Posted on 09/05/2016 5:39:45 PM PDT by Shanghai Dan
A picture truly is worth a thousand words:
I remember having something like that only smaller to take a Polaroid photo of a small o-scope screen.
Google wants as much information about you as possible. If you could see your personal dossier at Google, it would blow your mind. They'll make way more than $5 off of your personal information.
At this point, what difference does it make?
Are you listening, Microshaft?
*cough* *cough* Windows* cough*cough* *Ten* *cough*
I have had Windows Phone for 2 years now, and having used iOS, Android, and Windows phone, in my opinion, I prefer WP, followed closely by iOS, then Android. The only thing wrong with WP now is the lack of support, and the fact that I expect MS to soon pull the plug any day now. iOS, just WORKS, and smoothly. Android? A linux kludge built to emulate iOS, however on newer hardware it does work very, very well. I dont hate on it at all.
But then I am not a fan boi, just enjoy using tech of all shapes and sizes.
Here is a graphic that shows the major players without even starting to look at the innumerable white box makers in China, as well as the Android forks:
Because it's a meaningless statistic.
Selling 10 units at 10,000% profit would make it the world leader in profitability.
So what?
Even if ten units is an absurdly inconsequential number.
It will mean a lot. Samsung itself says they are going to recall 2.5 million phones. Many of those are already in the hands of people who have already disposed of their previous phones and will either have to replace their current Note7 with something safer, or be given a loaner until Samsung replaces their 7 with another one, guaranteed not to ignite, or Samsung is going to have to swap it out for another model. In the meantime, their Galaxy Note 7 will not be available for sale. However you look at it, it is not good optics for their products.
I love the customization of Android and the variety/prices of the phones that run it. I can upgrade every 6 months if I want, and it will cost me almost nothing.
As for iphones, it’s niche. Most of the people I know who own one are shallowbama and in debt up to their iBalls.
Why am I the only guy in town with a Samsung Note?
Everybody I know and their Children and their Childrens Children (yep I’m that old) Have an I-Phone
They still make fun of me ... such is life
Oh, bull excrement. You continually make claims you cannot backup with facts. You pull these facturds out of your behind with not a whit of evidence and post them as if they were handed down on high. Apple is on top of both vulnerabilities and exploits and publishes them when found. I KNOW, because I've been posting them over the past ten or so years on FR, usually much to the glee of the Anti-Apple Hate Brigade members. But it usually after Apple has found them, patched them, and published them. In that order.
The number of actual exploits for iOS is very small, countable on the fingers of two hands, while the number of exploits for Android number in the millions. That is a fact. So your claim that there is somehow an equivalence between Android and iOS in security is specious. Even your linked article equivocates by using a so-called security expert who obfuscates the issue by trying to raise the old Security-by-obscurity canard that has been shot down repeatedly, and decisively, for the last thirty years, when he says (actually talking about OS X, not iOS):
"Apple devices have experienced a surge in popularity in recent years. This increase in usage has not gone unnoticed by attackers."
Further, the list of "smartphone hacks" in your linked article, disingenuously lists an OS X supposed malware from The Hacking Team (it wasn't, it was a variation of an already existing and recognized Trojan)! More importantly, except for the two Apple entries, one of which is for a NON-SMARTPHONE, and other is a real stretch for an iOS "hack", the rest are all actual and serious ANDROID EXPLOITS in the wild:
More about smartphone hacks
- Stagefright bug now hits audio files on Android devices
- Stagefright: Android bug gives hackers control of your smartphone by sending a message
- ATMZombie: Malware laid the trap letting criminals steal cash from Israeli ATMs (Android)
- OS X malware: HackingTeam may have released a malicious code putting Apple's Mac devices at risk (Turned out to be a TROJAN that OS X already recognized, blocked, and warned the user about!)
- Apple iOS not as secure as you think – App Store tricked into allowing users to install pirate apps (Chinese THIRD PARTY app stores, not US Apple App stores. ONE malicious app got through Apple's vetting by using a stolen Apple certificate, but was removed within two days!)
- Google Android: GMBot source code leaked to the dark web - now anyone can become a malware kingpin
- Google Android: Xbot malware contains cocktail of data theft and ransomware
- Google Android: Smartphones hit with Mazar Bot malware that can 'erase everything'
So your evidence does not at all support your claim.
Further, Dan, 94% of the users of Apple's iOS are all running the latest iOS 9, and Apple can easily send out security patches to all of those iOS devices to correct any discovered vulnerabilities before they become exploitable malware in the wild and does exactly that.
On the other hand, on Android, Google decided long ago to allow the users or various manufacturers or carriers to be responsible for updating the versions and security of the operating systems out in the wild. . . which has resulted in a cacophony of Android operating system versions still running in the wild, some of which cannot even be updated and many which will not be updated and many others that for which the security updates are just plain not available. . . leaving many hundreds of millions of Android devices vulnerable to severe malware afflictions and hacker attacks that ARE in the wild, some of which can infect a device merely by innocently looking at a photograph with an older, un-patched device. That is simply NOT the case with any up-to-date Apple device.
Apple is there when the customer need support. Where are all those no-name Android makers when their phones go belly-up? Who supports them? Not Google.
If Apple products were over priced they couldn't sell them, they and any other business are not in business to benefit the consumer rather they are in business to fleece the consumer, the more attractive the product the more they can fleece.
Oh I forgot: Apple is Doomed once a year for over 30 years.
Apparently just Apple.
Android = new Windows
Google = new Microsoft
Because they make the real money on mining your information and selling it.
Uh, no, they don't:
(Apple) App Store revenue was almost double that of Google Play in Q1 2016
Seeing as how Google has to pay the developers, the money has to go to the developers who sell the apps.
Google's business model isn't Kodak's. Kodak sold the camera's they made inexpensively directly to consumers. They didn't give them away. They also charged license fees to other camera manufacturers for the rights to use the Kodak patents. The idea was to get the consumers locked into your camera tech so they had to buy your film. The Kodak model was adopted by the inkjet and laser printers makers.
Google doesn't do that. Google's business model is more of the free magazine content tabloid model. Provide content to local publishers in exchange for a cut of the advertising, except they're taking ALL of the advertising. . . PLUS they're providing the printing presses AND the paper (which in this instance are interactive and report back how they are being used and also have the added benefit of reporting on the reading habits of the buyers of the printed page to allow targeting of the ads).
Let's see.
The Samsung Galaxy Note 7, 5.7" unlocked 64GB, an Android flagship smartphone, was selling for $969 retail list on Amazon at introduction before it was pulled because of exploding phone batteries.
The Apple iPhone 6S Plus, 5.5" unlocked 64GB, an iOS flagship smartphone, was selling for $749 retail list on Amazon.
There are a lot of people who were wiling to give Samsung even MORE money for an Android phone than people give Apple for their top-of-the-line iPhone. That makes your argument a bit specious.
2. You don’t think that 4+ years of 80% or more of sales doesn’t mean about 80% of the total smartphone market (because, apparently, people keep their phones for longer than 4 years)
As I've outlined for you before, even Samsung has admitted in court with sworn testimony that their product mix is NOT ALL SMARTPHONES. While they were all Android phones, in 2013, their product mix was approximately 30% smartphones, 40% Feature phones, and an additional 30% basic phones. In 2014, Samsung told their investors at their annual meeting that they REDUCED the smartphone component of their product mix to only 19% due to wanting to concentrate on the third world by increasing the Basic and Feature phone components. This concentration continued through 2015 and resulted in a successful expansion in those third world countries. Samsung did NOT do so well with this policy in China.
The fact is that a large percentage of Android so-called smartphones are NOT smartphones at all, but are instead either Feature Phones or just plain basic, dumb phones, but are COUNTED by Gartner and IDC as smartphones. Most of the white box Android phones are in this category as the white box makers don't even bother to compete in the higher end smartphone market at all, because that is locked up by the six to ten Android market leaders. They only compete in the lowest end feature phone and basic phone markets where they can eke out a living.
Apple ONLY makes smartphones and only competes in the high end, not in the middle and not ever in the low end.
I've told you this before, but you keep making excuses. Samsung lists specific models in their OWN catalog as "Feature Phones" but YOU want to categorize them as fully functional "Smartphones," contrary to Samsung and industry definitions. Just because a phone runs an Android operating system does not mean it is a smartphone. Got it!
You don't got it. You don't get it. This story is NOT about Android defeating Apple in the "Smartphone Wars." It's about both Apple iOS and Google Android destroying all other competitors with the demise of Blackberry's OS and Microsoft Windows Phone.
The BIG difference is that Microsoft Windows Phone just suddenly dropped out of the market, distorting the previous statistics to make the market share percentages different. The chart is now no longer including a player who once had 3% of the market. Microsoft just stopped selling phones. That percentage was suddenly added to the Android and iOS segments. Apple did not lose the customers it had, but those buyers who normally would have been buying Windows phones were split between Apple and Android. . .
Uh, Tucker, it's worked that way on iPhones from the very first iPhone. . . even on FreeRepublic's pages. How come you didn't try it on the iPhone you had? Android copied that from the iPhone. You can see Steve Jobs demonstrate that feature on the original iPhone in the original KeyNote presentation from January 2007, long before the first touch screen Android phone was ever made. Alternately, you can just double tap a column of print and it will expand to fit the screen.
No, it is not "a meaningless statistic," publius.
Not if what you learn is that all of the other manufacturers are essentially chasing each other in a ridiculous race to the bottom by competing only on price, and selling their products at a loss to do it. When the largest makers of Android cellular phones are all but one posting losses, year after year, and in the entire industry, only Samsung and Apple are making a profit, but Apple is taking home 94% of the profits, while Samsung is claiming 11%, totaling 105% of the entire industry's profits, an industry comprising over 600 companies, then the rest HAVE to be losing money, pushing products out the door for less than it takes them to make them!
It cannot possibly be meaningless. . . especially when you realize that the company that is earning 94% of the industry's profits has only 16% of the industry's market share. It tells you that the rest of them who have little to differentiate them, all those who because of that are competing on price only, are competing on exactly the WRONG THING.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.