Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Samsung warns profit to fall 60%

taipeitimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 118 posts

Re: Samsung warns profit to fall 60%

#101

Post by jquery »

oblio wrote: post #61
AceJohnny2 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because when the iPhone came out it was very expensive but significantly ahead of competition. From a CPU perspective, they still are: https://www.anandtech.com/show/13392/the-iphone-xs-xs-max-re... (for the rest of the features, that's indeed debatable) Fun fact: Samsung made the chip for the first iPhone. Steve Jobs was so dissatisfied with the experience that Apple bought PA Semi to design the chips in-house.

The thing is, that CPU bit is not really relevant for the average consumer, anymore. Flagship phone CPUs have been good enough for web browsing and casual app use for about 2 years. Not that I'm against extra horse power, we'll find a use for it. But we're in "desktop land", almost, for smartphone CPUs. They're good enough. The real smartphone battles now are in camera quality, gaming oomph and battery usage.

It’s directly tied to battery power, and battery life is still a big concern. But largely I agree.

Re: Samsung warns profit to fall 60%

#102

Post by lancesells »

oblio wrote: post #98
Retric wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CPU is far more relevant if you want to keep your phone for 4+ years. The 2 year upgrade cycle on a smartphone is a major expense for many people.

Smartphone tech has matured. A smartphone CPU from 2011 would have been a drag in 2015, a CPU from 2018 will probably still be adequate in 2022.

I've got an iPhone from 2014 and it holds up for me in 2019. I replaced the battery last year and it was like a new phone.

Re: Samsung warns profit to fall 60%

#103

Post by prolikewhoa »

skilled wrote: post #15

Been using a Huawei 3i phone for more than a month now. I literally could not tell if this was Huawei or Samsung if I was given this phone without prior knowledge. Although, there are rumors that Huawei are working on their own OS. And it would be interesting to see whether they would also introduce an OS for their laptop series.

I've been using a $169 Android One Xiaomi and the only difference I can tell between my original Pixel 1 is with the Camera and lack of USB-C. Xiaomi gets 3x the battery life. I have a Sony A6500 that I use for photos and just WiFi transfer them to the Xiaomi seamlessly. No reason for a really cutting edge phone anymore unless you use it primarily for gaming or absolutely need a top tier camera?

Re: Samsung warns profit to fall 60%

#104

Post by prolikewhoa »

robjan wrote: post #37
AFascistWorld wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I won't recommend Xiaomi to anyone I like, and the demise of Samsung phones in China is more "emotionally" driven, yes Samsung phones are expensive, but so do Oppo and Vivo. They are more out-marketed than "out-tech-ed".

The high-end Xiaomis usually match the other flagship androids at half the price. My Mi5 S Plus has outlasted many of my friend's phones that were a lot more expensive. It cost just HK$3k (US$380).

I've had zero issues with my Android One Xiaomi. Best value I've ever had in a phone for $169. Easily a better value than the $349 Nokia 7.1.

Re: Samsung warns profit to fall 60%

#105

Post by pjmlp »

Retric wrote: post #95
oblio wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is, that CPU bit is not really relevant for the average consumer, anymore. Flagship phone CPUs have been good enough for web browsing and casual app use for about 2 years. Not that I'm against extra horse power, we'll find a use for it. But we're in "desktop land", almost, for smartphone CPUs. They're good enough. The real smartphone battles now are in camera quality, gaming oomph and battery usage.

CPU is far more relevant if you want to keep your phone for 4+ years. The 2 year upgrade cycle on a smartphone is a major expense for many people.

In many countries people keep their phones until they die, loose them or get stolen. There isn't a 2 year upgrade cycle.

Re: Samsung warns profit to fall 60%

#106

Post by pjmlp »

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #77
on_and_off wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am of 2 minds about this. On one hand, smartphones are more or less commodities now. Most established smartphone makers can make great phones (at this point I only compare cameras and even then, they also to all be great) so it is only natural that margins become pretty thin. But right now they are just too thin and the ecosystem is not really healthy. We don't really need another Apple making huge margins on its s…

>We don't really need another Apple making huge margins on its smartphone business though. I think I'd argue we need another two or three. Monocultures are almost never a good idea in the long term.

I bet monoculture will come to an end when most devices get to run web sites good enough.

Even Google is now facing the issue that despite Project Treble, most OEMs don't care to release newer versions or provide the respective upgrades, thus rending useless whatever they show at IO.

Re: Samsung warns profit to fall 60%

#107

Post by pjmlp »

collyw wrote: post #96
dragosmocrii wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should I upgrade my Huawei P9 I got in 2016, when it works perfectly fine* and has the adequate power to run everything smoothly. * I did change the battery twice though. Too bad it's not as easy as taking the back cover as on a Nexus One...

A lot of people get phones as part of a contract (here in Europe at least), and that's usually a year and a half or two years. After that you might as well take the phone upgrade.

Except that most Europeans actually go for pre-paid phones, unless they are really into iPhones and Samsung S devices.

Re: Samsung warns profit to fall 60%

#108

Post by cronix »

Retric wrote: post #95
oblio wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is, that CPU bit is not really relevant for the average consumer, anymore. Flagship phone CPUs have been good enough for web browsing and casual app use for about 2 years. Not that I'm against extra horse power, we'll find a use for it. But we're in "desktop land", almost, for smartphone CPUs. They're good enough. The real smartphone battles now are in camera quality, gaming oomph and battery usage.

CPU is far more relevant if you want to keep your phone for 4+ years. The 2 year upgrade cycle on a smartphone is a major expense for many people.

Not sure how my 4 year old Galaxy S6 still chugs along as fast as the day I got it. I'll purchase a new battery before getting a new phone (still on the original, which still makes it through the day on a charge). I'm pretty sure I could easily get another 4 years out of this. CPU and RAM are not an issue. I don't need or want AR or gimmicks that don't actually add value or productivity. Just a tool. My email and texts all still work fine as well as all of the business apps I need, websites I visit, etc. You don't need to upgrade every 2 years, or probably even every 4 years. People are more than welcome to spend the money if they wish, though. They've been trained well into thinking they do.

Re: Samsung warns profit to fall 60%

#109

Post by riku_iki »

Retric wrote: post #95
oblio wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is, that CPU bit is not really relevant for the average consumer, anymore. Flagship phone CPUs have been good enough for web browsing and casual app use for about 2 years. Not that I'm against extra horse power, we'll find a use for it. But we're in "desktop land", almost, for smartphone CPUs. They're good enough. The real smartphone battles now are in camera quality, gaming oomph and battery usage.

CPU is far more relevant if you want to keep your phone for 4+ years. The 2 year upgrade cycle on a smartphone is a major expense for many people.

During last 4 years probably RAM increase is more relevant than CPU: 1GB -> 2GB -> 3GB and now some have 6GB.

Re: Samsung warns profit to fall 60%

#110

Post by hnnmzh »

AFascistWorld wrote: post #22
axaxs wrote: post #5

Samsung's problems are just beginning. They're getting destroyed on every front, and basically all comes from China. On the phone front, they were used to selling phones at premium pricing only relying on their brand name. You don't have to look past Nokia or Blackberry to see how that will end. They're not really innovative, and while their devices are generally quality, they've pushed the price point too high. Xiao…

I won't recommend Xiaomi to anyone I like, and the demise of Samsung phones in China is more "emotionally" driven, yes Samsung phones are expensive, but so do Oppo and Vivo. They are more out-marketed than "out-tech-ed".

"demise of Samsung phones in China is more "emotionally" driven"

Incorrect. Unable to compete and inadequate customer support are the reasons.

Samsung used to have a big user base in China. But product offerings from local manufactures became much better. Design, software and quality wise, they suit the customers' needs better. Samsung's products are simply - "meh".

In terms of customer support, Samsung treated Chinese customers like second class citizen. E.g. during the faulty emmc and fire-catching battery fiasco, they refused to offer the same level of customer service as they did in the US and Europe.

When the first/second case of exploding battery surfaced, Samsung accused the owner putting his phone in a microwave to cause the battery to explode.

Also Samsung adopts some dirty marketing tricks which is well known in China. They have been fined in Taiwan before.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/oct/24/samsung-f...

All the factors combined, caused their market share to plummet.

Post reply on HN