HTC posted a 37% YoY decrease versus a triple digit 180% YoY growth for Nokia Lumia sales.

And yet Lumia sales are terrible. Dreadful. Disastrous. The numbers are extremely poor. 180% growth doesn't help when you hardly sold anyting in the first place and that's the cause of the large percentage increase.

To put it this way again: If you sell 1 phone one quarter and 2 the next you have 100% growth. But that doesn't help when your competitors increased their sales by millions.

Nokia outsold HTC in Q1 2013.

Maybe if you count dumbphones, I guess.

The HTC Flagship, One, sold 5 million units in a month.

The Nokia flagship, Lumia 920, sold 5.6 million units in the entire 1st quarter (up from 4.4 million the quarter before, a really pathetic increase if you look at iPhone and, say, the Samsung Galaxy).

Also, as one analyst pointed out: "Whether it's 5 million or 4 million, it's not clear how many of those are from inventory build-up in the last quarter."

Edited 2013-05-26 18:01 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by GraphiteCube on Wed 22nd May 2013 18:58 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
GraphiteCube Member since:
2009-04-01

So you can't respond properly but trolling and insulting the others?

I've seen many people say on the web that "Nokia must be better if they make Android devices". HTC make Android devices, but how do you explain the current situation of HTC?

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by Nelson
by Vanders on Wed 22nd May 2013 21:34 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Nelson"
Vanders Member since:
2005-07-06

HTC make Android devices, but how do you explain the current situation of HTC?

Cripplingly poor management?

No I'm sure it must be Android.

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Wed 22nd May 2013 22:34 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Nelson"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

I don't think anyone is claiming that HTC is failing because of Android, only that HTC is failing and Android can't save it.

Some have incorrectly claimed on other occasions that if Nokia had just gone with Android they'd magically be in a better position. What happened instead is that HTC fell off of a cliff and Nokia's future is looking more secure by the quarter.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by orfanum on Wed 22nd May 2013 19:55 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
orfanum Member since:
2006-06-02

If they have as much money to squander as he says they do, by the character, I am guessing.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by Nelson
by MOS6510 on Wed 22nd May 2013 14:22 UTC in reply to "Comment by Nelson"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

I think Nokia should have made their own OS, gone with WP or done both.

Certainly I agree Android was a no-go. It would reduce Nokia to just another phone maker, which would be sad for a company that was once synonymous with the mobile phone.

I'm sure Microsoft would welcome HTC and give them support if they're serious about WP phones.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Wed 22nd May 2013 14:45 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

I think Nokia should have made their own OS, gone with WP or done both.


So far, I think the Nokia strategy is bearing out nicely. It is exactly what every level headed person thought would happen -- a gradual but noticeable improvement in Nokia's financial position and in their Lumia shipments over time.

Windows Phone is certainly reaching the point where it has been fully bootstrapped and becomes self sustaining, but we're not all the way there yet.

I think for Nokia, Q2 and Q3 leading into Q4 will be pivotal for them. Its make or break now, they have their full portfolio with a competent OS. They just need to seal the deal.

I'm optimistic about Q2 given Nokia's own guidance last quarter, but Q3 remains a mystery. If they can keep momentum up into Q4 they'll do very well for themselves.


Certainly I agree Android was a no-go. It would reduce Nokia to just another phone maker, which would be sad for a company that was once synonymous with the mobile phone.


It's not just that, Nokia simply wouldn't have had the money to do the large scale launches they do (similar problem HTC now faces).


I'm sure Microsoft would welcome HTC and give them support if they're serious about WP phones.


They could even broker a deal which would see Nokia and HTC drop their litigation and move forward together against Android.

The combined volume of Nokia+HTC would be meaningful and provide a counterweight to Samsung and Apple.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by Nelson
by MOS6510 on Wed 22nd May 2013 15:38 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Nelson"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

I think they are doing well too, it's just that some (most?) people apparently think Nokia can switch to a new platform and have instant marketshare overnight.

My guess is Nokia now has a higher marketshare with WP than they would have had with Android. They would have made better phones than Samsung, but they don't have Samsung's well, let's call it "commitment" to marketing.

Still a bit annoyed about the WP7/8 thing being stuck on 7.8 now with my Lumia 800.

But it would be nice to see Nokia's with a Nokia designed operating system again.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by Neolander on Thu 23rd May 2013 06:05 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

I think Nokia should have made their own OS, gone with WP or done both.

Certainly I agree Android was a no-go. It would reduce Nokia to just another phone maker, which would be sad for a company that was once synonymous with the mobile phone.

I'm sure Microsoft would welcome HTC and give them support if they're serious about WP phones.

+1 Insightful for mentioning the third option of Nokia growing their own OS.

That one was also possible at some point, they only blew it by letting the Symbian team stagnate, let their code rot, and impose their tyranny upon other teams.

It's such a shame to leave so many of these impressive OS projects Nokia had being left to rot, in favor of the latest Microsoft mobile failure of all things... Though I can agree that Android (or iOS for that matter, if it was possible to license it) wouldn't have done much better.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by Nelson
by Deviate_X on Wed 22nd May 2013 16:19 UTC in reply to "Comment by Nelson"
Deviate_X Member since:
2005-07-11

Windows Phone isn't really going to help HTC. Nokia owns Windows Phone entirely (something like 80% of the WP phones are Nokia) for a good reason, they have put the commitment and effort where it counts.

The ultimate reason for Samsung's domination now, is probably due to the same early efforts and commitments Samsung had with Android.

HTC option now is to simply stay a-float and wait for the market shift its focus...

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by GraphiteCube on Wed 22nd May 2013 19:06 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
GraphiteCube Member since:
2009-04-01

Windows Phone isn't really going to help HTC. Nokia owns Windows Phone entirely (something like 80% of the WP phones are Nokia) for a good reason, they have put the commitment and effort where it counts.

The ultimate reason for Samsung's domination now, is probably due to the same early efforts and commitments Samsung had with Android.

HTC option now is to simply stay a-float and wait for the market shift its focus...

Nokia owns that large part of Windows Phone ecosystem because of their commitment. If you read the news about Windows Phone, I think 90% of the time you will find Nokia working on some exclusive apps on their products. Samsung and HTC do similar thing but not as frequent as Nokia does. I like HTC 8X but at the end I decided to go with Lumia 920, why? Because Nokia is willing to work and improve their products; Samsung/ HTC simply sell you the phone and do nothing. Even if Samsung/ HTC don't want to make exclusive apps on their own, why can't they sign deals with app makers to offer exclusive experiences on their phone?

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by Nelson
by Fergy on Wed 22nd May 2013 17:38 UTC in reply to "Comment by Nelson"
Fergy Member since:
2006-04-10

This just goes to show that no one OEM can grapple with Samsung's death grip on the Android ecosystem. There is almost no point in even calling it Android, Samsung has taken the entire cake.

It is still android and an app works on Samsung, HTC, LG etc.

This wouldn't be bad if it was a temporary trend, but Samsung has cleverly turned it into a self sustaining dominance. They have an enormous supply chain apparatus allowing for insourcing of components and non-commodity designs that just out class HTC.

If you mean Samsung outspends HTC on marketing you are right.

HTC's One may be the better phone, but like the others who try, it doesn't really matter if you make the better product when market conditions are irreparably out of whack.

Marketing

Samsung has a bigger foot print, more money, and more control over the components than their rivals. Pretty much everyone save for Apple is being absolutely crushed by Samsung.

Marketing

HTC absolutely needs to change direction. They're in Nokia's situation in 2010. To me, the only alternative is to go with Windows Phone in a meaningful manner.

HTC has their own OS, a huge software development team and had an iphone 2 years before the iphone? Ow you mean HTC has thrown away all their current phones and software and wait 3 years before they have windows phones!

Nokia increased the size of the Windows Phone market, there's no reason why HTC couldn't do the same. There's no lack of will at Microsoft to give out money either, so they could likely negotiate themselves a healthy deal.

Yes Nokia makes nice phones and even if they run a brand new unproven OS that has barely any apps they can grow windows phones marketshare. Of course it would have been really hard to get that low marketshare any lower.

With their profits taking a jump off of a cliff, I'm guessing they could need the extra cash.

And that would bring more money than selling Android AND windows phones?

An HTC/Nokia duopoly on Windows Phone would be the most coherent and formidable answer to Samsung. Microsoft has the pockets to bank roll the assault, it just needs a nice foot soldier like HTC to make the One running Windows Phone.

You already have Samsung/Nokia/HTC windows phones. The only thing different would be no sales from Android.

Had Nokia decided to go the HTC route, they'd be long dead by now. In an ironic twist, Nokia is trending upwards and HTC is trending downwards. And some people still think Nokia made the wrong choice.

You really think that if Nokia had kept all their symbian and linux phones and added android and windows phones that they would be _worse_ of?

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by Nelson
by tylerdurden on Wed 22nd May 2013 18:15 UTC in reply to "Comment by Nelson"
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

Yeah, it is clear that the best way to go against Samsung's products is using outdated HW platforms, running an OS with little traction overall in the smart phone market space... makes perfect sense.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Wed 22nd May 2013 22:40 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Yeah, it is clear that the best way to go against Samsung's products is using outdated HW platforms, running an OS with little traction overall in the smart phone market space... makes perfect sense.


What's your alternative? Because thats the same platform that has kept Nokia alive and even brought them to profitability.

HTC is at the point where they need real solutions. One with a chance of working. How wouldn't quarterly cash infusions from Microsoft, matched marketing, and engineering resources not help HTC?

Nokia outsold HTC and is poised to go even further in Q2, so how is this something that isn't beneficial to HTC?

HTC could save itself and in turn a lot of jobs if does what would be hypothetically mutually beneficial for both parties. In my opinion.

The alternative is staying their current course, as cash strapped as they are. Try to compete on marketing, sourcing of components, hiring of talent, and all that's associated with a successful product launch all without any comparable help from Google.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by Nelson
by tylerdurden on Wed 22nd May 2013 23:52 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Nelson"
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

Perhaps you're conveniently forgetting that there are more android vendors other than HTC and samsung, and that HTC actually produces Windows Phones.

Furthermore, a big contributor to nokia's recent (bare) profitability were financial transactions (liquidation of physical assets mainly). Their product revenues have been lackluster, and they did just post a 190 million net lost in the recent quarter (now they are out of assets to squeeze).


Also, I'd be more careful when gloating about market share gains. Since Nokia experienced the fastest collapse in market share of any mobile handset maker in history, while transitioning to windows phone; 62% drop per year from 2010 to 2012.

So I fail to see how it can be spun as good business decision having to compete with other vendors for 4% of the market (WP's overall share), vs ducking it out with some of the same vendors for over half of the market.

Nokia should have produced WP and Android devices, and let the market sort it out. Rather than just tie their fortunes to a single albatross around their neck (which just like android is out of their control, or perhaps even more so).

Edited 2013-05-22 23:53 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Thu 23rd May 2013 00:23 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Nelson"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Perhaps you're conveniently forgetting that there are more android vendors other than HTC and samsung, and that HTC actually produces Windows Phones.


So? What HTC goes to show is that it is by no means a sure thing.

HTC also half heartedly produces Windows Phone and barely supports the ecosystem, as such, they are not rewarded with the market unlike Nokia.

Furthermore, a big contributor to nokia's recent (bare) profitability were financial transactions (liquidation of physical assets mainly).


Can you quantify this? How did their financial transactions (which wouldn't show up in a non-IFRS profitability score, which incidentally shows Nokia having a profit last quarter) affect their bottom line? To what extent? Is it true that had they done them they'd be profitable?

I'm not sure either of those is especially true, but you seem sure, so I guess you've done the homework on it.


Also, I'd be more careful when gloating about market share gains. Since Nokia experienced the fastest collapse in market share of any mobile handset maker in history, while transitioning to windows phone; 62% drop per year from 2010 to 2012.


What is your point? That Nokia experienced a transition? Nokia was absolutely massive, a collapse like that I don't think should be all that surprising if you consider their lack of a response for many years.

People shed Windows Mobile in droves and they are similarly defecting from BlackBerry. Troubled companies bleed marketshare. News at 11.

This isn't about that, despite you trying your best at a stupid pot shot. What it is about is the impact that Windows Phone is now starting to have on Nokia's bottom line and on their volume shipments since switching over to them.

The pretty hard to argue with point that HTC is the counter-Nokia in strategy and has had a perilous time. My entire point is to point out that Android is not a fool proof solution, it doesn't automatically transfer into sales.


So I fail to see how it can be spun as good business decision having to compete with other vendors for 4% of the market (WP's overall share), vs ducking it out with some of the same vendors for over half of the market.


When you have a market that's expanding as fast as it is, and you're bleeding customers, the first thing you do is establish a bottom for your self.

HTC can help grow that 4% into something more meaningful and mutually beneficial for all parties involved. HTC makes damn good phones. They just need the resources to keep doing it before they die.

Android wont' give them that because Google doesn't go to the extent that Microsoft does. Its nice that you claim that Windows Phone has 4% of the market and try to use that as a stick to beat WP with, but the fact of the matter is that HTC isn't selling very many phones regardless.

HTC doesn't have another try at this, the One was pretty much it. Either they do something drastic now or they'll die.


Nokia should have produced WP and Android devices, and let the market sort it out. Rather than just tie their fortunes to a single albatross around their neck (which just like android is out of their control, or perhaps even more so).


Microsoft likely would not have given them the billions of dollars had they not gone exclusively with Windows Phone.

Nokia actually has pretty deep architectural hooks into Windows Phone and has contributed in many deep ways according to them and according to Microsoft. So unless you have some information that neither of us have, what is your reasoning to doubt that?

That Nokia doesn't throw a barometer in their phone or release an annoying UI skin? I don't think they want to do that when Metro is a pretty much 1:1 match to their design ethos.

Edited 2013-05-23 00:24 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by Nelson
by tylerdurden on Thu 23rd May 2013 00:43 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by Nelson"
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

since astroturfing is not part of my earning strategies, I'll make this one quick.

Its nice that you claim that Windows Phone has 4% of the market and try to use that as a stick to beat WP with


Yeah, how dare reality and actual data to be biased against your own particular narrative... the gall! At the end of the day, nokia has to compete for 4% of market share against Samsung and HTC. I fail to see how that can be spun as being a much better business proposition than having to compete against Samsung and HTC for over 50% of the market.

And yes you can simply ignore the catastrophic collapse in market share brought by the transition to WP, while at the same time heralding overall meager market gains as the second coming of Jesus. I guess hitting rock bottom could be spun as a "triumph against gravity" in some circles.


Re nokia's financial information; we already went through some of these figures when we discussed in another thread nokia's financial health by going through their actual financial results.

Finally, just because HTC is failing does not imply nokia is doing better or that they have a better strategy by some kind of magic dichotomy.

Edited 2013-05-23 01:01 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE: Comment by Nelson
by dsmogor on Thu 23rd May 2013 07:47 UTC in reply to "Comment by Nelson"
dsmogor Member since:
2005-09-01

HTC has already released decent Windows phones. They posses hefty 23% of WP market and the duopoly you describe is a fact today. Does it help them in any way? No.
What else do you them doing? Dropping Android altogether and whatever revenue comes with it. Given amount of past investments such a massive write off would mean a sudden death for the company.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Comment by Nelson
by bert64 on Thu 23rd May 2013 08:54 UTC in reply to "Comment by Nelson"
bert64 Member since:
2007-04-23

Nokia is a household name, and has been for many years... HTC is nowhere near as well known.

HTC already make devices running windows phone and they aren't selling very well either. They are doomed either way, a cheap clone of nokia or a cheap clone of samsung.

Reply Score: 3

It's simple
by tuaris on Wed 22nd May 2013 14:23 UTC
tuaris
Member since:
2007-08-05

HTC makes an awesome product, I currently have an EVO 4g. I'm looking to upgrade real soon and the HTC One is the best android phone in existence.

Guess what? I'm buying the Samsung Galaxy S4. The reason is simple: The S4 has a removable battery and microSD slot.

It's a big deal. Those of you who disagree with this statement are in the minority. The fact that the HTC One hasn't outsold the S4 it a clear indication of this.

All HTC needs to do is add a removable battery and microSD slot to the HTC One and then consumers may actually want to buy it.

Reply Score: 3

RE: It's simple
by Nelson on Wed 22nd May 2013 14:55 UTC in reply to "It's simple"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

You heard that HTC? Your profits fell by over 90% because of a microSD slot and a removable battery.

Given these recent departures, you might nag yourself a job of Head of Product Strategy.

Reply Score: 6

RE: It's simple
by WereCatf on Wed 22nd May 2013 15:23 UTC in reply to "It's simple"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

It's a big deal. Those of you who disagree with this statement are in the minority. The fact that the HTC One hasn't outsold the S4 it a clear indication of this.


Uh, that's quite a drastic conclusion you're drawing there. One reason for why HTC One hasn't outsold the S4 is that HTC's marketing sucks compared to Samsung. Another thing is that Samsung has a much larger base for brand-recognition, what with manufacturing almost every electronic device in existence. Claiming that HTC's not-so-stellar performance is because of the lack of features you happen to like seems... dishonest, at best.

Edited 2013-05-22 15:24 UTC

Reply Score: 5

RE: It's simple
by th3rmite on Wed 22nd May 2013 16:43 UTC in reply to "It's simple"
th3rmite Member since:
2006-01-08

I totally agree with the MicroSD. I will never buy a phone without one. It seems like such a simple, but truly functional, addition to a phone. The removable battery is not really a priority for me, but I can see why it would be to some.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: It's simple
by Fergy on Wed 22nd May 2013 17:43 UTC in reply to "RE: It's simple"
Fergy Member since:
2006-04-10

I totally agree with the MicroSD. I will never buy a phone without one. It seems like such a simple, but truly functional, addition to a phone. The removable battery is not really a priority for me, but I can see why it would be to some.

And if your phone had 64-128GB of storage? Would you still need microsd?

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: It's simple
by Neolander on Thu 23rd May 2013 06:12 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: It's simple"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

And if your phone had 64-128GB of storage? Would you still need microsd?

I'm sure someone has said the same thing before about having more that 64KB of RAM in a computer. Anytime a "comfortable" computer resource threshold is set, software and technology finds a way to require more for perfectly reasonable reasons. After all, who doesn't want HD video on those gorgeous new screens?

Besides, phone manufacturers will always artificially inflate the price of onboard flash to insane levels, making MicroSD a more cost-conscious choice. And having a removable storage media can be pretty useful in a bunch of scenarios, such as backups or phone-phone and computer-phone data transfers.

Edited 2013-05-23 06:22 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: It's simple
by majipoor on Thu 23rd May 2013 09:27 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: It's simple"
majipoor Member since:
2009-01-22

"I'm sure someone has said the same thing before about having more that 64KB of RAM in a computer. Anytime a "comfortable" computer resource threshold is set, software and technology finds a way to require more for perfectly reasonable reasons."

Yes, but no one expected a 64KB RAM computer could be upgraded to a 4MB RAM computer: resources needs do actually increase over time, but new requirements are met with new generations of hardware, which seems quite reasonable.

One can expect a 4 years lifespan for smartphones and today, 64GB or 128GB seems enough for current generation of hardware.

Problem with SD used as memory extension is that if you store apps data on the card and then want to upload or access photos or music or whatever from another card within an app, you are in trouble. SD as memory extension is not a wise option IMHO. SD as a way to load or backup files may be useful, but there is other ways to get the same result.

Edited 2013-05-23 09:31 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: It's simple
by Neolander on Fri 24th May 2013 05:44 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: It's simple"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

Indeed, I've also felt multiple times that the solution of storing important application data on the SD card instead of just using it as a dumb user data storage medium was a very bad idea.

But if you do not allow application data storage on the SD card, and only use it as a dumb medium to store downloads, pictures, videos, and music on, you should not fall into any trouble when unplugging the card. So in my opinion, the SD card itself is not necessarily to blame there.

A possible issue there is that sometimes, applications treat user documents which they act upon as private application data and store it accordingly. This is a bad software design practice that gets worryingly common these days, probably as a result of mobile OSs favoring app-centric usage paradigms over document-centric ones even when the latter makes a lot more sense. For media files, in my experience, hotplugging is still handled fine, however.

Anyway, if you store HD video on a mobile device, 64GB is relatively easily reached with a medium-sized media library. So unless we want to stay in the technological stone age of having to constantly delete and move data around from a desktop to a phone, it seems to me that memory extensions are still relevant.

I'd like to say that as with the desktop, the problem will mostly disappear by itself around the 250GB or 500GB storage node. But then again, I'm sure that someone will think of a way to make use of all the extra storage, such as by popularizing 4K video on tablets ;)

SD as a way to load or backup files may be useful, but there is other ways to get the same result.

If you are thinking of MTP data transfers there, the technology tends to be quite buggy on anything but Windows, probably since it has been developed by Microsoft for their Windows Media products.

Also, a number of devices tend to hide some of their internal storage when displaying internal memory, since they do not want to show system files, which is not a problem with MicroSD.

Edited 2013-05-24 05:55 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: It's simple
by moondevil on Wed 22nd May 2013 19:55 UTC in reply to "RE: It's simple"
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

Do you ever change it?

Most phones link the SD card with the internal storage.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: It's simple
by th3rmite on Thu 23rd May 2013 19:15 UTC in reply to "RE: It's simple"
th3rmite Member since:
2006-01-08

It's a matter of knowing that if I needed more storage space, then I wouldn't have to buy a new phone just to get it. Would you buy a laptop with the hard drive soldered to the motherboard?

Reply Score: 2

RE: It's simple
by Fergy on Wed 22nd May 2013 17:41 UTC in reply to "It's simple"
Fergy Member since:
2006-04-10

It's a big deal. Those of you who disagree with this statement are in the minority. The fact that the HTC One hasn't outsold the S4 it a clear indication of this.

All HTC needs to do is add a removable battery and microSD slot to the HTC One and then consumers may actually want to buy it.

There is no iPhone with a removable battery. Most Android phones don't have a removable battery. All my phones have had removable batteries and I have never removed the battery.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: It's simple
by Vanders on Wed 22nd May 2013 21:40 UTC in reply to "RE: It's simple"
Vanders Member since:
2005-07-06

Most Android phones don't have a removable battery.

Samsung ones do. I'm not claiming there's a correlation because I haven't actually done any market research, but hey, maybe it is a big enough deal that it helps drive Samsung sales of Android 'phones?

Reply Score: 4

RE: It's simple
by tylerdurden on Wed 22nd May 2013 18:18 UTC in reply to "It's simple"
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

It's a big deal. Those of you who disagree with this statement are in the minority. The fact that the HTC One hasn't outsold the S4 it a clear indication of this.


No, you're wrong. The fact that HTC One hasn't ousold the S4 is a clear indication that people just love plastic.

Yeah atrocious logic!

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: It's simple
by Vanders on Wed 22nd May 2013 21:43 UTC in reply to "RE: It's simple"
Vanders Member since:
2005-07-06

No, you're wrong. The fact that HTC One hasn't ousold the S4 is a clear indication that people just love plastic.

Clearly people just prefer companies that start with an 'S', which is why Samsung and Sony do so well.

(If Sony currently aren't doing well I'm sure I can twist some obscure financial or market research data to my advantage to claim I'm correct.)

Reply Score: 4

RE: It's simple
by JPisini on Wed 22nd May 2013 22:27 UTC in reply to "It's simple"
JPisini Member since:
2006-01-24

HTC makes an awesome product, I currently have an EVO 4g. I'm looking to upgrade real soon and the HTC One is the best android phone in existence.

Guess what? I'm buying the Samsung Galaxy S4. The reason is simple: The S4 has a removable battery and microSD slot.

It's a big deal. Those of you who disagree with this statement are in the minority. The fact that the HTC One hasn't outsold the S4 it a clear indication of this.

All HTC needs to do is add a removable battery and microSD slot to the HTC One and then consumers may actually want to buy it.



With you 100% when my EVO died the only options from HTC had locked boot loaders and no removable battery. I bought a Nexus it is a nice phone and runs straight Android.

Reply Score: 1

Competition
by Jbso on Wed 22nd May 2013 15:33 UTC
Jbso
Member since:
2013-01-05

Why does everyone act like Nokia and HTC are the only alternatives to Applesung? LG and Sony are the most likely to be real competitors. Just because they don't use aluminum doesn't mean they have nothing to offer.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Competition
by Deviate_X on Wed 22nd May 2013 16:25 UTC in reply to "Competition"
Deviate_X Member since:
2005-07-11

People like to talk about Nokia and HTC because Nokia was the Behemoth that forgot to move with the times and HTC was Android pioneer, first-mover which somehow managed to fall by the way-side

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Competition
by tylerdurden on Wed 22nd May 2013 19:22 UTC in reply to "RE: Competition"
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

HTC also applied the Nokia tactic of releasing a shitload of products, with ill marketed differentiation, and carrier-specific models.

E.g. there are at least 5 totally different "HTC Ones": There is an HTC One (the current shiny product), HTC One S, One X, One V, One XL...

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Competition
by Nelson on Wed 22nd May 2013 22:42 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Competition"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

This indicates an imbalance in the Carrier-OEM relationship.

Samsung at one point had this same problem, where they'd release confusing monsters like the Galaxy S II Skyrocket HD 4G LTE+ or something.

Carriers like that sort of artificial differentiation.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Competition
by tylerdurden on Thu 23rd May 2013 00:20 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Competition"
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

... and samsung managed to learn from their mistake, and adopted some of Apple's product branding schemes (aka keep it simple st*pid).

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Competition
by Nelson on Thu 23rd May 2013 00:27 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Competition"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Samsung gained more clout and was able to tell the (mostly US) carriers to shove it if they didn't like the naming.

The Galaxy S sells by virtue of being a Galaxy S (much like the iPhone), that comes with a better negotiating position.

I don't think Nokia is particularly fond of this practice, but if you want Hero status you need to play nice. At least until you're more influential.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Competition
by tylerdurden on Thu 23rd May 2013 00:55 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Competition"
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

I don't think Nokia is particularly fond of this practice


Right.

http://mynokiablog.com/2012/07/23/nokia-to-revamp-marketing-strateg...

Edited 2013-05-23 00:59 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: Competition
by Fergy on Wed 22nd May 2013 17:50 UTC in reply to "Competition"
Fergy Member since:
2006-04-10

Why does everyone act like Nokia and HTC are the only alternatives to Applesung? LG and Sony are the most likely to be real competitors. Just because they don't use aluminum doesn't mean they have nothing to offer.

I find LG and Sony untrustworthy. I still have hate for sony because they wanted to screw their customers with special memory cards, cables and formats. Also destroying the meaning of walkman.
I had a HTC Desire and loved it until HTC gave me the middle finger by not updating it. My friend has it now and it runs Android 4.2.2 so screw you HTC! That is why I absolutely did not want another HTC and went for Galaxy Nexus. I think that that was a huge reason why they are losing marketshare.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Competition
by nej_simon on Wed 22nd May 2013 23:12 UTC in reply to "RE: Competition"
nej_simon Member since:
2011-02-11

The desire was released with 2.1 and they did update it to 2.2 and 2.3. Honestly the desire has so little internal storage that newer versions are difficult to get running without resorting to hacks like a2sd.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Competition
by Fergy on Thu 23rd May 2013 12:12 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Competition"
Fergy Member since:
2006-04-10

The desire was released with 2.1 and they did update it to 2.2 and 2.3. Honestly the desire has so little internal storage that newer versions are difficult to get running without resorting to hacks like a2sd.

If you keep of the crap that HTC puts in you have more storage with 4.2.2. And I thought HTC stopped at 2.2. Maybe 2.3 came 2 years after it was released on Nexus One.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Competition
by tkeith on Wed 22nd May 2013 21:56 UTC in reply to "Competition"
tkeith Member since:
2010-09-01

Mind-share and marketing. How many HTC commercials do you see? How many people in the real world do you hear talking about HTC? As good of a reputation as HTC has among the technically savvy, the average Joe knows little to nothing about them. Samsung has been around and many people have a Samsung TV or washer/drier.

LG and Sony may have it a bit better in that respect but their Android strategies were very muddled until recently. They have too many phones with confusing names, and can't get momentum.

Reply Score: 3

acobar
Member since:
2005-11-15

From the link below, seems they are doing quite well except for chain supply issues. If that information is correct almost all the opinions here about them are disinformed moot and, worse, may echoes an orchestrated FUD campaign.

"http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2270109/htc-one-sales-repo...

I hope they sell a new version with removable battery and microSD slot though.

Reply Score: 2