Samsung May Copy Apple After Mocking Them. Galaxy S21 will most likely not include charger and headphones (will be sold separately).

[Gamer Schnitzel]

5 minutes ago, GoodBytes said:

 

Source: https://www.statista.com/chart/15655/apple-and-samsung-dominate-smartphone-market/

 

You are cherry picking stats. My link was regarding profit whereas yours is regarding numbers of phones sold. Apple will always lose in this category as their main selling point is that iPhones are pricey and higher quality so they will never sell more phones than Samsung whereas Samsung loves catering for poorer people who don't want to or can't spend a grand on a phone. It makes no sense to even look at this.

So if some business sells more cheap headphones than Sennheiser who sells audiphile quality headphones, are you going to say that they are the market leader and not Sennheiser? No.

[unsorted]

Mock Apple for not having a removable battery, then make devices without a removable battery.

 

Not only that, copying Apple is a trend in the entire industry. Right down to this practice: .https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMtqao-JV8k

 

Add to this the fact that all these companies (and countless third-parties) are filthy spies.

 

[Dracarris]

4 hours ago, dizmo said:

Apple implements things and tries to pass them off as the first time it's been in a phone, when really it's been around for ages.

I am legitimately interested in where this comes from. Apple has never ever claimed that something is on a phone for the first time. They simply say "First time on iphone now" or "Now on iphone" and then "here have this awesome feature". Apart from this, there is very big difference between a feature existing somehow and being implemented in the Apple-typical quality and user experience. Some half-assed feature that did not work half of the time, implemented by Android manufacturer X 10 years ago does not make Apple a copycat when they invest a shitton of R&D into providing fundamentally the same functionality but with a vastly improved user experience and reliability. A nice example for this is face ID, yes unlocking your phone with your face has been on phones before. But you have to be practically tech-agnostic to actually claim these implementations are even remotely comparable to Apples face ID.

[Doobeedoo]

Well, they better up their support for faster charging on their phones in general though. As for earbuds, you're mostly just getting an ok ones anyway. Though I wonder will they price them any different, we'll see. Still I can expect top spec flagship to be like €1500.

[Donut417]

As far as the earbuds go, who cares, you probably have a pair that you like to use. Plus they probably would have include cheap crappy ones anyway. 

 

As far as the charger.... Well people have a draw full of them. The issue people had with Apple was that they included a USB-C to Lightning cable, and most peoples previous chargers were USB-A to Lightning. So you would have to buy a charger or have a USB-C charger all ready. With Samsung I doubt thats the case. Most likely any charger you have will probably work. 

[dizmo]

7 hours ago, GoodBytes said:

sure they did. Just a smaller one for the front facing camera.

such as the M12, A10 and A20

Ahhh, I never look at the entry level phones.

7 hours ago, TVwazhere said:

I know the market is switching to wireless headphones and all but I will hold onto my wired headphones until they die and I cant get replacements for them. 

What if they produced on par if not better sound?

7 hours ago, GoodBytes said:

That is incorrect. Buying the phone in full, allows you to have drastically lower monthly payment with your plan, and giving you the power to change carrier each month, if you want (or even less then that), and also taking advantage of sign-up offers. You are not stuck for 2-3 years with a provider which knows you are stuck with them and can take advantage of that. In addition, you can buy phone at a lower price. The promotion you see, are actually not really promotions... you pay for them via your plan. In other words, a 0% interest loan disguised.

 

Now I can only speak in Canada, but buying your phone in full, also give you power to access "secret" plans not being displayed on the phone carrier website. This is where you call them, present what you have and ask what if they can do better... then magic... oh look, here is a perfect plan for you not listed on their website!

 

Another issue is if your phone is lost or broken. Carrier will go "no worries, here is a new one"... but you just renewed your contract... so now you are lock with them for another 2 or 3 years added to your current contract. So, if you have a 3-year contract, and your phone is lost 1 year in, well, now you get another phone, and now you are 5 years locked in, as you have to pay the old phone (finish the 2 years) and the new one (3 years contract). Mobile carriers want you to be locked in with them. This is the exact same principal with car leases. When you'll return your car at the end of your lease, and you choose to not buy it, you end up is the dealership scratching the bucket with overpriced things to repair or re-repair (as it happened that you didn't do it at the dealership, and therefore considered improper and needs to be redone, even though they'll charge you for it, and not actually do it), and goes "well now you have to pay us 3000$" (or whatever), and then goes "But dizmo.. you are our FAVORITE customer... so here is what we will do... get another lease from us, and all these fees will go away...". It is all about locking the consumer in, is the point I am going with.

 

This also, forces you to buy what you can afford. If the 1000$ price tag phone is too expensive (you don't have savings to buy it), then you can't afford it. Buy what you can afford, and now you can allow you to build up your savings, which you can use for other things that might be more important. (Water heater broke, roof leaks, car repair, computer hardware broken... whatever the case may be, now you have savings to tackle it) and you might still be perfectly happy with your lower cost phone, despite what you thought.

No, actually that's not true. In fact, with some companies it's actually cheaper per month to be on a contract. I believe it used to be true, many years ago, however times have changed and now you pay the same regardless if you bring your own phone or not. You do pay a "tab" fee if you get your device from them, which is simply the cost of the device spread over the term of your contract; something you would be paying whether you buy it outright or not. Below examples are based on the same plans from each carrier (eg 4GB BYOD vs 4GB Contract on Koodo).

 

Koodo:

BYOD: $45/mo

Contract: $45/mo

 

Bell:

BYOD: $75/mo

Contract: $75/mo

 

Telus:

BYOD: $85/mo

Contract: $75/mo

 

Rogers:

BYOD: $75/mo

Contract: $75/mo

 

You used to be able to pick from some more independent companies like Public Mobile, which only offer refurbished phones, and get a better monthly rate, however companies like Koodo became considerably more competitive and PM dropped 4G data all together only offering 3G so I don't even consider them comparable.

 

The only company which this isn't true for is Freedom Mobile, where you'll save $10/month and get 2GB of extra data for bringing your own device. Their coverage can be somewhat lacking.

 

I have yet to see a provider actually take advantage of someone because they're in a contract.

 

While it's definitely true that some models of phones are inflated price wise, that's not true for all models, so yes, you can definitely save money on the device over what you would have paid outside of contract. Case in point is the S20 FE I bought. It was $599 after the discount, a price you cannot get elsewhere.

 

There are no 3 year contracts that are enforceable in Canada. After 2 years, you're free to leave, regardless of the actual length you signed to, be it 3 years or 10.

 

You stepped around the liquid asset part, which is a huge part of the reason one would go with a phone on a contract. It makes far less sense to have $1,000 tied up in something all at once, and far more sense to have small monthly payments that take up less of your liquid capital. Which is exactly what you explain in your last paragraph, so paying for a phone up front in your own words makes little sense. Your argument of "you can't afford it if you can't pay upfront" is also simply incorrect, as that's the entire point of monthly payments. From a personal opinion point of view, sure, that might be true. From a strictly financial aspect? Blatantly false.

[Mark Kaine]

9 hours ago, GoodBytes said:

 

Source: https://www.statista.com/chart/15655/apple-and-samsung-dominate-smartphone-market/

 

I want to see the worldwide stats... I think Apple is pretty popular in Asia too? 

 

However I barely know anyone with an apple phone here in Germany, it definitely has the stigma of "for people who don't know tech" though.

 

It's always funny if I try to exchange any data with an apple user, first panic ensues and in the end they always email me the data because "it's the only way"  lol

[Spindel]

13 hours ago, TVwazhere said:

Are there any flagship phones that are releasing with a headphone jack?  

OMG are we still whining about this. Get a BT head set it’s 2020. 
 

And of you really have to use wired headphones it is an adapter that adds 5 cm of cable lenght. No biggie. 

[Master Disaster]

13 hours ago, Gamer Schnitzel said:

You are cherry picking stats. My link was regarding profit whereas yours is regarding numbers of phones sold. Apple will always lose in this category as their main selling point is that iPhones are pricey and higher quality so they will never sell more phones than Samsung whereas Samsung loves catering for poorer people who don't want to or can't spend a grand on a phone. It makes no sense to even look at this.

So if some business sells more cheap headphones than Sennheiser who sells audiphile quality headphones, are you going to say that they are the market leader and not Sennheiser? No.

No he's not, you're the one doing that.

 

You said Apple are the market leaders (with no extra context), you were given proof that Samsung sell more phones than Apple (in the majority of the world) and all of a sudden you were talking about profit?

 

Just an FYI, the term "Market Leader" literally means the company that sells the most of its items in their target market or a product that outsells all of its competitors. Profit and quality is totally irrelevant, market share is determined by sales numbers and to be market leader you must have the highest market share.

 

For most of the world Samsung are the smartphone market leaders as shown by the graph posted earlier.

[LAwLz]

1 minute ago, Master Disaster said:

Just an FYI, the term "Market Leader" literally means the company that sells the most of its items in their target market or a product that outsells all of its competitors. Profit and quality is totally irrelevant, market share is determined by sales numbers and to be market leader you must have the highest market share.

No it doesn't. That's a definition you came up with yourself.

Here is the definition from The Economic Times:

Quote

Definition: A market leader could be a product, brand, company, organisation, group name which has the highest percentage of total sales revenue of a particular market. Market leader dominates the market by influencing the customer loyalty towards it, distribution, pricing, etc.

Description: Market leader can be attributed to a firm which has the largest market share in a given industry. The term could also be ascribed to a firm which has the highest profitability margin as well. The market share is calculated by dividing the volume of goods sold by a particular firm by the total number of units in the market. Market leadership as a concept holds much relevance in the internet age because over a period of time we have seen large number of companies becoming market leaders.

Market leader often enjoys the first -mover advantage in new markets. Let’s look at some examples of market leaders in the digital space. Microsoft was the first company to launch operating system (Windows) and web browser (Internet Explorer) in the market. Apple as a company was the first one to introduce the concept of portable media device in which music can be stored on a drive, ipod. Market leadership is not about sales and dominance but it is more about how relevant the product is for the audience. Apple generates more revenue by selling iPods compared to other manufacturers who are selling MP3 players. It is all about innovative ideas which will help the company to connect with the relevant audience. The company tries to introduce those products in the market which can add value to the customer. Market leaders often unveil products which can redefine the customer experience in terms of product quality, longevity, ease of operating that product etc.

 

[Master Disaster]

32 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

No it doesn't. That's a definition you came up with yourself.

Here is the definition from The Economic Times:

 

Nope, I took mine from

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/market-leader.asp

 

Also the literal dictionary definition of Market Leader disagree but as we all know, Dictionary definitions can be quite succinct. Even ignoring that your own definition comes with an important qualifier, could.

Quote

The term could also be ascribed to a firm which has the highest profitability margin as well.

I feel like you're just arguing semantics for the sake of an argument here.

 

And after further research I found that actually Xiaomi Huawei (apologises, I was still reading the data and typed in the thing I just read ) are considered to be the current market leaders with Samsung #2 and Apple #3.

 

https://www.statista.com/statistics/271496/global-market-share-held-by-smartphone-vendors-since-4th-quarter-2009/

https://www.counterpointresearch.com/global-smartphone-share/

[Dracarris]

19 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

Nope, I took mine from

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/market-leader.asp

Quote

What Is a Market Leader? 

A market leader is a company with the largest market share in an industry that can often use its dominance to affect the competitive landscape and direction the market takes. A market leader typically enjoys the largest market share or the largest percentage of total sales in a given market. It may surpass its competitors according to other metrics, too, including brand loyalty, perceived value, distribution coverage, image, price, promotional spending, and profit.

 

Such a company may be the first to develop a product or service, which would allow it to set the tone for messaging, define the ideal product characteristics, and to become considered by the market as the brand that consumers associate with the offering itself.

Apart from units sold pretty much every single one of those points goes to Apple.

[Master Disaster]

1 minute ago, Dracarris said:

Apart from units sold pretty much every single one of those points goes to Apple.

Once again, you're ignoring the qualifier, may.

Quote

It may surpass its competitors according to other metrics, too, including brand loyalty, perceived value, distribution coverage, image, price, promotional spending, and profit.

Those things don't really matter, the metric used when calculating is units sold per quarter.

[Dracarris]

13 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

Those things don't really matter, the metric used when calculating is units sold per quarter.

By that definition, manufacturers of cheap products will always be so-called market-leaders even though their actual influence onto a specific branch is much smaller. Best example here is Apple vs. Samsung. Which makes this definition of market leader very very questionable.

[Master Disaster]

7 minutes ago, Dracarris said:

By that definition, manufacturers of cheap products will always be so-called market-leaders even though their actual influence onto a specific branch is much smaller. Best example here is Apple vs. Samsung. Which makes this definition of market leader very very questionable.

Hence why the current smartphone market leader is actually Huawei and not Samsung or Apple.

 

Remember the market will always look after itself, a Chinese sweat shop knocking out Phones at £20 a pop will never make it to the top as nobody looking for a half decent phone would ever buy one. To be market leader you really need a reputation in the industry (again there's nothing stopping an unknown from taking it except for the market itself).

[Dracarris]

57 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

Hence why the current smartphone market leader is actually Huawei and not Samsung or Apple.

Where do you pull that from? Your own source (https://www.counterpointresearch.com/global-smartphone-share/) clearly states Samsung sells the most phones, except for 2020Q2 where Huawei and Samsung where on-par.

 

Then again, by influence and power onto the market and as well revenue Apple is on top.

[Master Disaster]

26 minutes ago, Dracarris said:

Where do you pull that from? Your own source (https://www.counterpointresearch.com/global-smartphone-share/) clearly states Samsung sells the most phones, except for 2020Q2 where Huawei and Samsung where on-par.

 

Then again, by influence and power onto the market and as well revenue Apple is on top

https://www.counterpointresearch.com/global-smartphone-share/

Quote

Q2 2020 Highlights

Huawei continued its push in China and surpassed Samsung to lead the global smartphone market. Huawei's shipments declined only 3% YoY globally as it grew 11% YoY in China.

 

20 Nov 2020

And again, influence & power is totally irrelevant to this particular discussion.

[Dracarris]

7 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

https://www.counterpointresearch.com/global-smartphone-share/

Excuse me? That was the exact source I was citing which shows contradictory data compared to what you state.

Quote

Q2 2020 Highlights

Huawei continued its push in China and surpassed Samsung to lead the global smartphone market. Huawei's shipments declined only 3% YoY globally as it grew 11% YoY in China.

Why are you citing the outdated Q2 data? Look at the most current Q3 data and the graph and tables, as well as the comments. They clearly show Samsung first with the single exception of 20Q2 where they were on par for this single quarter (contrary to the outdated and overhauled Q2 data), a glitch due to Covid as explained in the Q2 commentary. You are stating misleading information, just because Huawei was on top in a single quarter in an already outdated report does not mean they are a market leader.

 

7 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

And again, influence & power is totally irrelevant to this particular discussion.

We are discussing Apple influencing Samsung to drop the charger. Influence & power is right at the heart of this discussion and what I think is a clear sign of someone being a leader.

[Master Disaster]

1 minute ago, Dracarris said:

Excuse me? That was the exact source I was citing which shows contradictory data compared to what you state.

We are discussing Apple influencing Samsung to drop the charger. Influence & power is right at the heart of this discussion and what I think is a clear sign of someone being a leader.

You might be, I'm not. I'm simply clearing up the misconception that the term market leader means anything other than the company that sells the most product in any given period.

 

Also to prove there's no funny business I left the URL visible at the top of the window

 

You're confusing influence & power with cost saving & profiteering. Samsung are not copying Apple because of Apples market influence, they're doing it because they can literally include less stuff in the box with the item and save money on each item they sell then they can also sell the missing items back to anybody who really wants them for 100% profit.

[R1TTER]

13 hours ago, unsorted said:

Not only that, copying Apple is a trend in the entire industry.

So you're saying Apple doesn't copy others?

[Dracarris]

5 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

 

Why the hell are you looking at the outdated Q2 data?? Why?? Why are you focusing on the single quarter over the last couple of years that seems to support your conception? And even this data point has been corrected to show Samsung and Huawei on par, for that single quarter only. Why are you trying to mislead people here?

 

There you go:

[RejZoR]

3 minutes ago, R1TTER said:

So you're saying Apple doesn't copy others?

Apple often sets own (often controversial) trends and everyone else seems to copy them. Notch was one of biggets ones, then ditching of headphone jack. And now the charger. Literally every time Apple does something big like this, everyone else just blatantly copies it. Saying Apple really copies anything is like saying BMW copied Audi because the car has 4 wheels.

[R1TTER]

Yeah no that's not it, first of all Apple copied LG for what is now called the iPhone. Then there's lots of elements in the iOS that have been ripped off from Android, it's a two way street though. Then there's dual, triple or quad cams that have been copied from the likes of Samsung, Huawei, Xiaomi etc. If we're playing the game of who to blame for copying stuff or likely who sets the trend, then really there's no end to it. No one's a saint here & literally none of the corporations are blameless, especially when it comes to exploiting consumers through various means!

 

Also good to see you active on LTT.

[RejZoR]

5 minutes ago, R1TTER said:

Yeah no that's not it, first of all Apple copied LG for what is now called the iPhone. Then there's lots of elements in the iOS that have been ripped off from Android, it's a two way street though. Then there's dual, triple or quad cams that have been copied from the likes of Samsung, Huawei, Xiaomi etc. If we're playing the game of who to blame for copying stuff or likely who sets the trend, then really there's no end to it. No one's a saint here & literally none of the corporations are blameless, especially when it comes to exploiting consumers through various means!

 

Also good to see you active on LTT.

Saying they "copied" a number of cameras is just stupid claim. If they copied the camera bump shape and camera arrangement too, sure, call it that. But just getting wide and telephoto is not an innovation, it's just a natural progression everyone followed one way or another. I have yet to see any phone having triangular camera arrangement Apple is using. Everyone else has them in straight line inside the camera bump.

[R1TTER]

9 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

I have yet to see any phone having triangular camera arrangement Apple is using.

You haven't been paying attention then have you? Also a "triangular shaped" cam arrangement is innovation now?