Samsung thinks the high-end market is saturated?

[s44]

Sammobile

This seems in accord with Google's thinking in Project Svelte and all the S4s I see in the subway... anyone who wants a high-end phone probably has one now, and the big growth from here on out is going to come at price points below even Nexus levels.

You can also see it in the functionally unambitious iOS and Android updates recently. There's just not much to add to the current smartphone setup.

 

[theeedude]

I am not sure I'd buy a Samsung mid-range phone. They have a vested interest in making it mediocre, because if it's good, it will cannibalize the high margin Galaxy S sales, which would hit Samsung's profits. For mid-range, I would go with something like a Nexus in the US or a Xiaomi in China, where you get high end specs with mid-range prices.

 

[gmaster456]

I'd rather get a last gen flagship over a current mid range.

 

[Zodiark1593]

I'd rather get a last gen flagship over a current mid range.

I'm rolling the last last gen and it seems to work fine for internet stuff and video. Dual Cortex A9 @ 1.5 GHz still got some life in them.

 

[Apex]

I'd rather get a last gen flagship over a current mid range.

So last gen $600+ device vs this gen, say, $349 device?

 

[Zodiark1593]

So last gen $600+ device vs this gen, say, $349 device?

I believe my mom got her Note 2 for ~ $400.

 

[shortylickens]

it kind of is. Each brand now starts with a super flagship phone and then waits to do the midrange.

But in my case I can wait. Note 2 is still damn good. I can go another year and then get the next high end device.

 

[lothar]

So last gen $600+ device vs this gen, say, $349 device?

I haven't kept up to date on the performance charts much, but doesn't a Galaxy S III outperform a Galaxy S4 Mini? The same for a Galaxy S II vs Galaxy S3 Mini?
Also, Galaxy S4 Mini is more like almost $400...And so is last years Galaxy S III flagship. Both brand new pricing.

 

[styrafoam]

Probably more of a factor overseas where carrier subsidies don't come into play. Until all the carriers give people a non subsidy rate plan like Tmobile there isn't really much motivation to pick a low end phone in the US. Someone in Europe would have a genuine decision when faced with $350 vs. $700. Here we are with the S4 about 6 months old and its in the $100 ballpark with your upgrade on Amazon.

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=sr_nr_p_...nid=2420627011

 

[StrangerGuy]

So last gen $600+ device vs this gen, say, $349 device?

For me, a new S3 LTE with the crappy pentile screen or the 32GB N5 for $100 more. Not even a contest.

 

[s44]

Not midrange either. Think below that, where it's not called "Galaxy S" anything.

 

[OBLAMA2009]

maybe a better strategy would be to get off the carrier subsidized model so the can sell more phones by selling them more often....

 

[jacktesterson]

I haven't kept up to date on the performance charts much, but doesn't a Galaxy S III outperform a Galaxy S4 Mini? The same for a Galaxy S II vs Galaxy S3 Mini?
Also, Galaxy S4 Mini is more like almost $400...And so is last years Galaxy S III flagship. Both brand new pricing.

The S4 Mini should be a little faster than the S3, even if both were 720p screens.

I know the Mega benches extremely well for a dual core, often beating a Note II Quad. It uses the same CPU/GPU.

 

[Graze]

I'm rolling the last last gen and it seems to work fine for internet stuff and video. Dual Cortex A9 @ 1.5 GHz still got some life in them.

Wow. That's old. I was thinking last gen would be the S4 pro in my Nexus 4.

 

[vi edit]

Not sure saturated is the right word. More like stagnated. There's only so much more that phone companies can do right now hardware wise. They've got CPU power out the whazoo. Screen size & tech has grown and matured quite a bit. THere's not much to gain with more resolution/pixel density and really be worth it. Screen sizes have sort of settled into that 4.5-5.5" range without much room to go bigger. Cameras are probably largely at a tipping point of size vs ability. They can't get much more out of them without really changing the physical size of the devices. And right now many of them are so thin/light that it would be going backwards to make them thicker/heavier.

There's not much more that they can throw into the device and really make it stand out. It's going to come down to ecosystems and integration with other products/devices that keep people tied to the brand.

 

[poofyhairguy]

I think Samsung's problem is competition. Last year they DOMINATED the high-end of the Android market with the S3, but this year they have to compete with the HTC One and LG's offerings. It leads to growth predictions that are not sustainable.

I don't see how they think tablets are a way out. Samsung has had a tablet offering since 2010 and none have been compelling. Too much money, too little PPI, too old of SoC.

To really succeed in tablet Samsung needs to cut margins and get aggressive, but that won't give you S3 profits.

 

[PowerYoga]

Midrange international capable phone please.

 

[Red Storm]

I think Samsung's problem is competition. Last year they DOMINATED the high-end of the Android market with the S3, but this year they have to compete with the HTC One and LG's offerings. It leads to growth predictions that are not sustainable.

I don't see how they think tablets are a way out. Samsung has had a tablet offering since 2010 and none have been compelling. Too much money, too little PPI, too old of SoC.

To really succeed in tablet Samsung needs to cut margins and get aggressive, but that won't give you S3 profits.

Samsung is making headways into the tablet market though, the iPad marketshare continues to fall and Samsung is the one raking in the most users.

 

[Oyeve]

Whats funny is that they can come out NOW with the worlds best tablet or phone (the tech IS there) But doing so now would just kill the future. If any company releases the ultimate phone or tablet and people grab it up, what the hell are they going to come out with next year? we are already near the point that there wont be much to add to tech and it will all be the same shit regardless who you go with. Its all in the software now. Maybe battery too but the HW is rapidly approaching max and the industry is going to have to come up with killer software.

 

[vi edit]

Yep. Samsung is going to start feeling the pains of Apple here shortly. Apple hit that point with the 4, and then every release after that was kind of a "Meh" of reception even though there was a lot of little tweaks and updates under the hood. They can't make their phones much bigger, that ship has set sail. THere's not much you can do with more horsepower, there's only so much demanding stuff you can do on a small device. The screens are already very high resolution/pixel dense and look great. Can't improve a lot there. Can't make them much thinner because then they just get too hard to hold. They are at a stagnation point in hardware.

It's going to come down to things like longest battery life, ecosystem, and ways to keep you locked into that brands family.

 

[poofyhairguy]

I feel like tablets have a way to go compared to phones.

Samsung has been known to hack some big stuff onto Android (like Multiwindow). Why not go all out and hack Android in such ways until its a decent real multi-tasking OS and take a run at this emerging 2-in-1 or convertible Windows market and kill MS's plans before they get anywhere?

Google is obviously holding back Android some because for some stupid reason they want the less capable Chrome OS to be their desktop OS. Samsung can easily do what they want to do with it at this point. Force Google into making bigger changes while you have the marketshare to do so.

 

[magomago]

I feel like tablets have a way to go compared to phones.

Samsung has been known to hack some big stuff onto Android (like Multiwindow). Why not go all out and hack Android in such ways until its a decent real multi-tasking OS and take a run at this emerging 2-in-1 or convertible Windows market and kill MS's plans before they get anywhere?

Google is obviously holding back Android some because for some stupid reason they want the less capable Chrome OS to be their desktop OS. Samsung can easily do what they want to do with it at this point. Force Google into making bigger changes while you have the marketshare to do so.

I'm going to make a statement being completely in the dark to anything: But if google is smart, they'll figure out a way to Marge Android and Chrome together so you can be seamless and interchangeable. Its kind of what Microsoft has been trying to do for a few years now.

IMO I disagree that the HW is maxed; every year still provides good gains. There is also software, which is largely games (WHAT A SURPRISE JUST LIKE ON THE CONSUMER DESKTOP) that will continue to demand high end phone hardware.

But I agree that most of the software isn't bringing a phone to its knees. Of course, as software gets more complex and matures, we'll see those demands rise; I'm sure you can get lots to run on an old single core android, but games just can't be had. Its a question whether games will become the same hardware driver that it was on the PC; it'll probably be a mix of games and other "key" software apps that can drive the need for more PC power (ie: think Google and Apple maps with their 3D rendering as an example)

 

[s44]

I feel like tablets have a way to go compared to phones.

I agree.

I also think the Note 12.2 is going to be a major hit. Just from having discovered its future existence, I'm seriously contemplating going another holiday season without replacing my I/O lagfest T201.

 

[vi edit]

IMO I disagree that the HW is maxed; every year still provides good gains. There is also software, which is largely games (WHAT A SURPRISE JUST LIKE ON THE CONSUMER DESKTOP) that will continue to demand high end phone hardware. But I agree that most of the software isn't bringing a phone to its knees. Of course, as software gets more complex and matures, we'll see those demands rise; I'm sure you can get lots to run on an old single core android, but games just can't be had. Its a question whether games will become the same hardware driver that it was on the PC; it'll probably be a mix of games and other "key" software apps that can drive the need for more PC power (ie: think Google and Apple maps with their 3D rendering as an example)

I'm not convinced that games will be a major hardware push for phones. You are size limited (only 4-5'ish in devices) so it's a fixed amount of power needed. Unlike trying to push crazy resolutions on a bigscreen monitor. You can cheat in the mobile space and hide lots of things because you just can't see it. Plus mobile in general caters to a much more casual gaming nature - Candy Crush, Angry birds, ect. Just stuff you can pull up and play for a few minutes and put away. Not any graphics heavy demands. Sure there's a few out there that are demanding, but it's just not the same type of user base as PC gaming.

 

[poofyhairguy]

I'm seriously contemplating going another holiday season without replacing my I/O lagfest T201.

You still use your TF201? I can't. I really can't. Especially after the Nexus 7. Feels like a device from 1991. Makes me obsess about 4k write scores in future devices (bought the 16GB N7 instead of the 32GB for that reason).

Mine is basically a Super Nintendo and MKV arcade machine going forward.