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 528651
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: History will repeat itself...
by ricegf on Sat 28th Jul 2012 11:42 UTC in reply to "History will repeat itself..."
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

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

Yeah its kind of funny. They thought that being open didn't work because of the hardware manufacturers not developing good devices, I think google has proved the problem with the approach was the poor software.

Reply Parent Score: 3

moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

Microsoft was already open in the MS-DOS days.

Even though on those days I actually preferred the development tools from Borland.

Reply Parent Score: 5

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

bert64 Member since:
2007-04-23

Open is quite subjective in this sense...
Apple have their own closed mobile hardware, but MS are heading that way too.

OSX is considerably more open than windows in general, the only area where they're not is that they supply the hardware too.

In terms of interoperability tho, Apple are considerably more open...
Compare facetime, which is based on sip and is a published spec to skype which is totally closed.
Apple support caldav, carddav etc, ms tries to lock you in to proprietary exchange protocols.

MS have traditionally kept their file formats and protocols closed, and the only reason there is any interoperability at all (eg samba) is through reverse engineering, and they only grudgingly implement any form of standards if they have to, and do so in bad faith (eg see their implementation of formulae in odf).

Reply Parent Score: 1

ricegf Member since:
2007-04-25

I suppose on a "openness" scale of 1 to 10, with Android being 10 and Apple 1, I would give Microsoft a 3, given their tight constraints on hardware and software and the special privileges given to Nokia.

If I'm wrong, please point me to the innovative WP 7.x phones that have resulted.

WP8 and WinRT may have different rules, of course, but they aren't shipping yet.

But I do strongly disagree that "the problems they're having have little to do with the open or closed nature of the ecosystem". I believe WP has failed to take off because all WP phones are basically the same. The iPhone also lacks variety, of course, but at least it provides a highly predictable experience, insanely comprehensive app store, and a certain brand cachet.

But this is just my opinion. Who really knows why customers buy what they buy? Only the Madison Avenue research firms, I suppose, and they aren't giving away their research. *shrugs*

Reply Parent Score: 2