8 ms·

IPhone 5 opens the door for Nokia, Samsung

23 points by denzil_correa 14y ago

melling 14y ago
I love my iPhone but I really don't get this. Apple only has 31% of the smartphone market and Android has 59%, for example. http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57510406-37/iphone-5-faces-u.s-market-share-challenges-says-analyst/ http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57510406-37/iphone-5-faces... The market is already open. Apple has never dominated. They just make a really good product that's loved by millions. :-) It's also clear that even more people are happier choosing a different phone.
- stevoyoung 14y ago
  Market share is like "users" in a startup, it means nothing. Revenue is everything. Sometimes, market share is directionally proportional to revenues, in the phone wars case, it isn't. Does any one really think Cook is loosing sleep at night because he wants customers from "android's share"? He wants users from the rite market segment aka the ones who spend money. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say they have quite a bit of those types. -- Edit: spelling
  - mtgx 14y ago
    For a company directly, yes. For a platform, market share is very important. It wasn't until recently that Android caught up and surpassed iOS in total user base, but given some of the problems of the Android ecosystem, iOS will probably remain the main platform for the time being. But eventually Android will become the main platform through sheer numbers. It's poised to have 3 billion devices on the market by 2016, while iOS only 1 billion.
    - gonzo 14y ago
      "only"?? If your point is that there will be 3X as many Android devices, fine. but a market of 1 billion? I'll take it.
- adsr 14y ago
  But Android is not a phone, look at market share by smart phone vendor instead of OS. It's a comparison that makes much more sense since there are many vendors, each competing with each other, all with individual market shares, all using the Android OS.
  - stevoyoung 14y ago
    I agree. Are there any numbers available with this phone vs phone type analysis?
  - andybak 14y ago
    I don't see that matter. To the extent that I am invested in a mobile platform, it's Android I'm invested in. My next phone will probably run Android so I can carry along my familiarity and my app purchases. It's only likely to be a Samsung specifically if they have the right combination of hardware features and price at that time.
    - adsr 14y ago
      It matters since we (parent comment and the article) are talking about market share of phones.
      - andybak 14y ago
        We are both responding to: "I love my iPhone but I really don't get this. Apple only has 31% of the smartphone market and Android has 59%, for example." and in turn the original article In this context the interesting definition of 'market share' is the one that focuses on platforms. There isn't very much interesting to be gleaned by making the distinction that Apple has a bigger market share than Samsung as Samsung and other Android OEMs collectively benefit from Android's market share.
        adsr 14y ago
        No, because the article essentially asks: does the new iPhone have enough bells and whistles to keep it's position, and compares it to other handsets like Nokia Lumia and Galaxy Note. It's putting up iPhone 5's hardware features against a few competing phones. It does not take platforms, operating system or any software into account.
- marknutter 14y ago
  Apple is one company. Android devices are made by a wide array of companies. So in terms of marketshare per company, yes, Apple has dominated (although I think they were recently surpassed by Samsung?).
- huxley 14y ago
  I think it's becoming clear that Android is winning over the majority of feature phone upgrades, which is great for raw numbers but I wonder if it will take a while for those people to buy into the eco-system. Is the existing wedge going to be less and less profitable? A lot of people had feature phones that had Java ME or BREW, but aside from telephony and texting, many only ever played Snake on it. If the phone manufacturers aren't making much money off of the hardware bought by feature phone upgraders, how much will Google or other ecosystem vendors make much off of the software side?
ianterrell 14y ago
What do you want folks? What one feature are you buying your phone based on? A stylus, a 20 hour battery, or a springy camera? The iPhone is crap! It doesn't have any of these! Pick your other substandard phone that has the one you want now!
- Quizzy 14y ago
  Trolling for dollars?
onetimeuse001 14y ago
The carriers are also dying for a third major OS, but time will tell. Maybe the features Apple left out aren't as loved by common people as bloggers make them seem. Personally I'd want better battery life (who wouldn't) but would not buy a phone for a stylus and 5.5 inch screen is too big for me.
- Toshio 14y ago
  > "The carriers are also dying for a third major OS" I'm rooting for either Firefox OS or Tizen to fill that void.
- mung 14y ago
  People throwing screen size into the mix with battery life and NFC are confusing 2 very separate things anyway. Screen size isn't a feature. If we all want big screens, then I guess iPad wins at the the mobile phone market (obvious failings aside, like, it's not actually a phone). And yes, wasn't the whole point of the iPhone (in the 2007 keynote no less) that it didn't use a stylus?
  - vidarh 14y ago
    We may not all want big screens, but the trend with Android high end phones has been that each generation has pushed the screen size higher within limit. Presumably for a reason: People buy those models. Even the Galaxy Note, which was ridiculed, went on to sell many million. As for the stylus: It's a selling point to not need a stylus for regular use, but for some types of use a stylus is far superior. Your fingers are no good for making precise drawings, for example, or for scribbling hand written notes. They simply don't have small enough tips. And even the name of the Galaxy Note makes the point that it is aiming for a niche of users that want to be able to replace paper note books while still getting all the benefits of a modern smartphone, including being able to not use the stylus when it's not needed.
- NLips 14y ago
  That's surprising to hear, because most carrier stores only seem to push Android and iOS - not Windows Phone (which is the most ideally placed to become no.3).
brunnsbe 14y ago
I find it interesting and awaited that Apple now has grown to the size that it has become more restrictive with introducing new features and technologies. It seems to happen to all companies that get a too big piece of the market cake, think for example what happened to Nokia a couple of years ago.
- camwest 14y ago
  What does 'more restrictive' even mean? What are you comparing this to? Is there some specific feature that is in demand that Apple has failed to deliver on due to their massive size?
  - brunnsbe 14y ago
    Restrictive in the sense that the company now has so many devices out in the market that making more radical changes in the software (in this case the operating system) or by introducing not backward-compatible new hardware can affect millions of users with older hardware negatively. Apple still wants to support all the older iPhones so that they can get money from the app store, if an app would need to have a separate version for older devices it would change their app market in a negative way.
    - camwest 14y ago
      Ok that makes sense, but isn't that just change for the sake of it. Again, I question if there is a clearly superior alternative that they are deliberately avoiding.
marknutter 14y ago
This is ridiculous. The iPhone 5 failing to wow everybody is more a symptom of the fact that there's really just not much more a smartphone can, or really should do. I hear people lamenting things like the fact that they won't be able to wirelessly charge the iPhone 5. Really? Placing your phone on top of a wired brick instead of inserting a wire is the next big thing? Please. Smartphones will continue to get faster and have longer battery life, but everyone should stop holding their breath for an announcement as revolutionary as the original iPhone's was.
- bnegreve 14y ago
  What was revolutionary in the original iphone ?
  - marknutter 14y ago
    It was the smart phone that the average consumer actually wanted to buy.
  - zuppy 14y ago
    finger based touch screen, a decent web browser, a different ui, etc.
  - forgottenpaswrd 14y ago
    1- Before Iphone, telcom companies would decide what software comes in on a phone and what does not, and it was a political decision, or based on how much you paid the telcom. Say you had a game and wanted to sell like you do on the App Store. The Telcoms would say: sure,we give you $200 for the game property and all rights, including exclusivity, consider yourself fortunate for us letting you in. Take it or leave it but we control the channel. 2- Internet browsing was possible in a phone for the first time. Only Nokia had something similar, albeit much harder to navigate but again the Telcoms will force wifi to be removed so you had to pay them more. 3- Google maps on a phone was fantastic, again only Nokia maps could compete. Easier gmail.(At the time Apple and Google were best pals). 4-Smooth interface, 0 delay, instantaneous feedback, you hold an icon and it moves without flickering and jumping. You could zoom in a natural and continuous way instead of steps for the first time on a phone. 5-All the interface controlled with one button and the screen, with the UI designed for it. This was so revolutionary on a phone, as "people love so much to press keys" like blackberry said. How easy people forget.
stephen_g 14y ago
I don't really understand what people expected - Apple's device strategy is fairly predictable, and what was announced was almost exactly what has been expected by all the rumour sites for at least a month or two now...
mtgx 14y ago
I like how the guy in the picture has really large hands to make the Lumia 920 seem smaller than it is (about as big as a Galaxy S3 or One X, but with a smaller 4.5" screen). But on the other hand, I can't really blame them considering Apple tried to make their iPhone 5 seem to have a significantly larger screen, when it's really just 14% bigger, and what I'd hardly consider a main reason for upgrading to it. Lumia 920 has interesting hardware, and some important innovations that others should pursue as well - better low-light performance, optical stabilization, a screen that's better in sunlight, but I think it ultimately falls short even of iOS with its WP8 OS. Sure iOS may be boring, and may barely try to catch-up with features Android has introduced years ago, but at least it has the ecosystem WP8 is trying to catch-up with Android and iOS, but it hardly has any ecosystem at all. For example, if you thought "Android has no games" (it does, but maybe not the latest hot ones on iOS), well the situation is much, much worse on Windows Phone. Windows Phone will never be the one to get the latest "hot apps", and will never be the one to have all the best "niche" apps that may be very useful to a certain category for people.
- forgottenpaswrd 14y ago
  "Lumia 920 has interesting hardware, and some important innovations that others should pursue as well - better low-light performance, optical stabilization, a screen that's better in sunlight" Has it? Better low light performance? You mean what NOKIA(biased source) says their PROTOTYPE(vaporware) has compared with olds iphones. You mean the faked night photos that now display a "simulated photo" in the corner after people discovered the truth?. Are you referring to the "RED camera in a van" optical stabilization of the fake videos NOKIA released and had to apologize for or are you referring to the real prototype stabilization that is worse than the Iphone 4S one? If so I have some Unicorns and a Big Tower to sell you(it is in the center of Paris, you will love it!). I find is going to be terrible hard for Windows to compete on phones, tablets are another thing, people need windows for a lot of things after all.
lawdawg 14y ago
This article should really be re-written and titled "iOS6 opens the door for Microsoft and Google". On the hardware front we are reaching a point where only incremental changes are necessary/possible, and even things like wireless charging or using the phone with gloves on, aren't that revolutionary and are mostly gimmicks. iOS6, on the other hand, seems like a very incremental step on the software side, a major step backwards on others (like Maps). Seems like the perfect opportunity for Android (and possibly Windows Phone) given they aren't constrained by the "only 1 major iOS update a year" rule that Apple appears to be tied to.
ToesByNoon 14y ago
LOL. I'm not sure why tech publications are so anxious to see people choose phones other than Apple. It almost seems like they have a vested interest in seeing apple "lose".
mtgx 14y ago
With a BOM of $167 for iPhone 5, while selling it for $650 at retail, I think Apple is just being cheap lately. They're all about lowering cost to increase their profit, and less about introducing new type of hardware inside the phone. http://www.eetasia.com/ART_8800674648_480700_NT_eff210e8.HTM?click_from=8800098239,9950147613,2012-09-14,EEOL,ARTICLE_ALERT http://www.eetasia.com/ART_8800674648_480700_NT_eff210e8.HTM... And sure, I realize that's not the whole cost for selling an iPhone, but if I remember correctly, a "new" iPhone's BOM used to be somewhere around $250-$300. I'm certainly seeing a trend downwards in cost. I think they mention the iPhone 4S BOM is cheaper "now", but I think it was more than $167 when it first launched, even though they barely changed anything. The iPhone 4's BOM was certainly higher.
- _djo_ 14y ago
  These BOM calculations are inherently flawed because there's no way a third-party can know what it actually costs to develop and produce the many custom parts in the phone. The A6 chip, for instance, may incorporate standard ARM cores and chips, but it was developed using a custom internal design process. Similarly, the new combined-glass-and-digitiser screen must have involved a fair bit of R&D spend and changes to the manufacturing process before it could even be produced in the required volumes. Apple consistently quotes a 30-40% margin (not gross margin) on its iOS range, which is not unreasonable considering the additional costs it sustains in developing value-added services like iCloud and having a good support setup in place. Looking at the court records that were unsealed recently I honestly don't think the real iPhone BOM has changed that much from model to model, with the exception that it's hugely profitable for Apple to continue to sell the older model (now the 4S) with cheaper-to-produce components.
5partan 14y ago
Hacker News should be renamed to Consumer News with this kind of articles. Please stop upvoting such *@$#! ...
bradleyland 14y ago
Anyone writing about things like NFC are missing the point. Consumers don't care about NFC, they care about convenience. Convenience is paying with your smartphone, and Apple has, apparently, figured out a way to make that happen. You can't enumerate the experience of using an Apple product with a list of specifications any more than you could express the beauty of a sunset with an Excel spreadsheet. I'm not saying it's unquantifiable, but I am saying it's far more subtle than, "ZOMG the iPhone doesn't even have NFC or springy cameras!" These are implementation details, not features, and consumers don't care about implementation details, they care about a quality experience. Apple knows how to deliver a quality experience. EDIT: Lest anyone think I am a breathless Apple fanboy, here's some data to back up my claim that Apple knows how to deliver a quality experience: http://www.jdpower.com/content/press-release/upO8vjP/2012-u-s-wireless-smartphone-customer-satisfaction-study-and-2012-u-s-wireless-traditional-mobile-phone-satisfaction-study.htm http://www.jdpower.com/content/press-release/upO8vjP/2012-u-...

23 points by denzil_correa 14y ago

I love my iPhone but I really don't get this. Apple only has 31% of the smartphone market and Android has 59%, for example. http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57510406-37/iphone-5-faces-u.s-market-share-challenges-says-analyst/ http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57510406-37/iphone-5-faces... The market is already open. Apple has never dominated. They just make a really good product that's loved by millions. :-) It's also clear that even more people are happier choosing a different phone.

stevoyoung 14y ago
Market share is like "users" in a startup, it means nothing. Revenue is everything. Sometimes, market share is directionally proportional to revenues, in the phone wars case, it isn't. Does any one really think Cook is loosing sleep at night because he wants customers from "android's share"? He wants users from the rite market segment aka the ones who spend money. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say they have quite a bit of those types. -- Edit: spelling
- mtgx 14y ago
  For a company directly, yes. For a platform, market share is very important. It wasn't until recently that Android caught up and surpassed iOS in total user base, but given some of the problems of the Android ecosystem, iOS will probably remain the main platform for the time being. But eventually Android will become the main platform through sheer numbers. It's poised to have 3 billion devices on the market by 2016, while iOS only 1 billion.
  - gonzo 14y ago
    "only"?? If your point is that there will be 3X as many Android devices, fine. but a market of 1 billion? I'll take it.
adsr 14y ago
But Android is not a phone, look at market share by smart phone vendor instead of OS. It's a comparison that makes much more sense since there are many vendors, each competing with each other, all with individual market shares, all using the Android OS.
- stevoyoung 14y ago
  I agree. Are there any numbers available with this phone vs phone type analysis?
- andybak 14y ago
  I don't see that matter. To the extent that I am invested in a mobile platform, it's Android I'm invested in. My next phone will probably run Android so I can carry along my familiarity and my app purchases. It's only likely to be a Samsung specifically if they have the right combination of hardware features and price at that time.
  - adsr 14y ago
    It matters since we (parent comment and the article) are talking about market share of phones.
    - andybak 14y ago
      We are both responding to: "I love my iPhone but I really don't get this. Apple only has 31% of the smartphone market and Android has 59%, for example." and in turn the original article In this context the interesting definition of 'market share' is the one that focuses on platforms. There isn't very much interesting to be gleaned by making the distinction that Apple has a bigger market share than Samsung as Samsung and other Android OEMs collectively benefit from Android's market share.
      - adsr 14y ago
        No, because the article essentially asks: does the new iPhone have enough bells and whistles to keep it's position, and compares it to other handsets like Nokia Lumia and Galaxy Note. It's putting up iPhone 5's hardware features against a few competing phones. It does not take platforms, operating system or any software into account.
marknutter 14y ago
Apple is one company. Android devices are made by a wide array of companies. So in terms of marketshare per company, yes, Apple has dominated (although I think they were recently surpassed by Samsung?).
huxley 14y ago
I think it's becoming clear that Android is winning over the majority of feature phone upgrades, which is great for raw numbers but I wonder if it will take a while for those people to buy into the eco-system. Is the existing wedge going to be less and less profitable? A lot of people had feature phones that had Java ME or BREW, but aside from telephony and texting, many only ever played Snake on it. If the phone manufacturers aren't making much money off of the hardware bought by feature phone upgraders, how much will Google or other ecosystem vendors make much off of the software side?

ianterrell 14y ago

What do you want folks? What one feature are you buying your phone based on? A stylus, a 20 hour battery, or a springy camera? The iPhone is crap! It doesn't have any of these! Pick your other substandard phone that has the one you want now!

Quizzy 14y ago
Trolling for dollars?

onetimeuse001 14y ago

The carriers are also dying for a third major OS, but time will tell. Maybe the features Apple left out aren't as loved by common people as bloggers make them seem. Personally I'd want better battery life (who wouldn't) but would not buy a phone for a stylus and 5.5 inch screen is too big for me.

Toshio 14y ago
> "The carriers are also dying for a third major OS" I'm rooting for either Firefox OS or Tizen to fill that void.
mung 14y ago
People throwing screen size into the mix with battery life and NFC are confusing 2 very separate things anyway. Screen size isn't a feature. If we all want big screens, then I guess iPad wins at the the mobile phone market (obvious failings aside, like, it's not actually a phone). And yes, wasn't the whole point of the iPhone (in the 2007 keynote no less) that it didn't use a stylus?
- vidarh 14y ago
  We may not all want big screens, but the trend with Android high end phones has been that each generation has pushed the screen size higher within limit. Presumably for a reason: People buy those models. Even the Galaxy Note, which was ridiculed, went on to sell many million. As for the stylus: It's a selling point to not need a stylus for regular use, but for some types of use a stylus is far superior. Your fingers are no good for making precise drawings, for example, or for scribbling hand written notes. They simply don't have small enough tips. And even the name of the Galaxy Note makes the point that it is aiming for a niche of users that want to be able to replace paper note books while still getting all the benefits of a modern smartphone, including being able to not use the stylus when it's not needed.
NLips 14y ago
That's surprising to hear, because most carrier stores only seem to push Android and iOS - not Windows Phone (which is the most ideally placed to become no.3).

brunnsbe 14y ago

I find it interesting and awaited that Apple now has grown to the size that it has become more restrictive with introducing new features and technologies. It seems to happen to all companies that get a too big piece of the market cake, think for example what happened to Nokia a couple of years ago.

camwest 14y ago
What does 'more restrictive' even mean? What are you comparing this to? Is there some specific feature that is in demand that Apple has failed to deliver on due to their massive size?
- brunnsbe 14y ago
  Restrictive in the sense that the company now has so many devices out in the market that making more radical changes in the software (in this case the operating system) or by introducing not backward-compatible new hardware can affect millions of users with older hardware negatively. Apple still wants to support all the older iPhones so that they can get money from the app store, if an app would need to have a separate version for older devices it would change their app market in a negative way.
  - camwest 14y ago
    Ok that makes sense, but isn't that just change for the sake of it. Again, I question if there is a clearly superior alternative that they are deliberately avoiding.

marknutter 14y ago

This is ridiculous. The iPhone 5 failing to wow everybody is more a symptom of the fact that there's really just not much more a smartphone can, or really should do. I hear people lamenting things like the fact that they won't be able to wirelessly charge the iPhone 5. Really? Placing your phone on top of a wired brick instead of inserting a wire is the next big thing? Please. Smartphones will continue to get faster and have longer battery life, but everyone should stop holding their breath for an announcement as revolutionary as the original iPhone's was.

bnegreve 14y ago
What was revolutionary in the original iphone ?
- marknutter 14y ago
  It was the smart phone that the average consumer actually wanted to buy.
- zuppy 14y ago
  finger based touch screen, a decent web browser, a different ui, etc.
- forgottenpaswrd 14y ago
  1- Before Iphone, telcom companies would decide what software comes in on a phone and what does not, and it was a political decision, or based on how much you paid the telcom. Say you had a game and wanted to sell like you do on the App Store. The Telcoms would say: sure,we give you $200 for the game property and all rights, including exclusivity, consider yourself fortunate for us letting you in. Take it or leave it but we control the channel. 2- Internet browsing was possible in a phone for the first time. Only Nokia had something similar, albeit much harder to navigate but again the Telcoms will force wifi to be removed so you had to pay them more. 3- Google maps on a phone was fantastic, again only Nokia maps could compete. Easier gmail.(At the time Apple and Google were best pals). 4-Smooth interface, 0 delay, instantaneous feedback, you hold an icon and it moves without flickering and jumping. You could zoom in a natural and continuous way instead of steps for the first time on a phone. 5-All the interface controlled with one button and the screen, with the UI designed for it. This was so revolutionary on a phone, as "people love so much to press keys" like blackberry said. How easy people forget.

stephen_g 14y ago

I don't really understand what people expected - Apple's device strategy is fairly predictable, and what was announced was almost exactly what has been expected by all the rumour sites for at least a month or two now...

mtgx 14y ago

I like how the guy in the picture has really large hands to make the Lumia 920 seem smaller than it is (about as big as a Galaxy S3 or One X, but with a smaller 4.5" screen). But on the other hand, I can't really blame them considering Apple tried to make their iPhone 5 seem to have a significantly larger screen, when it's really just 14% bigger, and what I'd hardly consider a main reason for upgrading to it. Lumia 920 has interesting hardware, and some important innovations that others should pursue as well - better low-light performance, optical stabilization, a screen that's better in sunlight, but I think it ultimately falls short even of iOS with its WP8 OS. Sure iOS may be boring, and may barely try to catch-up with features Android has introduced years ago, but at least it has the ecosystem WP8 is trying to catch-up with Android and iOS, but it hardly has any ecosystem at all. For example, if you thought "Android has no games" (it does, but maybe not the latest hot ones on iOS), well the situation is much, much worse on Windows Phone. Windows Phone will never be the one to get the latest "hot apps", and will never be the one to have all the best "niche" apps that may be very useful to a certain category for people.

forgottenpaswrd 14y ago
"Lumia 920 has interesting hardware, and some important innovations that others should pursue as well - better low-light performance, optical stabilization, a screen that's better in sunlight" Has it? Better low light performance? You mean what NOKIA(biased source) says their PROTOTYPE(vaporware) has compared with olds iphones. You mean the faked night photos that now display a "simulated photo" in the corner after people discovered the truth?. Are you referring to the "RED camera in a van" optical stabilization of the fake videos NOKIA released and had to apologize for or are you referring to the real prototype stabilization that is worse than the Iphone 4S one? If so I have some Unicorns and a Big Tower to sell you(it is in the center of Paris, you will love it!). I find is going to be terrible hard for Windows to compete on phones, tablets are another thing, people need windows for a lot of things after all.

lawdawg 14y ago

This article should really be re-written and titled "iOS6 opens the door for Microsoft and Google". On the hardware front we are reaching a point where only incremental changes are necessary/possible, and even things like wireless charging or using the phone with gloves on, aren't that revolutionary and are mostly gimmicks. iOS6, on the other hand, seems like a very incremental step on the software side, a major step backwards on others (like Maps). Seems like the perfect opportunity for Android (and possibly Windows Phone) given they aren't constrained by the "only 1 major iOS update a year" rule that Apple appears to be tied to.

ToesByNoon 14y ago

LOL. I'm not sure why tech publications are so anxious to see people choose phones other than Apple. It almost seems like they have a vested interest in seeing apple "lose".

mtgx 14y ago

With a BOM of $167 for iPhone 5, while selling it for $650 at retail, I think Apple is just being cheap lately. They're all about lowering cost to increase their profit, and less about introducing new type of hardware inside the phone. http://www.eetasia.com/ART_8800674648_480700_NT_eff210e8.HTM?click_from=8800098239,9950147613,2012-09-14,EEOL,ARTICLE_ALERT http://www.eetasia.com/ART_8800674648_480700_NT_eff210e8.HTM... And sure, I realize that's not the whole cost for selling an iPhone, but if I remember correctly, a "new" iPhone's BOM used to be somewhere around $250-$300. I'm certainly seeing a trend downwards in cost. I think they mention the iPhone 4S BOM is cheaper "now", but I think it was more than $167 when it first launched, even though they barely changed anything. The iPhone 4's BOM was certainly higher.

_djo_ 14y ago
These BOM calculations are inherently flawed because there's no way a third-party can know what it actually costs to develop and produce the many custom parts in the phone. The A6 chip, for instance, may incorporate standard ARM cores and chips, but it was developed using a custom internal design process. Similarly, the new combined-glass-and-digitiser screen must have involved a fair bit of R&D spend and changes to the manufacturing process before it could even be produced in the required volumes. Apple consistently quotes a 30-40% margin (not gross margin) on its iOS range, which is not unreasonable considering the additional costs it sustains in developing value-added services like iCloud and having a good support setup in place. Looking at the court records that were unsealed recently I honestly don't think the real iPhone BOM has changed that much from model to model, with the exception that it's hugely profitable for Apple to continue to sell the older model (now the 4S) with cheaper-to-produce components.

5partan 14y ago

Hacker News should be renamed to Consumer News with this kind of articles. Please stop upvoting such *@$#! ...

bradleyland 14y ago

Anyone writing about things like NFC are missing the point. Consumers don't care about NFC, they care about convenience. Convenience is paying with your smartphone, and Apple has, apparently, figured out a way to make that happen. You can't enumerate the experience of using an Apple product with a list of specifications any more than you could express the beauty of a sunset with an Excel spreadsheet. I'm not saying it's unquantifiable, but I am saying it's far more subtle than, "ZOMG the iPhone doesn't even have NFC or springy cameras!" These are implementation details, not features, and consumers don't care about implementation details, they care about a quality experience. Apple knows how to deliver a quality experience. EDIT: Lest anyone think I am a breathless Apple fanboy, here's some data to back up my claim that Apple knows how to deliver a quality experience: http://www.jdpower.com/content/press-release/upO8vjP/2012-u-s-wireless-smartphone-customer-satisfaction-study-and-2012-u-s-wireless-traditional-mobile-phone-satisfaction-study.htm http://www.jdpower.com/content/press-release/upO8vjP/2012-u-...