Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Whats the last thing you bought? I just got the new mac book air, really pleased. I have had it for 6 days used it every night and have not had to charge it once. It literally runs on air

Post up your new toy and brag away

http://cdn2.gsmarena.com/vv/pics/sony/Xperia_Tablet_Z_Xperia_Z.jpg

and the phone to go with it

http://homeshopping.pk/product_images/a/179/sony-xperia-z-purple-pakistan__07124_zoom.jpg

The last thing I got was a 2009 iMac. Hand me down, not bought. (excellent hand me down, lbr)

Before that I was actually quite good with purchases (for me), and haven't bought anything sine October, when I got an iPad Mini and an iPhone 5.

Before that I got a MacBook Air mid-2012 for my birthday (amazing birthday present, lbr again). Love the MacBook Air, the new ones look also amazing, with like 12-15 hours of battery life.

Anyways, I posted this pic before, but here the 4 gadgets are together, with complementary Batman wallpapers:

http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa158/Bardock42/batmanandapple_zps8bc72126.jpg

As for next purchases I am considering the next Nexus phone and the next Surface Pro (which hopefully will be announced by about October), as well as the new iPad Mini and a new iPhone, and maybe a new Apple device (smartwatch or TV box) if one of those should be announced. And while that's excessive, I am a software developer, so, I have an excuse....maybe? Someone enable me in my tech gadget addiction, please!


Also, how do you like the new Xperias, jaden? What made you choose them? The water resistance play a factor?

He does pee on his stuff a lot.

The phone has had a few snags but I got it on day of release and most phones tend to have a few software problems but they've been patched now and had no problems since. Given that almost all phones and tablets nowadays run pretty much identically then the biggest factor for me was aesthetics. I didn't like the look of the galaxy 4s. Was almost tempted by the HTC one but preferred the Xperia Z plus it was the best out within a short period of my old contract finishing. I've tried a different brand of phone almost every time I've renewed my contract. Last time I had a Sony was k800i. Since then I've had a Nokia n95. An n95 8gb black. A Samsung innov8. A Nokia n97, an LG optimus 2x and now the Xperia z. The only design fault with it is the external speaker which gets covered by your hand in almost any natural way of holding the phone either portrait or landscape.

Cos of how much I like the phone I got the tablet as well. I've had no issues with it at all and it looks astonishing.

Originally posted by Robtard
He does pee on his stuff a lot.

Na. Spunk proof. Essential.

I built a new computer a few months ago.

Originally posted by Supra
Whats the last thing you bought? I just got the new mac book air, really pleased. I have had it for 6 days used it every night and have not had to charge it once. It literally runs on air

Post up your new toy and brag away

Rabbit fer mi pussay!

Originally posted by Bardock42
The last thing I got was a 2009 iMac. Hand me down, not bought. (excellent hand me down, lbr)

Before that I was actually quite good with purchases (for me), and haven't bought anything sine October, when I got an iPad Mini and an iPhone 5.

Before that I got a MacBook Air mid-2012 for my birthday (amazing birthday present, lbr again). Love the MacBook Air, the new ones look also amazing, with like 12-15 hours of battery life.

Anyways, I posted this pic before, but here the 4 gadgets are together, with complementary Batman wallpapers:

http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa158/Bardock42/batmanandapple_zps8bc72126.jpg

As for next purchases I am considering the next Nexus phone and the next Surface Pro (which hopefully will be announced by about October), as well as the new iPad Mini and a new iPhone, and maybe a new Apple device (smartwatch or TV box) if one of those should be announced. And while that's excessive, I am a software developer, so, I have an excuse....maybe? Someone enable me in my tech gadget addiction, please!


Also, how do you like the new Xperias, jaden? What made you choose them? The water resistance play a factor?

Wow nice stuff man, Yea the new air is sick I loaded it with more ram, better processor the Haswell i7 chipset with a turbo boost to 3.3ghz

Originally posted by BackFire
I built a new computer a few months ago.

Take some pics, lets see that bone crusher!

Originally posted by Supra
Take some pics, lets see that boner! Eww.

I'm a bit lazy, I'd rather not. It's a good PC, though. It's a gaming PC.

Not that lazy that won't keep bombarding me with pictures of your freakish hermaphrodite multi-genitals.

That's more an action of habit than anything, these days. I've been doing it for so long.

New photos being sent to you now.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Before that I was actually quite good with purchases (for me), and haven't bought anything sine October, when I got an iPad Mini and an iPhone 5.

I haven't purchased any electronics cosine or tangent May 2013.

We bought a waterproof Digital Camera: Olmpus Stylus TG-630

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/71dBx0adQCL._SL1500_.jpg



We are very pleased with the purchase and it works wonderfully underwater. Those of you who are my friends on facebook got to see some of those images and videos.

Edit - Holy page stretching images, batman.

We specialize in providing technology solutions such as Network Switches, Hard Drives, Printers, Routers, Servers, Video Conferencing, Managed Print Services, and also Consultation Services on improvement of business practices. Our mission is to redefine traditional IT consulting by combining business insight and technology to fundamentally enhance a client's business performance.

Since last I posted I think I bought an iPhone 5S, a MacBook Pro 13inch Retina and a Samsung Soundbar for my TV.

Since I last posted I got a Galaxy Note 3 and an Xbox One (my son got this one).

Both terrible decisions.

Iphone 5s love it

anybody care to weigh in on this question?

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/f79/t597907.html

Originally posted by Bardock42
Both terrible decisions.

I think the Galaxy Note 3 is the best cellphone I have ever owned, by far.



Also, the Xbox One is coming into its own, now. I'm starting to like it, these days.


The wife and I, instead of going to the movie theater, now have date night at home. We rent a movie for $6. That's the equivalent of two $3 movie tickets. But we get the benefit of our own home and if we want to go get a snack while watching our show, we just pause the movie! Also, I can grab your boobies while watching the movie without fear of getting kicked out. WEEEE!



So, yeah, the media aspect of the Xbox One is quite nice. The games are very lacking, though. Minus Forza 5 two or 3 other gems, there really aren't that many great games.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Also, I can grab your boobies while watching the movie without fear of getting kicked out. WEEEE!


You most certainly can not!!!

Originally posted by Bardock42
You most certainly can not!!!


Just let it happen, man. It will all be over soon.

You should get yourself a Gear 2 and tell me how you like it.

Originally posted by Bardock42
You should get yourself a Gear 2 and tell me how you like it.

I will probably never ever ever own a smart watch.


Like...ever.

I got a Samsung Note 3 as well. HDMI out, good for downloading torrents to and watching them on the big screen.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I will probably never ever ever own a smart watch.


Like...ever.

Why not?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Why not?


Stupid and pointless if you have a smart phone. Screen is also waaaaay too small.


Originally posted by Time Immemorial
I got a Samsung Note 3 as well. HDMI out, good for downloading torrents to and watching them on the big screen.

*fistbump*


Great minds n'all that.

You know, if I was a mod I'd have fixed this thread title a year ago. Bothers me every time I see it.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
I got a Samsung Note 3 as well. HDMI out, good for downloading torrents to and watching them on the big screen.

Well, I can see the appeal of a big screen, I do have an iPad Mini which I treasure. It is rumored that Apple will release a bigger iPhone version later this year. If there's an option I think I'd stick with the smaller one however.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Stupid and pointless if you have a smart phone. Screen is also waaaaay too small.




*fistbump*


Great minds n'all that.

Hmm, I would like some sort of wristband that could give me some information (notifications, etc.) and could also gather biometrics for me. I think by the end of the year I'll at least try some sort of smart wearable.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Hmm, I would like some sort of wristband that could give me some information (notifications, etc.) and could also gather biometrics for me. I think by the end of the year I'll at least try some sort of smart wearable.

They have less cumbersome devices for that. My boss wears one. Fitbit?


Neat devices, those things. But I see no point to having them as, basically, a small smartphone. Why not the scanning equipment on the wrist and the screen and everything in the phone? I don't see the smart watch market taking off. It will be niche, at best, and fail dismally, at worst.



The bigger iPhone, since the market research indicates they want a bigger phone, should sell quite well. My complaints against Apple would nearly vanish if they made a 5" smartphone.

A fitbit or a fuelband is probably what I'd get if Apple doesn't come out with something. But yeah, they only do some aspects of the health monitoring, there are a lot more things that could be potentially great.

And there we come to the point of what we define as a smartwatch, right. I mean Samsung and Google and such seem to think it should be basically a small phone on your wrist. In regards to devices like that, Samsung Gear, Pebble, Moto 360 I do mostly agree with you.

Well, the market research is a bit disingenious, the vast majority of premium phones sold are 4 inch devices (the iPhone). There are some people who want bigger phones admittedly, so it makes sense for them to try to tap into that market.

Although, basically if you want a high end phone your choice is 4 inch and iOS or 5+ inch and Android. There really aren't any Android flagship smartphones in the 4 inch range, so we just don't know what people actually prefer.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Well, the market research is a bit disingenious, the vast majority of premium phones sold are 4 inch devices (the iPhone). There are some people who want bigger phones admittedly, so it makes sense for them to try to tap into that market.

Although, basically if you want a high end phone your choice is 4 inch and iOS or 5+ inch and Android. There really aren't any Android flagship smartphones in the 4 inch range, so we just don't know what people actually prefer.

I thought we went over this on GS? Market research showed that 4.5-5 inches was the preferred screen size.

IIRC, even Apple's own research confirmed that.

Originally posted by Bardock42
You know, if I was a mod I'd have fixed this thread title a year ago. Bothers me every time I see it.

My powers know no bounds.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I thought we went over this on GS? Market research showed that 4.5-5 inches was the preferred screen size.

IIRC, even Apple's own research confirmed that.

I remember you claiming that. I don't remember there being conclusive evidence. I especially don't know of any Apple internal research reports, like that.

The only indications I have read about people "preferring" larger screens is in snap buying decisions, not long term testing, which is not the same thing of course. There seems to be some evidence, that peoople in a store will think they will like the bigger screen more for themselves, and therefore buy it, even though they might actually prefer a smaller device long term.

Originally posted by BackFire
My powers know no bounds.


Noo, shield your eyes, don't look at such infinite power directly.....!!!!!

Originally posted by Bardock42
I remember you claiming that. I don't remember there being conclusive evidence. I especially don't know of any Apple internal research reports, like that.

I remember linking you to both research articles.

Originally posted by Bardock42
The only indications I have read about people "preferring" larger screens is in snap buying decisions, not long term testing, which is not the same thing of course. There seems to be some evidence, that peoople in a store will think they will like the bigger screen more for themselves, and therefore buy it, even though they might actually prefer a smaller device long term.


I don't agree with this. It seems like a half-assed apologetic for Apple rather than a genuine refutation of the research results.


But, here's some reading material:

http://www.todaysiphone.com/2014/07/data-shows-disillusioned-iphone-users-switching-samsungs-larger-screens/

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/11/technology/samsung-challenges-apples-cool-factor.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/27/technology/handset-makers-go-big-on-smartphones.html?_r=0

http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prCN24344613


Here's an article that covers part of what Apple discovered: the need to make a bigger phone:

http://9to5mac.com/2014/04/06/why-apple-has-to-make-bigger-screen-iphones-in-its-own-confidential-internal-slides/



Also, here's a nice summary of everything from the dailymail (I consider this to be a smut site but they sometimes have decent articles):

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2650513/Bigger-really-IS-better-comes-phones-People-experience-emotional-response-using-large-displays.html

Well, like I said this is all hypothesis, some of these articles have already been shown to be inaccurate in their assumptions (Samsung's stalling growth) as well or use obsolete information (China Mobile launch). I think you are really falling for the media hype machine here, we'll have to wait for the actual sales numbers, to see how much people choose iPhones despite the 4 inch screen. By all accounts there will be one (or maybe two) larger screened iPhone this year. It's possible that they will completely scrap the 4 inch model, in which case we might never know the actual market preference, but hopefully they won't and we'll learn something about consumer preferences.

As it stands my point is pretty much irrefutable, you can only get iOS flagships at 4 inches, and you can only get Android flagships at 4.5+ inches. So there's no direct competition to tell us what assumption is true;

Yours/Android Apologist "The Android flagships are following the market demands, therefore they all go to bigger screens, and Apple is lagging behind"

Mine/Apple Apologist "Android flagship devices are unable to compete with Apple in the same size category, that's why in a desperate attempt to differentiate themselves they move to larger and larger screens"

Originally posted by Bardock42
Well, like I said this is all hypothesis, some of these articles have already been shown to be inaccurate in their assumptions (Samsung's stalling growth) as well or use obsolete information (China Mobile launch). I think you are really falling for the media hype machine here, we'll have to wait for the actual sales numbers, to see how much people choose iPhones despite the 4 inch screen. By all accounts there will be one (or maybe two) larger screened iPhone this year. It's possible that they will completely scrap the 4 inch model, in which case we might never know the actual market preference, but hopefully they won't and we'll learn something about consumer preferences.

As it stands my point is pretty much irrefutable, you can only get iOS flagships at 4 inches, and you can only get Android flagships at 4.5+ inches. So there's no direct competition to tell us what assumption is true;

Yours/Android Apologist "The Android flagships are following the market demands, therefore they all go to bigger screens, and Apple is lagging behind"

Mine/Apple Apologist "Android flagship devices are unable to compete with Apple in the same size category, that's why in a desperate attempt to differentiate themselves they move to larger and larger screens"

I disagree. I think the market has made it pretty clear that they prefer larger screens (didja read any of the links?). The research shows that. The sales numbers which indicate a loss in Apples' market share in that screen market and an increase in the larger screen market (which indicates a direct shift) clearly indicates that not only is the market wanting larger screens than the 4" iPhone, Apple is behind the competition.


The fact that Apple is probably releasing a larger screen also indicates that they recognize they are losing the market share to the larger screens. They want to capitalize on that before it is too late. That's a good thing, in my opinion. They should capitalize on it.


If they had done this 6 years ago, I wouldn't have complained. I would have gladly purchased at $1000 phone if it was an iPhone with a 5.5" screen.

They are losing market share, that's true. But they are actually growing their sales, so it's not that bad. Most of the market share loss comes from sub-300$ phones, where Apple isn't playing at all.

Basically I see the move to have a larger screen as terrifying for Samsung, more so than a problem Apple had. Like I think that the larger iPhone will take a lot of the remaining over 500$ category, more so than it would get users that already have iPhones away from the 4 inch version.

I have read the links, some of them before you posted them, and like I said, I disagree with your interpretation of these.

Originally posted by Bardock42
They are losing market share, that's true. But they are actually growing their sales, so it's not that bad. Most of the market share loss comes from sub-300$ phones, where Apple isn't playing at all.

Except they are with the 5c and one of the articles I posted talked about that. I do believe it stated they were gaining market share in that category.


Originally posted by Bardock42
Basically I see the move to have a larger screen as terrifying for Samsung, more so than a problem Apple had. Like I think that the larger iPhone will take a lot of the remaining over 500$ category, more so than it would get users that already have iPhones away from the 4 inch version.


I agree that Apple expanding into the larger screen format on mobile phones is bad for everyone else but Apple. Apple would have made the jump, sooner, had the shit from Jobs not lasted so long. The 5 being bigger should have happened with the 3GS. The 5 should have been 4.5" (with a similar aspect ratio to other phones in that category).

If the sales supported it, THEN they could entertain 5" and 5.5" screen form-factors.

But, now, they are having to play catch-up to gain back some of the market share they lost (both new market share and existing market share).


Originally posted by Bardock42
I have read the links, some of them before you posted them, and like I said, I disagree with your interpretation of these.

It's okay. If Apple puts out a 4.5" phone, then Apple will have conceded the argument for both of us. I strongly suspect they will.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Except they are with the 5c and one of the articles I posted talked about that. I do believe it stated they were gaining market share in that category.

You are thinking in US terms. When people talk about sub-$300 phones they are talking off contract (like Apple did in its internal report, which btw, was used a year ago to explain why Apple will make a low cost phone....didn't happen). The 5C costs $549+



Originally posted by dadudemon
I agree that Apple expanding into the larger screen format on mobile phones is bad for everyone else but Apple. Apple would have made the jump, sooner, had the shit from Jobs not lasted so long. The 5 being bigger should have happened with the 3GS. The 5 should have been 4.5" (with a similar aspect ratio to other phones in that category).

If the sales supported it, THEN they could entertain 5" and 5.5" screen form-factors.

But, now, they are having to play catch-up to gain back some of the market share they lost (both new market share and existing market share).

They haven't lost existing market share worldwide though. The iPhone's absolute sales numbers have grown year over year.

Again we have two different thoughts on how to interpret the market. You are thinking that the iPhone is behind (although it completely dominates both the 4 inch market and the over $500 market), while I think the Android makers are unable to compete with Apple in the same market. I wrote a blog post about this exact different view of the market over a year ago: http://noiseandmultiplication.com/blog/2013/3/9/market-categories-iphone-vs-galaxy-s



Originally posted by dadudemon

It's okay. If Apple puts out a 4.5" phone, then Apple will have conceded the argument for both of us. I strongly suspect they will.

lol, nice try. I already said it is likely that Apple will come out with a bigger iPhone (people talk about 4.7" and 5.1" devices, but those are rumors), this does not in any way prove that consumers prefer the larger form factor (especially not whether consumer are more satisfied with their buying decision, the iPhone is by far the king of customer satisfaction).

The thing is right now the market of $500+ phones is something like 80+% iOS. The iPhone completely dominates the only segment it is in. Looking at market share without context is silly, which is what you are doing. Yes, Android has the larges market share worldwide. That this comes substantially from 100$ phones somewhere in China and India that make virtually no money for anyone (compared to Apple) is just not something you should ignore when making such a comparison.

Originally posted by Bardock42
You are thinking in US terms. When people talk about sub-$300 phones they are talking off contract (like Apple did in its internal report, which btw, was used a year ago to explain why Apple will make a low cost phone....didn't happen). The 5C costs $549+


In the US, very few people buy phones outright. It is a $99 for pretty much everyone, here. However, I do read that non-contract plans are on the rise.

Originally posted by Bardock42
They haven't lost existing market share worldwide though. The iPhone's absolute sales numbers have grown year over year.

Not sure why you would get hung up on that point. Is it because you need an "Apple win" in some way?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckjones/2014/04/07/apples-u-s-smartphone-market-share-holding-steady-against-every-competitor/

When the market is practically saturated, winning victories comes from taking market share from your competitors, not increasing minor absolute sales numbers (you may be lucky to outpace inflation if your business model runs this way...which is why it is not generally sustainable).

In this case, iOS made a market share gain in 2013.

However, and this is what I'm talking about, Apple is losing ground, again:

http://online.wsj.com/articles/apple-maintains-u-s-smartphone-market-share-lead-but-samsung-gains-ground-comscore-reports-1401830291

"ComScore said Google Inc.'s Android remained the top smartphone platform, with its market share rising to 52.5% from 51.7%. Apple came in at 41.4%, down from 41.6% for the three months that ended in January"

This, imo, is due to sales in Apple phones waning the quarter before they release their annual products. I believe we've seen this, before. But shouldn't that settle it?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Again we have two different thoughts on how to interpret the market. You are thinking that the iPhone is behind (although it completely dominates both the 4 inch market and the over $500 market), while I think the Android makers are unable to compete with Apple in the same market. I wrote a blog post about this exact different view of the market over a year ago: http://noiseandmultiplication.com/blog/2013/3/9/market-categories-iphone-vs-galaxy-s

I think Apple is behind the OS market share, yes. They lost that battle in 2010. Now they have stabilized, it would appear, in their market share...and are now in a minor decline. We'll see how things shape up in December after their 2014 fall sales numbers start hitting news sites.

Originally posted by Bardock42
lol, nice try. I already said it is likely that Apple will come out with a bigger iPhone (people talk about 4.7" and 5.1" devices, but those are rumors), this does not in any way prove that consumers prefer the larger form factor (especially not whether consumer are more satisfied with their buying decision, the iPhone is by far the king of customer satisfaction).

The thing is right now the market of $500+ phones is something like 80+% iOS. The iPhone completely dominates the only segment it is in. Looking at market share without context is silly, which is what you are doing. Yes, Android has the larges market share worldwide. That this comes substantially from 100$ phones somewhere in China and India that make virtually no money for anyone (compared to Apple) is just not something you should ignore when making such a comparison.

I think it's hilarious that you're dancing around the point. You cannot avoid this: if Apple sells a larger phone, I'm clearly correct. You honestly think a business that large would make an "on the whim" decision with out research to back it up? Of course not. They clearly conducted their own research that matches with what everyone discovered: people want larger screens than 3.5" or 4" skinny screens. Why would Apples own research magically differ from everyone else's results? Simple: it wouldn't. Their release of a larger phone will end the debate. Nothing is confirmed, just yet, on a larger screen, though. There is still hope.

Originally posted by dadudemon
In the US, very few people buy phones outright. It is a $99 for pretty much everyone, here. However, I do read that non-contract plans are on the rise.

The point is that you interpreted the numbers incorrectly, as you were thinking of them as contract prices, when actually everyone in the industry looks at off-contract prices.


Originally posted by dadudemon
Not sure why you would get hung up on that point. Is it because you need an "Apple win" in some way?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckjones/2014/04/07/apples-u-s-smartphone-market-share-holding-steady-against-every-competitor/

When the market is practically saturated, winning victories comes from taking market share from your competitors, not increasing minor absolute sales numbers (you may be lucky to outpace inflation if your business model runs this way...which is why it is not generally sustainable).

In this case, iOS made a market share gain in 2013.

However, and this is what I'm talking about, Apple is losing ground, again:

http://online.wsj.com/articles/apple-maintains-u-s-smartphone-market-share-lead-but-samsung-gains-ground-comscore-reports-1401830291

"ComScore said Google Inc.'s Android remained the top smartphone platform, with its market share rising to 52.5% from 51.7%. Apple came in at 41.4%, down from 41.6% for the three months that ended in January"

This, imo, is due to sales in Apple phones waning the quarter before they release their annual products. I believe we've seen this, before. But shouldn't that settle it?


The market is not yet saturated though (the US market is at about 66% smartphone penetration, and it is at the top end in the world). If it was you would be correct. Hence why Apple can sell more phones in absolute numbers and still lose overall market share.

But basically you already gave the reason why the share declined, they always do in the summer, a) in anticipation of the next iPhone's release and b) because all Android makers bring out their devices early in the year as competing with an iPhone launch is suicide. So that most definitely doesn't support your point, it just shows well established, seasonal market patterns.


Originally posted by dadudemon
I think Apple is behind the OS market share, yes. They lost that battle in 2010. Now they have stabilized, it would appear, in their market share...and are now in a minor decline. We'll see how things shape up in December after their 2014 fall sales numbers start hitting news sites.


I think it's hilarious that you're dancing around the point. You cannot avoid this: if Apple sells a larger phone, I'm clearly correct. You honestly think a business that large would make an "on the whim" decision with out research to back it up? Of course not. They clearly conducted their own research that matches with what everyone discovered: people want larger screens than 3.5" or 4" skinny screens. Why would Apples own research magically differ from everyone else's results? Simple: it wouldn't. Their release of a larger phone will end the debate. Nothing is confirmed, just yet, on a larger screen, though. There is still hope.

If Apple only make a larger iPhone, I will agree that you are correct in saying that Apple shares your opinion on market demands. If, however, they make a larger iPhone in addition to a 4 inch iPhone (which I suspect and am hoping for), then your point is not proven, as it is only an extension of their addressable market, not a concession that the smaller screen was a misstep. Agreed?

Originally posted by Bardock42
The point is that you interpreted the numbers incorrectly, as you were thinking of them as contract prices, when actually everyone in the industry looks at off-contract prices.

What you just said here is provably wrong with some simple numbers.

The iPhone 5's (not 5S) cost to Apple was estimated at $207

The iPhone 5c's cost to Apple was estimated at $195.

How much did a fully subsidized iPhone 5 cost?: $199.

How much does a fully subsidized iPhone 5c cost?: $99.


What is the difference on Apple's own cost?

iPhone 5 and the iPhone 5c:
$207-$195 = $12

Just a $12 difference. Even though this phone is supposed to be "significantly cheaper", it only costs $12 less.


What is the difference in the subsidized costs?
$199-$99 = $100

$100 is clearly larger than $12.


So what's going on, here?


Clearly, the point of the 5c was not a $549 MSRP market, it was definitely the subsidized market. What is the point of releasing a phone that would cost the consumer practically the same price as the previous year's phone but have little to no improvements? It should be obvious, at this point, that when you said this: "actually everyone in the industry looks at off-contract prices", you could not have been more wrong (obviously, they look at those numbers but, in context with what we were talking about, your point is wrong). Really what happened here is you thought I was mistaken on my understanding on the marketing decisions that went into the 5c but what really happened is you yourself were mistaken on your understanding of the marketing decisions that went into the 5c which lead you to incorrectly conclude that I was mistaken in my understanding as I expressed some of my opinions regarding these phones.

Originally posted by Bardock42
The market is not yet saturated though (the US market is at about 66% smartphone penetration, and it is at the top end in the world). If it was you would be correct. Hence why Apple can sell more phones in absolute numbers and still lose overall market share.

The market will be saturated in 2015.

The market just doesn't come, suddenly to a screeching halt. Market penetration has been slowing for a while now and it is pretty much done, at this point (I hope that makes sense. To use some random examples, the smartphone market increased by 8% in 2007 and only 3% in 2013 (these are made-up numbers but I have a sneaking suspicion that they are close to the real numbers) which indicates that growth is slowing even though growth is still happening).

We're already seeing that occurring because things like Apple's market share have stabilized and even lost a little bit of ground: something that hasn't happened with the iPhone, yet. These are the markers of technology adoption/saturation: when your heavy hitters stabilize and start eating into each other's shares.


Originally posted by Bardock42
But basically you already gave the reason why the share declined, they always do on the summer, a) in anticipation of the next iPhone's release and b) because all Android makers bring out their devices early in the year as competing with an iPhone launch is suicide. So that most definitely doesn't support your point, it just shows well established, seasonal market patterns.

My bad: I wasn't clear in what I was conveying. After reading over our conversation, I can definitely see where you got confused and it is my fault for not being clear enough (and I even misstated my point) in what I was trying to say. I'll restate the stuff but better.

When was the 5c and 5S released?

September 21st 2013.

What did those numbers I quoted reference?

"ComScore said Google Inc.'s Android remained the top smartphone platform, with its market share rising to 52.5% from 51.7%. Apple came in at 41.4%, down from 41.6% for the three months that ended in January"

What were the three months before January 2014? October, November, December.

Does my point become more clear? I'm still not done clarifying my confusing word salad, though.

My point about this fall's lineup from Apple and the market share gain from Apple was contingent upon Apple releasing a larger phone. I think Apple will start to gain back some of the market, again, come this fall. I am pretty dang sure that Apple lost even more market share these last 6 months of 2014, as well. You and I both agree that Android's heyday is every spring.

So, when I said this: "This, imo, is due to sales in Apple phones waning the quarter before they release their annual products. I believe we've seen this, before. But shouldn't that settle it?"

I made too many assumptions and muddied up the point I was making because I was trying to play a game and type at the same time. Sorry. But, yes, we both agree Apple should gain more market this fall and perhaps turn the current trends around.

Originally posted by Bardock42
If Apple only make a larger iPhone, I will agree that you are correct in saying that Apple shares your opinion on market demands.

Alright, then.

Originally posted by Bardock42
If, however, they make a larger iPhone in addition to a 4 inch iPhone (which I suspect and am hoping for), then your point is not proven, as it is only an extension of their addressable market, not a concession that the smaller screen was a misstep. Agreed?

Yes, I can agree to that...sort of. I never stated nor did I imply that Apple was going to stop making the smaller screen format. That's an assumption on your part (and one I should have surmised, now that I think about it). And it does make more sense why your jimmies were getting rustled over my perspective on this: you thought I was saying the existing formats were going to be quashed. Also, knowing this, it makes more sense why you were talking about market shares with the smaller screen format: you were saying Apple was dominating there in an attempt to convey that you don't think Apple is going to abandon that market. Of course, I don't disagree. That would be stupid of Apple to stop selling in that market!

So, yes, confusion and misstatements abound in these types of conversations.

Originally posted by Bardock42
You are thinking in US terms. When people talk about sub-$300 phones they are talking off contract (like Apple did in its internal report, which btw, was used a year ago to explain why Apple will make a low cost phone....didn't happen). The 5C costs $549+





They haven't lost existing market share worldwide though. The iPhone's absolute sales numbers have grown year over year.

Again we have two different thoughts on how to interpret the market. You are thinking that the iPhone is behind (although it completely dominates both the 4 inch market and the over $500 market), while I think the Android makers are unable to compete with Apple in the same market. I wrote a blog post about this exact different view of the market over a year ago: http://noiseandmultiplication.com/blog/2013/3/9/market-categories-iphone-vs-galaxy-s





lol, nice try. I already said it is likely that Apple will come out with a bigger iPhone (people talk about 4.7" and 5.1" devices, but those are rumors), this does not in any way prove that consumers prefer the larger form factor (especially not whether consumer are more satisfied with their buying decision, the iPhone is by far the king of customer satisfaction).

The thing is right now the market of $500+ phones is something like 80+% iOS. The iPhone completely dominates the only segment it is in. Looking at market share without context is silly, which is what you are doing. Yes, Android has the larges market share worldwide. That this comes substantially from 100$ phones somewhere in China and India that make virtually no money for anyone (compared to Apple) is just not something you should ignore when making such a comparison.

That's funny because I unlocked my iphone for free and my monthly bill is $30 :-)

Originally posted by dadudemon
What you just said here is provably wrong with some simple numbers.

The iPhone 5's (not 5S) cost to Apple was estimated at $207

The iPhone 5c's cost to Apple was estimated at $195.

How much did a fully subsidized iPhone 5 cost?: $199.

How much does a fully subsidized iPhone 5c cost?: $99.


What is the difference on Apple's own cost?

iPhone 5 and the iPhone 5c:
$207-$195 = $12

Just a $12 difference. Even though this phone is supposed to be "significantly cheaper", it only costs $12 less.


What is the difference in the subsidized costs?
$199-$99 = $100

$100 is clearly larger than $12.


So what's going on, here?


Clearly, the point of the 5c was not a $549 MSRP market, it was definitely the subsidized market. What is the point of releasing a phone that would cost the consumer practically the same price as the previous year's phone but have little to no improvements? It should be obvious, at this point, that when you said this: "actually everyone in the industry looks at off-contract prices", you could not have been more wrong (obviously, they look at those numbers but, in context with what we were talking about, your point is wrong). Really what happened here is you thought I was mistaken on my understanding on the marketing decisions that went into the 5c but what really happened is you yourself were mistaken on your understanding of the marketing decisions that went into the 5c which lead you to incorrectly conclude that I was mistaken in my understanding as I expressed some of my opinions regarding these phones.


This is all over the place. First of all, had Apple not released the iPhone 5C, the iPhone 5 would have been sold in the US for 99$ on a two year contract, just as the 5C is now. So Apple, taking your numbers (although I have my issues with iSupply), saved on the manufacturing and had a "new" product to advertise in the market, rather than last years phone. Both those advantages are the same in subsidized and unsubsidized markets (and those are the actual marketing decisions Apple made).

Additionally, Apple doesn't just get the cost of the phone as it is advertised on a contract, the carriers pay close to the wholesale price of the device, and bake that additional cost into the contract. So Apple gets its ~$549 for each on-contract device as well.

Consumers in the US, and some other markets, look at subsidized prices, because that's how they buy phones. Everyone in the industry that is trying to understand dynamics and compare manufacturers actual cost and prices looks at off-contract pricing (as on-contract prices obfuscate the actual dynamics).



Originally posted by dadudemon

The market will be saturated in 2015.


The market just doesn't come, suddenly to a screeching halt. Market penetration has been slowing for a while now and it is pretty much done, at this point (I hope that makes sense. To use some random examples, the smartphone market increased by 8% in 2007 and only 3% in 2013 (these are made-up numbers but I have a sneaking suspicion that they are close to the real numbers) which indicates that growth is slowing even though growth is still happening).

We're already seeing that occurring because things like Apple's market share have stabilized and even lost a little bit of ground: something that hasn't happened with the iPhone, yet. These are the markers of technology adoption/saturation: when your heavy hitters stabilize and start eating into each other's shares.


So, as I said the US market is not currently saturated (and therefore your arguments made under the pretence that it is, are incorrect). Additionally the world market is at about 30% market penetration. The rest are things I haven't disagreed with, just the claim of saturation.



Originally posted by dadudemon

My bad: I wasn't clear in what I was conveying. After reading over our conversation, I can definitely see where you got confused and it is my fault for not being clear enough (and I even misstated my point) in what I was trying to say. I'll restate the stuff but better.

When was the 5c and 5S released?

September 21st 2013.

What did those numbers I quoted reference?

"ComScore said Google Inc.'s Android remained the top smartphone platform, with its market share rising to 52.5% from 51.7%. Apple came in at 41.4%, down from 41.6% for the three months that ended in January"

What were the three months before January 2014? October, November, December.

Does my point become more clear? I'm still not done clarifying my confusing word salad, though.

My point about this fall's lineup from Apple and the market share gain from Apple was contingent upon Apple releasing a larger phone. I think Apple will start to gain back some of the market, again, come this fall. I am pretty dang sure that Apple lost even more market share these last 6 months of 2014, as well. You and I both agree that Android's heyday is every spring.

So, when I said this: "This, imo, is due to sales in Apple phones waning the quarter before they release their annual products. I believe we've seen this, before. But shouldn't that settle it?"

I made too many assumptions and muddied up the point I was making because I was trying to play a game and type at the same time. Sorry. But, yes, we both agree Apple should gain more market this fall and perhaps turn the current trends around.


Okay, good, then we seem to be in agreement on that point.


Originally posted by dadudemon

Alright, then.


Yes, I can agree to that...sort of. I never stated nor did I imply that Apple was going to stop making the smaller screen format. That's an assumption on your part (and one I should have surmised, now that I think about it). And it does make more sense why your jimmies were getting rustled over my perspective on this: you thought I was saying the existing formats were going to be quashed. Also, knowing this, it makes more sense why you were talking about market shares with the smaller screen format: you were saying Apple was dominating there in an attempt to convey that you don't think Apple is going to abandon that market. Of course, I don't disagree. That would be stupid of Apple to stop selling in that market!

So, yes, confusion and misstatements abound in these types of conversations.

Well, it's not so much an assumption on my part. I was just clarifying that when you said "You cannot avoid this: if Apple sells a larger phone, I'm clearly correct.", I can only agree that you are correct if they only make a larger phone. If they continue to make a new, high end, 4 inch phone, then you are not necessarily correct.

Originally posted by jinXed by JaNx
That's funny because I unlocked my iphone for free and my monthly bill is $30 :-)

I don't know what this is referring to, nor what it exactly means. You are saying you got an iPhone 5S for free on a 2 year contract for 30$ a months and sim-unlocked it? That would be a magnificent deal, if so, how did you get into that?

Originally posted by Bardock42
This is all over the place. First of all, had Apple not released the iPhone 5C, the iPhone 5 would have been sold in the US for 99$ on a two year contract, just as the 5C is now. So Apple, taking your numbers (although I have my issues with iSupply), saved on the manufacturing and had a "new" product to advertise in the market, rather than last years phone. Both those advantages are the same in subsidized and unsubsidized markets (and those are the actual marketing decisions Apple made).

Additionally, Apple doesn't just get the cost of the phone as it is advertised on a contract, the carriers pay close to the wholesale price of the device, and bake that additional cost into the contract. So Apple gets its ~$549 for each on-contract device as well.

Consumers in the US, and some other markets, look at subsidized prices, because that's how they buy phones. Everyone in the industry that is trying to understand dynamics and compare manufacturers actual cost and prices looks at off-contract pricing (as on-contract prices obfuscate the actual dynamics).


None of the stuff you talk about, here, addresses the points I made in my post. You were directly wrong about saying they don't focus on subsidized cost (by saying the everyone focuses on off-contract prices) when that was the entire point of the 5c (the subsidized price-point was the major marketing attraction for the 5c) despite costing about the same as the 5 before the 5c came out.






Originally posted by Bardock42
So, as I said the US market is not currently saturated (and therefore your arguments made under the pretence that it is, are incorrect). Additionally the world market is at about 30% market penetration. The rest are things I haven't disagreed with, just the claim of saturation.

Nice try in misrepresenting my position with a strawman just to be right about something.

But I was right from the beginning:

I said, "When the market is practically saturated..." I did not say, "The markets are saturated." One more year is not going to change much in the market share. It's pretty much done.

Additionally, the global market has never been something I am interested in discussing. Have you noticed how I continue to ignore that topic and cut those pieces out of your quotes? I live in America. These are American companies. I have access to and use almost only English speaking websites. I cannot comment nor do I know enough about other markets to entertain those discussions. Frankly, I am not even interested in those markets because they do not affect me. Fortunately or unfortunately, the US Market trends DO affect other markets, such as the European markets that you are more used to. So, while you obtain some benefit and insight from discussion with an America-centric perspective, I gain nothing from, say, a German-centric discussion.






Originally posted by Bardock42
Okay, good, then we seem to be in agreement on that point.

Yeah, we should be. Apple needs to patch the massive market hole they are not participating in or they are going to continue to lose market-share.




Originally posted by Bardock42
Well, it's not so much an assumption on my part. I was just clarifying that when you said "You cannot avoid this: if Apple sells a larger phone, I'm clearly correct.",

I'm still not seeing why you made the assumption that my words were, "if Apple sells only a larger phone." That's too much of an assumption on your part, imo. You've added meaning to my words that were simply not there.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I can only agree that you are correct if they only make a larger phone. If they continue to make a new, high end, 4 inch phone, then you are not necessarily correct.

You'll have no choice but to agree with me if Apple releases are larger phone regardless of what you incorrectly think my position is or what your position is. I do not need you to acknowledge that I'm right in order for me to be right. But, we may be getting ahead of ourselves. We don't know that they are releasing larger phones, just yet.

If they do officially announce a larger phone, I will quote myself, and say I was right.

Originally posted by dadudemon
None of the stuff you talk about, here, addresses the points I made in my post. You were directly wrong about saying they don't focus on subsidized cost (by saying the everyone focuses on off-contract prices) when that was the entire point of the 5c (the subsidized price-point was the major marketing attraction for the 5c) despite costing about the same as the 5 before the 5c came out.


As I pointed out in my reply to you, there were two reasons for the 5C, neither of them were limited to the subsidized cost. The 5C cost 100$ less on launch than the 5 cost on launch regardless of subsidy or not.

Originally posted by dadudemon

Nice try in misrepresenting my position with a strawman just to be right about something.

But I was right from the beginning:

I said, "When the market is practically saturated..." I did not say, "The markets are saturated." One more year is not going to change much in the market share. It's pretty much done.

Additionally, the global market has never been something I am interested in discussing. Have you noticed how I continue to ignore that topic and cut those pieces out of your quotes? I live in America. These are American companies. I have access to and use almost only English speaking websites. I cannot comment nor do I know enough about other markets to entertain those discussions. Frankly, I am not even interested in those markets because they do not affect me. Fortunately or unfortunately, the US Market trends DO affect other markets, such as the European markets that you are more used to. So, while you obtain some benefit and insight from discussion with an America-centric perspective, I gain nothing from, say, a German-centric discussion.

The US market saturation is at 66%. Even your link stated it will take over a year to arrive at their definition of saturation.

And yes, I have directly pointed out that you ignore the global market, and stated how I find that a silly thing to do (and funnily enough many of the links you posted talk about them, including the internal Apple report). Additionally your claim of the US market influencing the other markets, does not hold up in the case of smartphones, where the US market is an outlier.



Originally posted by dadudemon
Yeah, we should be. Apple needs to patch the massive market hole they are not participating in or they are going to continue to lose market-share.

And yet you do not think that Android OEMs needs to patch a massive market hole, even though in the US over 40% of smartphones sold are 4 inch and under and more than 80% of premium smartphones sold are.


Originally posted by dadudemon

I'm still not seeing why you made the assumption that my words were, "if Apple sells only a larger phone." That's too much of an assumption on your part, imo. You've added meaning to my words that were simply not there.

I did not make the assumption you said that. I have pointed out that what you said is only correct if we add this disclaimer. Really I pointed out that you did not say it, sadly.

Originally posted by dadudemon

You'll have no choice but to agree with me if Apple releases are larger phone regardless of what you incorrectly think my position is or what your position is. I do not need you to acknowledge that I'm right in order for me to be right. But, we may be getting ahead of ourselves. We don't know that they are releasing larger phones, just yet.

If they do officially announce a larger phone, I will quote myself, and say I was right.


Well you can quote yourself, and think you are right, however much you want, I don't mind that. But like I said, I'll only agree that your assertion is correct if they abandon the 4 inch phone.

Originally posted by Bardock42
As I pointed out in my reply to you, there were two reasons for the 5C, neither of them were limited to the subsidized cost. The 5C cost 100$ less on launch than the 5 cost on launch regardless of subsidy or not.

You're incorrect. It was only $12 more, not $100 more. I proved your point wrong, directly, with the numbers. It was clearly a marketing campaign, the 5c was.



Originally posted by Bardock42
The US market saturation is at 66%. Even your link stated it will take over a year to arrive at their definition of saturation.

I said, "When the market is practically saturated..." I did not say, "The markets are saturated." One more year is not going to change much in the market share. It's pretty much done.

The market just doesn't come, suddenly to a screeching halt. Market penetration has been slowing for a while now and it is pretty much done, at this point (I hope that makes sense. To use some random examples, the smartphone market increased by 8% in 2007 and only 3% in 2013 (these are made-up numbers but I have a sneaking suspicion that they are close to the real numbers) which indicates that growth is slowing even though growth is still happening).

We're already seeing that occurring because things like Apple's market share have stabilized and even lost a little bit of ground: something that hasn't happened with the iPhone, yet. These are the markers of technology adoption/saturation: when your heavy hitters stabilize and start eating into each other's shares.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Additionally your claim of the US market influencing the other markets, does not hold up in the case of smartphones, where the US market is an outlier.

Oh, so you mean Apple and Google's activities in the US don't affect other markets?

Well, this has been fun. But when you start saying stuff like that, there's no way I can take you seriously. You're either trolling or bored.






Originally posted by Bardock42
And yet you do not think that Android OEMs needs to patch a massive market hole, even though in the US over 40% of smartphones sold are 4 inch and under and more than 80% of premium smartphones sold are.

Nope! They seem to be doing just fine how they are. You know, majority market share n'all that and also cutting into Apple's market share n'all that.




Originally posted by Bardock42
I did not make the assumption you said that.

You did. You were going out of your way to add meaning that wasn't there just to be right about something because I trounced you on every other point we've been talking about, so far. That's petty and childish of you and I thought you were better than that.


Originally posted by Bardock42
I have pointed out that what you said is only correct if we add this disclaimer. Really I pointed out that you did not say it, sadly.

I didn't need to say it because we're not 6 years old. You should be able to think like an adult and interpret things like an adult and not have every minor point spoon-fed to you. But, hey, go ahead and keep on thinking I said, "if Apple sells only a larger phone." It's kind of pathetic what you're doing, really.




Originally posted by Bardock42
But like I said, I'll only agree that your assertion is correct if they abandon the 4 inch phone.

You can go ahead thinking that: you'd be wrong, though. That has never been my position. You love your strawman, eh?



Let's recap:

You missed the point of the 5c: I set you straight. You are kicking and screaming about it, though. It's getting kind of cringey watching you continue. But, you can't argue with the numbers: they are right there, telling you the marketing story.

You tried your hardest to be right about something so you decided to nitpick about the market saturation thing. I showed you were I was right from the beginning and that the saturation will occur next year. Yet, you're still trying to rustle up the last vestiges of what you think is a good argument. "ZOMG! I totes got you!" No you didn't. I said, from the beginning, "pretty much saturated." "One year before saturation" seems pretty much saturated, to me!

You had a reading comprehension problem because you injected meaning into my words that were not there. Your fault, not mine. It took me a bit to see why you were getting so frustrated over it because it did not make sense. But once I saw your error and explained why you were confused, you still refused to admit it.


Does that about recap things for you?

Who's got or getting the Amazon Phone?

Originally posted by dadudemon
You're incorrect. It was only $12 more, not $100 more. I proved your point wrong, directly, with the numbers. It was clearly a marketing campaign, the 5c was.


The 16 GB iPhone 5 cost the consumer 199$ on contract (649$ off contract) on its US launch on September 21st 2012, the 16GB iPhone 5C cost the consumer 99$ on contract (549$ off contract) on its US launch on September 20th 2013. That is a 100$ in both cases off contract and on contract. The contentious iSupply numbers that state that the iPhone 5C cost Apple 12$ less than the iPhone 5 cost Apple are obviously also the same whether they are off or on contract.. To claim that the point iPhone 5C must be solely the subsidised market is just not supported by your calculations, really nothing is supported by those calculations.


Originally posted by dadudemon

I said, "When the market is practically saturated..." I did not say, "The markets are saturated." One more year is not going to change much in the market share. It's pretty much done.

The market just doesn't come, suddenly to a screeching halt. Market penetration has been slowing for a while now and it is pretty much done, at this point (I hope that makes sense. To use some random examples, the smartphone market increased by 8% in 2007 and only 3% in 2013 (these are made-up numbers but I have a sneaking suspicion that they are close to the real numbers) which indicates that growth is slowing even though growth is still happening).

We're already seeing that occurring because things like Apple's market share have stabilized and even lost a little bit of ground: something that hasn't happened with the iPhone, yet. These are the markers of technology adoption/saturation: when your heavy hitters stabilize and start eating into each other's shares.


Sure, I accept that you meant the market is now almost saturated at the 66%, fair enough. However I disagree that nothing's going to change in the last part until complete saturation. For this to be true we'd have to assume that the profile of the late adopters is the same as that of the earlier adopters, obviously that isn't necessarily the case, perhaps it is not even likely. For example these late adopters obviously do not care much about what phone to get, that has been generally a favor for Android as sales people push Android phones more (due to receiving commissions) and Android has generally taken the place of the 0$ on contract dumphone. On the other hand these late adopters may also not very technically savvy, and in those cases iPhones are often preferred due to the ease of use and availability of good in-person help due to the network of Apple stores. We don't know yet how these two dynamics will play out for the last users to get smartphones. To assume that the market share numbers won't change is a bold, and imo, unfounded claim.


Originally posted by dadudemon
Oh, so you mean Apple and Google's activities in the US don't affect other markets?

Well, this has been fun. But when you start saying stuff like that, there's no way I can take you seriously. You're either trolling or bored.


That's a more broad assertion than what I was making. Of course Apple and Google's actions in the US affect other markets, however so do their actions in China (soon to be Apple's biggest market), in the EU, in Japan, etc. My point was more that the US smartphone market is an outlier as the true cost of the phones are almost completely obfuscated by the carrier pricing, hence why Apple is doing considerably better market share wise in the United States than almost anywhere else in the world (except Japan, iirc).



Originally posted by dadudemon

Nope! They seem to be doing just fine how they are. You know, majority market share n'all that and also cutting into Apple's market share n'all that.


Apple is the uncontended market leader in the United States. Samsung is a somewhat distant second, further trailed by LG, Motorola and HTC. And while the Android OS as a whole is used by considerably more people (worldwide, and some more people in the US), Apple collects almost all of the profits. HTC most definitely has to react in some way before they go bankrupt.


Originally posted by dadudemon

You did. You were going out of your way to add meaning that wasn't there just to be right about something because I trounced you on every other point we've been talking about, so far. That's petty and childish of you and I thought you were better than that.


I didn't need to say it because we're not 6 years old. You should be able to think like an adult and interpret things like an adult and not have every minor point spoon-fed to you. But, hey, go ahead and keep on thinking I said, "if Apple sells only a larger phone." It's kind of pathetic what you're doing, really.


When something you say can be reasonably interpreted in multiple ways, and furthermore its literal interpretation is inaccurate, then it is not childish to point out which interpretation of the statement one takes to be correct.


Originally posted by dadudemon

You can go ahead thinking that: you'd be wrong, though. That has never been my position. You love your strawman, eh?


Again you seem to insist that me stating my thoughts on a matter is somehow ascribing thoughts to yours. That is by no means what I intend to do.
But I can understand if you feel I have been misrepresenting your position in parts of our conversation, if you are willing to repeat it in different words, so I understand, I'd love to read it once again. Perhaps there has been a miscommunication, I assure you it would not have been on purpose, however.

Originally posted by dadudemon

Let's recap:

You missed the point of the 5c: I set you straight. You are kicking and screaming about it, though. It's getting kind of cringey watching you continue. But, you can't argue with the numbers: they are right there, telling you the marketing story.

You tried your hardest to be right about something so you decided to nitpick about the market saturation thing. I showed you were I was right from the beginning and that the saturation will occur next year. Yet, you're still trying to rustle up the last vestiges of what you think is a good argument. "ZOMG! I totes got you!" No you didn't. I said, from the beginning, "pretty much saturated." "One year before saturation" seems pretty much saturated, to me!

You had a reading comprehension problem because you injected meaning into my words that were not there. Your fault, not mine. It took me a bit to see why you were getting so frustrated over it because it did not make sense. But once I saw your error and explained why you were confused, you still refused to admit it.


Does that about recap things for you?

I disagree with this interpretation of events.


Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Who's got or getting the Amazon Phone?

It looks interesting, I won't get it, cause it's really to expensive for me to just play around with. I'd love to check out one in person some time though. And Amazon has been fantastic at iteratively improving its devices. I'm very interested to see where it goes. If I was to get an Android phone right now I would get the OnePlus One. It has amazing specs, costs 299$ off contract and runs Cyanogen Mod natively. But, while I do need an Android phone for development at work, I already have a Moto G which does the job extremely well. It's probably my favourite Android phone I ever owned (I had a T-Mobile G1 and a Galaxy Nexus before that) and the price is insanely good. Will you get the Amazon phone?

I feel like you can't really have it both ways; Yell strawman again and again, yet refuse to give clarification when asked for it.

At any rate, it seems to me like this has become too convoluted, with each of us assuming or interpreting things the other said that they feel they haven't.

So, to sort of reset it, and without presuming how you feel about any of these, here's some of the things I am thinking about the topics we discussed.

I think Apple made the iPhone 5C, because rather than lowering the price of their previous flagship phone (iPhone 5), as they have done in the past, they decided to manufacture a slightly cheaper version, that they could advertise as new. Both these advantages worked in predominantly subsidized as well as predominantly unsubsidized markets.

I am not convinced that a majority of the market wants screens larger than the current iPhone 5S. I also think, that articles claiming that, have failed to provide valid evidence.

Additionally I believe that Apple is the absolute winner in the "smartphone wars", with Samsung a second and Google a third. This belief comes from me putting more importance in certain market segments than others, in particular the market segment in which Apple dominates. It is to me the most important segment from a company's point of view.

I could also imagine that the US market share data will further change quite a bit until saturation. I define "quite a bit" as a difference of more than 5 percentage points for Apple (up or down) in this case.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I feel like you can't really have it both ways; Yell strawman again and again, yet refuse to give clarification when asked for it.

I already provided clarification and I showed you very specifically where you went wrong with quotes and an example.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I think Apple made the iPhone 5C, because rather than lowering the price of their previous flagship phone (iPhone 5), as they have done in the past, they decided to manufacture a slightly cheaper version, that they could advertise as new. Both these advantages worked in predominantly subsidized as well as predominantly unsubsidized markets.

Do you agree that most of the European markets are now subsidized?

Originally posted by Bardock42
I am not convinced that a majority of the market wants screens larger than the current iPhone 5S. I also think, that articles claiming that, have failed to provide valid evidence.

I am convinced that a significant portion of the population wants a screen as large as or larger than a 4.5" screen. But the spread is unknown. I don't know if it the 4.5" thing comes from a plurality or a majority of the people studied.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Additionally I believe that Apple is the absolute winner in the "smartphone wars", with Samsung a second and Google a third. This belief comes from me putting more importance in certain market segments than others, in particular the market segment in which Apple dominates. It is to me the most important segment from a company's point of view.

I see Google as the winner since their OS has the majority of the market share and their share continues to grow while Apple's iOS is not starting to shrink (which may have occurred for 3 quarters in a row, now...which is a first for Apple).

Originally posted by Bardock42
I could also imagine that the US market share data will further change quite a bit until saturation. I define "quite a bit" as a difference of more than 5 percentage points for Apple (up or down) in this case.

From this year to the next, I don't think the saturation numbers are going to change much. iOS's share seems to have stabilized and Android's share is not increasing as much as it used to. If there are significant changes from this year to the next, I'll be surprised...sort of. I won't be surprised if Apple starts raping the markets if/when they release a larger phone at a $200 subsidized price point. I think this is going to be huge (pun intended) and should see a shift in the market back to Apple's favor.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I already provided clarification and I showed you very specifically where you went wrong with quotes and an example.

While I have read everything you have written in this thread, I have been unable to find that.

Originally posted by dadudemon

Do you agree that most of the European markets are now subsidized?

I do not know exact numbers on that. I know that pay-as-you-go or prepaid options are much more common in many European markets than in the US market, and if there are subsidies they are generally more closely corresponding with the off-contract pricing. Do you have numbers about the prevalence of subsidies in European markets?

Originally posted by dadudemon

I am convinced that a significant portion of the population wants a screen as large as or larger than a 4.5" screen. But the spread is unknown. I don't know if it the 4.5" thing comes from a plurality or a majority of the people studied.

Then I think we agree on this part.

Originally posted by dadudemon

I see Google as the winner since their OS has the majority of the market share and their share continues to grow while Apple's iOS is not starting to shrink (which may have occurred for 3 quarters in a row, now...which is a first for Apple).

Hmm, yes, that is one of our fundamentally different views on the issue.

Originally posted by dadudemon

From this year to the next, I don't think the saturation numbers are going to change much. iOS's share seems to have stabilized and Android's share is not increasing as much as it used to. If there are significant changes from this year to the next, I'll be surprised...sort of.

Well, we'll see.

Originally posted by dadudemon

I won't be surprised if Apple starts raping the markets if/when they release a larger phone at a $200 subsidized price point. I think this is going to be huge (pun intended) and should see a shift in the market back to Apple's favor.

Yes, I agree with that. If Apple should come out with a larger 4.5+ inch screened iPhone, I imagine their competitors to lose significant market share. Perhaps iOS will even become the majority OS.

Originally posted by Bardock42
While I have read everything you have written in this thread, I have been unable to find that.

K. Maybe a third party could find it and quote it but my patience has run out and I am unwilling to go back and quote a quote of quottiness.



Originally posted by Bardock42
I do not know exact numbers on that. I know that pay-as-you-go or prepaid options are much more common in many European markets than in the US market, and if there are subsidies they are generally more closely corresponding with the off-contract pricing. Do you have numbers about the prevalence of subsidies in European markets?

I do not know the numbers on that, either. All I know is the article I linked said that, in the beginning, the European markets were largely unsubsidized and now the majority are subsidized.



Originally posted by Bardock42
Hmm, yes, that is one of our fundamentally different views on the issue.

It is not that you're wrong in your measure of "share." You're not. You just have a different approach. I view Google's approach to the mobile market to be fundamentally different from Apples and, therefore, cannot be compared Manfacturer to Manfacturer. As many tech sites do, they compare OS share rather than manufacturer share. I think they do this because of how different Google's approach is compared to Apple's.



Originally posted by Bardock42
Yes, I agree with that. If Apple should come out with a larger 4.5+ inch screened iPhone, I imagine their competitors to lose significant market share. Perhaps iOS will even become the majority OS.

That's not a bad thing. I like what Apple is doing with iOS these days and their hardware is generally head and shoulders above the majority of android phones. Though I do love my Galaxy Note 3, I would probably be happier with a 5" Apple 6.

Originally posted by dadudemon
K. Maybe a third party could find it and quote it but my patience has run out and I am unwilling to go back and quote a quote of quottiness.

You by no means have to. I was more looking for a rephrasing of what you said, since apparently I am unable to grasp your meaning from the way it had been phrased previously. However we can also drop it, I have no problem with that.


Originally posted by dadudemon
I do not know the numbers on that, either. All I know is the article I linked said that, in the beginning, the European markets were largely unsubsidized and now the majority are subsidized.

I know that the German market has always had "subsidized" contracts. However the granularity is considerably higher, so that you can't win that much by choosing a phone that has been subsidized more.


Originally posted by dadudemon

It is not that you're wrong in your measure of "share." You're not. You just have a different approach. I view Google's approach to the mobile market to be fundamentally different from Apples and, therefore, cannot be compared Manfacturer to Manfacturer. As many tech sites do, they compare OS share rather than manufacturer share. I think they do this because of how different Google's approach is compared to Apple's.

Yeah, I understand that, and it is a perfectly valid way to look at it as well. I think a holistic view of the market is often lacking, depending on whether you get your news from pro-Apple or pro-Android sites.

Originally posted by dadudemon

That's not a bad thing. I like what Apple is doing with iOS these days and their hardware is generally head and shoulders above the majority of android phones. Though I do love my Galaxy Note 3, I would probably be happier with a 5" Apple 6.

I don't view it as a bad thing either as I am committed to the Apple ecosystem. I think it could be potentially lethal for certain Android OEMs though.

Well, I bought a new PC.

Take a look, here:

5R0_FJ4r73s


4.7" and 5.5" is the rumor.



But this gent claims that these are the actual display sapphire covers for the iPhone 6.



Still, nothing official from Apple so these prototypes can be considered unofficial, but, as other leaks have indicated, the form-factor is pretty much done. The shape may change but the components and general shape/size are pretty solid at this point.

From the iPhone 4 leaks, we may see the iPhone 6 become less "bulky" meaning it may become thinner. Apple likes to streamline and make their products look more sleek compared to their prototypes. However, the prototype already looks fairly thin and sleek. Not sure what else they can improve?

I just saw that video (and then started watching back Marques Brownlee videos, they are great). I looks amazing, and actually the size doesn't look too bad, I might consider it over a 4 inch one. And yeah, I agree, Apple will probably try to make it even sleeker (rather than putting say a larger battery in the same thickness)

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
Well, I bought a new PC.

What PC did you get?

Originally posted by Bardock42
What PC did you get?

Gaming desktop. i7 4770k, GTX 780, 16GB RAM.

GTX 780?

Nice.

http://media.247sports.com/Uploads/Assets/353/62/1062353.jpg

Thanks, it sure is nice.

My most recent purchase was a Galaxy S5.

It's a solid phone. Excellent battery life; lasts for a day with heavy usage.
Build quality is better than my previous phone (LG G2), but the design is meh. Looks like every other Samsung phone out there. Performance is fluid and smooth. Arguably still the best Android phone in the market, and probably the best phone I've ever owned.

Model 3 (formerly Model E) - Around $35.000 - 2017 - Yes, thx, plz to be putting in a bag to go!

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/tesla/87867/tesla-model-3-to-challenge-bmw-3-series-world-exclusive

Ahhhh.


They said "30k" before. Looks like they couldn't keep it that low.

I recently bought the PS4 and bought my son an X-Box one for his birthday. I'm pretty happy with the PS4, but will be more happy in October when good games start flooding the market.

Originally posted by socool8520
I recently bought the PS4 and bought my son an X-Box one for his birthday. I'm pretty happy with the PS4, but will be more happy in October when good games start flooding the market.
Haven't bought a PS4 yet.

Waiting for a major price drop, and more importantly, the games.