|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
3rd November 2012, 05:20 PM | #521 |
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,924
|
That is not what happened at all. TheL8Elvis claimed the numbers in that article were shipped for Samsung, and sold for Apple.
If you read the article past the headline you see that that is not the case. It is clearly shipped vs. shipped. Also, are you suggesting that they are amassing huge quantities in a warehouse somewhere? Like it's 1982 with Atari ET games?? I seriously doubt that. I'm sure both companies have a very good idea of what future demand is. Also, even if you were suggesting that, you would have to be implying that only Samsung is doing that and not Apple!! Because the article is "shipped" numbers for both companies. So, yes, "shipped" is a very good indicator of "what counts here". Therefore the data in the article that started this entire conversation is valid. Which is what the entire point is. |
__________________
________________________ |
|
3rd November 2012, 09:12 PM | #522 |
Muse
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 727
|
I don't believe that there are mountains of Samsung smartphones in warehouses; however it is quite commonly the case that a manufacturer has a substantial amount of inventory in the supply chain -- shipped but not sold. For example, Samsung got busted on this very point with the initial launch of the Galaxy Tab. If my memory serves, they claimed to have shipped something like a million but it eventually came out that they only sold about 100,000.
Again, I do not think that's the case here but it does, in principle, happen. |
3rd November 2012, 11:58 PM | #523 |
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,924
|
|
__________________
________________________ |
|
4th November 2012, 02:25 AM | #524 |
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,924
|
Apparently the iPad mini is so popular that not only do customers not realize there is also a new iPad (iPad 3.5), some employees don't know about it either!!
So much for Jobs thinking that 10 inches was the minimum size... http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57...medium=twitter
Quote:
|
__________________
________________________ |
|
4th November 2012, 03:20 AM | #525 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 3,177
|
I saw the iPad Mini in person yesterday. Great feel and weight but after living with an iPhone 4S and iPad 3 I can't go back to that resolution. Looked downright fuzzy.
|
4th November 2012, 06:49 PM | #526 |
Philosopher
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 8,276
|
And the point you never seem to have understood is that apple doesn't release shipped numbers. It release sales numbers.
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2012...r-Results.html ... The Company sold 26.0 million iPhones in the quarter, representing 28 percent unit growth over the year-ago quarter. Apple sold 17.0 million iPads during the quarter, an 84 percent unit increase over the year-ago quarter. The Company sold 4.0 million Macs during the quarter, a two percent unit increase over the year-ago quarter. Apple sold 6.8 million iPods, a 10 percent unit decline from the year-ago quarter. ... So much for the accuracy of your article. No signs of the weasel word shipped ... |
4th November 2012, 06:57 PM | #527 |
Philosopher
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 8,276
|
|
4th November 2012, 07:00 PM | #528 |
Philosopher
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 8,276
|
|
4th November 2012, 09:28 PM | #529 |
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,924
|
Oh Apple, gotta love it:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...540216392.html
Quote:
That's all well and good. Some companies sell at cost and make money back on software. Apple chooses not to. (Certain types of) people buy it anyway. Whatever. But then there is this:
Quote:
|
__________________
________________________ |
|
4th November 2012, 09:36 PM | #530 |
Muse
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 611
|
Yeah, it does seem a little odd that they would go to a non-retina screen for that, particularly as competing tablets have better resolution.
One theory is that they couldn't get the usual profit margin they wanted if they added the retina screen, as they were very aware the price would be a major sticking point for customers when models like the Kindle, Nexus etc were already relatively cheap, so they needed to keep the cost of components down and take a hit on the spec. Edit: The post above seems to confirm that possibility, the gross margin for the mini is already apparently lower than the corporate average. So adding the retina would have pushed it even lower. Will have to see if that makes any dent in sales. |
5th November 2012, 09:16 AM | #531 |
"más divertido"
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: USA! USA!
Posts: 24,384
|
|
5th November 2012, 09:53 AM | #532 |
Philosopher
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 8,276
|
Since OTT won't do it, I was looking for Samsung sales numbers broken out by phone model. Shipping numbers, even. Then we could compare apples to apples as far as SIII sold versus iPhone 5, etc.
Did I just overlook the number in your links ? I saw that samsung shipped a total of XXX phones, and that S III was number 1 at some point in time... |
5th November 2012, 10:14 AM | #533 |
Muse
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 727
|
To educate you. Shipped is a weasel word. I have no recent memory of Apple releasing any shipment figures - only sales figures - so I question any source that claims to know.
To demonstrate my fairness, Apple's announcement today of 3M iPads and iPad minis sold is also weasely. They launched a brand new product yet rolled its sales total in with another product. While I think it accounts for the lion's share of the 3M figure, they used weasely language to arrive at a bigger number. |
5th November 2012, 01:00 PM | #534 |
"más divertido"
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: USA! USA!
Posts: 24,384
|
There was a bar chart on the uk figures. Let me check.
Regarding total market share: From July, so it's a bit dated, but here are global figures through Q2 of this year. Apple at around 14% and Samsung at 26%. This more or less jibes with the other numbers posted in this thread. Their respective sales numbers were revealed in the patent trial. However, it's not like-for-like because Samsung didn't include all of their phones that weren't part of the lawsuit. Those numbers were 3:1 apple, which can't be even close to right. Here's another chart of market share, with Samsung at 26% to Apple's 16%. Sales by model: Samsung Galaxy S3 hits 30 million sales
Quote:
iPhone sold a "disappointing" 5 million units in the first weekend it was available. I'm having no luck at all finding sales numbers from October, 2012. According to one recent article:
Quote:
|
8th November 2012, 03:52 PM | #535 |
Dreaming of unicorns
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: UAE
Posts: 11,938
|
Just seen global sales figures for Q3. S III was 18million. iPhone 4S was 16.2 million. A whopping 1.2 million difference with the now "older model" iPhone
No weasel "shipped" nonsense in the piece either. I guess OTT will still not get it or pony any data up |
__________________
Stundie - Avoided like the plaque, its a scottish turn of phrase. |
|
8th November 2012, 04:49 PM | #536 |
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,924
|
I'm not the person that claimed only 1 of the 2 was "shipped". If anything was weasely it was that.
I'm the person that realized the first article (from post #486) was legit. There were no complaints about the first article from me. Perhaps by your comment you are still claiming that the shipped to sell ratio is different between those 2 companies. Do you have anything to back that up? Either that or you've got what happened in the last 30 posts completely backwards. To claim that I'm the person didn't "get" something is pretty funny. As for your numbers, you need to also get the sales of S2 and S2 Skyrockets and sales numbers for the iPhone 4 and iPhone 5. The Skyrockets in particular have been selling a ton. Don't forget the comparison we agreed on. If we let the Apple fanboys claim that the iPhones are just "1 phone" then the Galaxy S's are just "1 phone" as well:
Quote:
So stop trying to compare just 1 of them to another one. Stop trying to just compare them during 1 quarter. And please stop trying to do both at once. Especially when you do both and Apple still comes up short! That just looks bad. |
__________________
________________________ |
|
9th November 2012, 10:13 AM | #537 |
Dreaming of unicorns
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: UAE
Posts: 11,938
|
Still refusing to give us any data? Just continuing with the hot air about shipping units. It is absolutely hilarious that you ask anyone to back anything up. And that you make up stories about what people are claiming. Just fabulous dishonesty.
I was comparing like for like on the models current in that quarter. OK? Globally a 1.2 million difference is less than I expected. I believe October will show a turn around. |
__________________
Stundie - Avoided like the plaque, its a scottish turn of phrase. |
|
9th November 2012, 05:48 PM | #538 |
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,924
|
I'm quite your you are not following the chain of events here. Someone, not me, posted an article. Other users attacked that article using flawed reasoning. I clearly showed how that reasoning is flawed. I even suggested, multiple times, what the relevant numbers we need are. If you want to cite those numbers, have at it. I don't care. Nor do I jump around complaining if you don't. But if you post something other than that, I assume you just want me to not point it out?? Thanks for posting the information from the article. (Even though you, for whatever reason, didn't give us the link, it was on several news sites yesterday, I saw it anyway.) If you didn't mean for that to represent the analogy currently being discussed I apologize. And then when I do point out that those are not the numbers that the person that attacked the article needed for a valid comparison, you yell at me about how I should be the one getting them?? The claim was, that if you count Apple as 1 phone, then Samsung really isn't selling more. Though I did help to clarify what Apple being 1 phone would mean, it is not my claim. |
__________________
________________________ |
|
10th November 2012, 05:32 PM | #539 |
"más divertido"
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: USA! USA!
Posts: 24,384
|
|
10th November 2012, 05:39 PM | #540 |
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,924
|
Yeah I'm beginning to think it is just better to ignore it when people try to find which metric they can use to feel that Apple is still the leader in smartphones. I suppose if I was an Apple fan I would be in denial as well. But I would probably also be happy that they had a few good years. It was surely unexpected to anyone familiar with Apple history. |
__________________
________________________ |
|
10th November 2012, 10:20 PM | #541 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,594
|
5 1/2 years ago, Apple redefined the smart phone. Now another company is copying their work and happens to be selling more phones. That doesn't make the other company or their phones better. It's just the reality of the market place when they can save a boatload in research and development and therefore sell their phones for less.
|
11th November 2012, 03:23 AM | #542 |
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,924
|
You do realize that Apple copied other peoples work first right?
|
__________________
________________________ |
|
11th November 2012, 05:01 AM | #543 | ||||||
Lackey
Administrator
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 113,982
|
So I take it all this was copied from Apple:
And they haven't copied all of this:
Sense of humour failure test. |
||||||
__________________
“If only it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?” Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago |
|||||||
11th November 2012, 05:47 AM | #544 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,594
|
|
11th November 2012, 07:06 AM | #545 |
"más divertido"
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: USA! USA!
Posts: 24,384
|
Test passed.
|
11th November 2012, 07:19 AM | #546 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,594
|
|
11th November 2012, 03:08 PM | #547 |
Dreaming of unicorns
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: UAE
Posts: 11,938
|
You're the one that made up stuff, made assumptions and brought nothing to the table when making claims about numbers sold.
Also made errors in models sold by Apple. You just seem to blindly blank out any errors you make while ignoring date provided. You have indeed made claims and failed to back any of them up. Thats the point. All I have been looking at is what the sales figures are for the phones. You're more interested in dribbling at the "fanboys" |
__________________
Stundie - Avoided like the plaque, its a scottish turn of phrase. |
|
11th November 2012, 09:23 PM | #548 |
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,924
|
|
__________________
________________________ |
|
15th November 2012, 06:44 PM | #550 |
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,924
|
Notice how TheL8Elvis conveniently doesn't highlight the 2nd half of the sentence that explains the 3GS being included! The last time TheL8Elvis tried the "Oh well if iPhone is considered only 1 phone then Apple is still winning" nonsense, the 3GS was still officially for sale! I'm pretty sure both funk de fino and TheL8Elvis know that I already explained that. Yet they both still bring it up?? Clearly grasping at strawmen. Too bad Apple is still losing whether or not you remove the 3GS and the Galaxy S from the classic "Just 1 phone" comparison. Apples time in the sun for smartphones is over, there is just no way for them to dominate anymore. They are only going to lose more and more market-share. Two years from now it will be the same with their tablet market-share. |
__________________
________________________ |
|
15th November 2012, 06:50 PM | #551 |
Philosopher
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 8,276
|
|
15th November 2012, 07:07 PM | #552 |
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,924
|
Is that seriously all you have left? That's even assuming Apple is better than Samsung. You're making quite a leap there. I doubt you are going to distract many people with that... This has been explained multiple times Do you and funk de fino think that JREF members are stupid or something. You made the claim that if you count all the iPhones as "1 phone" that it is on top. It is clearly TheL8Elvis's claim that if you do a "1 phone" vs "1 phone" comparison that Apple would be selling more. It's your claim, you have to back it up. Even if it were true, which it isn't, it would really just be a sad justification. Clearly you are partial to Apple and are just digging for a metric that makes you feel better. All I did was point out that if you are counting the iPhone as "1 phone" then you have to count the Samsung Galaxy S line of phones as "1 phone" as well. iPhone 3GS = Galaxy S iPhone 4 = Galaxy S II iPhone 4S = Galaxy S II Skyrocket iPhone 5 = Galaxy S III Telling you what numbers you need to find to back up your claim doesn't suddenly make it my claim!! Then you both accuse me of making the claim and not backing it up. Even though I just explained that it wasn't my claim a few posts ago. I'm sorry but that is not only not how it works here at the JREF, no one is going to fall for such nonsense. |
__________________
________________________ |
|
15th November 2012, 07:31 PM | #553 |
Philosopher
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 8,276
|
No, I feel confident they can all see what your doing.
If it was clearly my claim, you would be able to quote it, instead of continuing to claim these are all 'things everybody knows'. My claim was that I expected a company who makes that makes 25+ models of smartphones to outsell a company that makes 1 model. And they do. Whatever else you infer from that comes from your own imagination. You made quite a positive claim in post 500
Originally Posted by OnlyTellsTruths;
THIS IS YOUR CLAIM I am asking you to back up the claim you made, that I have quoted multiple times. That, among other things, is what you have been called out for dodging. Go ahead, dodge again. |
16th November 2012, 12:04 AM | #554 |
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,924
|
Seriously?
You are disavowing the claim that if you compare just the "one iPhone" to one Samsung phone that Apple would be selling more? Not only that but you are saying you never made that claim? That you meant something else entirely when you said that the only reason Samsung is selling lots of phones is because "they have 25 PLUS phones and Apple only has 1". I'm sooooo sure that you were only pointing out the obvious, that a company that has "25 PLUS phones" would have a better chance of selling more phones than a company that only has 1 phone (or 3 if you aren't in Apple fanboy parallel zone). There's absolutely no way you were trying to imply that if we did a 1 to 1 comparison that Apple would be selling more.... http://www.internationalskeptics.com...s/rolleyes.gif And that you just waited until 2 weeks after it was called out to tell us that.... I assume since you didn't make that claim we won't be hearing it from you again in the future either? We can only hope. Because an argument that doesn't even turn out to be true is a sad argument indeed. |
__________________
________________________ |
|
16th November 2012, 07:09 AM | #555 |
Philosopher
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 8,276
|
|
16th November 2012, 08:53 AM | #556 |
Dreaming of unicorns
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: UAE
Posts: 11,938
|
Ok, as well as the stuff posted by TheL8Elvis.
Who posted this?
Quote:
I certainly do not think the JREF members are stupid. I think they can see you made a clear claim and have completely failed to support it. They can probably see that I have even posted some figures that may have helped you with your claim. But they can also see you have failed to bring anything but assumptions and unsupported claims. I really dont care either way who is winning the smartphone sales figures. I just like to see folks bring facts to back up their claims. You have spectularly failed to do that so far and it should be relatively simple. |
__________________
Stundie - Avoided like the plaque, its a scottish turn of phrase. |
|
16th November 2012, 08:02 PM | #557 |
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,924
|
You seriously have to be just kidding now right? Are you completely new to logic? Aside from it being a response to a claim, it is itself not a claim at all, it is merely logic. It even contains the word "relatively". If we have no evidence that either company has an extraordinary system of shipping for demand then we can safely assume that both companies would have a similar shipped vs sold ratio to correspond with their supply and demand forecasts. If you think that is a claim, then you are either very confused about logic or you are just grasping at straws. What's very ironic here is that you just pulled this with the "oh but Apple is only one phone!" claim! Someone made the "oh but Apple is only one phone" claim. I debunked it. I even provided the correct numbers that would be needed for it to be true. You then lied and said it was originally my claim!! Someone made the "oh but those are shipped vs sold numbers in that article" claim. I debunked it and pointed out that the article was, in fact, shipped versus shipped. I even pre-emted an "oh but Apple has a different shipped/sold ratio than Samsug", with the logic for why both companies probably have relatively similar shipped/sold ratio. You then lied and said it was originally my claim! So the exact same response applies to you that applies to TheL8Elvis: It seems to be an interesting strategy: A: Make a claim without evidence. B: Someone points that out that not only do you have no evidence, but the claim is likely wrong. C: Accuse that someone of not providing the evidence, so therefore A must be correct!! Here at the JREF we ask people to back up their claims. We're not going to do your work for you. That strategy seems like the natural response to try, a second time, to get someone too do your work for you. Nice try, but I'm not falling for it. I like TheL8Elvis's idea better. Just disavow that you ever made the claim in the first place! Because that means that the next time someone actually does try the old "oh well Apple is just 1 phone" nonsense then TheL8Elvis should be right there with us to debunk it. |
__________________
________________________ |
|
17th November 2012, 05:19 AM | #558 |
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,924
|
Google is almost ready to launch a new version of Maps on iPhone.
http://www.informationweek.com/mobil...phon/240142256
Quote:
|
__________________
________________________ |
|
17th November 2012, 09:16 AM | #559 |
Philosopher
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 8,276
|
How exactly did you debunk it. It was pointed out to you that the article was wrong, because apple releases sales numbers, not shipped numbers:
So, please explain again how you 'debunked' the fact that the article was wrong when it claimed shipped numbers ? You seem to think I did "A": Can you please go ahead and quote where I made that claim ? Pretty please ? Which post ? Exactly. Here is your claim: I hilited it for you. Here you made it again: I hilited exactly what you are doing. I'm betting that if you respond, you won't quote my claim or provide evidence for your claims. Let's see .... |
17th November 2012, 10:22 AM | #560 |
Dreaming of unicorns
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: UAE
Posts: 11,938
|
|
__________________
Stundie - Avoided like the plaque, its a scottish turn of phrase. |
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|