Why did this device get so popular?

[The Hustleman]

Week after I bought my S3 I bought 3 additional batteries + charger for $10 off Ebay without blinking an eye. It's one of the strengths of the S3 - user should be able to access the back of the phone.

1. Why 3? I'm on my phone quite a bit and only needed to change my battery once a day
2. EBay batteries don't do nfc. I learned that the hard way after buying a battery that said nfc... I just went to a carrier store, bought another battery, then swapped them out and returned the eBay battery

sent from the best smart phone (not phablet) on the worst network- the galaxy S III unfortunately on T-Mobile

 

[sledge007]

I tried to add this to my earlier post, but was having some issues with this app. My work flip phone sitting on top for scale.

Sent from my SGH-I747 using Android Central Forums

 

[Suntan]

In my opinion Ry's response is valid. Sure the features of the phone made it popular but advertising is what can make anything popular.. You even just said it yourself right there lol.

Sure Samsung put in NFC but I can bet most don't use it so.. It wasn't like consumers knew it and ran out to buy the s3 for this... It only got popular with the consumers because of the advertising.

Again, popular and aware are two different things.

Yes, the ads making iphone users look like sheep were good. They brought attention to the fact that there was an actual alternative to people that didn?t know it. But I wouldn?t say the ads making fun of people are the only reason they went to the store and bought the phone.

The ads got people interested, made them start asking questions (as Ry stated multiple times.) Questions are not the same as throwing money at a store clerk.

The underlying product has to hold up or else the marketing is just wasted effort.

Take the original Palm Pre for example. The (admittedly weird) marketing and journalist buzz that was generated prior to its release built it up to be called ?The iPhone killer." Then it released and everybody came to realize that it was a decent OS housed in a ****y phone. It went nowhere really and webOS is now just a skid mark in open-source die-hard?s tighty whities.

Marketing can polish a turd, but it can?t make you want to buy a polished turd.

In any case, again if it?s all just marketing, does anyone have any suggestions for marketing campaigns or strategies that HTC might have employed more successfully to promote the HOX better than it was promoted?

-Suntan

 

[zapfrog]

Again, popular and aware are two different things.

Yes, the ads making iphone users look like sheep were good. They brought attention to the fact that there was an actual alternative to people that didn?t know it. But I wouldn?t say the ads making fun of people are the only reason they went to the store and bought the phone.

The ads got people interested, made them start asking questions (as Ry stated multiple times.) Questions are not the same as throwing money at a store clerk.

The underlying product has to hold up or else the marketing is just wasted effort.

Take the original Palm Pre for example. The (admittedly weird) marketing and journalist buzz that was generated prior to its release built it up to be called ?The iPhone killer." Then it released and everybody came to realize that it was a decent OS housed in a ****y phone. It went nowhere really and webOS is now just a skid mark in open-source die-hard?s tighty whities.

Marketing can polish a turd, but it can?t make you want to buy a polished turd.

In any case, again if it?s all just marketing, does anyone have any suggestions for marketing campaigns or strategies that HTC might have employed more successfully to promote the HOX better than it was promoted?

-Suntan

THIS! There certainly has been some good campaigns out there like the Pre and others but if it doesn't stand up it will fizzle. Side note about marketing; One campaign I think that needs to be overhauled is the DNA campaign, just doesn't do it for me. And on subject a bit; IMO Apple is riding the wave and that wave is starting to fade and will soon come crashing down.

 

[Suntan]

I can't say as I've really seen advertising for the DNA, but I don't really watch commercials.

I will add though that the marketing for the whole "Droid" thing seems to be done to death. I wasn't a big fan of it in the beginning. I mean, it obviously focused on targeting young males, but how many times a year do these people get their parents to buy them a new smartphone? I think it alienated a large section of the phone market. It basically stated, right in the commercial, "We acknowledge that the iphone is for everyone else!" and we are now seeing Google and friends starting to turn that ship around, years later.

-Suntan

 

[Ry]

Quote: "The marketing teams just got the word out. That?s their job."

Title of thread: "Why did this device get so popular?".


In my opinion Ry's response is valid. Sure the features of the phone made it popular but advertising is what can make anything popular.. You even just said it yourself right there lol.

Sure Samsung put in NFC but I can bet most don't use it so.. It wasn't like consumers knew it and ran out to buy the s3 for this... It only got popular with the consumers because of the advertising.

So.. As the thread says how did it become popular? Good marketing.. They also related to consumers by poking fun at iPhone line waiters and made their phone look so nonchalantly cool .

Sent from my Sprint S3 using AC forums

No consumers ran out and bought S3s because it has expandable memory and a removable battery. lol.

Good marketing and building enough phones to be able to put the same physical phone in all carrier stores guaranteed a win for Samsung. Look at the Nexus 4, quad-core, great price unlocked - yet mainstream consumers probably have never even heard of it.

 

[Almeuit]

Again, popular and aware are two different things.

Yes, the ads making iphone users look like sheep were good. They brought attention to the fact that there was an actual alternative to people that didn?t know it. But I wouldn?t say the ads making fun of people are the only reason they went to the store and bought the phone.

The ads got people interested, made them start asking questions (as Ry stated multiple times.) Questions are not the same as throwing money at a store clerk.

The underlying product has to hold up or else the marketing is just wasted effort.

Take the original Palm Pre for example. The (admittedly weird) marketing and journalist buzz that was generated prior to its release built it up to be called ?The iPhone killer." Then it released and everybody came to realize that it was a decent OS housed in a ****y phone. It went nowhere really and webOS is now just a skid mark in open-source die-hard?s tighty whities.

Marketing can polish a turd, but it can?t make you want to buy a polished turd.

In any case, again if it?s all just marketing, does anyone have any suggestions for marketing campaigns or strategies that HTC might have employed more successfully to promote the HOX better than it was promoted?

-Suntan

Read all posts before trying to argue with everyone. Quote from first page.

Also the galaxy series has always been a good series for samsung.. So that helps as well.

Sent from my Sprint S3 using AC forums

No one denies the phone itself being good made people buy it. However..

Good marketing = people asking questions like what's that? Then.. Look at reviews from people who have phone.. Then throw money at the store clerk as you said.. Then they spread the word the device is good and it gets more popular.

No reason to try and argue what made it popular. A combination of things did. Get good marketing, a good device, and then word of mouth. Bam. Success.

Sent from my Sprint S3 using AC forums

 

[Ry]

Read all posts before trying to argue with everyone. Quote from first page.



No one denies the phone itself being good made people buy it. However..

Good marketing = people asking questions like what's that? Then.. Look at reviews from people who have phone.. Then throw money at the store clerk as you said.. Then they spread the word the device is good and it gets more popular.

No reason to try and argue what made it popular. A combination of things did. Get good marketing, a good device, and then word of mouth. Bam. Success.

Sent from my Sprint S3 using AC forums

It feels like people are looking for a killer feature or spec to explain how the S3 got so popular. There is really isn't one. Flooding the market with pretty much the same good phone behind strong marketing made the S3 popular. Dual-core/quad-core didn't do it on it's own. RAM didn't do it on it's own. Batteries didn't do it on it's own. S-beam didn't do it on it's own. Getting the word out about it did.

 

[Suntan]

Read all posts before trying to argue with everyone. Quote from first page.

I thought I had.

From the first two pages (before all the pointless, ?You shouldn?t want a removable battery" talk):

?Strong advertising.

In general, the great unwashed masses don't know the difference between an iPhone and an Android device. But Samsung has been hitting the airwaves with enough ads to help people distinguish them?.?

?Like others have said it's marketing. Sammy's ads have stuck out for me even before I got the s3??

?Samsung is really good at marketing. The other Android phone manufacturers need to follow there lead??

?Advertising and marketing. I enjoy the phone but it's really not that much better than HTCs offerings. The incredible advertising by Samsung just led you to believe so??

?Marketing surely plays a substantial role Samsung is the only phone company to compete with Apple in that regard?.?

?Great marketing by Samsung, as most have already pointed out??

?Advertising, plain and simple?.?

?Reading this thread - it makes me glad to see that people are recognizing advertising and marketing over raw specs...?

Reading the posts made it sound like a large portion of the people in the discussion believe it to be just marketing. Saying it played a "substantial role," or that it was just marketing, "plain and simple". Or even going so far as to say that people are not capable of knowing the difference without marketing to tell them what to think or even that Samsung marketing fooled them into thinking the phone was better than it was.

I was just asking what they thought HTC could have done to "out market" Samsung if it was just down to the marketing departments to win the day.

And I'm sorry if you have the notion that I am trying to argue with you. I'm not. In fact it appears we share the same opinion, that Samsung just went out and successfully sold a good phone. Also, it should have been clear that the last sentence in the post that you quoted was not directly aimed at you, but at anyone that was proclaiming it was "just down to marketing." It wasn't a rhetorical question either. If anyone has thoughts on the notion, it would be interesting to hear.

-Suntan

 

[LegalAmerican]

No offence, because I really do agree with the comments you've made here, but I wasn't talking to you. I was talking to someone else that was making comments that were not the same as you. Further, when I did respond to a comment that you directed at me, I specifically said that I agreed with you fully. Then went on to explain how your comment (which I agreed with) was different than the one I disagreed with.

So don't insinuate that I'm lumping all the counter-arguments together and saying, "I know you are but what am I?" Because I'm not.

Further, don't blame me for any past baggage you may have had in some other forum talking about some other phone. I've never made any comments pertaining to the non-removable battery on the Droid Maxx.

Now since you seem to want to discuss it, let's discuss it. You say you have a counter point to every argument that is made for the value of a removable battery. In so far as it relates to the GSIII and the HOX, what would those counter points be?

The GSIII has a larger battery, so it isn't like the Droid Maxx where you actually get something out of it.

The thickness really isn't much different between the GSIII and the HOX. Maybe the HOX is a little thinner (I really don't know) but personally, I wouldn't say thickness makes a difference between the two.

People claim they like the "solid" feel of the HOX and claim the GSIII feels cheap with its plastic back. I'll give you that argument if it is important to you. I've never played with a real HOX so I can't compare myself, but I don't think the removable battery would make a difference. Even if the GSIII didn't have a removable battery, Samsung has shown that they have an affection for cheap plastic backs. I don't think anything would be different if they just glued the plastic back on.

Anyway, I'd be interested to hear any other opinions about why the non-removable battery on the HOX is better than the removable battery on the GSIII. Perhaps there are a few that I just haven't thought of.

-Suntan

I wasn't blaming you for "past baggage" I was stating that these battery argument threads are nothing new, and in any case, each side tends to think the other side is insane for their choice. Some people brought up the HOX to discuss an alternate point of view, and I did the same with the Maxx.

The counterpoints I have for removeable batteries is this: Charge your phone each night as you sleep. If you can't make a full day on one charge, buy a powerpack for the same cost as a spare battery. I think the vast majority of people have enough time that they can attach a powerpack to their phone to recharge at SOME point during the day. Or, buy a car dock that recharges the device if you travel. If you aren't on the road, then you should have access to a outlet if push comes to shove. Don't get me wrong, I will be the first to say that it's ridiculous to buy a MOBILE PHONE and then be tethered to a wall all day. However, my point is that there are options out there for people without removeable batteries that are not a big deal. I have a solar powered charger for camping for crying out loud. And it wasn't expensive.

The reason I brought up the Razr Maxx, is because Motorola realized that nonremoveable batteries were a bad deal in the Razr, so for heavy users they offer a Maxx option to meet their needs. Once the Maxx came out, I no longer required a removeable battery because A) I wouldn't keep my phone long enough for the battery to wear down, and B) I could EASILY make it through a full day and then charge the thing at night as I slept.

I should emphasize that my point is not that "Non-Removeable batteries" are BETTER, but that there are so many options for either design that it should in no way be a deal breaker because there are simple solutions for either device that is for all intents and purposes identical in terms of convenience and effectiveness. I own a GS3 and I love it. But the only time i've removed the back cover was to activate it, and to replace the back cover with a flip cover. I assure you my experience would not have been tarnished if the back was not removeable.

 

[Suntan]

All valid points Legal American. If we actually were talking about the virtue of the batteries between the Razr Maxx vs the GSIII, I would be in complete agreement with you.

That said, we're talking about the HOX vs. the GSIII. The only point I am making here is that *as far as I can see* the non-replaceable battery on the HOX provides no advantage to the replaceable GSIII battery while eliminating the added flexibility of being able to take the battery out.

Yes, I get it that you can plug in and/or carry a spare external battery charger. But you can do those exact same things with the GSIII too. So they are in no way an "advantage" for the HOX. They're just an option available to both phones.

What advantage does the non-removable battery on the HOX offer? Or is there no advantage?

I remain of the opinion that there is no advantage to the non-removable battery in the HOX, when comparing it to the GSIII, only disadvantage. If you disagree, then I'd be interested to hear. But we're not talking about a bigger battery in a different phone, and were not talking about chargers and external batteries that any phone can make use of. We're talking about these two phones and why some people feel the GSIII has an advantage over the HOX in the battery compartment.


...And Ry, you don't have to follow along liking and thanking everybody that mentions using a battery charger. We all know you like battery chargers by now.

-Suntan

 

[zapfrog]

For the record my wife and I think the nfc/s-beam is cool as hell and do use it all the time.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Android Central Forums

 

[Ry]

For the record my wife and I think the nfc/s-beam is cool as hell and do use it all the time.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Android Central Forums

But you probably shouldn't view that on the plane.

 

[Kevin OQuinn]

All valid points Legal American. If we actually were talking about the virtue of the batteries between the Razr Maxx vs the GSIII, I would be in complete agreement with you.

That said, we're talking about the HOX vs. the GSIII. The only point I am making here is that *as far as I can see* the non-replaceable battery on the HOX provides no advantage to the replaceable GSIII battery while eliminating the added flexibility of being able to take the battery out.

Yes, I get it that you can plug in and/or carry a spare external battery charger. But you can do those exact same things with the GSIII too. So they are in no way an "advantage" for the HOX. They're just an option available to both phones.

What advantage does the non-removable battery on the HOX offer? Or is there no advantage?

I remain of the opinion that there is no advantage to the non-removable battery in the HOX, when comparing it to the GSIII, only disadvantage. If you disagree, then I'd be interested to hear. But we're not talking about a bigger battery in a different phone, and were not talking about chargers and external batteries that any phone can make use of. We're talking about these two phones and why some people feel the GSIII has an advantage over the HOX in the battery compartment.


...And Ry, you don't have to follow along liking and thanking everybody that mentions using a battery charger. We all know you like battery chargers by now.

-Suntan

I think you like splitting hairs. A LOT. And any member can like any post they want. Just like we know where Ry stands on battery chargers, we know where you stand on removable batteries without the long posts proclaiming so. I'm just saying, that the last line in the comment I quoted can be said just as fairly to you.

The S3 is beating the HOX in marketshare for me reasons than JUST marketing. They also released on FAR more carriers.

 

[sledge007]

I think your last sentence nailed it Kevin. Availability...... everywhere.... (along with the marketing, the good phone overall, etc, etc.)

 

[mfriedman79]

I think the differences between the OneX and the GS3 success is two fold; consistency in the device worldwide and marketing. It would be hard to argue one phone has substantially better features or build quality over the other to justify the dramatic differences in success.

World Consistency - This is a big one in my opinion and ties directly into the marketing. Physically speaking the device is identical with a the exception of the color variations across all carriers around the world. They all have the same user based features (CPU/GPU not withstanding) and allows for Samsung to run an advertising campaign everywhere that shows the same device a person can get on their carrier of choice. HTC has different variants of the same phone with different names and construction that does not build consistency. A person hears EVO 4G LTE or Incredible 4G or whatever other name variants they had and there is no tie in to the One X. The average user has no idea these are essentially the same phone and if they saw someone on a different carrier then they have they discount it as just another phone.

Marketing - Samsung has hit a home run with their marketing campaign. Unlike most other phone makers they handle a large amount of their own advertising which allows them to present the device as they see it and not how a carrier sees it. They advertise the features of the phone in possible real world situations and relate them to the customer. The family sharing photos/videos or Mrs Claus giving a special video for Santa on his journey are all funny and users can relate and identify with the use cases. That was always the brilliance around Apple advertising. They advertise us cases for their devices and not just the shiny parts inside them. This is where HTC really falls short. They typically let the carriers do their advertising for the phones and carriers could care less which phone they sell just as long as it gets you into the store and signing a contract. The HTC DNA is a perfect example of bad advertising. Sure it's all flashy and cool looking, but to the masses it tells them nothing about the phone other than technical specs that only the phone geeks care about.

Until HTC takes control of their own destiny and standardizes their flagship phones physically and does some of their own advertising that actually shows the innovations in the phone they will struggle against the forces of Apple and Samsung. Even Motorola (Razr M + Google Translate commercial) and LG (actor/director texting and viewing movie at same time on Optimus G) has started changing their advertising to speak more to how customers can use the device versus just what specs are.

 

[LegalAmerican]

That said, we're talking about the HOX vs. the GSIII. The only point I am making here is that *as far as I can see* the non-replaceable battery on the HOX provides no advantage to the replaceable GSIII battery while eliminating the added flexibility of being able to take the battery out.

Yes, I get it that you can plug in and/or carry a spare external battery charger. But you can do those exact same things with the GSIII too. So they are in no way an "advantage" for the HOX. They're just an option available to both phones.

What advantage does the non-removable battery on the HOX offer? Or is there no advantage?

I remain of the opinion that there is no advantage to the non-removable battery in the HOX, when comparing it to the GSIII, only disadvantage. If you disagree, then I'd be interested to hear. But we're not talking about a bigger battery in a different phone, and were not talking about chargers and external batteries that any phone can make use of. We're talking about these two phones and why some people feel the GSIII has an advantage over the HOX in the battery compartment.


...And Ry, you don't have to follow along liking and thanking everybody that mentions using a battery charger. We all know you like battery chargers by now.

-Suntan

In actuality, we're talking about why the GS3 got so popular. YOU have made this about the HOX. So no, I wont cater to just YOUR aspect of the conversation. If this was a thread titled: "GS3 vs. HOX" then yeah, I would either compare the two or move along with no comment.

I don't necessarily mean the powerpack is an advantage, so much as an alternate option that negates a DISADVANTAGE that others might attempt to portray.

I did get a chuckle over how adamant you are that this is your thread all about comparing the One X. Just because someone mentioned it a few pages back and you took it and ran, doesn't mean everyone must follow your path. I am broadening my contribution to the conversation into more of a "Non-Removeable vs. Removeable" within the realm of how it affected the popularity of the device. I wont limit myself to your 'boundaries' just because you've chosen to shape the discussion your own way.

That being said, I once again state my opinion that no one has the same needs. Therefore, one option is not better than the other because someone prefers a particular design aspect. Regardless of a comparison between the GS3, HOX, Maxx, or anything else. I am not here to say non-removeable is an advantage, but I will say that neither option is advantageous over the other because there's too many accessory options that level the playing field based on your preference.

 

[nDroid3]

The twitter trending advertisement on the iphone5 release date was genius. That was probably what got me thinking android instead of sticking with the iphone.


Sent from my SCH-I535 using Android Central Forums

 

[zapfrog]

But you probably shouldn't view that on the plane.

What's funny is it took me a second to get the joke until I remembered the Samsung ad.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Android Central Forums

 

[Suntan]

YOU have made this about the HOX. So no, I wont cater to just YOUR aspect of the conversation. If this was a thread titled: "GS3 vs. HOX" then yeah, I would either compare the two or move along with no comment.

Perhaps I mis-read the intentions of the OP when he stated:

i ended up with the One X and feel like i got the short end of the stick. People never recognize my phone as anything special and i constantly wonder why the One X has been forgotten and is such an underdog while the S3 dominated in popularity?

I was of the understanding that the OP intended to compare the GSIII vs. the HOX.

In any case, if you don't want to answer the question I put forth, that's cool. I wasn't asking anyone to "cater" to my anything. Just asking a question during a conversation.

Have a good one.

-Suntan