Analyst: ‘Apple has Samsung on the ropes like never before’

“Apple’s biggest competitor is reeling,” Jonny Evans writes for Computerworld. “Not only has its heir apparent been arrested, but it has had to slow down its release schedule to avoid any more negative PR, following an explosive problem in 2016. Not only that, but public perception of the brand is at a new low even as Apple beats Samsung’s market share.”

“Loss of consumer loyalty will likely mean that many Samsung users will at least be curious about whatever iPhone announcements Cupertino may have to make this year. This includes any news that may emerge next month,” Evans writes. “iPhone 8 will prompt one of the biggest Android-to-iOS switches we’ve seen as consumers fall out of love with big brand Samsung.”

Evans writes, “I’m not the only one to see it this way — Drexel Hamilton analyst Brian White observes: ‘Apple has Samsung on the ropes like never before in recent memory.'”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: The main reason why Samsung is “Apple’s biggest competitor” and, in fact, is able to sell phones and tablets at all was because they made fake iPhones and fake iPads designed to fool the unwitting (who are now finally waking up in droves, by the way) in much the same way that Microsoft et al. profited wildly from upside-down and backwards fake Macs at the end of the 20th century. Google, Samsung, HTC, Xiaomi, et al. are the Microsofts, HPs, Dells, and eMachines of the new century.

Apple’s products came first, then Samsung’s:

Samsung Galaxy and Galaxy Tab Trade Dress Infringement

Here’s what Google’s Android looked like before and after Apple’s iPhone:

Google Android before and after Apple iPhone

And, here’s what cellphones looked like before and after Apple’s iPhone:

cellphones before and after Apple iPhone

People who buy Android phones and tablets reward thieves.

SEE ALSO:
Apple took 92% of smartphone industry’s profits in Q416 – February 7, 2017
IDC: Apple iPad’s hold on the tablet market remains unchallenged – February 2, 2017

14 Comments

      1. There is a vast difference from doing your own research and development and understanding why Widget 1 was used instead of Widgets 2 thru 6.

        Just copying Widget 1 leaves you in the position of not understanding the subtleties of why, where & then how & when do you change when conditions or technology advances.

        Copying in ultra complex devices is very risky. Trust me on one thing. The engineers know.

  1. While it’s leadership are criminals, doesn’t help matters. The Korean government is waking up and looks like hey are cleaning house.

    Think about this. Samsung imploding does not fix Aplles problems, but it does allow other companies to start making profits.

  2. Why was Samsung ever associated with ‘quality’ in the first place? Some people suffer from ignorance and bad taste, leading them to be easy marks for parasites like Samsung.

    Actually innovative competitors with Apple are always welcome!

    1. Q: What is the effect on a company when they have no competition?

      A: Malaise, laziness, lack of focus, lack of innovation, drop in respect for their customers.

      … Just like we’re witnessing now at Apple. There are many great people who don’t need incentives to create new and wonderful things in the world. But the vast majority of people are NOT that way and require some sort of incentive to inspire them to do more than mediocre. That’s what business competition is for. Everyone wins, especially the customers.

      1. Isn’t that the purpose of R&D. I would think it’s difficult for a company such as Apple to be spending billions on R&D and various R&D centers around the globe to not be able to come up with something that would give customers something to be happy about. I realize money spent on R&D doesn’t always turn into a perfect product but there has to be some formula for turning R&D into good products.

        I just hope Apple doesn’t use everything it develops to put it into the iPhone alone. How hard can it be to make a decent, powerful desktop computer?

        1. Uh oh. Here comes an Eastman Kodak story:

          While I was at Kodak, Marketing was running the company. R&D did indeed come up with a lot of wonderful innovations. But due to the nature of Marketing-As-Management, most of those innovations were squashed, diminished or buried by Marketing-As-Management. Instead, several ‘marketing-approved’ fumbles and bumbles came out on the market, all designed to take advantage of Kodak’s film and paper products, minimizing innovative digital technology.

          Keep in mind that Kodak literally invented the first digital still camera.

          I can go on and on in glorious, horrifying detail. But I’ve provided an idea of the problem.

          IOW: If marketing has the ability to intrude upon creativity, invention and innovation, they will wreck it with aplomb and ferocity. I’ve watched it happen first hand. The core cause of this dysfunction is the single worst clash within the human personality scale, the ‘Producers’ versus the ‘Relators’. If anyone wants references, I shall provide.

          1. Indeed. It was Jobs’ true strength in being a product developer AND CEO that led to the success of Apple. He wasn’t a technologist, but a really good Product Manager.

            Oh, and the worlds best snake oil salesman. Remember the RDF!

            1. Well, Pogue was a highly trained and experienced technologist with limitations. He was no Woz. But Jobs had remarkable insight into technology such that he knew what was here, what was possible and what we would want in the future. I’d call that a talent he developed to the level of genius.

              Meanwhile, I believe he had some natural talent for management, but initially had limited people perception and interpersonal skills. He spent many years learning how to interact with the relational personalities such that he could talk their talk while maintaining his skills as a producer personality. The result was what is considered the great in between of effective management. I could blether on with diagrams and comparisons to Jungian personalities, but I’ll spare the world and stop there.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.