backtop


Print 62 comment(s) - last by Freelancer47.. on Aug 4 at 6:46 AM

Samsung's share fell from 32.3 percent in Q2 2013 to 25.2 percent in Q2 2014.

According to the latest figures from IDC, the global smartphone market grew by an incredible 23.1 percent during Q2 2014 compared to Q2 2013. During the quarter, over 295 million smartphones were sold worldwide and IDC’s forecasts show that shipments will break the 300 million mark in Q3 2014.
 
Despite the launch of the Galaxy S5 and numerous other smartphones over the past 6 months (including the 7” Galaxy W), Samsung’s shipments for Q2 2014 actually declined year-over-year (YoY) from 77.3 million units to 74.3 million units. In addition, Samsung’s share of the global smartphone market fell from 32.3 percent in Q2 2013 to 25.2 percent in Q2 2014.

 
These numbers should come as no surprise as Samsung already issued a warning for its Q2 earnings, and over 200 Samsung managers have returned bonuses to “apologize” for the company’s performance.
 
Apple’s iPhone shipments grew 12.4 percent YoY from 31.2 million to 35.1 million units. However, Apple also saw a decline in market share — although to a lesser extent than Samsung — falling YoY from 13 percent to 11.9 percent. IDC notes that Q2 is traditionally a “seasonal low” for Apple and that “consumers [are] holding their collective breath for the long-awaited bigger screens [of the iPhone 6].”

 
IDC’s Melissa Chau attributes Samsung’s troubles to Chinese manufacturers, which have in recent years stepped up their game when it comes to value-packed smartphones.
 
“[They offer] smartphones at a much better value than the top global players but with a stronger build quality and larger scale than local competitors gives these vendors a precarious competitive advantage.”
 
IDC’s numbers do indeed show a surge in growth for Chinese OEMs. While both Huawei and Lenovo each currently have less than 7 percent of the global smartphone market, they saw YoY growth of 95.1 percent and 38.7 percent respectively.

Source: IDC



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Not at all surprising.
By retrospooty on 7/30/2014 10:12:24 AM , Rating: 2
Samsung's competitors in the Android camp have all raised their games and Samsung is kind of stagnating.

What I find surprising is how far ahead Samsung still is. based on the competing products for the past 2 years, I would think Samsung would be alot lower than it is today.




RE: Not at all surprising.
By amanojaku on 7/30/14, Rating: 0
RE: Not at all surprising.
By amanojaku on 7/30/2014 10:33:32 AM , Rating: 2
Slight correction:
quote:
You have to fight the image battle, EVERYONE.
Image is what sells these days, not quality or features. Think:

Beats
Godiva
Starbucks
Toms (the stuff you put on your feet that DT censors)
Whole Foods


RE: Not at all surprising.
By tonyswash on 7/30/14, Rating: -1
RE: Not at all surprising.
By NellyFromMA on 7/30/2014 1:51:06 PM , Rating: 2
We've reached a point where there aren't really any major changes to be made.

There is little incentive to have a Mhz/Ghz race because these devices are disconnected and battery life is key.

Aside from that, the only real areas of innovation would be quality of materials, and sensors. Even then, all devices in the passed 2 years have enough sensors and many more have gimmick sensors that feel cheesy and don't expand the experience in any useful way.

The 3D camera thing is alright, but I hardly think its a killer feature. It's a niche sensor that could be really useful in a niche market, but for general users they will pay a massive premium (or receive a garbage implementation) for something they wouldn't likely use.

That's why there's a whole fitness type push right now. It's the latest fad to try and spur more business, and it largely uses the same sensors that are already there, albeit sometimes in wearable form factor instead.

Even the whole bendable / curved screen is meh. It's about the only cool sounding thing of the lot, though, because it works towards the holy grail of essentially having just a screen for a phone, however practically that may (or may not) be.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By ritualm on 7/30/2014 4:24:22 PM , Rating: 2
The fitness push exists because too many people put too much time on a smallish display and too little time taking care of their health. lol.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By tonyswash on 7/30/2014 4:32:54 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Aside from that, the only real areas of innovation would be quality of materials, and sensors. Even then, all devices in the passed 2 years have enough sensors and many more have gimmick sensors that feel cheesy and don't expand the experience in any useful way.


You are assuming that the only axis of improvement, innovation and competition is the hardware, in fact ht e value added service stack and ecosystem is where product differentiation is mostly occurring. The problem for Android OEMs is that Googles control of the OS and it's core services precludes them competing in that arena.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By Reclaimer77 on 7/30/2014 4:49:43 PM , Rating: 2
You have no idea what you're talking about, do you?

How does Google control Android to the point that OEM's can't compete and offer differing products?


RE: Not at all surprising.
By tonyswash on 7/30/2014 6:21:25 PM , Rating: 1
Android OEMs, if they don’t want to fork Android and be completely cut off from access to future releases of Android, the Google Play app store and other services such as Google Maps etc, have to include all Google Play Services in all their Android phones.

How can an Android OEM differentiate it’s device from other OEMs in anything other than hardware? It can bundle duplicates of Google services but it then just clutters up the device with bundled crap (sound familiar?). How can Android OEMs capture more of the value chain revenues (advertising, app and content revenues, etc) 100% of which currently accrues to Google?

Contrast this with Apple whose iTunes service and content stack now generates $20 billion in revenues annually and is growing very fast (currently 12% per year). Samsung would love to be able to build something like that but the problem they face, along with every other OEM, is that they cannot do it incrementally (which is what Apple did starting just over ten years ago) because they must bundle all Google Services or none.

So even when the OEMs try to build their own services, such as app stores, they have to include the bigger and far better established Google versions, which generate precisely zero revenue for the OEMs, or be completely shut out of the whole Google Android ecosystem.

The only alternative to bundling Google services, and thus killing their own services at birth, is to build an all encompassing all singing total replacement for Google, not just all the services but also future OS development. It’s an impossible difficult task. And because they cannot build their own service stack and broaden their revenue stream Android OEMs are forced to compete on hardware. And if you want to know how that turns out ask Dell and HP.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By retrospooty on 7/30/2014 7:48:21 PM , Rating: 2
Stick to Apple T... You simply don't get what is going on in the rest of the tech world.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By niva on 8/1/2014 1:26:22 PM , Rating: 2
Google at least gives the vendors the options to change the OS and overlays and literally anything else. To me these so called "benefits" and ways to make their devices "stand out" have been the biggest drawbacks to otherwise good hardware. Only Nexus phones for me and my family, thanks!

But yeah, you should stick to Apple since you clearly seem to like what they do.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By amanojaku on 7/30/2014 6:47:05 PM , Rating: 2
He doesn't know what the f*ck he's talking about. If the OEM is a member of the Open Handset Alliance then it is contractually forbidden from forking Android and producing products from that fork. Because the whole point of the Alliance is to use the same Android sources with only specific customizations.

However, you don't have to be a member of the Alliance if you want to sell an Android device. Amazon's FireOS, Baidu's Baidu Yi, Barnes & Noble's Nook OS, the Ouya OS, and the ill-fated Nokia X are all competing forks.

However, a company that is not a part of the Alliance can still produce a non-forked Android device that has access to all of Google's services.
quote:
Is compatibility mandatory?

No. The Android Compatibility Program is optional. Since the Android source code is open, anyone can use it to build any kind of device. However, if a manufacturer wishes to use the Android name with their product, or wants access to Google Play, they must first demonstrate that the device is compatible.

How much does compatibility certification cost?

There is no cost to obtain Android compatibility for a device. The Compatibility Test Suite is open-source and available to anyone to use to test a device.

If my device is compatible, does it automatically have access to Google Play and branding?

Google Play is a service operated by Google. Achieving compatibility is a prerequisite for obtaining access to the Google Play software and branding. Device manufacturers should contact Google to obtain access to Google Play.

How can I get access to the Google apps for Android, such as Maps?

The Google apps for Android, such as YouTube, Google Maps and Navigation, Gmail, and so on are Google properties that are not part of Android, and are licensed separately. Contact android-partnerships@google.com for inquiries related to those apps.
http://source.android.com/faqs.html


RE: Not at all surprising.
By tonyswash on 7/30/2014 8:01:05 PM , Rating: 1
So ......er.........how does that help Android OEMs differentiate their products in terms of services without breaking with Google?

The point is that Google services come in one size, all or nothing. What an Android OEM cannot do is slowly ditch Google services one by one, thus accessing revenues currently flowing through their devices to Google and incrementally growing an alternative to Google Services, without falling foul of Google.

Android OEMs find it very hard to differentiate their products on anything other than hardware. Samsung is being squeezed in terms of sales, revenues and margins by the Android ecosystem. Apple is not, it's sales and revenues are up and it's margins remain very high and have essentially remained intact and undamaged by the growth of Android device sales. Apple takes about 60% of all the profit in the entire global phone business. There is a reason for that.

This chart shows the profits position for the global phone business at the end of 2013 (source: http://www.asymco.com/2014/03/18/invaluable/ ).

http://regmedia.co.uk/2014/03/18/profit.jpg

Note how only Apple and Samsung were making any profit. Now Samsung's profits are being squeezed by the growth of Android but not Apple's. There is a reason for that.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By amanojaku on 7/30/2014 8:23:28 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
So ......er.........how does that help Android OEMs differentiate their products in terms of services without breaking with Google?
My god, your reading comprehension...

1) You can be an Open Handset Alliance OEM, be restricted to using a stock Android build with Google-approved changes, and gain full access to Google Play and Google Apps.

2) You can be a stand-alone OEM, use the stock Android build with Google-approved changes, and gain full access to Google Play and Google Apps.

3) You can be a stand-alone OEM, fork Android, lose access to Google Play (the app store), and gain full access to Google Apps (YouTube, Gmail, Maps, etc...)

4) You can be a stand-alone OEM, use Android that has access to Play and Apps, and sell forked Android that only has Apps.

The only restriction is whether or not your device has access to Google Play, and you can make the same device that runs both a fork with no access and the stock version with access. So far, everyone has CHOSEN to be all-in or fork-only.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By tonyswash on 7/31/2014 4:05:23 AM , Rating: 2
Leaving aside the nonsense and inaccuracies you just wrote let's consider a real world scenario.

Samsung, in order to increase the value and revenue earning potential of it's handset business does a deal with Microsoft to install Bing as the default search engine on it's devices. What would Google do?

I think in your mind the fact that there is essentially no service or software differentiation amongst Android devices or the fact that Android OEMs have no revenue generation service stacks attached to their phones is just some strange coincidence.

I am surprised by your reluctance to accept the reality of the Android ecosystem and Google's role it, sucking up all the additional revenues, when it so widely accepted and discussed in tech reporting and journalism. It,s almost as if you want to defence an imaginary and ideal version of the Android system rather than it's reality.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By w8gaming on 7/31/2014 5:01:50 AM , Rating: 2
You are assuming Google will punish any "alliance member" who decides to sell another variant of phone besides the Android pure breed. But the fact is Google will do no such thing. If Google is worried about others deviate from their core Android OS, they would not even support Apple by offering services in iOS in the first place. Google wants to dominate in service, not become a handset of OS vendor. It does not care whether others are running iOS, Android, or another forks of Android. As long as others are willing to use Google services, Google benefits from it. That's why Samsung is thinking of creating a Tizen platform, or many vendors also selling Windows phone even though they sells Android phones at the same time. Does Google punish anyone for selling Windows phone? No.

Although the apparent conflict between Google and Microsoft (which Microsoft claims Google intentionally not supporting Windows mobile platform) seems odd to me. Maybe Google is afraid Microsoft can be their toughest opponent in service and therefore trying to undermine its acceptance? Google does not dare to do much to Apple yet since they still have 11% market share in sales volume and much bigger share in existing devices. But maybe they will do the same trick to iOS when they deem iOS market share has fallen to insignificant level that they can ignore it.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By Flunk on 7/30/2014 10:51:36 AM , Rating: 3
I agree, I think a lot of people are buying phones have been let down by the build quality of a previous Samsung phone and choosing to go with a different brand this time.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By rountad on 7/30/2014 10:58:01 AM , Rating: 2
That's me, for sure.

I was tired of the Sambloat and the failing power button pushed me to try out LG instead.

So far it seems like a good move...


RE: Not at all surprising.
By retrospooty on 7/30/2014 11:19:13 AM , Rating: 2
"a lot of people are buying phones have been let down by the build quality "

Yup... That is me. That and the bloat is so bad it bogs it down.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By Omega215D on 7/30/2014 5:25:43 PM , Rating: 2
That was me after the Droid Charge and I went back to check out the Galaxy S3 and S4 to be disappointed. The Galaxy S5 is a step up and feels quite nice but not for that price and the software included isn't that far advanced to warrant it.

Sadly Samsung is becoming what Apple has become in which they have fanboys/ sheep that fervently defend the company while trolling other companies products. They're becoming the very thing they mock Apple for.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By Reclaimer77 on 7/30/2014 5:34:51 PM , Rating: 1
You can't make a bunch of ignorant statements then accuse others of being "sheep" when they call you on it.

Samsung isn't perfect, nobody is saying that. But they are the face of Android, and you cannot deny that they've been a target for FUD-spewing Apple zealots and Google haters since day one.

I don't see anyone else in the Android space selling 40+ million units of a single flagship, not even close. Now at some point, you people have to acknowledge on some level that Samsung is doing something right. A LOT of things right actually.

Not being a total hater doesn't make one a fanboi or sheep. Even Anandtech, which is becoming increasingly biased toward Apple, called the Galaxy S5 "almost perfect".


RE: Not at all surprising.
By retrospooty on 7/30/2014 6:54:15 PM , Rating: 2
If by "doing something right" you mean from a business perspective then yes... Samsung nad Apple somehow manage to get 10's of millions of people to buy products that arent as good as the competition. Samsung and Apple are masters at that. If you are talking about who makes the best phones for the past couple years, it's neither of the 2 power players. Not by a longshot.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By Reclaimer77 on 7/30/2014 7:17:25 PM , Rating: 2
I don't think there can be an objective "best phone" though. How do you quantify that? Isn't that something based on personal needs/wants and opinion?

You probably would say the LG G3 is the "best phone". But I think the buttons on the back are awkward and just not for me. So to ME, it's not the "best phone". To someone else the screen is too big, so it's not the best phone to them.

Samsung does a LOT of things right with their phones, to say otherwise is incredibly biased.

Retro, you were just preaching to a guy the other day about what the market wants, and how consumers are dictating what phones get sold, not the other way around.

Well I suggest you take what you actually say to heart here. The market has spoken. Samsung may not make the best phones for YOU, but they are clearly a leader in smartphones and have been for some time.

ps. where did I say Samsung made "the best" phones??


RE: Not at all surprising.
By retrospooty on 7/30/2014 7:44:48 PM , Rating: 2
I am not saying that Samsung phones dont have good points. Even Apple phones have good points... But Samsung's real strength was being first. Like Apple was first to market with a modern smartphone that put all the pieces together, Samsung was the first alternative to the iPhone that put it all together... Both companies are reaping the benefits of that. Well deserved? Yes, I think so.

But today they are both sort of resting on their laurels and reaping profits from the Sheep effect of previous efforts. I think you would be really hard pressed to find anyone even semi informed that thinks Samsung is making the best phones for the past few years. If someone did think that, I would seriously question their knowledge or motives... One or the other simply doesn't add up.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By Reclaimer77 on 7/30/2014 10:50:20 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
But today they are both sort of resting on their laurels


Aside from the QHD screen, I can't imagine what more you could expect from the Galaxy S5. What's it missing?! It's got all the latest hardware, plus IP67 rated dust and water resistance STANDARD. And I'm supposed to agree that it's lacking somehow?

The Note line is STILL the only phablet with a built in digitizer for the stylus. Is that Samsung "resting on laurels"? Seems like everyone else is. Where are the competing products?

Also I think it's pretty awesome that removable batteries and SD support still comes standard on their smartphones. If more OEM's would get a clue on this (looking at you HTC) Samsung would have some real competition.

I see a lot of good in their lineup. You've decided that there's "Sambloat", so everything they make is now crap. Not that it isn't a valid criticism, it is, but it's not the deal-breaker for most people.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By w8gaming on 7/31/2014 5:09:54 AM , Rating: 2
Actually there is one competing stylus enabled phablet: Asus FonePad Note 6. But it runs Intel SoC. And apparently it does not generate too much buzz even after available in the market for a year. I agree that no one else has bothered with this segment though, not even Apple. Maybe it is too tough to create such a device which is affordable and stable?


RE: Not at all surprising.
By atechfan on 7/31/2014 5:15:21 AM , Rating: 2
Probably because Apple marketing has convinced people that styluses are taking a step backwards. Back in the day, all Windows Mobile and Palm devices had a stylus. Then when the iPhone became popular, the stylus became a thing that was mocked. Releasing a phone with a stylus in that environment was risky. Samsung is large enough, with a varied enough line-up, to take that risk, and it paid off for them.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By retrospooty on 7/31/2014 8:26:11 AM , Rating: 2
I didn't say it was missing anything... I said the competition is just building better phones. If I had to pick on why, bloat and build quality would certainly be high on that list. It's not that other OEMs are miles above Samsung, just a step or two. 3 years ago Samsung WAS miles above the competition, and now they are slightly behind is all.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By Reclaimer77 on 7/31/2014 11:39:37 AM , Rating: 2
If Samsung had build quality issues, there would be concrete proof by now in the way of statistics. Yet everything points to Samsung phones being extremely well built and durable.

I think choice of materials is legitimate point of view, if you prefer aluminum over plastic for example, but using the term "build quality" invokes images of Samsung phones falling apart or dying before their time. It seems purposefully divisive for you and others to use that phrasing.

quote:
It's not that other OEMs are miles above Samsung, just a step or two.


Sure I would agree with that, but only on a case by case comparison. Not as a blanket statement, it's just too general.

And I mean honestly, most all these phones are using the same off-shelf components anyway. There's not a TON of difference. We're pretty fortunate to have the luxury of nitpicking the little things imo.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By retrospooty on 7/31/2014 2:13:25 PM , Rating: 2
"using the term "build quality" invokes images of Samsung phones falling apart or dying before their time."

No, that is more failure rates... Samsung is quite good in that regard. Build quality is just the rickety feel of Samsung phones. Not well designed, fit and assembled. The G3 proved it can be done with plastic and a removable back and not be rickety. I know you dont see it, and I am not trying to prove it to you. I am just stating what myself and alot of of other people think. There are just better phones available, where 3 years ago, Samsung was significantly better than its competitors, today they are not.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/31/2014 3:04:48 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Build quality is just the rickety feel of Samsung phones.
My S3 was never that way, it was solid as a brick.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By retrospooty on 7/31/2014 3:15:13 PM , Rating: 2
Mine just didn't feel good to me. It felt rickety, as have the S4's ,Note 2's and 3's I have held. Not that it was awful, it just doesn't feel solid and well built like my G2, G3, or even an HTC One feels to me.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By ritualm on 7/31/2014 7:26:52 PM , Rating: 2
The build quality of too many Samsung products leave much to be desired. They won't break upon contact, sure... but they don't quite exude "well-designed". They look like most TV dramas - designed towards the lowest common denominator, and stopped there.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By Mitch101 on 7/30/2014 10:58:59 AM , Rating: 2
I believe most owners are kind of saying what I was when Windows Phone started to support multiple cores. I wanted to upgrade for a better camera not because I I felt it needed more power. It did what I wanted smooth just wanted better pictures and video. I think similar may be occurring with Samsung since the S3 there hasn't been any major hardware increases for existing owners to upgrade and competition has similar spec hardware so why spend the money if it doesn't do much more than the previous gen did?

So heres a question to anyone iPhone, Android, Windows Phone. What do you want to see that would make you want to upgrade? I suppose a portion of iPhone users want a larger screen but maybe they dont. Nothing wrong with that but if your OS is buttery smooth, the Pictures, and video are great and you have all the apps you want why upgrade? Or maybe your embarrassed by having a last generation iPhone?

If anyone says weight and thinner just punch yourself in the face. I personally think every phone should be made indestructible not thinner. Putting a case on a phone defeats the thin design but that me. Give me military class durability over making in an extra mm thinner. Thats my take whats everyone elses?


RE: Not at all surprising.
By amanojaku on 7/30/2014 11:15:27 AM , Rating: 4
Android users want Dalvik to die and phones to be upgraded to the latest stock Android.

Surveys of iOS users show the most desired feature is a larger screen. It's the one feature that has caused former iOS users to defect to Android and others.

Windows Phone users... just want more respect for a decent mobile OS. It's more efficient than Android and more feature-filled than iOS. The phones are more reasonably priced than either competitor's, too.

For all phones I'd want a week of phone usage on a single charge, 3-4 days of heavy text usage (screen is the issue there), and a durable case and screen that can resist being tossed or dropped 10 feet. Until then, I'm sticking with my flip phone. ;)


RE: Not at all surprising.
By retrospooty on 7/30/2014 11:20:58 AM , Rating: 2
"- Android users want Dalvik to die and phones to be upgraded to the latest stock Android."

- Surveys of iOS users show the most desired feature is a larger screen.

- Windows Phone users... just want more respect"


LOL. That last line just made me giggle.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By StevoLincolnite on 7/30/2014 6:58:13 PM , Rating: 2
It's true though. :(

I walked into my bank and asked about a Windows Phone app, the worker there then asked me... "Does it run Android?".


RE: Not at all surprising.
By Reclaimer77 on 7/30/2014 12:14:05 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Android users want Dalvik to die


Pretty sure 99% of all Android users couldn't even begin to know what Dalvik is or what it does. Nor do they care. Dalvik is a complete non-issue for the vast majority of users. It's simply become fanboi bait for iTrolls and Windows Phone fanatics desperate to criticize Android and Google in general. "Dalvik" gets thrown around a lot by people who don't know what the F they're talking about honestly.

Also if you want your phone to be upgraded to stock Android, then BUY a phone running stock Android.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By atechfan on 7/30/2014 1:41:19 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Pretty sure 99% of all Android users couldn't even begin to know what Dalvik is or what it does.


I thought Android users were supposedly the tech savvy ones and Apple users were tech illiterate.

quote:
"Dalvik" gets thrown around a lot by people who don't know what the F they're talking about honestly.


If this is true, then why is the replacement of Dalvik with ART the most hyped feature of Android L? Dalvik has always been the weakness of Android. If it were not, why is ART showing such huge promised performance gains?


RE: Not at all surprising.
By XZerg on 7/30/2014 2:01:40 PM , Rating: 2
Just because something is great doesn't mean that vast majority of the consumers give a damn... The Haswell has great iGPU but you don't see vast majority of people who have C2D or 1/2nd gen of iCore cpus know or care about it. Heck if it wasn't the 8GB RAM limit on my system that 1st gen iCore mobile cpus had I would still not look at upgrading the cpu. the SSD upgrade gave quite a bit of performance to my laptop. I am a developer who needs to run multiple application servers on my system and the only thing that bothers me is the 8GB limit.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By Reclaimer77 on 7/30/2014 3:30:58 PM , Rating: 1
Dalvik has been a weakness of Android, yes, but only in certain use cases. Also one of it's biggest strengths. Nobody seems to want to talk about the benefits of Dalvik, I wonder why?

Android from day one had better multitasking and resource management than anyone. And like it or not, Dalvik has been a big part of that.

Go grab an iPad and have a few applications open while trying to open a new one. The app will crash and iOS will return you back to the desktop when iOS runs out of memory. It's not even smart enough to crash an app you aren't even using!

That's life without something like Dalvik. I see it on my iPhone all the time.

quote:
I thought Android users were supposedly the tech savvy ones and Apple users were tech illiterate.


Truly understanding Dalvik goes far beyond simple "savvy", and into the realm of software engineering on an extremely geek level. But nice try :)

Android has completely dominated the mobile space, phones and tablets, with the terrible horrible "laggy" Dalvik in use. So yeah, I wonder what Straw Man you guys will use once ART is in play.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By atechfan on 7/31/2014 5:10:15 AM , Rating: 2
I am not sure you even know what Dalvik is, other than it is part of Android, so is automatically "good".

Dalvik is a virtual machine that is sort-of Java based. It has the advantage that it can take standard Java code, which means there are already lots of people with coding experience for it. It takes this Java code and converts it to Dalvik code. Dalvik code has the advantage of being quite a bit smaller than Java code, but at the same time, running Dalvik code is significantly slower than even standard Java, which is already no major speed demon.

The only reason Dalvik works well for multiple apps running at once is it uses little memory, so multiple VMs can be open. But that just means it is fine for tasks that can be shoved to the background when not in use. It completely sucks for true multi-taking, where the apps are actually running concurrently, as the code is just slow to run.

Dalvik wasn't even developed by Google, so I am not sure why Google fanbois are so keen to defend it. It just came with Android when Google bought it. I am sure Google has been wanting to replace it all along, but just finally got around to it. If I were as pro-Google as you, I'd be using ART as proof of Google's coding prowess, as it is so far above Dalvik as to not even be in the same league.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By Reclaimer77 on 7/31/2014 8:10:55 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The only reason Dalvik works well for multiple apps running at once is it uses little memory


And somehow that ISN'T relevant to what I was saying??

quote:
I am not sure you even know what Dalvik is


What in my previous post gave you this impression? Did I state something about Dalvik that was technically wrong? I don't think so.

quote:
Dalvik wasn't even developed by Google, so I am not sure why Google fanbois are so keen to defend it.


Likewise, I'm not sure why Apple and Microsoft fanbois are so keen to bash it and make grand exaggerations about it. When it's clear they're ignorant about the whole thing.

Nothing you've said about Dalvik was educational or informative in the slightest, at least to me. I guess you get off on a false sense of superiority.

quote:
If I were as pro-Google as you, I'd be using ART as proof of Google's coding prowess


I'm not responsible for your trollish characterization of what I am and am not.

If I was as "pro-Google" as you think, I would own Google stock. But since out of the two of us, you're the only one who what you say is influenced by a market price, you can just shelve any attempt to make yourself seem more impartial than I.

No sh*t Dalvik wasn't developed by Google. The entire Android kernel wasn't even developed by Google! Wow, you're so insightful with this post, thank you for opening my eyes lol.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By KoolAidMan1 on 7/31/14, Rating: -1
RE: Not at all surprising.
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/31/2014 9:14:36 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
G2 here are so stable
Mine is, what's your point?

I highly doubt you have actually touched an Android device based off your continuous comments on it.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By retrospooty on 7/31/2014 10:02:55 AM , Rating: 2
KAM is either not bright enough to figure it out or more likely is just FOS. Just ignore.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By inighthawki on 7/30/2014 11:27:46 AM , Rating: 1
For me, I'm a Windows Phone fan. Not that I find anything wrong with Android or iOs - they are great - I just like Windows Phone. I don't use a lot of apps, so the app gap is not an issue for me, and it works well with my other Microsoft products and services.

That said, the biggest issue I find with WP is the lack of interesting devices. I do not need anything high end. I'm not looking to make sure I have the latest Snapdragon, 2+ GB of ram, etc. I just want a well built phone that I find aesthetically pleasing. To me, the Lumias do not really fit that bill. I also would like the phone to be on the smaller side. I'm not a fan of 5+ inch phones (4.5" is a sweet spot for me) but it seems to be a general pattern in the industry that 5+ phones are the ones that have the highest quality. I assume this is generally due to the fact that the larger body accommodates better internals with better heat dissipation, and they then use the already high price tag to throw in the bells and whistles that make it look and feel like a quality device. I'd just like that on a midrange phone.

I've been hoping now that Microsoft bought the Lumia line from Nokia that they will push for a surface phone. I've seen some absolutely amazing concept art from people that I would honestly buy in a heartbeat.
http://www.neowin.net/news/this-is-the-surface-pho...


RE: Not at all surprising.
By tonyswash on 7/30/14, Rating: -1
RE: Not at all surprising.
By ritualm on 7/30/2014 4:21:27 PM , Rating: 2
Right now I have a phone from all three major mobile OSes in the industry. Blackberry doesn't count - sorry guys, just because it's a homegrown (Canada) brand doesn't mean I'm warming to your stuff.

iPhone 4S, bought mid-Oct 2011 on 3-year contract - for one, web browsing on a 3.5" display is painful. Customization is restricted by what Cupertino deems acceptable, and a lack of granular control sucks.

Samsung GS4, bought July last year - first of all, I had to overwrite the Sambloat with CM9 and later CM10.x before I can actually use it. Even then, it doesn't feel lag-free at times. Stuck on Jelly Bean because I really don't like how Google's handling SD card storage on KitKat. It borders on the edge of unusable as far as the size goes, so anything that goes larger is a no go.

Nokia 620, just came in 48 hours ago - waiting on Cyan update. At the meantime, the stock music player sucks in more ways than one (album list looks at a field other than "Album", WTF). Cannot use a dummy 3.5mm-plug phone strap without the phone thinking it's a headphones and attempting to output sound through it.

Kept the first two because of apps.

As far as what I want to see... a 4.5"-5" flagship that isn't a bastardized gimped version masquerading as one. Most of the latest Android phone releases are too big for me, and most of the "mini" ones are horrible. Phone thickness doesn't bother me, and neither does weight. Thin phones, where they have to gimp the battery to go under 6mm? Do not want.

Finally, carrier-exclusive phones and 2-year contracts can both die in a fire.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By nikon133 on 7/30/2014 5:05:36 PM , Rating: 2
As a Nokia Lumia 920 user...

Better battery life. I can squeeze 2 days out of my 920 and usually end up with ~ 20% charge... but not always. More battery would give me confidence in that 2nd day. Not that I would mind 5 days or a week worth of battery charge either :)

Better camera. Lumia's 8MP look great on phone screen and in FB-size photos, but anything close to native resolution - even downsampling to 2MP - still leaves much to be desired. That being said, I'm a bit of camera freak, DSLR and high-end pocket camera... so standards are set quite high...

Larger screen, maybe? I think I could do 5" 1080p. Not sure about that one, really - I can't say I'm finding 4.5" 720p lacking, maybe I'm just falling into hype trap on this one.

Outside of that, not much; Lumia 920 works perfectly for me. Here in NZ it is a bit challenging to find accessories as phone wasn't too popular - it took me a while to get a proper car holder (most car holders are not friendly with Lumia's side buttons layout), and choice of protective shells, belt pouches... is limited... but that's really minor problem - everything can be ordered from overseas.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By w8gaming on 7/31/2014 5:50:02 AM , Rating: 2
More built-in storage. Faster CPU is always helpful but the developers need to come out with useful apps that actually make use of the speed. More battery life. Allow air gesture recognition without finger touching the screen and making oily smudge. Built-in projector and motion recognition that can project a virtual keyboard on a surface and recognize keypress. Camera so fine that you can use it as a microscope.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By tng on 7/30/2014 1:07:47 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Samsung's competitors in the Android camp have all raised their games and Samsung is kind of stagnating.
Yep, more makers and more choice out there. Although the Galaxy is still a good phone, it really is time for a makeover, change the looks/name and start over with a fresh face.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By NellyFromMA on 7/30/2014 1:44:13 PM , Rating: 2
They were basically the first OEM to provide acceptable quality high-end devices for 4.x devices. They rode on those coattails up to and now during the peak of market saturation.

People just aren't rushing out to by phones that are perceptively equal to what they are replacing.

If you have a phone from the passed 3 years that was middle of the pack in its prime, you still have little incentive to upgrade in terms of actual gains.

Unless you've broken or lost your device, there really is little to no gain unless you just want to have a spec sheet war with someone. Only people fixated on benchmarks are going to see an appreciable difference between a quad-core and a dual-core device in real-world use.

Even screen resolution and size is really negligible. 720P vs 1080P on a 4.7 or 5.5 inch device is a minor upgrade and that's about the biggest boost devices from any given manufacturer have received in the passed 2 years easily.

IMO, the real issue is build quality over time. There are a LOT of gains to be made regarding wear and tear, especially on the plastic-dominated devices.

And yet, you likely will find NO OEMs tackling that because its runs counter to what OEMs desire; for consumers to purchase new devices.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By Reclaimer77 on 7/30/2014 3:46:13 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
People just aren't rushing out to by phones that are perceptively equal to what they are replacing.


Well sure they are, just look at the numbers. The ENTIRE market is still growing. That can't happen if people are not replacing their phones like they've always done.


RE: Not at all surprising.
By Krinosy on 7/30/2014 9:40:38 PM , Rating: 2
I think it's more that Samsung is getting displaced from the vast and growing China market by Chinese OEMs that are locally based and don't have to worry about expenses like international marketing, shipping/distribution or maintaining inventory levels in multiple markets.


Others?
By CyCl0n3 on 7/30/2014 10:14:43 AM , Rating: 2
If you consider that these are Smartphone shipments and marketshare, and the second largest Growth from 2Q 2013 to 2Q 2014 (38.7%) is the "others" group which is the largest amount of devices (45.8%), it would be nice to know who these others are, and how they are stacked up.




RE: Others?
By Ushio01 on 7/30/2014 10:34:07 AM , Rating: 3
Well it's all the manufacturers who shipped less than 14.5 million unit's so

HTC
Nokia (Microsoft)
Blackberry
Motorola (is it part of Lenovo yet?)
ZTE
TCL
Sony
Pantech (Korea's 3rd largest though there in ore trouble than HTC or Blackberry)

and etc.


RE: Others?
By jbwhite99 on 7/30/2014 1:50:41 PM , Rating: 2
Motorola is not part of Lenovo yet.

Where is this Xiaomi that I keep seeing on the list?

And I switched from htc to Samsung (got a GS4 for free on Black Friday). Honestly, my problem is not Samsung bloatware - it is VZW bloatware. No, I don't want your navigation or NFL football or other junk.

PC's have the decrapifier software. Someone could make a killing (I want 5% for the idea) if they came up with a phone decrapifyer.


RE: Others?
By ritualm on 7/30/2014 3:39:23 PM , Rating: 2
Xiaomi won't be on the list unless it starts selling its wares worldwide AND Apple doesn't sue its pants off. If you pay attention, everything at Xiaomi - all the way down to product announcements and marketing - is a blatant copy of Apple, and it gets away with doing that because China offers very little foreign IP protections. The company will get sh!tcanned faster than you can say "surprise buttsex" the moment it starts selling outside China.


RE: Others?
By w8gaming on 7/31/2014 9:42:50 PM , Rating: 2
Just saw another list somewhere indicating Xiaomi has kicked LG off and become #5 vendor.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2461691,00.as...


It has begun ...
By Freelancer47 on 8/4/2014 6:46:40 AM , Rating: 2
and samsung will drop even more with every passing time.
Agressive marketing is what made samsung what it is today, but poor quality and poor after-sale services is what made many samsung buyers to never buy samsung again. Also, what keeps samsung alive is the great support from the community.
Now I am using a chinese smartphone - way better quality/price ratio. I will never go back to samsung again, that`s for sure.
The smartphone market is maturing and more people begin to use the internet properly and not choose what the commercials tell them to. And there are far better devices at a lower prices than what samsung is offering.
OPPO , OPO, Huawei , Lenovo, others




"I'd be pissed too, but you didn't have to go all Minority Report on his ass!" -- Jon Stewart on police raiding Gizmodo editor Jason Chen's home














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki