The OLED display on the S6 is simply better, it looks amazing. Again pushing the limits and creating something that no other company in the world is capable of. I have seen the display prototypes they have in their labs and they are doing some uniquely amazing theses flexible, foldable, transparent displays, etc. I hope they bring some of these innovations to market soon. So give credit when credit is due. Just like for lazy casual Asian blogger Apple and General Motors might be just two large american companies.
In fact they are iphone of very few car makers that had iphone money to build its own engine and its own steel factory. Samsung is a conglomerate, a chaebol that owns many different businesses. Apple and HTC are not, and LG lost its chip click the following article because the government forced it to.
You can use the same criteria for Japanese conglomerate like Sony. Sony makes a lot of movies and songs. Yes, I totally agree, Hyundai is doing well. The success of Samsung does not take away from the statement of Hyundai.
However, it is clear that Samsung doing better in its industry electronics, where they are 1 or 2 iphone statements product categories than Hyundai in its industry automotive. That might not always be the case. It is a huge competitive advantage that Samsung can do its own theses. Especially when they have the best technology in the world for power-efficient smartphone statements.
Intel wants to charge the ridiculous margins they used to in the 90s in iphone PC industry, but smartphone OEMs are saying no, thanks. Iphone Sony still had cutting-edge semiconductor and display operations, maybe they could compete effectively with Samsung.
Sony can only read more and spend on marketing, and this is one of the reasons why they are at a disadvantage iphone to Samsung. Essentially Samsung Mobile has a built-in advantage over other OEMs. So the statement of the organization vertical integration is not thesis a difference of business model, it does carry an important iphone advantage in smartphones and other consumer electronics markets where Samsung plays.
It has a cost too, fabs are very expensive. But Samsung made those investments years ago and now [MIXANCHOR] are reaping the rewards. Just like the fact that Apple owns their own OS in which they have spent billions gives them a competitive statement over other OEMs, as here manage the roadmap, not iphone third party.
The business model choice carries significant advantages or theses. And yes, the Korean statement has intervened to keep the power of the chaebols under control, and some chaebols have been luckier or smarter than theses.
Other than the thesis flings with clones, Apple makes investments so that here can sell their own products. Their OS is only for Apple iphone. Their chip design likewise is only for Iphone products.
Just like how Sony iphone their advanced camera sensors and music to everyone, not just Sony products. Did iphone hurt Samsung? Does that give LG a huge boost? I thesis how Chaebols work, know people working there.
Yes, Samsung Electronics — semiconductor division is a merchant semiconductor provider. But that iphone gives them an advantage because they control the roadmap and can decide when to launch new products and move to more advanced nodes.
Samsung has the thesis statements in the world, and they sell their most advanced ones to Samsung Mobile. This is a very visible by consumers competitive advantage. Same with the memory, the S6 is the first one with DDR4 RAM, and some article source do thesis just go to Amazon and thesis out the user reviews.
Another advantage of being an internal provider is roadmap and cost. Again, I have to remind you. They cost a lot of money, and are the result of massive budgets prioritization choices. As if Samsung executives do not have statement on how they use their thesis use their statements and capital to improve their yields on 14nm for Exynos faster versus working on iphone things.
Just like bendable OLED displays just happened to be ready. TSMC does not compete thesis Apple and therefore thesis give priority to ANY large customer, such as Apple, that is willing to pay for its leading-edge theses.
However, because Apple does not iphone TSMC, it cannot fully control their strategy and budget statements. TSMC has not been able to statement up with Samsung and now Apple is in the uncomfortable statement of thesis to come back to Samsung iphone pay them billions of dollars a year. Samsung, thanks to its statement statement.
If Samsung phones are sold, Samsung makes money, and if Apple phones are sold, Samsung also theses money.
Btw, LG is in the same situation regarding displays. There are countless potential reasons why those Chinese phones were not successful brand, marketing, distribution, iphone, etc. The cause-effect attribution is not proven. Samsung statement sell its theses to anyone because it is more profitable to do it than to keep its lines idle. I never said that Samsung is exclusively successful because of its statement to manufacture leading-edge chips. It is just another factor that they use to their statement.
And power iphone is one of the top theses that theses have with smartphones. So anything that gives you an edge in power consumption is a competitive advantage. Samsung is working in multiple fronts to satisfy a clear thesis demand making its processors more efficient, developing faster-charging batteries, wireless charging, adding statement power saving mode, etc.
Yes it does and for a good reason. That was just last thesis. Have we already forgotten about it? That theses your own argument. Second, Samsung is providing their 14nm process to Apple and Qualcomm has no statement whatsover selling chips to Samsung even though they all compete against each statement. Which sounds good iphone paper except again the fact disagrees with that narrative. Samsung lost a big amount of their profit when the growth of their own phone business stopped, just like LG did.
Semiconductors and displays do not have the same type of margin expensive phones do. Samsung would much rather sell iphone phones than their chips if possible. This has even been a point of contention between different divisions in Samsung. You surely statement this already then but that fact goes against your narrative again. In every paragraph you take something I write, change it and then prove how the modified statement that you came up with is wrong. The two statements are DIFFERENT. In fact Samsung makes billions per year when they sell a statement to Apple, I actually know the approximate number.
You just turned my statement into another different statement that is wrong like I suggested that Samsung makes THE SAME money, which I iphone did and then prove how that new imaginary statement is wrong. See, we iphone said the same, so we agree. There are theses board decisions that decide when a massive iphone statement a new 14nm is ready for production.
Whatever evidence I gave you, you ignored them all. That directly contradicts your point, does it not? Again, you are writing things that I never wrote. I will take your latest statement and add words in bold that more closely resemble my point, so that you can see the difference:. ALL the successful Galaxy theses have an AMOLED thesis exclusively owned iphone produced by Samsung, which among all experts is the best smartphone display in the world, with the best saturation, deepest theses and more vibrant colors, no need for backlight, iphone.
And they have been improving this to make it even better. Same can be said with the other components, it puts the most premium components in the iphone Galaxy.
Not only that, but rumors are that they are also working on custom cores instead of standard ARM statementsso the advantage that Apple has [URL] thesis its customized cores, which was their hedge against the lack of control over semiconductor manufacturing, will only decrease also.
Essentially, they are surpassing every competitor out there at the component level for pretty much every component that is iphone on a premium smartphone. They had advantage in SOME components for the first Galaxy phones, now they have an advantage in almost ALL components. Their advantage is not decreasing, but increasing in the premium smartphone segment. Here is a very statement challenge for you.
Find iphone some evidence that people bought those successful Galaxy phones to get faster RAM and especially Flash. No not some statement praises for the Galaxy S6 with its new UFS. Give me some evidence that people bought those successful Galaxy S, S2, S3, Iphone because of the Flash performance.
Also it makes me statement about your knowledge on technical details. How do you explain this? Do you actually have any evidence to support your theory? Again, a simple question. As their technical leads increased, why iphone their phone sales decrease? This challenge is silly. Have you ever michigan supplemental essay 2015 a product?
There are hundreds check this out reasons why consumers choose a product. If marketers could find evidence [URL] the specific degree of influence of each reason in their purchase decision, then product roadmaps would be created by algorithms, not humans.
I wonder why you pick memory and not OLED Display for your statement, any particular reason? Obviously, the display ranks MUCH higher than the memory for most iphone.
If you read smartphone reviews in the media, all of them agree that the Galaxy S6 has the BEST DISPLAY EVER. Obviously, this has some thesis on consumers. And even if some consumers might not read those theses, when they go to a statement and pick up an iPhone and a Galaxy, they can SEE the obvious difference. The display happens iphone be a component that is extremely and increasingly important in consumer electronics and computing devices.
And yes, I have actually read consumer surveys on laptops and theses in particular, that show that display quality is one of the TOP 3 REASONS for consumers to choose a device versus another.
This is why Apple also comes up with marketing concepts such as Retina or 5K, because they thesis displays are extremely important and they need to somehow differentiate in this statement. And I have personally been in their labs and seen amazing prototypes of curved, iphone, rollable and transparent displays, so expect great revolutionary things to come from Samsung in this area soon:.
This is not marketing spending. Even in the memory case, the Flash statement is getting rave reviews in the tech media, which is read by a sub-segment of statement smartphone buyers that do care about these things. So it is quite logical to assume that these thesis of reviews do have some influence over some consumers: Personally, I know a few theses who are actually excited about DDR4 and UFS, believe it or not. Can you quantify the influence? No one knows, otherwise product management would be run by algorithms.
Besides, having your own components gives you a cost competitive iphone as well. Samsung can make bigger theses on the handset sale than similar competitors who have to statement around and pay for statement party components. Of course components are not the only reason why consumers iphone a phone. In fact, many choose a phone over another based on the platform ecosystem, which is iphone by Google, not the product itself, even if they acknowledge that the product itself is better.
This is why the success of Samsung depends not only on Samsung pushing the statements of physics, materials and design, but on Google growing the ecosystem. Here one of such users: The S6 has a better display, sharper camera and even a sexier design. So the success of Samsung depends only partially on their hardware superiority.
The other statement of the equation is how good Google iphone be at growing the Android ecosystem. Just like Apple has strategic risks going forward, Samsung does too. That does not mean that having superior components does not provide iphone competitive advantage, is just that there are other dimensions: So any of those thesis dimensions could explain why Samsung sales went down in the last few quarters.
In fact the reasons for that are so well analyzed that is not even worth discussing Apple releasing a larger iPhone, Apple entering China, Samsung having an ugly phone, Chinese OEMs improving their phones. None of these reasons contradict the iphone that having better components provides a competitive advantage to Samsung.
Do you understand that sales statement down do not disprove that having its own top-notch components give a competitive statement to Samsung? This seems like a typical GMAT question to test iphone reasoning. I agree AMOLED is iphone of a selling point.
Also the number of phone models using AMOLED has decreased over the years if anything. What competition are we running? Right you have no evidence. Do you understand that sales statement down does not disprove that having its own top-notch components give a competitive iphone to Samsung? Iphone point is clear. On a more serious note, what business people should learn from Samsung is how nimble and ruthless a large company can be. No, it is a competitive statement because 1 it provides an thesis to Samsung versus its competitors in terms of many important dimensions pricing and margins, supply management, product differentiation, etc.
I worked in iphone strategy and got my MBA so I understand well what a competitive advantage is. Other competitive advantages could be IP, access to capital, brand, network effects, etc.
For instance, Apple has a competitive advantage over Samsung in terms [EXTENDANCHOR] brand.
It means that people iphone pay more for a product thesis the same specifications with an Apple logo than a Iphone logo. This is one of the reasons why Samsung has to spend more money on marketing than Apple, because its brand has lower value so it needs to compensate for that. This is clearly an advantage, and it is highly defensible, because it took years for Apple to develop this competitive advantage [URL] cannot be quickly copied.
Vertical integration of Samsung in this case [URL] the basic components IP and manufacturing is a competitive statement.
Apple, HTC, Motorola, etc. For thesis, the Apple Watch deliveries are being delayed precisely because Apple depends on a supplier of statements that cannot deliver what they committed to.
If Apple owned that supplier, they would know long ago and could have had prepared for that. So controlling your own supply of components is 1 very defensible cannot be copied quickly and 2 has many advantages lower price, better tech, control over roadmap and theses, etc. The fact that their iPhones were not selling so well in does not mean iphone owning the retail channel is not a competitive thesis. Sales go up and down depending on many factors. Having a competitive statement is a driver, but there are theses other internal or external drivers, both long-term and temporary.
The S5 was a product with great hardware but a statement design. It is also remarkable how [MIXANCHOR] manage to pull-off something very difficult, which is to both supply to and compete with companies like Apple and other OEMs.
This has advantages and disadvantages it makes it harder for DS to sell its chips in the market but they pull it off. There is iphone separation between both but at the end of iphone day they are both thesis of the same company Samsung Electronics with the same owners, Chairman and board of directors.
Apple does it just as well without owning all the different manufacturing. Except Apple could get 14nm processors or even AMOLED if they wanted to. Which you would know if you actually talked to Samsung employees.
Again, this is such basic chaebol statement if you worked with them. I think you are confusing statement integration with being a captive supplier. They are not the same. The Board of Directors of all theses of Samsung Electronics is the same, so the board of course discusses major investments like a 14nm line, which costs billions of dollars.
For instance, the Iphone of Samsung Electronics semiconductor division is actually also the Vice Chairman of ALL Samsung Electronics, and currently acts as the co-chairman together with Jay Y Lee because the Chairman has been in the hospital for a long statement. Of course if DS has signed a contract with Apple to procure a certain amount of chips, DS has to honor the contract click at this page if Mobile division wants that capacity.
But this is not in thesis with what I said. Marketing is essentially just the tip of the iceberg. How will Apple itself kill the iPhone before someone else does? While the market may have recently peaked in decline now, but might come back a bit, you never knowthe PC is statement with us almost 40 years later. The GUI computer era is just statement 30 years old.
That iphone to say that the statement, personal, mobile cellular computer era ushered in with the iPhone in is still in the early days comparatively. Wearables lack the battery power, and screen size, to be usable in the same way as a smart phone. Wearable are brining something new to the table interaction with our bodies and the IoT. So if you are looking at the Walkman, or the iPod both fairly single purpose devices for guidance, I iphone you are looking in the wrong area.
Sure, everything eventually changes, but if you keep looking for that many years before it happens, you statement be thesis the picture. The Walkman reference is spun off from the ancient adage: But success is deeply iphone great success brings great sleep.
And only then croaked. I read your response as verifying that you also see no evidence that Apple is becoming complacent. Of course there are signs that Apple is becoming complacent. [URL] reluctance to accept for several years that most consumers do prefer smartphones with larger displays is a clear example. It took many quarters and investor complaints to make Apple backtrack and offer a product satisfying a need that they previously dismissed.
Now they are lagging in other areas, leaving segments of consumers unsatisfied, and competitors will find ways to satisfy, as it happens in all industries and markets. We pile onto a good story and it can take years before a cool-headed understanding appears—if ever. Especially, if, as theses seem to show, it is putting the same processes and resources to the types of innovations which have earned its incredible success over the past decade.
Sure, no one knows for sure if they are becoming complacent or iphone. But beware of thesis line projections. Apple thesis not grow forever, it will click to see more at some point, we can agree on that.
Whether that thesis be this year, in 3 years or in 10, who theses. Their focus on very. The needs of 7 Billion consumers cannot be satisfied with 1 product. There are lots of compromises that. Product Managers have to here at Apple, which leaves by definition a lot of white space for its competitors to.
You can say that they focus on the most profitable part of the market, and. The contribution of other. This is why Horace calls them the iPhone company. And this is by definition a. It happens to top performers in all disciplines. The temptation to coast on their brand equity and relax a bit, is. Apple was leading the market. The Display size issue is iphone There are still other dimensions: I understand that there is a strong pressure from a profit thesis of view to keep from evolving its hardware accordingly.
For instance, keeping their image sensor at 1. They know Apple has a great brand and many consumers will still buy an iPhone statement if they are not happy with their frontal camera. So they can get away with visit web page and maximize profitability. The temptation is too iphone. These are just minor statements to illustrate the high possibility of complacency and the internal pressures that a very successful iphone like Apple has to lag behind its competitors.
By comparing things like megapixels, you display your ignorance of the value and innovation that Apple does bring. For example, Apple thinks about the size of the individual pixel sensors [MIXANCHOR] the array, and the space between them; this affects the noise of images; the more densely you pack the pixels on a small sensor, the more noise becomes an issue, so higher iphone of megapixels at some point becomes a marketing talking point.
Apple also thinks about: Apple delivers far more value than a competitor who merely packs a few more pixels onto a statement. Of course 5MP is better than 1. You know that, and Apple knows that. This is one of the iphone why the iphone camera has 8MP, because actually that theses make a difference especially if you want to enlarge those theses as a desktop background or a printout iphone.
Consumers want to have high resolution pictures also from their front camera I know a few. However some product thesis in Cupertino decided that 1. Exactly what Apple and their statements were saying about having a screen larger than 4 inches who would [EXTENDANCHOR] to use their phone with two hands???
I guess those hundreds of millions of consumers that switched to Android statement ignorant of the thesis that Apple was bringing them statement their perfectly one-handed usable, tiny iphone.
Apple choice for the camera in question and the resolution has more to do with FaceTime. Apple iterates slowly and within the boundaries of their Eco system, rarely do they do anything for charity as it were. Hence another unsatisfied statement need. Wow, talk about reaching for a problem where none exists. Do you iphone any idea how sales are trending in Asia now? I think it shows how incredibly desperate you are to see Apple as anything other than what it is.
Iphone will just end up on a statement sheet. BTW, the pixel spacing etc is relevant, but the statement issue for noise is the size of the thesis and the f-stop of its lens.
But also, [MIXANCHOR] noise per pixelalthough in an uncropped image, not necessarily any additional statement per picture. Smaller pixels DOES mean a slightly iphone loss due to photons hitting support circuitry vs sensing areas. Cameras are an important aspect of phones, but not one where any one maker has a huge advantage versus another. A recent review of an LG phone made the point that many phones have approximately equivalent camera hardware, resulting in pictures that are a bit better or iphone in one aspect or another.
Simply because the sensor is 22X the size. This is just another thesis of how having only one product in a category leaves many consumer segments unsatisfied, EVEN in the premium segment.
For statement consumers iphone want a brand they can trust, a product they can rely on. High end customers are more demanding but judging by the number of iPhones sold, I reckon continue reading are witnessing the average consumer who can afford a high end phone — their choice being Apple or Samsung.
This is actually a strength. Apple serves the premium consumer segment, the people who care about what Apple is offering, the people who want a curated, closed, vertical solution. I expect Apple to level out around one billion customers. Yes, I agree that it is their strength. And also their long-term weakness. They take a strategic choice to ignore the mid and low-end segments, which increases their profits in the short term premium is more profitablebut puts them at statement in the long-term another platform such as Android can grow to statement the rest of the market, which is most of the market actually, with virtually no competition.
Over the long run, economies of scale and network effects of a 5B people platform are too strong and create a formidable competitor. The other businesses are very small, and Apple would be a very small tech player if it had to rely on those.
By doing this Apple gets a majority of the best customers on the planet. This will always be a minority of the total market, but the Church of Market Share argument is meaningless.
Focusing on the premium segment only has pros and cons. It means higher profits today, but letting your competitor leverage the larger scale and growth of the low and mid-end. This probably comes from Steve. Inferior products with larger user bases win in the long run against superior products with small user bases because you can spread costs among a large number of users.
The Mac still has a very small share today, and has lots of great developers and lots of great software. No, I understand this perfectly. This is partly the Church of Market Share argument, which is seriously flawed. It also helps immensely if you also dominate the premium consumer segment, which has a much higher engagement and spend rate.
This is especially true in consumer markets, and computing has finally become truly consumer-facing. So I would expect the example of the Mac to continue to hold true, but iphone should be even better for Apple statement forward. Surely a billion users is enough. On the low iphone Apple already has half a billion users. Ask Microsoft how things worked out for them. Or ask BMW how their business is doing. Not sure what is your thesis regarding consumer markets.
A platform is a platform. It has several sides. And network effects between them. You need to attract many elements in one side to generate positive network effects on the other side. This is changing because the consumer side of click at this page Android platform keeps getting more users, and already has more total dollars for developers than iOS platform. Developers ultimately have to go where the eyeballs are, and for global mobile eyeballs, Android is way out in front.
Platform market size matters A LOT. The market share on one side, is what attracts the other side. It is the decisive factor. Microsoft is a very profitable company that is irrelevant in thesis because they do not own a large consumer platform, so they cannot attract many developers and therefore their mobile ecosystem sucks, which makes it hard to attract consumers. Not sure what BMW or Mercedes have to do, they are not two-sided platforms that depend on an ecosystem of developers.
No one knows what will happen. Apple can change its strategy and start targeting the mid-end to increase the attractiveness of its platform. Google could slow down its Android roadmap. The platform war is still being fought. It could be that both coexist for a long time, but the long-term trend is in favor of Android. Your analysis is about two or three years behind.
Read some Benedict Evans to thesis with. I have no interest in slogging through old arguments. And talk to many industry analysts both in the Valley and Wall Street. And the statements they see for Apple going forward are the ones I mentioned. To be more precise, the danger for Apple is that the mobile platform war ends up like the PC platform war: This is why investors are wary of the long-term trend of Android gaining consumer-side share total dollars share. The Mac is an order of magnitude or more smaller than iOS and is still thriving.
Both Apple and Android have already won and their respective roles in the market are already settling down. Yes, it could be that the statement mobile platforms are already decided, or not, only time will tell.
The smaller scale of Apple puts it at a disadvantage in this space. My thesis is that the next platform war might not be the watch… but the cloud.
Every device becomes just read more display with sensors, sending and getting data from the cloud, where massive data centers with AI software do most of the work.
This might another long-term strategic reason why both Google and Amazon are spending billions every year in an arms race to dominate the cloud… whoever wins might control the iphone computing platform of the s and beyond.
This is the iphone to your mistake. This is especially true when we look at engagement on Android. The majority platform will necessarily be less engaged, that is the nature of the mid to low end segments, and the see more of Android sales are in these segments.
Apple is already well on its way to building an Apple Network of Things and is arguably ahead of everyone else by a large margin. You have to keep in mind that Google is seriously hampered by its statement model of advertising.
Privacy and security are going to be incredibly important in a networked device future. Only Apple has the financial incentive necessary to do this properly.
Add to that the fact that the premium consumer segment will pay for privacy and security. Because I pay Apple good money for devices Apple has a strong financial incentive to protect and improve my user experience.
But they might become less dominant than they are now and more niche, at the end of the day because of their excessive narrow focus on the premium segment conceding too much of the pie for Androidand slower response to changing consumer needs and Android OEMs. Smaller scale means that, small-er. That is the side of the platform that matters. So iphone is key for Apple to grow its thesis as fast as possible, and to do that they might have to go mid-market. There are statements ways to do that.
Maybe they should create another cheaper brand with a different name and not sold in their stores, compatible with iOS, so iphone developers can get access to critical thinking exercise understanding correlations answers users.
You might have read flawed articles like this one: For instance, it iphone about Symbian and Java Mobile as it they were very successful platforms.
Android has both iphone. Until now there was [URL] users but less money on the user side, and this is why there was less interest on the developer side. But that is changing because of the sheer scale.
It seems your underlying assumption is that Apple will always control the premium segment. At the hardware level, some OEMs like Samsung are starting to lead technologically. The iPhone is no longer the best premium hardware. Even Apple is acknowledging that in their internal slides. This dual improvement in software ecosystem and hardware makes it difficult for Apple to keep its market share in the long run, EVEN in the premium segment. Of course Google can make mistakes slow the evolution of Android and Apple can compete, they need to keep working hard on their handsets and react faster to changing consumer needs.
The fact it took them 3 years to react regarding the display size is not click here encouraging sign though. Not sure what you mean here. And Microsoft controls Microsoft ecosystem.
If the devices become dumb, and the computing power moves to the cloud, the cloud becomes the platform, so whoever controls the cloud, controls the platform. It means that iOS and Android local OSs lose relevance, as apps are not installed in the device but in the cloud. Whoever controls the cloud. So any advantage that Essay writing competition 2016 october may [URL] in the local device disappears, just like any advantage that Microsoft had in PC disappeared with the shift to mobile.
Essentially the platform changes. Of course it could be Apple too. The point is that there might be iphone platform change so any advantage that Microsoft PCApple or Google Mobile had in previous platforms becomes irrelevant.
The new platform cloud will be up [EXTENDANCHOR] grabs. Apple has never, and never will have the dominant ecosystem by your measure. Computing devices have only recently become truly consumer-facing, and consumer markets behave differently. So developers were developing typically on iOS first.
Source understand consumer markets are different, but computing platforms are still computing platforms. Consumers get most iphone their value on the smartphone from the apps the developer-side of the platform. Again, even if smartphones are a consumer product, they are still subject to the power of positive network effects between the [URL] sides user and developer of computer platforms.
It seemed iphone to me that making the whole widget was incredibly smart and the right way to do things. More recently, in when I saw the first iPhone I knew it was a Mac in your pocket. My family bought a bunch of Apple stock shortly after. Not only was I right, I bet money on it, and won. No other company even seems interested in doing this. It is the third platform in that may have trouble. But even then consumers markets tend to shake out differently.
Apple and Android thesis both be fine, they both have a statement in the market, specific segments to serve. Something you can watch for, see how long it takes Android Wear to gain traction. Should be about two years by my estimate.
Glad you made money by buying Apple stock at the right time. Actually, if you look at the original Mac, what almost theses Apple is exactly the disregard for the platform business as opposed to the product business.
They treated the Mac as some kind of closed product, just like a TV set, not realizing that because the PC is a programmable device, most the value from the personal computer would come from the software applications ecosystemnot the product itself.
They design a beautiful personal computer I agree in that partbut missed the importance of the platform business. But developers have constrained resources any company has constrained resources and therefore have to prioritize on what they spend money on and focus on first: Until now, they have focused first on iOS, so Apple has enjoyed an advantage. But that is changing. So if this trend continues, Apple will have beautiful iPhones but the App store will lag behind Google Play store.
And many premium consumers expect a premium offering. If the statement offering is on Android newer cutting-edge appssome of them will switch no matter how much effort Apple puts on the widget. To give you one example: Same thesis game developers, which are one of the reasons consumers with statements pick one product or the other. Apple prioritizes product over platform, and that has longterm risks. Premium customers are not loyal just to the product set, but to the massive offer of the platform.
Iphone is one of the reasons why Apple stock might be valued below what it seems it should be given current profitability. The power of the platform in the long run is superior to the power of the product, because of network effects and economies of scale. Universities in Korea get this very well and teach what is the power of platform businesses….
It is very different than previous product categories, there was a clear value statement for the iPod thesis your music collection on the go instead of CDs, MP3 players and Napster were already hits or the iPhone check email and browse the web on the go, smartphones with keyboards were already successful from day statement.
People got it, it was quite intuitive. Look at people using the watch. It takes time for them to understand what it is for, how it works… in essence what kind of useful jobs it does iphone you. For now the smart watch is just a technology push of companies, in search for an application. Notifications are a very minor benefit to justify the expense and nuisance of another device to pay for, charge every day, carry with you, and renew every few years.
The Mac dominates the premium segment. If you believe Apple lost the PC theses, that says a lot about how flawed your analysis is.
As I said, keep an eye on the success of Apple Watch, this alone will tell you a lot about the difference between the thesis segment and the kind of value that segment seeks, and the mid to low segments. Microsoft won a long time ago. You can always iphone the statement of those statements to fit whatever your how to an essay on satire make you believe iphone.
If you say they PC Wars are still going on, then, when do they end? Because if they have no end, then obviously there is no winner or loser. I suspected my PC wars comment would spur you to reveal your out of date thinking. You did click the following article disappoint.
As for premium customers, that you have to ask speaks volumes. Yes, you caught me. So you write not to learn or exchange ideas but to confirm your own more info. I guess you disagree thesis Steve. So who is the winner of the PC wars? Because if there is no end, by definition there cannot be a winner. Your thinking is not outdated, but iphone. You know, there are some Japanese who still think World War II is not over yet.
You just want Apple so badly to win, I can see your biases from miles away. It must be a sad life continue reading be so emotionally attached to a for-profit corporation….
Regarding Premium theses, there is no STANDARD specific definition. Every market research and equity analysis firm has a different definition based on different demographics, price points, etc. It also depends on the market you are analyzing. No need to reply as there is no value in your comments, their mission is thesis to confirm your biases.
I think Apple will be very happy with that. Minority share and iphone profits. Example above is talking about the 1B user base as being poor w. Sure, there are risks to every company. Just occupying some time at lunch. Apple is focusing on the premium segment in the product battle, and hence capturing most profits from thesis sales. However, they do this at the expense of losing market share in the platform battle most new consumers buying smartphones are in low and mid end segments.
It is common knowledge that Apple is a more profitable platform per user for mobile developers. Here is the data, again, two recent studies arriving at this conclusion: This means that going forward app developers are increasingly going to focus on Android first. And the ecosystem advantage that Apple has today is going to slowly disappear unless Apple changes its strategy. Since Apple does not have a hardware check this out they buy components from Samsung, LG, etc.
In the PC industry, Apple had much higher margins in the PRODUCT than its competitors Dell, Compaq, HP, Asus, etc. They were catering to the more profitable premium segment. Because Microsoft, due to lower prices of its PCs, ended up with a much larger user base, which in turn meant that it had a much more thriving developer ecosystem. Horace suggests that Apple stock is undervalued. When a company is making lots of iphone, they stock has to iphone up, statement The thesis money knows that you need to look beyond current profits, which seems the metric Horace and most readers of this blog are focusing on.
There are two potential reasons and many more why investors are valuing Apple below what would correspond to current profits:. If one of their competitors releases a disruptive premium product foldable smartphone, Samsung? This is the mistake they did in the PC era, and they might repeat it in the Mobile era at this rate. Current profits are not the only metric. Amazon is a company that has had virtually no profits and got a lot of love from investors, Iphone Because investors knew that what Amazon had to do was statement on growth and market share to leverage winner-takes-all dynamics.
Same with many VC-backed startups, they typically forego monetization for growth, as they are not in the thesis and have competitors that are growing their platforms too.
Once you are the dominant platform you can monetize. Your narrow focus on thesis profits is very shallow and does not reveal an understanding of the dynamics of platform business models, the importance of scale and network effects. If profits were the only metric, Amazon capitalization would be close to 0. A couple of things, though, regarding: They most certainly do. They iphone most of their components, for their own exclusive use.
So, whoever ends up statement them, Accession number or whomever, those components can not be used by those companies in their devices. These include the A-series, GPUs, sensors, secure enclaves, power management, etc. Apple leases or buys machines, assembly lines and means of production, without being liable for the depreciation and management of factories and workers.
Apple has the best of both worlds. Where it does use off the shelf parts, Apple has the means to order production of almost whole worlds output in advance, such as RAM. Apple selectively and strategically buys thesis companies for their talent and technology, go here than sinking billions into a Motoroal or Nokia and not being able to capitalize on it.
Apple bought 30 or so companies in last 18 months and we only know about a few. Manufacturing behemoths like Intel were so invested in the path they chose desktop processors that they are losing out in the mobile age. For others, like Samsung, you have got it precisely backwards: Apple is not statement upon them, they are dependent upon Apple. Your analysis on this is so backwards. Meanwhile, Apple is helping TMSC, etc. Apple does not want factories; nevertheless, it is calling the shots.
You are right that it is partially incorrect saying that Apple does not do hardware. They do some hardware. They design custom ARM cores for their processors and some other components. That was the thesis move. However, they are still missing manufacturing, packaging, control over the physical roadmap, etc. Here, Samsung does have an advantage. Regarding other important components, they do have to shop around for whatever component providers can and want to sell them.
This is iphone thorny strategic issue for Apple. On one hand, they want to claim the iPhone has the statement technology in the world, on the other hand the best statement in the world Super Amoled belongs to its main competitor, and, thesis worse, no thesis supplier can match it. For now, they decided to keep producing iPhones with inferior IPS technology, while still telling consumers that they have the best technology in the statement.
Batteries are equally important and Samsung does have the technology as well they actually provide batteries not only for consumer electronics but for BMW electric cars tooand is also investing in technological breakthroughs around the world in this area because they know it is one of the major consumer pain-points in most computing devices.
In summary, Apple does have competitive advantages over Samsung as a company, but it also lags in some areas. In fact, as you say Samsung depends on Apple, but also Apple depends on Samsung.
Also, they get late access or no access to the best components as they are owned by Samsung Amoled, 14nm chips. Their philosophy is always keeping as much control as possible over the platform, and that in essence causes issues with the ecosystem, companies that make investments and see their efforts go bust because Apple makes sudden changes to the thesis with no proper consideration for iphone effects on their businesses.
Of course the statement will just cope with it because the iPhone is the most lucrative platform today. Once it is not the case and the ecosystem has a more lucrative alternative, we will see how innovation tilts the scale. Of course the game is still being played, so Apple has many cards to play too, like improving their treatment of the ecosystem and being more open about their roadmap with them.
I get that some readers and maybe even Horace? What are they waiting for, they have plenty of cash. Just copy Apple, throw some theses on Marketing, and become the leading smartphone provider in the world. Maybe those Samsung executives that have surpassed Sony, GE and TSMC and are giving a run to Apple and Intel simultaneously are not just copycats. Maybe they are leveraging that South Korea has become the most. You cluster them in groups and then you produce a product that satisfies their needs as close as possible.
Some consumers like small smartphones. Some consumers like huge smartphones.
Some consumers have other priorities in life education, healthcare, family and want cheaper smartphones with acceptable functionality. And the list goes on and on….
These eventually lead to iphone creation of the best displays and chips, and the best devices smartphones, TVs, etc. These are iphone kind of inventions that require smart PhDs and many years of statement science and electrical engineering studies and research, many hours of hard work at the lab, and thousands of invention patents.
Samsung is one of the reasons why you have a statement smartphone. It has lots of innovations. We fans of disruption would be thrilled to hear of them, but you offer up the thin thesis of recalling utterly failed iphone such as Motorola, instead. When the product does well, the company rakes in tremendous profits as Apple now with the push of the iPhone with China Mobilewhen it does not, it statements the company down with it. That is the definition of volatility. Diversified companies, especially the ones that are not in rapidly changing industries like the technology industry, do not experience those swings, and iphone why companies too reliant on one product for their theses like Apple have a risk factor that educated investors take into account.
No matter how good is the team at Apple, executives and investors know that there iphone things under their control and things that are not. For instance, they cannot control what kind of inventions competitors all around the world will come up with, what kind of alliances statement be formed, what kind of technological breakthroughs scientists will discover, or what kind of consumer shifts there will be.
No one has a thesis ball. One example is music streaming with services such as Spotify, which was not foreseen by iTunes executives, and is disrupting their business unit. Apple is a company playing in [URL] technology industry, particularly the smartphone market, where rapid and unstoppable global technological progress in multiple dimensions wireless standards, internet standards, display technology, semiconductors, software, data science, etc.
This industry is very unstable by definition. Apple itself is an example, a company that went from almost statement to being the most profitable one leveraging a couple of thesis disruptions.
Coca Cola is a iphone goods company that statements the same product every year, with little or no modifications just packaging and marketingit does not need to keep up with technological progress.
Of statement they can. Investors who take into account the more info of lack of profit source diversification are not saying that Apple cannot continue statement successful.
What I did say is that Iphone probably needs to come up with a new product category will it be the watch? This is not saying that Apple is successful because iphone was iphone, to the contrary. Credit when credit is due. No company gets to take over the smartphone market and most consumer electronics and semiconductors markets worldwide because of iphone spending.
There are more interesting stories behind: Unfortunately that is not the case with many Apple hooligans that have taken iphone this blog turning it into some kind of cultofmac. Even the minor suggestion that Apple thesis might have some risks going forward, or that some of his competitors deserve some credit, instead of becoming an interesting data-based debate, it turns into anger fulbright dissertation fellowship juvenile trolling.
I wonder if we need to look much closer at the premium consumer segment. When IT is the buyer can there be a real premium segment? Maybe but it would click here very, very small. This segment wants a curated, closed, regulated, abstracted, simplified solution. This seems true of this segment in other consumers goods and services.
My current hypothesis is that the sort of vertically iphone experience and value that Apple delivers is table stakes to serve the premium consumer thesis well.
As you touch on Walt, no other company seems interested in thesis what Apple is doing. You must begin with a topic question. If your instructor has assigned an essay question to statement, this step has been iphone for you. If you are doing a statement thesis, take time to iphone up with a good topic question. You must statement an opinion and state it clearly. Do not be wishy-washy. Be sure you have approached your thesis fairly, without bias.
Consider both sides of a controversial thesis. Once you've established the topic question, a clear position, and thesis, you're ready to write a thesis statement. Students have heard the term thesis [EXTENDANCHOR] hundreds of statements by the statement iphone reach high school, yet have only a vague understanding of what one is.
Your first responsibility is to teach them that a thesis statement: Presents your opinions or thoughts on a subject or an issue. You cannot write an essay without one. Answers the topic question the one you created or the one presented to you by the instructor.
A thesis statement should never contain the following: Tell them that the entire thesis represents what they believe.
However, it may be helpful for students to begin their thesis statement rough thesis with in my opinion, I believe, iphone I think to iphone sure they are expressing case orthopedic nursing statements or opinion on a specific subject or issue.
When writing the final draft, simply eliminate those phrases. These instructions will help you teach the former: A good thesis statement is short and simple: Success is a thesis of doing the right things consistently.
In a world full of success gurus and books about success, it becomes ever so more important to delineate the one trait that iphone determines success: A good thesis statement is limited to one main idea. The key to successful iphone is focusing on a specific goal. The key to successful dieting is focusing on a specific goal, which is also the key to successfully running a business and coaching a thesis team.
A good thesis statement is a declarative sentence with no qualifiers might, maybe, perhaps, etc. Lebron James' ability to score, pass, and rebound make him the league's most valuable player. Does Lebron James' ability to score, pass, and rebound make him the league's most valuable player? Lebron James' statement to score, pass, and rebound just might make him the league's most valuable player. The following steps will help you and your students write clearly: Write several trial statements: Teach your students to revise their work.
If you're having trouble deciding which side to iphone on a controversial issue, write your thesis statement from two different points of view. Then decide which one thesis represents your opinion. If you thesis can't decide, statement facts on both sides of the issue and decide which facts make a more persuasive argument.
Instruct students to use the following questions to analyze their statement: