Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 28th Jul 2012 10:10 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless In case you were still doubting whether or not Apple's lawsuits against Samsung were a case of 'if you can't compete, litigate', Samsung's financial results should seal the deal. The company shipped round and about 50 million smartphones, twice as many smartphones as Apple shipped. So, not only is Android doing better on smartphones than iOS, there's now also a single manufacturer outselling Apple. Oh, the next avenue for de-emphasizing this achievement has already reared its head: Samsung has a wider portfolio, and as such, the comparison isn't fair. Nonsense, of course - Volkswagen sells lots more models than, say, Mazda, but that doesn't mean you can't compare them. Maybe, just maybe, having a wide portfolio of devices to meet the various different needs of the market is simply a very good strategy. It'll be interesting to see just how much Apple can take back with the next iPhone, especially since the full potential of the Galaxy SIII hasn't been realised yet and will be accounted for in Samsung's next quarter as well. Fun, such a fight between titans. Just too bad one of the two titans plays dirty by opting for the courtroom.
Thread beginning with comment 528643
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
History will repeat itself...
by moondevil on Sat 28th Jul 2012 10:28 UTC
moondevil
Member since:
2005-07-08

I am slowly convinced that the way things are going, Apple will return to the PC wars days, with the same outcome as it happened before.

Steve is no longer around to save the company a second time, and he was the soul of Apple. During the time he was away, Apple had issues to stay afloat, and was even more proprietary than Microsoft actually.

Now that he is sadly no longer with us, I am not sure how long the current board will manage to stay innovative enough to attract new customers, while not scaring existing ones.

Reply Score: 7

ricegf Member since:
2007-04-25

What's interesting to me is that Microsoft is following Apple's lead, constraining innovation in WP phones and WinRT mobile devices, while Google has adopted Microsoft's old open approach.

The open approach worked very well last gen, and seems to be working just as well now, with Android covering a huge variety of interesting devices and rapidly growing its market share.

I'm still hoping for a third option to arise to ensure competition, but certainly not the new, closed Microsoft 2.0. Rather, an open option like Android but with a different feature set to cover different use cases. I was rooting for MeeGo until Nokia's insanity hit. Perhaps Jolla will thrive yet; certainly outselling Nokia's weak WP line would be poetic, if unlikely.

It's like all the fun of the home computer wars of the 1980's. :-)

Reply Parent Score: 9

tanzam75 Member since:
2011-05-19

But Microsoft had a monopoly in the Windows era. They could be open because they defined the terms of the competition in that way -- compatibility with the widest array of applications. Remember: developers, developers, developers.

Windows Mobile was an open system, as well. You could do anything you wanted with it -- you could install apps simply by downloading a .CAB, edit the registry, etc.

By being slow with Windows Phone, Microsoft allowed Android to become the second entrant. Thus, Microsoft went from first entrant to third entrant. As third entrant, it now faced a radically different competitive situation. Either it could compete against free, or it could compete against Apple. Guess which one they decided would be more profitable.

Reply Parent Score: 3

kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

What's interesting to me is that Microsoft is following Apple's lead, constraining innovation in WP phones and WinRT mobile devices, while Google has adopted Microsoft's old open approach.

The open approach worked very well last gen, and seems to be working just as well now, with Android covering a huge variety of interesting devices and rapidly growing its market share.

I'm still hoping for a third option to arise to ensure competition, but certainly not the new, closed Microsoft 2.0. Rather, an open option like Android but with a different feature set to cover different use cases. I was rooting for MeeGo until Nokia's insanity hit. Perhaps Jolla will thrive yet; certainly outselling Nokia's weak WP line would be poetic, if unlikely.

It's like all the fun of the home computer wars of the 1980's. :-)


Microsoft is still more open than Apple and the problems they're having have little to do with the open or closed nature of the ecosystem but everything to do with the feeling that Windows Phone 7 was essentially put out there to say to the public, "we're still here and alive" given that rumours have been circulating even before Windows Phone 8 regarding the future of the Windows Phone platform. If I was an OEM, why would I invest a tonne of money in a phone platform running Windows Phone 7 which would essentially be stop gap measure till Windows Phone 8 was ready? Windows Phone 8, Windows RT and Windows 8 are really the starting point to which Microsoft should be evaluated as to whether they'll have success into the future regarding new devices and emerging opportunities.

Personally the biggest deciding factor as to the success or failure is whether they can bring everything together - they've failed to do that in the past but maybe this time with Steven Sinofsky in charge we're seeing a gentler version of Steve Jobs coming forth that is willing to lay out a vision then move heaven and earth to achieve it rather than doing the lazy managerial thing of 'delegating responsibility' to underlings then hoping for the best.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: History will repeat itself...
by Sodki on Sat 28th Jul 2012 12:13 in reply to "History will repeat itself..."
Sodki Member since:
2005-11-10

I am slowly convinced that the way things are going, Apple will return to the PC wars days, with the same outcome as it happened before.

Steve is no longer around to save the company a second time, and he was the soul of Apple. During the time he was away, Apple had issues to stay afloat, and was even more proprietary than Microsoft actually.


I'm not sure. Steve Jobs managed to do something else, the creation of the Apple identity and mindset. I'm sure it's "pupils" learned the lesson and will try to use it well. When Jobs went away the first time, his ideas were thrown away and substituted by others. Not this time.

Reply Parent Score: 2

cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

Just having great ideas leads you nowhere. You also need to execute them, bring them to the market in a great way and react to market changes in an even greater way. Having just the Steve spirit and some ideas left does not cover that.
The worst thing that can happen is if Apple loses its stand as the company with taste, as inventor (not that they did invent much new but they did bring it to market and hit the right buttons to trigger that impression) and as leader.
That is where Steve was a genius and not on the ideas themselfs. He was good making a product out of them, executing the process and hiting the market. That is gone from Apple.
We will see the result as soon as there are new products from Apple rather then the n-iteration of what Steve made. Only then we are able to see if the spirit, the ideas and structures he left is of any use for Apple in a post-Steve time. I have my doubts. Also I think all the sueing of compitors going on and yet Samsung is kicking them away to a poor 2th place is not helping. Apple is, in the public, turning from an inventor that fights competition with great products into a suer tgat fights competition with dirty tricks.
Over time more people may see that change Apple puts itself into. That will have a downwards-effect since if Apple is not seen to be cool any longer then the products will suffer. Its already happening but needs a bit more time till we are able to see it. Apple is going down. The spirit left does not help to prevent that.

Edited 2012-07-29 04:18 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

tanzam75 Member since:
2011-05-19

iPhone has gotten an immense boost in the US from the higher carrier subsidies given to it, vs. Android phones. When you can buy a $600 iPhone for $200, and a $400 Android phone for $200, then Apple gets the benefit of the doubt.

At some point, Android phones will have enough market share -- even in the US -- that the iPhone subsidy will no longer be justified. If a $600 iPhone sells for $400, and a $400 Android phone sells for $200, then a lot of iPhone users will think twice about upgrading.

And then, there's the possibility that carriers will eventually eliminate subsidies. The current Verizon CEO has publicly spoken about the need to eliminate subsidies -- something that no previous Verizon CEO has ever stated publicly before. And T-Mobile has always been very grumpy at being forced by the other three carriers to play the subsidy game.

$600 vs. $400 presents a smaller relative price difference, but $600 will cause consumers who are used to $200 iPhones to reel from sticker stock. In addition, a deferred upgrade is just as bad for Apple as a sale lost to Samsung.

In other words, Apple has relentlessly maximized its profits under the current market structure -- just like they did back in the late 1980s, when the price of a Mac gave you a nosebleed. But they're not considering what is sustainable over the long run, after the market structure changes.

Reply Parent Score: 6

Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

For what its worth with at&t

cheapest iphone is 650 off contract,, 200 on
samsung galaxy s3 550 off contract ,200 on

So yes there is a discrepancy, but its not quite as large as you think.

Reply Parent Score: 1

unclefester Member since:
2007-01-13

A senior Telstra (Australia's largest phone carrier) executive recently stated that Telstra hate the iPhone because of the massive subsidies they must provide.

Reply Parent Score: 2