Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 4th Dec 2012 09:50 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless "For a seventh consecutive month, the Samsung Galaxy S III is the most popular smartphone in the United Kingdom. The data compiled by uSwitch is based on live searches, pre-orders, as well as postpaid sales. Curiously, Apple's current smartphone flagship is not even second. The iPhone 5 is outperformed by its predecessor, whose lower price and improved contract offers helped it remain appealing. The Samsung Galaxy S II completes the quartet at the top. The rest of the top ten smartphones is entirely an Android party. It includes the Google Nexus 4, who entered the rankings a solid fifth. The second half of the top ten includes the Samsung Galaxy Ace, Samsung Galaxy Note 2, Sony Xperia U, HTC One X, as well as the Samsung Galaxy Ace 2." This is getting ridiculous, and it's not good for the market. For the love of Fiona, people, buy something that's not Android. I don't want to live in an Android-dominated smartphone world.
Thread beginning with comment 544111
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Obviously
by henderson101 on Tue 4th Dec 2012 10:17 UTC in reply to "RE: Obviously"
henderson101
Member since:
2006-05-30

Exactly, I'm not arguing with you at all. The costs pretty much show you why the figures are as they are, and why the SIII is so popular. It's a third cheaper over 2 years.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Obviously
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 4th Dec 2012 10:19 in reply to "RE[2]: Obviously"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Exactly, I'm not arguing with you at all. The costs pretty much show you why the figures are as they are, and why the SIII is so popular. It's a third cheaper over 2 years.


It's Google's strategy, really. Make smartphones super-cheap. It's working, and sadly, I don't think the market benefits from it.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[4]: Obviously
by MyNameIsNot4Letter on Tue 4th Dec 2012 10:29 in reply to "RE[3]: Obviously"
MyNameIsNot4Letter Member since:
2011-01-09

I agree. One dominating mobile platform is Windows all over again. After the death of Amiga, computers became kinda boring really.

Well, i'm lining up for a Firefox phone. Or a BlackBerry. Whichever comes first.

I tried the BB tablet and was sold. That thing is snappy as hell. And that was 6 months ago.

/Uni

Edited 2012-12-04 10:29 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Obviously
by henderson101 on Tue 4th Dec 2012 10:30 in reply to "RE[3]: Obviously"
henderson101 Member since:
2006-05-30

It's Google's strategy, really. Make smartphones super-cheap. It's working, and sadly, I don't think the market benefits from it.


I'd far rather have a Jolla or a Windows Phone 8 phone. But I'm sticking with my iPhone 4 till it dies because I don't see the point of upgrading. If the Jolla phones are cool, I'll get one. If Microsoft decides to allow sideloading without paying a stupidly large developer fee every year, I'll get one instead. As it stands nothing appeals to me as a developer. (especially as I already have an N7, Android is boring and Java still sucks.) Vendors - give me an OS that has a decent SDK that I can do something useful with! Please!

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[4]: Obviously
by JAlexoid on Tue 4th Dec 2012 11:24 in reply to "RE[3]: Obviously"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

Actually economics says that that is exactly for the benefit of the market - lower price demands higher efficiency.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[4]: Obviously
by gan17 on Tue 4th Dec 2012 11:28 in reply to "RE[3]: Obviously"
gan17 Member since:
2008-06-03

Right now, I'm more worried about Samsung's growth than Google's.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: Obviously
by Wondercool on Tue 4th Dec 2012 11:28 in reply to "RE[3]: Obviously"
Wondercool Member since:
2005-07-08

Why don't you think the market benefits from it?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Obviously
by Chrispynutt on Tue 4th Dec 2012 11:55 in reply to "RE[3]: Obviously"
Chrispynutt Member since:
2012-03-14

I can see the negatives in cheap, but I see nothing wrong with technology being open to everyone, not just the rich elite and the technophiles.

Much like Windows (95 to 7), it isn't so much that I like the OS, but dislike the other options more.

Not sure I like the look of Jolla, to minimal for my liking. Firefox OS interests me more.

I'd prefer a new desktop OS at this stage, rather than a new Mobile one. I am fed up of the direction Apple, Microsoft, Gnome, Ubuntu are all going in.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: Obviously
by moondevil on Tue 4th Dec 2012 12:57 in reply to "RE[3]: Obviously"
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

That is how Microsoft got where it is now.

I remember having to get a PC with DR-DOS, instead of an Amiga 500, because that is what everyone else was having.

People don't want diversity as much as we geek want to, they just want something cheap that allows them to have the same set of applications as their friends have.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: Obviously
by l3v1 on Tue 4th Dec 2012 13:57 in reply to "RE[3]: Obviously"
l3v1 Member since:
2005-07-06

It's Google's strategy, really. Make smartphones super-cheap. It's working


That should've been the end of the sentence, and I would've agreed. I don't see why enabling the production of cheap phones is a bad thing. It pushes up the number of available phone types&shapes&sizes, which is always good. While one might be a fan of diversity, I don't think we're at a point to start crying. Diversity for diversity's sake won't help us out. It wouldn't make us happier if all phones would be at or above Apple phone prices, or would it? Regardless of company or OS preference, I like the fact that we can get a usable phone well below the Apple price range. We're not in a point in time where we should think that phones belong to some exotic luxury category supported by a high price range. Also, the S3 is a capability-wise very acceptable piece of hardware, with a fairly usable and developable OS, so it doesn't make me sad that it's - at some places, at least - it's cheaper than Apple's offering.

And as always, the best course for good competition is: competition. Make better and/or cheaper alternatives (sometimes they - capability/price - go hand-in-hand, other times one of them wins over the other) and voila, there'll you have a more diverse phone ecosystem. It's not enough to "just" put something out there and say that's it's the better choice. People vote, and here you see the results.

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[4]: Obviously not
by kragil on Tue 4th Dec 2012 15:38 in reply to "RE[3]: Obviously"
kragil Member since:
2006-01-04

Nonsense and FUD at the same time. I could write pages and pages why you are wrong (and maybe even like Engadget) but other wiser people have already done so:

https://plus.google.com/+LinusTorvalds/posts/8KBkzumMEc1

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Obviously
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Tue 4th Dec 2012 18:23 in reply to "RE[3]: Obviously"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

What?! "The Market" I'd rather benefit consumers by having high powered, flexible devices in everyone's hands than benefiting some abstract notion of "the Market". Android is still the most open platform allowing and encouraging wild experimentation with hardware and software. I think that is a good thing that its doing better than Apple, Microsoft's, or Blackberry's platforms.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Obviously
by galvanash on Wed 5th Dec 2012 06:14 in reply to "RE[3]: Obviously"
galvanash Member since:
2006-01-25

It's Google's strategy, really. Make smartphones super-cheap. It's working, and sadly, I don't think the market benefits from it.


US non-contract pricing

Galaxy S3 - $699
Galaxy Note II - $799
HTC One S - $649
Droid RAZR MAXX - $799
iPhone 5 - $699

I think that global sales figures skew peoples view of reality when talking about Android being "cheap"...

China represents a full 27% of the global smartphone market by volume, but close to 70% of the phones sold there are from Chinese vendors you probably never heard of making ultra cheap Android knockoffs. This certainly makes Android look cheap because it skews the global sales charts dramatically. There are a few other Asian countries with very similar markets - they cheap phones sell well, but they are not from major global manufacturers and barely qualify as being called smartphones.

If you ignore China things look VERY different. The most popular priceband of smartphones globally is actually $450+ dollars (the highest priceband that IDC tracks)... That priceband makes up close to 45% of global volumes according to IDC... IF you leave out China.

In short Android phones simply are not cheap if you are talking about Western Europe and the US. There are certainly some cheap phones, but most people don't buy them... Android pricing is roughly comparable with Apple pricing, in some cases higher - even with contract discounts. The Note II goes for $299 with contract from AT&T, and that is a pretty popular model in the states.

The Nexus 4 is fairly cheap, but it is targeted at non-contract buyers primarily, and as such it simply won't get anywhere near the volume of other flagship models sold with contract discounts. The reality is in the States and most of Western Europe people buy phones under contract. Until that stops happening "cheap" Android phones don't have a prayer of making a big dent in those markets.

Reply Parent Score: 3