

IPhone 5 opens the door for Nokia, Samsung - denzil_correa
http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-19512_7-57511658-233/iphone-5-opens-the-door-for-nokia-samsung/

======
melling
I love my iPhone but I really don't get this. Apple only has 31% of the
smartphone market and Android has 59%, for example.

[http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57510406-37/iphone-5-faces...](http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57510406-37/iphone-5-faces-u.s-market-
share-challenges-says-analyst/)

The market is already open. Apple has never dominated. They just make a really
good product that's loved by millions. :-) It's also clear that even more
people are happier choosing a different phone.

~~~
adsr
But Android is not a phone, look at market share by smart phone vendor instead
of OS. It's a comparison that makes much more sense since there are many
vendors, each competing with each other, all with individual market shares,
all using the Android OS.

~~~
andybak
I don't see that matter. To the extent that I am invested in a mobile
platform, it's Android I'm invested in. My next phone will probably run
Android so I can carry along my familiarity and my app purchases. It's only
likely to be a Samsung specifically if they have the right combination of
hardware features and price at that time.

~~~
adsr
It matters since we (parent comment and the article) are talking about market
share of phones.

~~~
andybak
We are both responding to: "I love my iPhone but I really don't get this.
Apple only has 31% of the smartphone market and Android has 59%, for example."
and in turn the original article

In this context the interesting definition of 'market share' is the one that
focuses on platforms. There isn't very much interesting to be gleaned by
making the distinction that Apple has a bigger market share than Samsung as
Samsung and other Android OEMs collectively benefit from Android's market
share.

~~~
adsr
No, because the article essentially asks: does the new iPhone have enough
bells and whistles to keep it's position, and compares it to other handsets
like Nokia Lumia and Galaxy Note. It's putting up iPhone 5's hardware features
against a few competing phones. It does not take platforms, operating system
or any software into account.

------
ianterrell
What do you want folks? What one feature are you buying your phone based on? A
stylus, a 20 hour battery, or a springy camera?

The iPhone is crap! It doesn't have any of these! Pick your other substandard
phone that has the one you want now!

~~~
Quizzy
Trolling for dollars?

------
marknutter
This is ridiculous. The iPhone 5 failing to wow everybody is more a symptom of
the fact that there's really just not much more a smartphone can, or really
_should_ do. I hear people lamenting things like the fact that they won't be
able to wirelessly charge the iPhone 5. Really? Placing your phone on top of a
wired brick instead of inserting a wire is the next big thing? Please.
Smartphones will continue to get faster and have longer battery life, but
everyone should stop holding their breath for an announcement as revolutionary
as the original iPhone's was.

~~~
simplexion
I am tired of hearing this myth that the first iPhone was so revolutionary.
That is completely ignoring that the LG Prada was released prior to it.

The iPhone didn't do anything new. You could buy a Nokia phone at the time
that did all the iPhone did and some. The iPhone couldn't copy and paste, MMS
and a bunch of other basic things that other phones at the time could.

~~~
marknutter
Well, without getting into an argument about what exactly made the iPhone
revolutionary in terms of features and design, I think the evidence is clear:
average people didn't buy smartphones before the iPhone came out, they did
after it came out. Now every phone looks like an iPhone. Sounds revolutionary
to me, in every sense of the word.

~~~
simplexion
Touchscreen does not make a smartphone. Plenty of people had non-touchscreen
smartphones prior to the iPhone.

------
lawdawg
This article should really be re-written and titled "iOS6 opens the door for
Microsoft and Google". On the hardware front we are reaching a point where
only incremental changes are necessary/possible, and even things like wireless
charging or using the phone with gloves on, aren't that revolutionary and are
mostly gimmicks.

iOS6, on the other hand, seems like a very incremental step on the software
side, a major step backwards on others (like Maps). Seems like the perfect
opportunity for Android (and possibly Windows Phone) given they aren't
constrained by the "only 1 major iOS update a year" rule that Apple appears to
be tied to.

------
bradleyland
Anyone writing about things like NFC are missing the point. Consumers don't
care about NFC, they care about convenience. Convenience is paying with your
smartphone, and Apple has, apparently, figured out a way to make that happen.

You can't enumerate the experience of using an Apple product with a list of
specifications any more than you could express the beauty of a sunset with an
Excel spreadsheet. I'm not saying it's unquantifiable, but I am saying it's
far more subtle than, "ZOMG the iPhone doesn't even have NFC or springy
cameras!" These are implementation details, not features, and consumers don't
care about implementation details, they care about a quality experience. Apple
knows how to deliver a quality experience.

EDIT: Lest anyone think I am a breathless Apple fanboy, here's some data to
back up my claim that Apple knows how to deliver a quality experience:

[http://www.jdpower.com/content/press-
release/upO8vjP/2012-u-...](http://www.jdpower.com/content/press-
release/upO8vjP/2012-u-s-wireless-smartphone-customer-satisfaction-study-
and-2012-u-s-wireless-traditional-mobile-phone-satisfaction-study.htm)

------
brunnsbe
I find it interesting and awaited that Apple now has grown to the size that it
has become more restrictive with introducing new features and technologies. It
seems to happen to all companies that get a too big piece of the market cake,
think for example what happened to Nokia a couple of years ago.

~~~
camwest
What does 'more restrictive' even mean? What are you comparing this to? Is
there some specific feature that is in demand that Apple has failed to deliver
on due to their massive size?

~~~
brunnsbe
Restrictive in the sense that the company now has so many devices out in the
market that making more radical changes in the software (in this case the
operating system) or by introducing not backward-compatible new hardware can
affect millions of users with older hardware negatively. Apple still wants to
support all the older iPhones so that they can get money from the app store,
if an app would need to have a separate version for older devices it would
change their app market in a negative way.

~~~
camwest
Ok that makes sense, but isn't that just change for the sake of it. Again, I
question if there is a clearly superior alternative that they are deliberately
avoiding.

------
stephen_g
I don't really understand what people expected - Apple's device strategy is
fairly predictable, and what was announced was almost exactly what has been
expected by all the rumour sites for at least a month or two now...

------
5partan
Hacker News should be renamed to Consumer News with this kind of articles.
Please stop upvoting such *@$#! ...

------
mtgx
I like how the guy in the picture has really large hands to make the Lumia 920
seem smaller than it is (about as big as a Galaxy S3 or One X, but with a
smaller 4.5" screen). But on the other hand, I can't really blame them
considering Apple tried to make their iPhone 5 seem to have a significantly
larger screen, when it's really just 14% bigger, and what I'd hardly consider
a main reason for upgrading to it.

Lumia 920 has interesting hardware, and some important innovations that others
should pursue as well - better low-light performance, optical stabilization, a
screen that's better in sunlight, but I think it ultimately falls short even
of iOS with its WP8 OS. Sure iOS may be boring, and may barely try to catch-up
with features Android has introduced years ago, but at least it has the
ecosystem WP8 is trying to catch-up with Android and iOS, but it hardly has
any ecosystem at all. For example, if you thought "Android has no games" (it
does, but maybe not the latest hot ones on iOS), well the situation is much,
much worse on Windows Phone. Windows Phone will never be the one to get the
latest "hot apps", and will never be the one to have all the best "niche" apps
that may be very useful to a certain category for people.

~~~
forgottenpaswrd
"Lumia 920 has interesting hardware, and some important innovations that
others should pursue as well - better low-light performance, optical
stabilization, a screen that's better in sunlight"

Has it?

Better low light performance? You mean what NOKIA(biased source) says their
PROTOTYPE(vaporware) has compared with olds iphones. You mean the faked night
photos that now display a "simulated photo" in the corner after people
discovered the truth?.

Are you referring to the "RED camera in a van" optical stabilization of the
fake videos NOKIA released and had to apologize for or are you referring to
the real prototype stabilization that is worse than the Iphone 4S one?

If so I have some Unicorns and a Big Tower to sell you(it is in the center of
Paris, you will love it!).

I find is going to be terrible hard for Windows to compete on phones, tablets
are another thing, people need windows for a lot of things after all.

------
mtgx
With a BOM of $167 for iPhone 5, while selling it for $650 at retail, I think
Apple is just being cheap lately. They're all about lowering cost to increase
their profit, and less about introducing new type of hardware inside the
phone.

[http://www.eetasia.com/ART_8800674648_480700_NT_eff210e8.HTM...](http://www.eetasia.com/ART_8800674648_480700_NT_eff210e8.HTM?click_from=8800098239,9950147613,2012-09-14,EEOL,ARTICLE_ALERT)

And sure, I realize that's not the whole cost for selling an iPhone, but if I
remember correctly, a "new" iPhone's BOM used to be somewhere around
$250-$300. I'm certainly seeing a trend downwards in cost. I think they
mention the iPhone 4S BOM is cheaper "now", but I think it was more than $167
when it first launched, even though they barely changed anything. The iPhone
4's BOM was certainly higher.

~~~
_djo_
These BOM calculations are inherently flawed because there's no way a third-
party can know what it actually costs to develop and produce the many custom
parts in the phone.

The A6 chip, for instance, may incorporate standard ARM cores and chips, but
it was developed using a custom internal design process. Similarly, the new
combined-glass-and-digitiser screen must have involved a fair bit of R&D spend
and changes to the manufacturing process before it could even be produced in
the required volumes.

Apple consistently quotes a 30-40% margin (not gross margin) on its iOS range,
which is not unreasonable considering the additional costs it sustains in
developing value-added services like iCloud and having a good support setup in
place.

Looking at the court records that were unsealed recently I honestly don't
think the real iPhone BOM has changed that much from model to model, with the
exception that it's hugely profitable for Apple to continue to sell the older
model (now the 4S) with cheaper-to-produce components.

------
onetimeuse001
The carriers are also dying for a third major OS, but time will tell. Maybe
the features Apple left out aren't as loved by common people as bloggers make
them seem.

Personally I'd want better battery life (who wouldn't) but would not buy a
phone for a stylus and 5.5 inch screen is too big for me.

~~~
mung
People throwing screen size into the mix with battery life and NFC are
confusing 2 very separate things anyway. Screen size isn't a feature. If we
all want big screens, then I guess iPad wins at the the mobile phone market
(obvious failings aside, like, it's not actually a phone). And yes, wasn't the
whole point of the iPhone (in the 2007 keynote no less) that it didn't use a
stylus?

~~~
vidarh
We may not all want big screens, but the trend with Android high end phones
has been that each generation has pushed the screen size higher within limit.
Presumably for a reason: People buy those models. Even the Galaxy Note, which
was ridiculed, went on to sell many million.

As for the stylus: It's a selling point to not _need_ a stylus for regular
use, but for some types of use a stylus is far superior. Your fingers are no
good for making precise drawings, for example, or for scribbling hand written
notes. They simply don't have small enough tips.

And even the name of the Galaxy Note makes the point that it is aiming for a
niche of users that want to be able to replace paper note books while still
getting all the benefits of a modern smartphone, including being able to not
use the stylus when it's not needed.

