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

[Master Disaster]

54 minutes ago, Dracarris 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Why the hell are you looking at the outdated Q2 data??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:

Again you show your misunderstanding. The Q3 data presented in that graph is incomplete since the fiscal Q3 doesn't end for another week. If you notice the page we've both been looking at was published in Nov 2020, it takes a while for all the data to be collated and processed.

 

When I said Huawei are the current market leaders I was correct, the last time it was measured was Q2. It will be remeasured again in the new year and will be updated accordingly.

 

The reason we focus on the most current data is the same reason why a runner who breaks the current world takes the world record and we don't say "well this other guy has performed better on average than the winner therefore he should have the WR instead". That entire line of thinking is logically flawed. It's a measurement of performance over time and the current leader is the company who performed the best over the shortest measure (in this case volume sold per fiscal quarter).

 

As for why Huawei are the market leaders, remember you're not arguing with me (I actually thought it was Samsung) rather you're arguing with the financial analysts who published that on their website.

[Prodigy_Smit]

This was inevitable.

[Aereldor]

21 hours ago, DrMacintosh said:

They probably figure that if it was ok with Apple customers that it would be ok with their customers too...and they're right. What are you going to do, not buy a new phone? 

At some point, yes. Why do you think Apple has made an enemy of the repair industry? 

[TVwazhere]

8 hours ago, dizmo said:

What if they produced on par if not better sound?

I'm doubtful if Bluetooth quality will ever surpass wired quality, though it will probably get pretty close at some point. However,....

7 hours ago, Spindel said:

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. 

One of the downsides about Bluetooth headsets is it's just another thing I need to charge. I'm forgetful; the last time I had a Bluetooth headset, it would always beep telling me battery was low because I forgot to plug it in the night before. 

 

My issue with the adapter isnt the length, it's just another thing I can easily lose because I still have a lot of devices that have 3.5mm jacks, so I cant "permanently" convert my headphones to USB. 

 

This being said, I actually agree with not having a charger with the phone., since we all have those from our old phones and they still work just fine. 

[LAwLz]

1 hour ago, Master Disaster said:

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.

But you're WRONG.

Market leader does not have any strict definition like "it has to be the one who sells the most smartphones". That's something you have made up. There is no strict definition of the world "market leader" and can mean any company that leads in any area, such as units sold, revenue, profits, etc.

Stop trying to define "market leader" to what you want it to be.

 

 

Anyway, I don't get why you are so hard bent on arguing semantics. It really doesn't matter as long as everyone understands what is being debated. All this about what "market leader" is or isn't is irrelevant to the discussion.

 

 

1 hour ago, RejZoR said:

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.

Apple were not the first with a notch.

Apple were not the first to ditch the headphone jack.

 

 

  

49 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

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.

You gotta be fucking kidding me.

You don't think including multiple camera sensors with different lenses in a smartphone was innovative and Apple didn't "copy" anyone by also doing it, but you think putting said cameras in a triangle is, or putting said cameras in a triangle somehow makes it not a "copy"?

Please, tell me you are just trolling, because I find this post so ridiculously stupid I don't want to believe someone actually thinks this way.

[Master Disaster]

Just now, LAwLz said:

But you're WRONG.

Market leader does not have any strict definition like "it has to be the one who sells the most smartphones". That's something you have made up. There is no strict definition of the world "market leader" and can mean any company that leads in any area, such as units sold, revenue, profits, etc.

Stop trying to define "market leader" to what you want it to be.

Tell that to the financial analysts who literally measure the statistic in volume sold per quarter. I'm not trying to define the term to be anything, I'm telling you exactly what it used to determine it.

 

Market leader means the company with the highest volume of units sold over a predefined period. You can include anything you please in your definition of it, that doesn't change the fact that the data is published as a statistic each quarter and only takes into account volume sold over time.

 

@DracarrisIt seems as though I owe you an apology. I was wrong and I'm sorry.

 

It seems as though they use regular quarters when measuring and not fiscal quarters. That was an assumption on my part.

 

Samsung are indeed the current market leaders as of Q3 2020.

[Dracarris]

37 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

Again you show your misunderstanding. The Q3 data presented in that graph is incomplete since the fiscal Q3 doesn't end for another week. If you notice the page we've both been looking at was published in Nov 2020, it takes a while for all the data to be collated and processed.

Oh my god.. Just, no. Why would anyone publish incomplete and doubtful data in a report, then draw conclusions from it? Those are sales data from Q3 which ended Sept 30 and for sure by one month later every manufacturer knew exactly how many units they sold. Whether the fiscal Q3 hasn't ended yet is completely irrelevant. You are really hanging to very thin straws here, you are simply incorrect. Here is the more detailed report about the Q3 that they link to, even clearly stating that Samsung has regained a very clear leadership: https://www.counterpointresearch.com/global-smartphone-market-shows-signs-recovery-q3-realme-grows-fastest-132-qoq/

 

40 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

When I said Huawei are the current market leaders I was correct, the last time it was measured was Q2. It will be remeasured again in the new year and will be updated accordingly.

No, again you are factually incorrect. If you would finally have the decency to look at the Q3 data (or at least read my replies completely), you'd see that the updated Q2 data have been corrected to show both Samsung and Huawei at 20% on par. I am now re-iterating this for the third time.

 

Something else I am now stating repeatedly: In the Q2 analysis that you'd like to refer to, the source clearly states that Samsungs temporary loss in market share is an artefact due to Covid and likely only of temporary nature. Which is completely confirmed in the Q3 analysis where Samsung is a full 8% ahead of Huawei. Even if it would be true what you said, another week of fiscal Q3 would never ever change this margin.

[Dracarris]

3 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

 

@DracarrisIt seems as though I owe you an apology. I was wrong and I'm sorry.

 

It seems as though they use regular quarters when measuring and not fiscal quarters. That was an assumption on my part.

 

Samsung are indeed the current market leaders as of Q3 2020.

Wow, okay at least we come to a conclusion. Still can't believe that took so much effort on my side to convince you. Well anyhow apology accepted.

[Master Disaster]

1 minute ago, Dracarris said:

Oh my god.. Just, no. Why would anyone publish incomplete and doubtful data in a report, then draw conclusions from it? Those are sales data from Q3 which ended Sept 30 and for sure by one month later every manufacturer knew exactly how many units they sold. Whether the fiscal Q3 hasn't ended yet is completely irrelevant. You are really hanging to very thin straws here, you are simply incorrect. Here is the more detailed report about the Q3 that they link to, even clearly stating that Samsung has regained a very clear leadership: https://www.counterpointresearch.com/global-smartphone-market-shows-signs-recovery-q3-realme-grows-fastest-132-qoq/

 

No, again you are factually incorrect. If you would finally have the decency to look at the Q3 data (or at least read my replies completely), you'd see that the updated Q2 data have been corrected to show both Samsung and Huawei at 20% on par. I am now re-iterating this for the third time.

 

Something else I am now stating repeatedly: In the Q2 analysis that you'd like to refer to, the source clearly states that Samsungs temporary loss in market share is an artefact due to Covid and likely only of temporary nature. Which is completely confirmed in the Q3 analysis where Samsung is a full 8% ahead of Huawei. Even if it would be true what you said, another week of fiscal Q3 would never ever change this margin.

Please see my last post

[Master Disaster]

Just now, Dracarris said:

Wow, okay at least we come to a conclusion. Still can't believe that took so much effort on my side to convince you. Well anyhow apology accepted.

Yeah, to quote a bad movie "assumption is the mother of all fuck ups"

[LAwLz]

13 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

Tell that to the financial analysts who literally measure the statistic in volume sold per quarter. I'm not trying to define the term to be anything, I'm telling you exactly what it used to determine it.

I also linked you a definition which you are currently ignoring.

Again, it depends on what you measure. "Market leader" is about as vague as "best athlete". Sure, if you measure "best athlete" by who is the fastest then you could argue Bolt is the "best athlete", but if you measure it by who can swim the fastest then Phelps is a better athlete than Bolt.

If I say Phelps is a better athlete than Bolt then you can't just go "no he isn't. Bolt is better and I am right because Bolt can run faster". Well who said we were talking about who is the best athlete at running? "Best athlete" does not inherently mean "at running". 

 

 

13 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

Market leader means the company with the highest volume of units sold over a predefined period.

No it doesn't. It just means someone who is leading in something. It could be revenue, or units sold, or profits, or any other measurement you want. For example the definition I linked in The Economic Times defines it as highest revenue, not units sold.

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.

On Investopedia the definition is:

Quote

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.

The Business Professor includes both things in their definition:

Quote

A market leader refers to a firm with the largest share or also with the highest profitability margin in specific goods or service industry. 

Same for TechTarget:

Quote

Market leadership is the position of a company with the largest market share or highest profitability margin in a given market for goods and services. Market share may be measured by either the volume of goods sold or the value of those goods.

And same for Chron:

Quote

A market leader holds the largest share, or the highest percentage of revenue, in the market in which it competes. 

Market Business News goes a bit deeper and says basically what I have been trying to tell you:

Quote

The market leader is a company or country that has the highest sales of a specific product in the market. By ‘market,’ we are referring to a country, region, or the whole world. The word ‘market’ may have a physical or abstract meaning. In this article, its meaning is mainly abstract.

-snip-

There are several ways we can measure leadership in the market. Some league tables list companies or countries according to the total value of sales. Others calculate according to volume, i.e., the total number of units they have sold.

The Cambridge Dictionary gives a similar definition to what you have said, but includes the specific "in a particular market" clause which means it depends on what we are measuring. Are we measuring global smartphone sales? High end smartphone sales globally? Smartphone sales in the US? High end smartphone sales in the west?

Quote

the company that sells most of a product or service in a particular market:

 

[spartaman64]

apple once again pushing the envelope on testing what shit they can get away with and other companies following. i hope at least that the galaxy s21 doesnt have a new fast charging feature that only the new charger can support

[GoodBytes]

10 hours ago, dizmo said:

Ahhh, I never look at the entry level phones.

What if they produced on par if not better sound?

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.

Sure. However, when I was with Rogers last year, I was paying 56$ for 9GB (on LTE+) of data. So, for 4GB, I don't know how low it would go... 35$?! I can only guess. I know that this plan wasn't, and isn't on the website... those are the 'secret' plans you can only access when you call and "negotiate".

Today, I have 8GB (this month, make that 13GB due to the possibility of rollover of unused data from last month to the following month) for 46$ per month (also on LTE+). Back in 2017, back with Rogers again, I was paying ~37$ per month for 5GB of data on LTE.

 

My point is that on the website, they won't give you lower pricing plans if you BYOD... exactly to convince you to get a phone with them. But in reality, they have cheaper plans if you BYOD, because the carrier knows you can switch provider at any time, so for them, they know that having some money is better than having none. So, they do have plans that isn't visible on their website when you are not under contract.

 

I know they are no 3 years contract in Canada... but they are lot of people in the US in this forum and other countries who do have 3-years contracts.

 

[RejZoR]

1 hour ago, R1TTER said:

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

That's literally saying aaah, it has a steering wheel. Clearly it's copying someone who also uses steering wheel in their car! Lol, this isn't relevant on any level. It's not positioned in the corner, not in a hump and not the same triangular arrangement. I have been paying attention, but I'm not so sure about you...

[cj09beira]

21 hours ago, poochyena said:

I'm glad, I hate how every single thing that charges comes with a cable, its just waste. nearly all of us already have plenty of charging cables, and you don't need a separate cable for each device.

in my house we can never have enough of them, as they get destroyed easily, and most members are still on microusb which we all know it isn't reliable 

[R1TTER]

5 hours ago, RejZoR said:

I have been paying attention, but I'm not so sure about you...

If you say so, I guess triangles or triangular cam arrangement is the "in thing" for you 

 

Whatever floats your boat.

[unsorted]

8 hours ago, R1TTER said:

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

No. I was simply giving an example of total hyppocrisy from Samsung, in the theme of this topic. They all influence each other. They are all filthy spies with State Mafia contracts. They are all practicing anti-repair initiatives. They are all including hard-to-remove batteries. They ALL don't deserve an ounce of respect, in my humble opinion, let alone fans.

[Jet_ski]

Samsung bricked my $1200 TV’s WiFi and SmartTV features with an update 4 years after I purchased it; just to force people into buying newer TVs. So don’t blame Apple, Samsung has always been a s***y anti-consumer company.

[Donut417]

2 minutes ago, Jet_ski said:

Samsung bricked my $1200 TV’s WiFi and SmartTV features with an update 4 years after I purchased it; just to force people into buying newer TVs. So don’t blame Apple, Samsung has always been a s***y anti-consumer company.

Problem is easily solved by a Fire Stick or Roku. To be honest Samsungs TV's software was garbage to begin with. My mom has a Samsung Smart TV and she has a Roku stick because Samsungs software is that bad. 

[Blademaster91]

12 minutes ago, Jet_ski said:

Samsung bricked my $1200 TV’s WiFi and SmartTV features with an update 4 years after I purchased it; just to force people into buying newer TVs. So don’t blame Apple, Samsung has always been a s***y anti-consumer company.

Smart TV's are usually garbage anyway.

But I will blame Apple for this one, they've pushed things like non-removable batteries, display notches, no headphone jack, and now no charger in the box on $800+ phones and people still buy the brand they're loyal to instead of voting with their wallets.

[Donut417]

Just now, Blademaster91 said:

non-removable batteries

To be clear people wanted thinner devices. Thats the only way to get thinner devices. Because removable batteries require a hard shell so you dont puncture them. Because Im fairly sure the chemicals in batteries are probably not safe. 

 

2 minutes ago, Blademaster91 said:

and now no charger in the box

To me the only issue with this is they changed from a USB-A to Lightning cable to a USB-C to Lightning cable which means all the old chargers were useless. Unless you used older lighting cable. I suspect the only reason Apple did this was because the EU cried like 2 year olds about making all devices use type C, so Apple implemented type C in the way they wanted. However in Samsungs case, not including a charger seems like a good move. I mean shit, I can probably pull open a drawer and find 4 or 5 chargers. I have a headphone stand for my PC headset, it has 3 USB ports. I have USB ports on my PC, in my car, etc. So there are lots of ways to charge. Also now there are electrical outlets you can buy that have USB built in. On top of that most devices support Wireless charging anyway. The only bullshit about this whole thing is that they dont reduce the cost of the device.  

 

6 minutes ago, Blademaster91 said:

phones and people still buy the brand they're loyal to instead of voting with their wallets.

I own an iPhone and will never buy a Samsung phone again. Why? Because I had a bad experience with their phone, my mom had a bad experience and my sister had a bad experience. So I voted with my wallet. Ive had a iPhone XR for a little over 2 years. Been a great experience. The experience is why people keep buying certain products/brands. Just because YOU have had a bad experience doesn't mean every one does. Ive had a shit experience with Windows 10, but there are tons of people who have had great experiences. Its just the luck of the draw. 

[Jet_ski]

26 minutes ago, Donut417 said:

Problem is easily solved by a Fire Stick or Roku. To be honest Samsungs TV's software was garbage to begin with. My mom has a Samsung Smart TV and she has a Roku stick because Samsungs software is that bad. 

They bricked that too! I had to get a Google Chromecast which connects via HDMI. A part of the decision to buy this TV was that it had WiFi connectivity and could run a Netflix app. It was a good experience for the most part.

15 minutes ago, Blademaster91 said:

Smart TV's are usually garbage anyway.

But I will blame Apple for this one, they've pushed things like non-removable batteries, display notches, no headphone jack, and now no charger in the box on $800+ phones and people still buy the brand they're loyal to instead of voting with their wallets.

It could open Netflix and Amazon Prime. That’s all I needed from it!

 

As for the Apple comments it might just be that the things you care about in a smartphone are not important to most iPhone users. For instance I have 3 of the old chargers, 2 of the 18 watt ones, a laptop charger, and my own Ankle charger. Apple surveys their customers and they know the majority don’t need another charger. I still have a HTC usb charger from 2012. And between a notch and a forehead, I’d take the notch because it’s more screen for the little icons.

[Donut417]

3 minutes ago, Jet_ski said:

They bricked that too! I had to get a Google Chromecast which connects via HDMI

How do you think the Roku or a Fire Stick connects? Via HDMI, Samsung could not break devices connected to an HDMI port. The only difference between a Fire stick/Roku and a Chromecast is that the Chromecast requires a separate device to stream to it. 

 

 

[Jet_ski]

1 minute ago, Donut417 said:

How do you think the Roku or a Fire Stick connects? Via HDMI, Samsung could not break devices connected to an HDMI port. The only difference between a Fire stick/Roku and a Chromecast is that the Chromecast requires a separate device to stream to it. 

I didn’t know, I thought you need the USB ports to work. I am using my phone as a remote for the chromecast, super annoying.

[Donut417]

Just now, Jet_ski said:

I thought you need the USB ports to work

For power. But Amazon recommends you use the included Power brick. But you can power these devices off the TV's USB port.