iPhone not top dog in 2013 ? Android + Windows gaining.

canna said:
So what's the draw to a smartphone platform without apps?

If their market share reaches such a steep difference, developers *will* abandon IOS as a platform. Apple is repeating the same mistakes that previously forced the into obscurity.
Click to expand...

Reaches a steep difference? Scroll up and look at that normalized market share graph. iOS has oscillated between 10% and 20% of market share for the past four years. It's "always" been the minority player in this market, albeit a well-positioned one. And developers have flocked to it.

So long as Apple can maintain a stable of a hundred million plus users who are willing to actually pay for apps, they will be well supported by the dev community.
 
It's nice to have competition it creates ebb and flow. With that said I remember when Apple was significant enough in the creative world and made a blip in the home pc world. Then the 90's came and they went quite. Then the iPod and iPhone with their sleek designs and simple UI enabled the masses to engage in this type of tech and Apple was back in the game.

People throw around "firsts" with Apple but the smartphone was around long before the iPhone among other things that Apple claims. There is no denying there place in history and the marketplace but I think other posters on here are right, Apple is shooting itself in the foot. Don't run around telling your fan base you invented everything when you didn't, your keynotes are getting rediculous. Apple reminds me of an addict that thinks they don't have a problem. Lets keep blowing our funds by trying to sue everyone but keep losing.

No Apple you work out licensing deals and use your cash to take those ideas you just licensed and create better products otherwise you will lose your fan base and your suppliers. In the end it will be like the 90's the iPhone will have it's place but with a lot less market share.
 
Went to ATT store to look around at new smartphones, I am a Nexus fan, having owned all three so far, and before that the first two iPhone's. But always open minded to new tech.

- Lumia 920 = :eek: Wow, very impressive, nice fresh original design, was super fast and smooth. Live tiles are different, but cool. I read complaints it's too thick and heavy :rolleyes: Hit the fucking weight room you skinny nerd, I didn't notice the thickness or weight one bit holding it. I came away really liking it, and for $99 on contract, a super good deal.

- Note II = Very nice too, read so many positive things about it. But the size is just too large for me, very difficult to one hand operate it. And Samsung's plastic design has got to go, just a sea of shiny plastic, no design sense. I went in thinking, I might buy the Note II, but after 5 minutes with it, not my thing.

- iPhone 5 = :rolleyes: LOL, wow that thing looks so outdated OS wise, and way too small. There is no way I would go for an iPhone 5, just too basic and boring for me.

- Nexus 4 = I have not seen one yet, but I have liked all my other Nexus phones, and am leaning towards it, site unseen.

To me, it's between the Nokia 920 and Nexus 4.
 
Zorachus said:
To me, it's between the Nokia 920 and Nexus 4.
Click to expand...
I've decided on the Nexus 4 because I just cannot bring myself to pay Evil&T directly for a phone, despite the fact AT&T will give me unlimited everything with LTE for $70 (company has deal with AT&T). Since Straight Talk doesn't have LTE, the Nexus 4 at $350 is perfect for me.
 
XenIneX said:
Reaches a steep difference? Scroll up and look at that normalized market share graph. iOS has oscillated between 10% and 20% of market share for the past four years. It's "always" been the minority player in this market, albeit a well-positioned one. And developers have flocked to it.

So long as Apple can maintain a stable of a hundred million plus users who are willing to actually pay for apps, they will be well supported by the dev community.
Click to expand...

This is a common misconception and if I hadn't read the data for myself I would agree with you. Please check out this article, and especially look at the three graphs that are included.

http://www.phonearena.com/news/As-t...developers-supporting-Android-tablets_id36486

Apple and Android are about 60/40 now in terms of overall revenue from apps. Conversely, when it comes to monthly revenue per app, Android makes more on average per app.

But never mind all of that, this is the really important part. Apple's top 200 apps make an average of $7 million per app per day, while Android's make "only" $2 million per app per day. At first this may seem like a bad thing, but it actually implies that app sales are less concentrated in a small number of heavy hitters, and more evenly spread throughout the app ecosystem on Android. What this means is that average developers have a better chance of doing well with Android than with iOS.

When you consider that Android has a significantly larger user base compared to iOS, and you consider that app revenues are more equally distributed with Android, it means that if the app developers get the message, they will eventually jump ship and move to Android. If they don't see this information, they obviously won't due to false pretenses (that Apple is more profitable for app developers, etc.)

But one can hope (or not, depends on who you are)...
 
I think this year more than ever before the heat is on Apple. You have what seems to me more advertising for Android devices and Windows, you have Samsumg with two of the hottest devices right now the GS3 and Note2 and Google just releases three new Nexus devices just in time for Christmas. All this and the Apple keynote was rather sad with the iPad mini with it's high price tag and lackluster specs and then the iPhone 5. Nothing, really new there, I really think Tim Cook is going to take all the money and use it to try and sue instead of innovate.
 
I like the iPhone 5 personally. I like the 920 as well. I don't like any of the current Android flagships. Its all my opinion, and because my needs slightly differ from everyone else my opinion will differ. I don't think any phone has innovated much this year other than the 920. The 920's design is quite refreshing and new. Feature wise its solid, and so it the build quality. Current Android phones even quite more of the same. The S3 is like the S2 before it and the S before that. The galaxy line looks so identical to each other the only real thing that has changed has been screen size. Software wise its been huge changes, and Google has made huge strides in usability and stability. But I personally think they haven't gotten quite there. Until the day when Stock android, I mean COMPLETELY stock is almost 99% complete, meaning I don't have to go to Custom ROM to fix something then I feel android is still broken. I mean I have had countless Android based phones and none of them had stood well stock for one reason or another.
 
///AMG said:
I don't think any phone has innovated much this year other than the 920. The 920's design is quite refreshing and new.
Click to expand...

How did the 920 innovate? Nokia has been using that exact design for a year now - ever since the N9 they've been re-using that same design. It's a good design, sure, but there's nothing "innovative" about the 920...

I would call the Nexus 4 far more innovative simply for it's insanely cheap unlocked, off-contract price.
 
kllrnohj said:
How did the 920 innovate? Nokia has been using that exact design for a year now - ever since the N9 they've been re-using that same design. It's a good design, sure, but there's nothing "innovative" about the 920...

I would call the Nexus 4 far more innovative simply for it's insanely cheap unlocked, off-contract price.
Click to expand...

The Nexus 4 is so much like the older LG optimus phones, the 920 feels and looks quite different from the 900. Price wise the 920 is VERY competitive. I think almost all phones are more of the same these days, bigger screen, faster processor, slimmer, faster wireless chip, bigger battery. lets be honest the 920 might not be that innovate but it is the "freshest" phone on the market today. Manufactures havent been able to do anything radical in the last 2 years.
 
I also don't feel that there are any truly innovative phones on the market right now. The new iPhone isn't radically different from the iPhone released in 2007. OEM-made Android and WP8 devices are limited to the functions of their OS, so differentiation is simply in size, shape, and specs.

The last two phones to truly impress me were:
-Samsung Wave
-Nokia 808 PureView

I truly love the Wave series and wish that the chassis was used for the Galaxy S series. Nothing innovative, just Samsung's best built-phone not using Android, but instead their Bada OS. As for the Nokia, they are using a 41MP camera. It's not that it takes 41MP photos, but instead can zoom in for 8-13MP shots without losing detail. It's a way of getting around digital zoom limitations. Has to use Symbian because WP7 doesn't support camera sensors that large. Nokia has hinted that WP8 support is a possibility.
 
I think the galaxy note is an innovative phone.
It is innovative in a backwards sense but that is a good thing. It used to be that phone companies tried to make phones useful so they had things like keyboards, stylus and programs. But after the iPhone everyone saw that you could sell people a rectangle with a screen and 1 button for plenty of profit, so why bother with all the added expense?

The galaxy note is a bit of a throw back to those old days of making phones dynamic all in one devices again, It was the gamble on the huge screen, and they deserve every bit of praise they get for having the balls to try that. Lets be honest it could have been a huge flop.

The problem with innovation in phones is most of what we really need is standards to get things rolling. There are lots of attempts to innovate the phone inot an all in one device like the padphon and atrix, but they all create custom solutions that only last as long as a single phone. We need to see the same modularity, a standard dock for all androud phones that allows you to turn any phone into a desktop PC.

Next up I hope we see MS make a surface phone, surface is neat, but where it really would make a ton of sense is on a phone. A nice little protective cover that doubles as a keyboard. I also hope that we can see more companies
 
I don't see how the Galaxy Note was a gamble or innovative at all. Dumb phones got smaller since you just make phone calls so bulk was just useless, but smartphones are just screens you play with but can make phone calls too. The trend is bigger screens, and is the reason why my wife went for the Note 2 instead of the iPhone 5 or SG3 - just a big screen. While not innovative, Samsung made a move in making a device that they felt their customers wanted.

Personally, I think cell phone innovation, the huge "jumps" and "wows" are over until a new form of user interface is invented and becomes widespread. The jump from dumb phones to stylist to touchscreens were an evolution upon each design, but not a revolution. Beyond what we have now, touchscreens, what else can we realistically do? Not a whole lot since it's essentially at the pinnacle of this particular style of UI. The next evolution, the next innovation, will have to be something completely different, I'm talking about Google Glasses, virtual holograms, whatever.
 
It's still much bolder move than making another "me too" phone with 4-5" screen, square or rounded edges and inadequate battery ;)

Really note 2 ticks so many boxes on my wish list it's like custom made for me :)
 
If you define innovation so strictly then innovation has not happened in decades in the phone market. Because the fact is before the iPhone every single thing the iPhone did was already being done in smart phones. Yet you see everyone on TV essentially calling the iPhone a major innovation.

That is why I pointed it out, the built in stylus may not be a new idea but sometimes, or I should say in fact most of the times, what people think it innovation is just a company going out and looking at past products and re releasing them when others have given up on them usually for profit motives.

I mean its not like google classes are really going to be an innovation such products have been prototyped and made in the past, so the innovation is really only the fact that a company is able to make a product at a price and volume that did not seem to work out before.
 
///AMG said:
the 920 feels and looks quite different from the 900.
Click to expand...

No, not really. They are damn near identical from the front and side:

http://www.nokia.com/us-en/products/phone/lumia900/specifications/
http://www.nokia.com/us-en/products/phone/lumia920/specifications/

And both have *very* similar dimensions and weight.

Price wise the 920 is VERY competitive.
Click to expand...

Yes, but I think you missed the part where the N4 is not competitive, it blows everything else away. The Lumia 920 is $150 more expensive - $299 vs. $449. The Lumia 920 is definitely competitively priced, just not game changing priced :)
 
kllrnohj said:
Yes, but I think you missed the part where the N4 is not competitive, it blows everything else away. The Lumia 920 is $150 more expensive - $299 vs. $449. The Lumia 920 is definitely competitively priced, just not game changing priced :)
Click to expand...

Not the fairest comparison. The Lumia comes with 32GB of storage. The model you're comparing it to has 8GB. At least use the 16GB $349 model for comparison, it's much closer to apples to apples.

At that point, does the extra 16GB and LTE of the Lumia 920 justify the extra $100 in price?
 
Ah, another 808 fan. I use an 808 and an older Desire Z, and the camera truly is the dog's bolloc*s.
 
Medion said:
Not the fairest comparison. The Lumia comes with 32GB of storage. The model you're comparing it to has 8GB. At least use the 16GB $349 model for comparison, it's much closer to apples to apples.

At that point, does the extra 16GB and LTE of the Lumia 920 justify the extra $100 in price?
Click to expand...

Exactly. And when you put it that way, the extra storage, LTE, Office suite, and tight integration with SkyDrive made the extra $100 worth it to me.
 
I'd call super sensitive touch screen and OIS real innovations. Real OIS on a phone is truly impressive.
 
Tup3x said:
I'd call super sensitive touch screen and OIS real innovations. Real OIS on a phone is truly impressive.
Click to expand...

"super sensitive touch screen" - not really any lower latency or higher sensitivity than what, say, an iPhone 5 has or an N4/Optimus G.

OIS is nice, but what's the end result of that? You get better looking pictures. That's more the typical march of progress than innovation. And the downside is you get a thicker phone with a built in rattle.

Medion said:
Not the fairest comparison. The Lumia comes with 32GB of storage. The model you're comparing it to has 8GB. At least use the 16GB $349 model for comparison, it's much closer to apples to apples.

At that point, does the extra 16GB and LTE of the Lumia 920 justify the extra $100 in price?
Click to expand...

Lumia isn't overpriced, I agree - but it's still not pushing the boundaries on price like the N4 is. Yes, the N4 only has 8GB vs. 32GB, but I'm comparing cheapest vs. cheapest here. And personally I'd take double the RAM and a quad core S4 Pro over an extra 16GB of storage.

LTE would matter more if AT&T's LTE network actually, you know, existed in places. N4 is unlocked + pentaband HSPA+ 42, which kind of balances out the missing LTE here.
 
kllrnohj said:
"super sensitive touch screen" - not really any lower latency or higher sensitivity than what, say, an iPhone 5 has or an N4/Optimus G.
Click to expand...

I disagree on both points here. The Lumia 920 runs at 60 fps and has a noticeably smoother display. Also, next time it gets cold, try using an iPhone 5 or an N4/Optimus G with gloves on - once you do, you'll realize "super sensitive touch screen" absolutely means a higher sensitivity.

kllrnohj said:
Lumia isn't overpriced, I agree - but it's still not pushing the boundaries on price like the N4 is. Yes, the N4 only has 8GB vs. 32GB, but I'm comparing cheapest vs. cheapest here. And personally I'd take double the RAM and a quad core S4 Pro over an extra 16GB of storage.
Click to expand...

The difference here is the Lumia 920 doesn't need double the RAM and a quad core to run smoother than a Nexus 4. To me the extra storage is something I could actually use.

I'm not knocking either as both are great devices, but to call the Lumia 920 not innovative and not competitive on price - I disagree.
 
wilsonrdfl said:
I disagree on both points here. The Lumia 920 runs at 60 fps and has a noticeably smoother display. Also, next time it gets cold, try using an iPhone 5 or an N4/Optimus G with gloves on - once you do, you'll realize "super sensitive touch screen" absolutely means a higher sensitivity.
Click to expand...

The iPhone 5 and Nexus 4 both run at 60fps as well, and displays aren't "smooth". That's not an adjective that applies to displays in any way.

I confess it's been a long time since I've worn gloves, so the 920 may have a neat trick there but that wasn't the sensitivity I thought you meant. I thought you meant that it was lower latency than the competition, which I haven't seen anything to support.

The difference here is the Lumia 920 doesn't need double the RAM and a quad core to run smoother than a Nexus 4. To me the extra storage is something I could actually use.
Click to expand...

The RAM doesn't help with "smooth", it helps with multitasking. But then again, if your OS doesn't support that I guess it doesn't matter :p

Also, [citation needed] for "smoother" claim. All the reviews of the N4 call it flat out blazing fast.

I'm not knocking either as both are great devices, but to call the Lumia 920 not innovative and not competitive on price - I disagree.
Click to expand...

I didn't say it wasn't competitive on price, so not sure who you are disagreeing with there. And so far nobody has pointed out anything the 920 did that was innovative. It looks entirely like an iteration of the last years worth of phones Nokia has been producing. This is pretty much backed up by all the reviews, which call it a good phone but nothing special or great.
 
Just curious, if you don't call the sensitive touch and OIS innovative, what phone/feature could you give as an example of what would be?
 
I've recently gone back to an iPhone having been on an Android for years (I am an android fanboy at heart) and I have to say, it's been an absolute joy to use.

I don't have to worry about background apps / processes sucking precious battery life, multitasking isn't "pure" but it works equally as well IMO.

All of the apps are far superior to their Android counterparts. That's the first thing that struck me, the quality.

Little things, such as being able to save down photos from direct with Facebook (I could never gets pics to save on the Android app) and then shove them in a shared photostream that others can view.

The whole process of creating a full back up is easy and seamless.

There is nothing innovative here, but the quality and supported by better battery life sell it to me again.

iOS 4 (last time I had one) to 6.01 is a vast improvement.

I could never get use to a tiny 3.5" screen, but at 4" it's a comfort sweetspot. I can pick the phone up in one hand, do everything in one hand.

I found myself constantly switching Android handsets because nothing ever felt "quite right". Sensation > HTC One X > Galaxy Note > S3.

I'm sticking with the Apple way of things here on.
 
wilsonrdfl said:
Just curious, if you don't call the sensitive touch and OIS innovative, what phone/feature could you give as an example of what would be?
Click to expand...

Nokia 808 PureView's camera
Nexus 4's price
HTC Droid DNA's screen

Or for some older innovations:
Motorola Droid 1 - high density, high resolution screen for the masses
iPad redefining tablets as giant phones instead of small laptops (love it or hate it, it was unique)
Galaxy Note - making the phablet work

The super sensitive touch screen is a neat trick, but people have been coping just fine without it for years - and for those that want to use gloves with phones there are plenty of low cost alternatives such as conductive thread in the finger tips. It doesn't really change anything.

OIS is new for phones, yes, but again it just lets you take better low light pictures. Is that more important than, say, the camera work Apple has been doing with the iPhone? The 920's camera is good, but it's not like it bests other good smartphone cameras across the board. The colors are a bit bland, for example, and the OIS doesn't do squat to help its daylight performance.
 
6 of 1 half a dozen of another, why is a higher resolution screen an innovation when more sensitivity is not? LCDs have been increasing pixel density as a general trend for as long as we have been making them. That is just the steady march of progress.

Also ipad came after archos had lots of giant tablets nothing new there. In fact thats not the first product apple copied off of them. On top of that the ipad is not a giant phone its a giant mp3 player. The most sold models do not have any sort of phone functionality.

The only common trend I see in your innovations is that those companies just seem to be newer or better at advertising, so the innovation is in advertising.
 
rudy said:
why is a higher resolution screen an innovation when more sensitivity is not?
Click to expand...

Well, because the more sensitivity just means you can use it with gloves on, it isn't more sensitive as in lower latency. If it was significantly lower latency than the competition, that would be a hell of a lot more noteworthy.

If your confused as to significance of that, Microsoft has a nice video about it: http://techcrunch.com/2012/03/09/mi...hscreen-but-will-they-ever-make-it-to-market/

But being able to use it with gloves on? Cool, but I just don't see that being any sort of meaningful impact. I don't think we're going to look back in 2 years and go "man, that Lumia 920 with it's ability to use it with your gloves on was just so innovative! People outside in the cold just rejoiced at that!"

LCDs have been increasing pixel density as a general trend for as long as we have been making them. That is just the steady march of progress.
Click to expand...

No, actually, they haven't. LCDs on desktops never budged from the 95-100 PPI range since they took off some 20 years ago. Even laptops never really ventured past maybe ~120-130 PPI, and the few times they did it just showed the OS failing to scale properly and they promptly died. The Motorola Droid with Android was the very first pairing that showed you can bump PPI to the previously unheard of 240 PPI and have an OS that scales properly.

After that, yes, it became the "march of progress" - that's what makes it innovative, it kicked off an entirely new line of improvements for screens. One that flat out didn't exist before except inside R&D labs.

Also ipad came after archos had lots of giant tablets nothing new there. In fact thats not the first product apple copied off of them. On top of that the ipad is not a giant phone its a giant mp3 player. The most sold models do not have any sort of phone functionality.
Click to expand...

I've used the archos of old, they are nothing like the tablets of today. They are just a giant MP3 & video player, although you seem to think that's all tablets are you are dead wrong there.
 
You are just arguing to justify even though alot of what you say is out of sync, my touch pro released way before the droid and had over 280 ppi.

LCD's on desktops have also been moving up in size which counters PPI but is no less important, my point was you are making silly cutoffs with no logical reason, I mean I am fine with you saying the increased sensitivity is just the steady march of progress but not when you call higher PPI an innovation in the same post. I have been around all these years and the price / pixel density and size of LCDs on average has just been moving forward on all fronts. Now days you can configure lots of 15 inch laptops with 1080p screens couldnt do that before.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top