backtop


Print 67 comment(s) - last by Reclaimer77.. on Oct 30 at 9:14 AM


Samsung Galaxy S III  (Source: mobilemag.com)
Samsung did well, but many worry that it won't see this amount of money rolling in next year as the smartphone market continues to grow competitive

Samsung reported strong financial earnings in the third quarter, but now faces slowed smartphone momentum in the future as the market gets more crowded.

Samsung posted $7.4 billion USD in Q3 2012 operating profit. Net profit rose 90 percent to $5.9 billion USD. 

During the third quarter, Samsung sold 56.3 million smartphones, giving it a global market share of 31.3 percent. Apple only sold 26.9 million iPhones in the same quarter. The Samsung Galaxy S III alone accounted for 18-20 million shipments from July to September.

While Samsung did well in the smartphone department, particularly with its Galaxy line of devices, it didn't do so hot in chip sales. The chip division dropped 28 percent to $1 billion USD.

Samsung rocked a healthy profit overall this quarter, but many worry that the electronics maker won't see this amount of money rolling in next year as the smartphone market continues to grow competitive.

In fact, Samsung's profit is expected to grow 16 percent next year -- down from this year's predictions of 73 percent.

Samsung has other strong businesses, like tablets and OLED TVs, but analysts say these sectors aren't quite ready to sell the way that Galaxy is selling.

Samsung's tablets, in particular, haven't been able to keep up with the like of the iPad and Kindle Fire. Now, with the iPad Mini and Windows 8 tablets making a fresh appearance into the market (not to mention Google's Nexus 7 and a refreshed Kindle Fire HD line has made its way into the market), Samsung seems to continuously fall behind.

Samsung also took a hard hit with tablets due to its patent war with Apple. Apple worked pretty hard to ban Samsung's smartphones and tablets around the world, and successfully accomplished this in countries like Germany and Australia. Samsung launched a few lawsuits of its own regarding 3G patents, and was also able to lift the ban on its Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Australia in December 2011. However, Samsung wasn't so lucky in Germany, where the Galaxy Tab 10.1 is still banned.

Back in August, a jury in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California reached an unfavorable verdict for Samsung, saying that the South Korean electronics maker was guilty of violating technology patents. In other words, most of Samsung's smartphones and tablets in question were found guilt of copying Apple's iPhone and iPad designs. It was ordered to pay $1.05 billion in damages to Apple.

Earlier this week, Samsung Display decided to cut ties with Apple, saying it will no longer ship LCDs to Apple next year. Its LCD shipments to Apple have been cut more and more over time due to Apple wanting huge discounts, but the recent patent infringement drama couldn't have helped either.

More recently, an ITC judge found that Samsung violated four Apple patents, including
the flat front face with wider borders at the top and bottom, the lozenge-shaped speaker about the display screen; the translucent images for applications displayed on the screen, and the device's ability to detect when a headset is plugged in.

Samsung did get a little bit of relief in the UK, though, when a judge ordered Apple to post a notice on its UK site that Samsung didn't copy the iPad. Apple complied, but in a very snarky way.



Source: Samsung



Comments     Threshold


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

RE: Impressive
By Solandri on 10/27/2012 9:21:31 PM , Rating: 3
Dude. For someone who claims Android and Android phones are a dead end, you sure seem to follow it closely. Most of your points are wrong, and I was going to write up a rebuttal. But looking over your prolific posting above, it's just going to fall on deaf ears.

I say this with all due respect: Get a life. It's a phone, not a religion.

I will address one point for the benefit of others. Once you reach a certain angular resolution, pentile (or some other version or RGBG) is indistinguishable from RGB. That war was fought and decided in the early 2000s. Most cameras use Bayer filters (RGBG), while Sigma came out with a technology where each pixel was full RGB. The benefits are there at extreme zooms (e.g. when tightly cropped), but once your resolution (or PPI for a display device) gets high enough, there's no benefit. The difference is simply indistinguishable to the eye. The reason is because the color resolution of your eye is lower in red and (especially) blue than it is in green.
http://nfggames.com/games/ntsc/visual.shtm

So once you reach a certain resolution, any additional red and blue pixels are just wasted, while additional green pixels still provide noticeable improvement. Basically the extra R and B pixels on the iPhone are pointless. By the time you hold the screen close enough for them to start to make a difference, the green resolution has long since become sub-par. OTOH with a pentile display, the R, G, and B resolution become sub-par closer to simultaneously.

So the higher effective resolution of the S3's pentile display produces clearer images (to the eye) than the higher subpixel resolution of the iPhones RGB display. The iPhone's subpixels are improperly tuned for our eyes. If you use a magnifying glass or take a close-up picture, the higher subpixel resolution of the iPhone looks better because you've enlarged the image beyond your eye's red and blue resolution threshold. But that is irrelevant because people don't look at phone screens with magnifying glasses or close-up lenses in normal use.

Don't believe me? Have you ever had a problem with JPEG images? Every JPEG file you've seen takes advantage of this - to save file space it contains lower red and blue resolution than it does green. Viewing a JPEG image on a full-RGB display is pretty much the same thing as viewing a pentile image on a full-RGB display.


RE: Impressive
By testerguy on 10/28/2012 3:42:04 AM , Rating: 2
You were going to write a rebuttal - but you can't, because all of my comments are factually the case.

You say 'get a life' as if any of my points are disputable or represent my 'opinion'. They aren't. They are all proven via independent benchmarks, or just logical facts.

Your claim that PenTile is indistinguishable from RGB is the only flat out raging fanboy denial here, so I tell you - it's a phone, not a religion - accept the reality that PenTile is inferior.

[Link removed to allow comment through]

quote:
You’ll notice on a PenTile screen that certain colors won’t display correctly. Such is the case of the DX2 or Atrix which use a RGBW layout – the pixels have to constantly fight with each other to produce the correct color that you should be seeing. You may also struggle to view black text over white backgrounds on websites when zoomed all the way out or find yourself with a headache after quickly scrolling. And then there is the fact that everything tends to look a little grainy. It’s very difficult for a Pentile RGBW display to produce straight lines, some times leaving spots with an almost jagged (or grainy) edge to them.


[Link removed to allow comment through]

Furthermore, the PPI of the SG3 is not at the point where the PenTile is not obvious.

quote:
The disadvantages of PenTile are widely recognized to be fuzzy text on some color combinations (most noticeably saturated red) and color fringing on high contrast edges on the screen . For the most part it is not visible but it is one of those cases of “when you see it, it is hard to disregard”. PenTile panels also tend to skew colors when viewed from an angle . The disadvantages become less prominent when the resolution moves up and with its 1280x720 pixel resolution (for more on pixel resolution controversy see our Nexus article), Samsung should have ironed out the most visible effects but the argument remains . Samsung agreed when they launched the Galaxy SII but it seems that they have reversed their stance on the matter without any technical breakthroughs, which surely seems contradicting. In the end we guess it all comes down to marketing instead of integrity. We had hoped to see a Super AMOLED “Plus” screen with RGB in Galaxy SIII but unfortunately it failed to materialize this year.


http://www.flatpanelshd.com/focus.php?subaction=sh...

quote:
If you try hard, you will be able to spot evidence of the Pentile matrix affecting the smoothness of fine edges


quote:
Sadly, while that may have been a great compliment a year or two ago, the quality and viewing angles of AMOLED have recently been bypassed by refinements in LCD technology


http://www.theverge.com/2012/5/25/3042640/samsung-...

Furthermore, your argument on angular resolution and visual acuity simply buys into Apple's fixed distance, 20/20 vision claim. The reality is that average people have better than 20/20 vision, and even not being able to distinguish the subpixels doesn't take away the other effects such as fringing on black text. It is certainly not the case that RGBG is superior to our own eyes, the only arguments in favour of PenTile is that you can't notice that it's worse. That isn't the same thing. If you argue that you can't notice it - then you also wouldn't notice the downscaling of HD movies, or the higher resolution which is claimed on the SG3. Fundamentally, the SG3 has fewer sub pixels with which to represent pictures, and those fewer pixels are spread over a larger area.

For many, many people - including me, I can visually see the inferior quality.

Contrast to the iPhone 5 review on Anandtech:

quote:
Wrapping up, the iPhone 5 display is a quantum leap better than the display on the iPhone 4. Contrast levels and light output have both been increased, and color performance is astonishing. The full sRGB gamut is present here, and color errors are remarkably low even for a high end desktop display. While many were hoping for a move to OLED or some other screen innovation, this really is a huge step up that is very easy to quantify. To put this in perspective, in the past few years I've reviewed probably 30-40 different displays, from PC monitors to TVs to projectors. Not a single one, out of the box, can put up the Gretag Macbeth dE numbers that the iPhone can, and perhaps one projector (which listed for $20,000) can approach the grayscale and color accuracy out of the box.


As for your question regarding JPEG images - they are most definitely inferior (visually - and obviously) in terms of quality when compared to PNG or BMP. That's obvious, which kinda defeats your whole rant.

Finally - you can be absolutely sure that Samsung, when it releases the next phone with AMOLED+ (the plus is even their admittance that it's superior) will be pointing out that the new display isn't PenTile and how that's superior.


RE: Impressive
By Solandri on 10/29/2012 11:13:14 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
You were going to write a rebuttal - but you can't, because all of my comments are factually the case.

No, it's because I have a life and have better things to do than troll on tech forums all weekend.

quote:
Your claim that PenTile is indistinguishable from RGB is the only flat out raging fanboy denial here, so I tell you - it's a phone, not a religion - accept the reality that PenTile is inferior.

Way to miss my point. A pentile display is indistinguishable from RGB once you reach sufficiently small angular resolution. Once you reach that point, it's a more efficient allocation of sub-pixels since it better matches the peculiarities of the human eye's color sensitivity.

At lower ppi, the RGB display is better. But once you reach that threshold ppi, the pentile display is indistinguishable and the RGB display is wasting sub-pixels. Per Apple's marketing, the Retina display is at that point, and hence it's wasting sub-pixels compared to a 4.5 inch 1280x720 pentile display.

At higher ppi, both are wasting pixels, but the pentile display is wasting fewer pixels.


RE: Impressive
By testerguy on 10/28/2012 3:46:32 AM , Rating: 2
And by the way, I didn't once claim anything which even remotely resembles 'Android phones are a dead end'.

I've stated that there are very large question marks over its profitability - but that's common knowledge, and doesn't affect it's capabilities to the consumer.


RE: Impressive
By Reclaimer77 on 10/28/2012 3:40:33 PM , Rating: 2
What does Androids "profitability" have to do with anything? It's like you, Tony, and Takin seem to take this point of view that the most profitable product, or company, is automatically the best for everyone. Do I need to point out how flawed that is?


RE: Impressive
By retrospooty on 10/28/2012 4:07:10 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly... This isn't a financial news site it is a consumer tech site. One companies profit vs. another is irrelevant. What a product gives the user and at what cost is relevant. Market share is to an extent because it relates to how many users have it, but profit? Only relevant if the company is in danger of going out of business... Like for HTC and RIMM its relevant, not for Google, Samsung or Apple - None of them are going anywhere.


RE: Impressive
By testerguy on 10/28/2012 6:24:10 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
What does Androids "profitability" have to do with anything? It's like you, Tony, and Takin seem to take this point of view that the most profitable product, or company, is automatically the best for everyone. Do I need to point out how flawed that is?


quote:
Exactly... This isn't a financial news site it is a consumer tech site. One companies profit vs. another is irrelevant. What a product gives the user and at what cost is relevant. Market share is to an extent because it relates to how many users have it, but profit? Only relevant if the company is in danger of going out of business... Like for HTC and RIMM its relevant, not for Google, Samsung or Apple - None of them are going anywhere.


You replied to the wrong comment. He stated that I was saying that Android was a 'dead end'. I corrected him by stating that a previous comment (waaaaay up the thread) - which is the only real point I've made on Android - is about its profits. This article is about profits, so it's relevant. I never said it is important to the consumer, I'm arguing the facts, not the importance.

The comment thread your reading addresses all of the things you get on the iPhone which aren't on Android phones, thus representing arguably better value for some people. Certainly, as my point proves, you cannot equate the two and then compare prices as if they are equal.


RE: Impressive
By TakinYourPoints on 10/29/2012 12:56:42 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
What does Androids "profitability" have to do with anything? It's like you, Tony, and Takin seem to take this point of view that the most profitable product, or company, is automatically the best for everyone.


Way to try and lump me in with Tony, who is basically on the flip side of the same loony coin you and many people here are.

Profitability only matters in discussions of stock price, which do pop up here from time to time. It also matters when it comes to developers, but that is a completely different point thing from how profitable Apple is.

However much Apple makes or doesn't make on iDevices has little bearing on product quality itself, there isn't a direct correlation there. I have devices from many many companies and run multiple operating systems. I have no horse in this race, I just pick the best tools for me. The fact that Apple make the best specced devices on the market with the best developer support is a completely different subject, and one that I actually do argue.


RE: Impressive
By Reclaimer77 on 10/29/2012 5:36:32 PM , Rating: 2
Oh please. You've made your bed now lay in it. You lumped yourself in with them.


RE: Impressive
By TakinYourPoints on 10/29/2012 5:51:42 PM , Rating: 2
If objectively laying out facts lumps me in with you weirdos then I don't know what to say. Keep believing what you believe.


RE: Impressive
By Reclaimer77 on 10/30/2012 9:14:43 AM , Rating: 2
lol you really believe that don't you? That everything you say is "objective fact" and that we're "weirdos". Too funny.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_superiority


RE: Impressive
By Scoot2000 on 10/28/2012 5:30:58 AM , Rating: 2
Pentile displays are definitely inferior. It's not so obvious on photos or videos, in fact in those cases they look pretty good. It's mostly visible on graphics like icons (e.g., the icon for Chrome). With my Galaxy Note next to my Nexus 7, the speckled look of the pentile display is quite noticeable. E.g., the yellow-ish area of the Chrome icon seems to be a speckled pattern reminiscent of what you'd see in the print for a supermarket catalogue. This is despite often reading online that the resolution of such displays is high enough for the pentile pattern not to matter. Well, it's obvious to me, and I'd hate to have eyesight so bad that I couldn't tell the difference. I would also assert that there must be some reason that (so far as I know) Samsung changed to a full RGB subpixel layout for the Note 2.

In fact, the OLED screens I've owned (Pentile or not) have made me quite a fan of LCDs for the moment. Comparing my Note to my iPhone 5, the difference in colour quality is absolutely enormous, and the display on the Galaxy Note was lauded in reviews. The default settings from Samsung are horrible (way oversaturated), but even on the least gaudy setting there's not much positive to say other than that the black is good (as you'd hope for OLED). Colour shift on OLED (issues with blue tint due to differing lifetime of different subpixels, etc) are real-life issues.

Bayer filters and 4:2:0 YCbCr are different issues. 3CCD and 4:4:4 are better anyway, it's just a matter of how much better versus the cost.


RE: Impressive
By TakinYourPoints on 10/29/2012 1:04:15 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah, anyone who can't tell that they're looking at a pentile display should be thankful for poor eyesight.

Other than that, most Android devices I've seen have very inaccurate color calibration. I'm surprised that this is still a problem, but maybe not calibrating at the factory is a way to cut costs.

As someone that works in imaging, I have all of my desktop monitors and my HDTV plasma color calibrated, and iPhones and iPads are the only ones that I'd call anywhere close to accurate. Anandtech's color tests on the iPhone 5 review confirmed it.

They also confirm what I'd been saying about the S3 color settings for a while, but I guess if oversaturated settings with too much contrast are considered "good", then great. I know there are people out there that run their LCD HDTVs with an awful "sports" preset and that 60fps frame interpolation on, and they think it looks fantastic. It doesn't mean that they're right, but whatever makes them happy.


RE: Impressive
By Solandri on 10/29/2012 11:32:43 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Pentile displays are definitely inferior.

See post above. I the ppi is insufficient so you can see the sub-pixels, then it's inferior. But once you pass that point, pentile (or RGBG) is a more efficient allocation of sub-pixels while remaining indistinguishable from RGB.

quote:
It's not so obvious on photos or videos, in fact in those cases they look pretty good. It's mostly visible on graphics like icons (e.g., the icon for Chrome). With my Galaxy Note next to my Nexus 7, the speckled look of the pentile display is quite noticeable.

You do realize even RGB has color fringing? The sub-pixels are not overlaid on top of each other (as they are on Sigma's Foveon camera sensor). They're usually arranged side-by-side. If you look closely enough at either display, you will see color fringing.

The key factor for both RGB and RGBG is that the sub-pixels are small enough to be indistinguishable to the eye. RGBG reaches this point sooner than RGB, allowing you to meet the eye's maximum resolving power with fewer subpixels (i.e. lower sub-pixel ppi).

quote:
In fact, the OLED screens I've owned (Pentile or not) have made me quite a fan of LCDs for the moment. Comparing my Note to my iPhone 5, the difference in colour quality is absolutely enormous, and the display on the Galaxy Note was lauded in reviews. The default settings from Samsung are horrible (way oversaturated)

That's completely dependent on color calibration and has nothing to do with the quality of the display. Android currently lacks support for color profiles, and it's one of the things I wish they'd add. Without support for color profiles, the colors you get are purely based on the electrical characteristics of the display.

I suspect Apple has support for color profiles built into iOS because the color accuracy of its iOS devices has been remarkably consistent. When Android adds color profile support, this will become a non-factor.

In terms of the potential quality of the display (after you can profile it), what's more important is gamut - how deep a red, blue, or green it can display. And OLED completely wipes the floor with LCD in gamut.

quote:
Bayer filters and 4:2:0 YCbCr are different issues. 3CCD and 4:4:4 are better anyway, it's just a matter of how much better versus the cost.

As I've been saying, 3CCD is only better if you lack sufficient resolution so that the individual red and blue sub-pixels are still distinguishable. Once you exceed that resolution (as is claimed with Retina displays), RGB and RGBG become indistinguishable to the eye, and you can achieve the same performance using fewer sub-pixels arranged in an RGBG array instead of RGB.


"You can bet that Sony built a long-term business plan about being successful in Japan and that business plan is crumbling." -- Peter Moore, 24 hours before his Microsoft resignation














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