Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 26th Jul 2013 14:56 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless "In smartphones, it's not all about Apple and Samsung anymore. For several years, these two companies have dominated the mobile phone-making business, successively one-upping each other with ever sleeker, more technologically sophisticated iPhones and Galaxy handsets that left would-be rivals grasping. But now the competition is stirring, and consumers are giving another look to brands they once ignored." Not only is Samsung now more profitable in mobile than Apple (next goalpost please), smaller Android manufacturers, such as LG, ZTE, and Lenovo, are making huge inroads, and are raking in growing profits - in fact, these three now belong to the top 5 mobile device makers. The common parlance that only Samsung is making a profit off Android is simply no longer true.
Thread beginning with comment 568027
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Comment by cdude
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Fri 26th Jul 2013 18:10 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by cdude"
Bill Shooter of Bul
Member since:
2006-07-14

The only reason I listed Motorola, is for the counter example. If Motorola can't be profitable despite its close ties to Google, well then its really difficult to make money with android and Nokia might have a valid point.

You can't forget that HTC despite its stellar phones and reviews is not very profitable with android. If others besides samsung are doing well, then it must be something HTC is doing wrong. When Nokia made the statement, they were kind of pointing at HTC as the poster child of a company destroyed by samsung.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: Comment by cdude
by judgen on Fri 26th Jul 2013 21:06 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by cdude"
judgen Member since:
2006-07-12

To be frank: The lack of HTC profits is due to paying the microsoft tax on trheir android devices. The others that are making money do not.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[6]: Comment by cdude
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Fri 26th Jul 2013 21:12 in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by cdude"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

I thought there were other vendors that had also capitulated. In anycase, I'd re-examine those. things like the fat patents shouldn't really be an issue if there is no external sdcard and they use MTP for file transfers.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: Comment by cdude
by Fergy on Sat 27th Jul 2013 18:01 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by cdude"
Fergy Member since:
2006-04-10

You can't forget that HTC despite its stellar phones and reviews is not very profitable with android. If others besides samsung are doing well, then it must be something HTC is doing wrong. When Nokia made the statement, they were kind of pointing at HTC as the poster child of a company destroyed by samsung.

And your point is that had they gone with only Windows Phone they would have flourished?
I liked my HTC Desire until HTC refused to update my phone. That meant I had to go Nexus to get the treatment I deserve. I wonder if that had something to do with HTC's nosedive? I also wonder if releasing 22 android phones in 2011 was smart.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[6]: Comment by cdude
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Sun 28th Jul 2013 03:07 in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by cdude"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

No, that's not my point at all. Go back and re read for comprehension. Its pretty stinking obvious.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by cdude
by cdude on Sun 28th Jul 2013 14:12 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by cdude"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

The only reason I listed Motorola, is for the counter example. If Motorola can't be profitable despite its close ties to Google, well then its really difficult to make money with android


That counter-example is wrong. If Motorola can't be profitable with Android then it shows only one thing: the close ties to Google are not competative advantage enough.

The whole mobile segment is full competition. Making products that sell good is what counts.

Reply Parent Score: 1