The Phone wars are over...Samsung just won

[JeffDenver]

I mean people can't say on one hand Touchwiz sucks but then be upset if Vanilla doesn't have the same features.

There is a really good reason that Samsung does not allow you to disable or uninstall Touchwiz. And it is not because they can't.

Touchwiz has some nice features, but they are accompanied by a huge load of baggage. The assets do not outweigh the liabilities.

That's the point to Samsung and HTC having their skins on the devices....

I have owned both Samsung and HTC devices. I always bought them because the hardware rocked...not because of those stupid skins. I think if most people were actually given a choice they would pass on them.

 

[Ry]

I'll take that ridiculous jab to mean you don't have anything.

Sent from my (fill in the blank) phone using (fill in the blank software)

I'll take this comment to mean you don't understand anything.

 

[yfan]

I suspect sales figures by this time next year will disagree.

No they won't. Not if you don't lump the sales figures of the Google Experience GS4 with the other GS4 sales.

I suspect T-Mobile will eventually finance this like they do their other phones...they are financing my N4 right now.

Now THAT would be a coup for T-Mobile. I would really like to see them do this.

The developers and engineers that worked on TouchWiz's features would like to think they added value.

Well, they'd be wrong. In all honesty, whether it adds value (or frankly, subtracts value) depends on the individual user. But on the net, I do not think it adds value for consumers in the sense that they would pay more for a phone with TouchWiz than for a phone they like just as much but doesn't have TouchWiz.

Quite a few people already do. Whether its because they want to keep unlimited data, or they sell their contracted phone and buy a different off contract. It happens much more than you'd think.

Actually it happens much less than *you* think. Enthusiasts on AC forums, and our respective circles are much more likely to do this than average Joe. The vast majority of mobile customers could not care less about unlimited data, especially if giving it up would reduce their bill. It's true that modern customers use more data, but modern customers are also much more savvy about finding wifi hotspots. And most people definitely don't get a new phone and then look to sell it back within 6 months.

Well, anyone who has the new T-Mobile un-subsidized cell phone plan probably will.

If T-mobile offers it on an installment plan, yes. Otherwise, no.

 

[Ry]

Absolutely. That's the beauty of AOSP. I will offer that the percentage of Nexi running custom software is pretty high. Perhaps not as high on the N4 as it's much more mainstream than previous Nexi, but it's still a developer and/or techy device. BTW there's a difference between ROM and kernel devs. Kernel devs are more likely to be electrical engineers for starters, the rest is technical.

What evidence do you have that the percentage of Nexi running custom software is pretty high? What's high to you? 10%?

ROM/kernel - same boat. Still irrelevant to the masses unless these kernel devs are working for OEMs.

 

[TheLibertarian]

I have owned both Samsung and HTC devices. I always bought them because the hardware rocked...not because of those stupid skins. I think if most people were actually given a choice they would pass on them.

Wholeheartedly disagree. It's those skins and gimmicks that market these devices. The average consumer won't have a clue what a Snapdragon is aside from a pretty flower one plants in a garden.

Devices are about the features they bring, not the hardware. Few understand that better than Apple and Blackberry.

If the device works as designed, it doesn't matter if it's power by coal or fairy dust, and the general consumer won't care either.

 

[Ry]

Well, they'd be wrong. In all honesty, whether it adds value (or frankly, subtracts value) depends on the individual user. But on the net, I do not think it adds value for consumers in the sense that they would pay more for a phone with TouchWiz than for a phone they like just as much but doesn't have TouchWiz.

It's a cost though.

 

[Aquila]

Is this in reference to me? I have an S4 and TouchWiz is my preferred OS right behind stock. I obviously knew Samsung Hub and all thing like it would be left out, but this phone has the same front facing sensors as the TouchWiz S4, unless those aren't really sensors and are only there to match the original S4 with the aesthetics. I don't why I'm disappointed as this means I get to save $650, but I am.

That's what I was trying to explain earlier, that it'll have the hardware, but lack the software support to make them work. That's why my opinion is that a regular S4 is a better value than the Google Edition one. I know, I included, wish that OEM's would find a way to code their features in an as-stock-as-possible manner as app's that work on top of the OS, rather than integrated throughout it; but that's not what TouchWiz or Sense is, it's closer to accurate to think of TouchWiz or Sense as it's own OS than it is to a launcher with some cool apps.

 

[fernandezhjr]

No they won't. Not if you don't lump the sales figures of the Google Experience GS4 with the other GS4 sales.

And what good would that do? The idea is to get sales figures on the Google GS4, so we can know how many people where willing to pay $649 for the phone and how successful it has been. Trust me, without carriers subsidizing the price to where consumers can get it for $199 vs $649, sales will not be so snappy. Sure, on this site, and especially XDA, you will see many that will say "I got it". But in the typical consumer world, those guys are gonna go for the $199 GS4 and the "bloat" that comes with it.

 

[JeffDenver]

Devices are about the features they bring, not the hardware. Few understand that better than Apple and Blackberry.

Why are Apple and blackberry no longer on top then? Why is the HTC One not outselling the GS3?

If the device works as designed, it doesn't matter if it's power by coal or fairy dust, and the general consumer won't care either.

Obviously they care. Do you really think Touchwiz is what is selling all those GS3s? Do you really think people find the GS3 more attractive than the iPhone? Or even the HTC One?

I think features matter a lot more to the average consumer than people on here are willing to admit. The best selling phones are not the cheap phones.

 

[yfan]

And what good would that do? The idea is to get sales figures on the Google GS4, so we can know how many people where willing to pay $649 for the phone and how successful it has been. Trust me, without carriers subsidizing the price to where consumers can get it for $199 vs $649, sales will not be so snappy. Sure, on this site, and especially XDA, you will see many that will say "I got it". But in the typical consumer world, those guys are gonna go for the $199 GS4 and the "bloat" that comes with it.

I believe I was making the same point you just did.

 

[omniusovermind]

I'll take this comment to mean you don't understand anything.

Stay on topic please.

Ty.

Sent from my (fill in the blank) phone using (fill in the blank software)

 

[NotJustAPhone]

Keep the discussion civil and on-topic. I'm not going to ask again.

Sent from my Nexus 4

 

[TheLibertarian]

Why are Apple and blackberry no longer on top then? Why is the HTC One not outselling the GS3?


Obviously they care. Do you really think Touchwiz is what is selling all those GS3s? Do you really think people find the GS3 more attractive than the iPhone? Or even the HTC One?

I think features matter a lot more to the average consumer than people on here are willing to admit. The best selling phones are not the cheap phones.

1) Apple is on top. No smartphone manufacturer brings in their level of profits, and no smartphone as ever outsold an iPhone. How do you not think they're on top?

2) The Galaxy series has the highest marketing budget of any smartphone, that's why it outsells any other Android product.

It's marketing, buddy. And note that nowhere in the marketing will you see Samsung raving about a Snapdragon 600 processor or the Adreno 320. You know what is marketed? TouchWiz. Features. Gimmicks.

That's what's sells: marketing and features. Yes, people buy into TouchWiz, that's what the average consumer sees and knows.

You said it yourself, features matter to the general consumer. Following that logic, why would the general consumer chose the relatively featureless stock Android over an OS as feature packed as TouchWiz? Hint: They wouldn't, and I'll bet sales figures will prove that.

 

[Aquila]

1) Apple is on top. No smartphone manufacturer brings in their level of profits, and no smartphone as ever outsold an iPhone. How do you not think they're on top?

2) The Galaxy series has the highest marketing budget of any smartphone, that's why it outsells any other Android product.

It's marketing, buddy. And note that nowhere in the marketing will you see Samsung raving about a Snapdragon 600 processor or the Adreno 320. You know what is marketed? TouchWiz. Features. Gimmicks.

That's what's sells: marketing and features. Yes, people buy into TouchWiz, that's what the average consumer sees and knows.

You said it yourself, features matter to the general consumer. Following that logic, why would the general consumer chose the relatively featureless stock Android over an OS as feature packed as TouchWiz? Hint: They wouldn't, and I'll bet sales figures will prove that.

Didn't the S3 outsell the iPhone 5? Or is that the "shipped" versus "sold" thing in play?

 

[TheLibertarian]

Didn't the S3 outsell the iPhone 5? Or is that the "shipped" versus "sold" thing in play?

Last figures I knew were around 30 million for the GS3 and upwards of 50 million for the iP5. I'll dig around for it, but it was a sizeable margin.

 

[Aquila]

Last figures I knew were around 30 million for the GS3 and upwards of 50 million for the iP5. I'll dig around for it, but it was a sizeable margin.

LoL, there goes that talking point. I always heard the Samsung people saying the S3 was destroying the iPhone in sales.

 

[Ry]

Stay on topic please.

Ty.

Sent from my (fill in the blank) phone using (fill in the blank software)

I'll ask again. You can dodge the question again with an insult if you'd like.

What do you think a smartphone should cost in 2013?

Materials are around $200-$250, wholesale. Now let's put the phone together. There's a labor cost there. Let's package up these phones and accessories. There's a materials cost there. Oh wait. This phone needs to be designed, engineered, and tested. Hardware engineers working with software engineers and quality engineers. We've gotta send these phones to the Bluetooth SIG and the FCC for compliance testing. Ca-ching. Who's gonna know about this smartphone? We have to pay to market it as well. Let's also cover cost to run the facilities where all of this takes place.

 

[Aquila]

I'll ask again. You can dodge the question again with an insult if you'd like.

What do you think a smartphone should cost in 2013?

Materials are around $200-$250, wholesale. Now let's put the phone together. There's a labor cost there. Let's package up these phones and accessories. There's a materials cost there. Oh wait. This phone needs to be designed, engineered, and tested. Hardware engineers working with software engineers and quality engineers. We've gotta send these phones to the Bluetooth SIG and the FCC for compliance testing. Ca-ching. Who's gonna know about this smartphone? We have to pay to market it as well. Let's also cover cost to run the facilities where all of this takes place.

How much the phone should cost to whom? Based on our current model of subsidized phones, I believe the phone should cost a carrier 150% of suggested retail, the consumer buying it outright 75% of suggested retail and the consumer buying it subsidized, 40% of suggested retail. Suggested retail I would say prices are not that far off from what they should be, however I think costs could come down if they'd focus on fewer, better devices, rather than 2-20 different devices per year. So if a phone costs $200 in parts, $200 in sunk costs per unit and they charge $500, I have no issues with that. I think they should cost Verizon (as an example) $750, a consumer buying it outright $375 and a subsidized purchaser $200. This creates an environment where the incentive for consumers is to buy directly from the manufacturer and not support the contract model, but if they choose to support contracts, they can still save money and Verizon will have to make up the difference to the manufacturer, as their part of the bargain.

 

[Topgonzo]

I don't think the title of this thread is accurate.

Posted via HTC One

 

[HNNNNNGHHH]

Switch out ALL the Samsung Galaxy S4's currently in stock for participating carriers for the Galaxy S4 Google editions and I'll be more interested. Otherwise, my attention will remain on the HTC One, since I'm not a stickler for how thin a phone is or how massive the screen is. Nonetheless, I'm still undecided at this point, since both phones don't have very reliable custom firmwares out there yet. (ROMs are still nightlies and I've yet to see a One or S4 custom kernel with overclock)