Well, AC is the one who said this was like the '90s all over again, and I thought it was interesting that they chose a time when Apple's supposed betters collapsed in smoking heaps and they not only kept going, but doubled down on the whole "incredibly expensive computer" thing. As someone who owned an Amiga as late as '99 I sometimes wish Commodore had played the long game a bit better.
They're good phones, but I'm just saying, it's not Android that's doing well right now, it's Samsung. And I dare say that Samsung's more interested in boosting the Samsung ecosystem than Google's.
I've heard of deifying Steve Jobs but this is ridiculous. You do appreciate that their profitability came out of Tim Cook's ops management, iOS came out of Forstall's engineering team, and their design was by Jonathan Ive, right? And the zillions of people that work(ed) under them?
The early '90s, when Amiga and Atari went out of business? I bet Apple regrets not copying their business models. I loved my Amiga but Commodore were utterly delusional if they thought they were competitive at that time.
He's annoyed that they aren't free-as-in-speech, in that Google is making the most fundamental Android apps proprietary. The open-source versions have been abandoned by them. It'd be like if Ubuntu was still ostensibly open-source but everything outside of the window manager had to be written by the customer or bought via a non-compete licence agreement with Canonical.
Half of all the profit in the smartphone market goes to Apple, the other half to Samsung.. Everyone else is losing money. It's an alarming situation for smartphones. Google can afford to stay in the game to keep Android going - they're basically selling the Nexus line at cost- but I'm not sure that the rest can. The idea of a Samsung-Apple duopoly controlling smartphones does not appeal.
You're conflating marketshare and sales volume. If your sales volume goes down, so does your marketshare* but the inverse is not true. Your sales volume can be increasing - and with it your profits - while your marketshare declines, simply because other companies are now selling products in your sphere. As long as volume is good and your margins are good, you keep making money.
This is why Apple continued to be profitable in the days when all it was selling was iMacs and Powerbooks to a tiny portion of the market: they made money on every unit sold and the number of units they sold was enough for them to operate. This is why Apple's balance sheet was at its healthiest in the period when its smartphone marketshare was declining most rapidly: there was a boom on, and their volumes were increasing spectacularly even as their share shrank.
I'd be more concerned about all the phone companies who are making losses every quarter on their devices, despite growing market share. If you're selling 10% of the world's smartphones and you're losing $100 per device sold you need to turn that around or you are up the creek.
*Unless the whole market is shrinking, but that wasn't the case for Nokia or Blackberry
Yes, traditionally Sony, Apple etc. have actually opened factories to make the devices in Brazil because it's better for their bottom line than expecting customers to spend the import levy.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, AC is the one who said this was like the '90s all over again, and I thought it was interesting that they chose a time when Apple's supposed betters collapsed in smoking heaps and they not only kept going, but doubled down on the whole "incredibly expensive computer" thing. As someone who owned an Amiga as late as '99 I sometimes wish Commodore had played the long game a bit better.
They're good phones, but I'm just saying, it's not Android that's doing well right now, it's Samsung. And I dare say that Samsung's more interested in boosting the Samsung ecosystem than Google's.
I've heard of deifying Steve Jobs but this is ridiculous. You do appreciate that their profitability came out of Tim Cook's ops management, iOS came out of Forstall's engineering team, and their design was by Jonathan Ive, right? And the zillions of people that work(ed) under them?
What is it that Blackberry phones ostensibly do that other smartphones don't? Is it just that they have that little keyboard on there?
The user with "a million lemmings can't be wrong" as their sig thinks that popularity is more important than profitability. Classic.
The early '90s, when Amiga and Atari went out of business? I bet Apple regrets not copying their business models. I loved my Amiga but Commodore were utterly delusional if they thought they were competitive at that time.
If your phone needs are the same as a teenager's, sure.
He's annoyed that they aren't free-as-in-speech, in that Google is making the most fundamental Android apps proprietary. The open-source versions have been abandoned by them. It'd be like if Ubuntu was still ostensibly open-source but everything outside of the window manager had to be written by the customer or bought via a non-compete licence agreement with Canonical.
In 2009 all the available iPhone models were made out of plastic. They didn't switch to metal until 2010.
Half of all the profit in the smartphone market goes to Apple, the other half to Samsung.. Everyone else is losing money. It's an alarming situation for smartphones. Google can afford to stay in the game to keep Android going - they're basically selling the Nexus line at cost- but I'm not sure that the rest can. The idea of a Samsung-Apple duopoly controlling smartphones does not appeal.
Night of the Living Trekkies. If the cover art doesn't do it for you, I don't know what will.
You're conflating marketshare and sales volume. If your sales volume goes down, so does your marketshare* but the inverse is not true. Your sales volume can be increasing - and with it your profits - while your marketshare declines, simply because other companies are now selling products in your sphere. As long as volume is good and your margins are good, you keep making money.
This is why Apple continued to be profitable in the days when all it was selling was iMacs and Powerbooks to a tiny portion of the market: they made money on every unit sold and the number of units they sold was enough for them to operate. This is why Apple's balance sheet was at its healthiest in the period when its smartphone marketshare was declining most rapidly: there was a boom on, and their volumes were increasing spectacularly even as their share shrank.
I'd be more concerned about all the phone companies who are making losses every quarter on their devices, despite growing market share. If you're selling 10% of the world's smartphones and you're losing $100 per device sold you need to turn that around or you are up the creek.
*Unless the whole market is shrinking, but that wasn't the case for Nokia or Blackberry
Somewhere around 100W, given the hardware inside it.
Almost everything they publish is about Samsung. It's shameless:
Pages about Strategy Analytics that mention Samsung.
Pages about Strategy Analytics that don't mention Samsung.
It looks like they're going to patch in much of this functionality later.
Yes, traditionally Sony, Apple etc. have actually opened factories to make the devices in Brazil because it's better for their bottom line than expecting customers to spend the import levy.
It says "in PAL markets" because that's the version of the FAQ issued on the European PAL region PlayStation blog.
Jim Steinman wrote Meatloaf's best work, but Jim Steinman wasn't twelve people.
Well, it's not meant to be exact, is it? Unless you were planning on building your own device on the basis of a Slashdot summary?
By deus, why is this modded Insightful and not Funny?
iPhone owner here. I'll take a Nexus and $350 of cold hard cash any day.
In all seriousness, aren't most pop songs written by committee* before the performer gets involved?
*Admittedly, usually a pretty talented committee
I thought that's where the tunes came from in the first place.
In my day, dupes happened within hours of the original posting, not months. Boo.
It was a joke. The original title for the article posited that the urine smell was a thrilling new feature.