Re: Pocket change for the 2nd run Samsung I was thinking the same thing, samsung makes most of the key parts of the iphone.
Mod note: Deleted quote removed. --kc
Laughable...those parts come out of Samsung semi, not their mobility unit, meanwhile everyone makes semi just like everyone makes steering wheels but it is a long road between steering wheels and seats to putting them together to make art like a Ferrari; something revolutionary that has people saying "Wow, I gotta have that." The only reason Apple is buying from Samsung semi is they could handle Apple's massive volume on short notice, not because Samsung is anything special. Apple is already ditching Samsung and moving to Taiwan Semi with their 28nm fab. They already make Qualcomm's, Broadcom's, NVidia's and AMD's chips; including the Tegra 3 and Snapdragon. Samsung is nothing unique. They are semi manufacturing muscle without any brains; the Master Blaster of semiconductors.
The mobility unit is a 2nd run operation, they don't innovate, they are in a state of constant 'creative crisis', relying on others to do the innovation and revolutionize the mobile space. Then they roll in with their slightly tweaked products, horribly built, running a free OS from another company that is a sorry knock off of iOS and sell it at a lower price point serving the bottom rungs that is the free phone market. And that is great; that is where the volume is.
Samsung doesn't innovate. They do nothing revolutionary. They follow the heard. That is their business model and they make big bucks doing it.
reply to skeechan
Re: Pocket change for the 2nd run Samsung Dude, you're talking out of your butt. I don't even like Samsung, but who was the first to mass produce phones that utilize NFC? And which other phone can you splitscreen?
Who gives a shit about NFC? Seriously? There is nothing revolutionary about a solution looking for a problem and it's already been done...it's called Bluetooth. People surrendering their wallets since they can buy EVERYTHING via NFC? Great, you get to unlock the phone, open the app, choose a payment method when you can much more quickly swipe a card you are already carrying in your wallet and never forget. Making a task LESS convenient isn't innovation.
NFC is one of those things that looks good on paper but in real life is completely impractical. For filesharing between phones, there are no shortage of 3rd party apps on either Android or iOS running on WiFi/3G/4G or via BT and a lot of them are cross platform so they'll work iPhone to iPhone, iPhone to Android, Android to Android or mobile to desktop. Again, it's already been done. And I would guess there are more Bump users than Samsung NFC users (meaning people who actually use NFC for file/information transfers).
Split screen? There were 3rd party apps on the platform doing split screen before Samsung implemented it in devices like the Galaxy Note. Again, Samsung sees what others were doing and implements the idea...even if they polish it up, it is still someone else's innovation. Samsung does evolution, not revolution and they don't create markets.
The only thing "revolutionary" that I have seen on the platform was the Transformer dock's pointing device; the Transformer dock actually made a the tablet good enough for productivity, a 1080P netbook with 14 hour battery life, laptop like productivity. Unfortunately the platform's productivity apps suck ass rendering the innovative idea of brining mousing to Android largely useless.
·WOW Internet and..
It's just funny - what you're saying about Samsung is precisely what Apple has always been known for. Taking ideas that belong to others, putting a little Apple spin on it, and then calling it their own. That's not innovation, that's copying.
I'll just leave this here:
Again, Apple CREATES MARKETS for products, even if a similar product already exists. 2nd run companies wait for a concept to be proven as marketable, and then copy it (making small changes along the way). Samsung mobility, being the 2nd run they are, merely serves these newly proven markets after others show them how to do it (make a marketable product). Because Samsung mobile NEVER innovates, NEVER puts out anything revolutionary, they don't create new markets. Samsung has never released a product 180 degrees away from where the market is like Apple did with the iPhone or Microsoft did with Metro.
I'll just leave this here
Yes, Apple is a marketer, not a technology innovator. I don't think anyone disagrees.
"You lie!" Talk about an understatement, Joe.
Simba7I Void Warranties
reply to skeechan
said by skeechan:
Samsung has never released a product 180 degrees away from where the market is like Apple did with the iPhone or Microsoft did with Metro.
..and how many people hate Metro?
In that sense, Apple could've copied several devices.
..and before the iPhone..
I did find this interesting..
Bresnan 30M/5M | CenturyLink 5M/896K
MyWS[PnmIIX3@3.2G,8G RAM,500G+1.5T+2T HDDs,Win7]
WifeWS[A64@2G,2G RAM,120G HDD,Win7]
Router[2xP3@1G,2G RAM,18G HDD,Allied Telesyn AT2560FX,2xDigital DE504,Sun X1034A,2xSun X4444A,SMC 8432BTA,Gentoo]
Oh I'm sure they have...but LG couldn't create a market for their product...they were doing it wrong, primarily with the OS.
What made the iPhone unique wasn't touch as much as it was touch plus the operating system. The iPhone with a horribly convoluted OS like that of the Treo, with its horrible hard to use apps would have bombed Newton style. It would have been an epic failure...and edge phone with a Treo type OS? I shiver at the thought.
Hell, Microsoft was trying to do tablets for 10 years and they sold like crap but I already mentioned that. Bill Gates KNEW tablets were the future but was simply doing it all wrong.
Meanwhile it isn't about whether or not people hate metro...it is that Microsoft took a risk trying to build a new market doing something 180 degrees from what the rest of the market is doing. You can have have a revolutionary product that is a total bomb in the market. And I guarantee if Metro was a massive hit, OS X would start looking a lot like iOS in the next version or two.
Samsung doesn't take chances doing anything. They are a very conservative company and it serves them well; just look at their balance sheet.
The iPhone predates the SGH-F700 in both announcement and delivery but more importantly the F700 was still a physical keyboard equipped phone with an OS typically horrid for that era. They weren't going to take the chance dumping the keyboard and they didn't have the talent to write decent software. The LG predates the iPhone by about a month in both announcement and delivery and also had a horrible OS typical of that time. They either didn't understand the importance of software or like Samsung simply lacked the talent to do it.
There was nothing revolutionary in the F700...it was the same old crappy OS and slider keyboard with some touch. The old Simon had a touch screen as did the Ericsson R380 while sliders had been around for what, 5 or 6 years already. Taking a keyboard phone and adding touch was nothing new. Abandoning keyboards and buttons completely and bringing a desktop quality OS and apps to a handset was revolutionary as evidenced by the products titanic success. Finally the masses could get a USABLE smartphone and usable as evidenced by the web traffic it generated compared to other browser equipped smartphones of the time.
Not one really "invents" anything from scratch. Again as I mentioned previously, lots of people make seats and steering wheels, but very few design them and more importantly combine them to make something really special. A Ferrari F430 and a Kia Rio have a LOT in common...internal combustion engines, 4 wheels and tires, bumpers, gage cluster, perhaps even cup holders but the user experience is 180 degrees apart.
Samsung makes nothing special. In a world of Kia Rios they would never build a Ferrari. They would build the Yaris or Fiesta. Their business model is the 2nd run model. They wait for others to take the risks, find just that right combination that wows people and then they duplicate it with some very minor changes.
It happens in lots of industries. Look at Toyota and the Prius or Honda with the first Insight. Toyota was selling the Prius and Honda the first Insight when gas was close to $1 a gallon, in a time of cheap gas and giant SUVs, they tried something 180 degrees in the other direction. That is a risk, that is revolutionary. Now everyone and their dog makes and sells hybrids and Toyota is well ahead of the curve. Toyota and Honda were the first runs...everyone else 2nd runs. That doesn't mean that the Ford Fusion Hybrid is a total piece of shit, it just means Ford isn't the innovator, Ford isn't revolutionary when it comes to hybrids. Someone else took the risk, proved the market and they said, "Woe, there is money to be made doing that so let's do it."
It's a matter of timeline. Apple just jumped on the mobile phone bandwagon. The risks were already taken when the first cell phones were developed. Apple just took what was there and added their own little pieces and had a hit. Many companies can do that. The Japanese were masters at it. Apple just out Japanesed the Japanese. The key is to keep doing it constantly.
As a fashion/marketing organization and not an innovator, Apple is bound to the changing preferences of fashion. Can they keep it up? Not with how fickle the fashion conscious are. Heck, it's happening already as Apple continues to lose worldwide market-share. And Cook ain't no Jobs.
"You lie!" Talk about an understatement, Joe.