11/20/2023 0 Comments Sony ericsson candy bar![]() ![]() Again, I am not saying that they should not produce phones with MS OS, only that putting all its eggs on one basket is rarely a smart move, even more if you take account on MS business practice history. They had the quality, the presence, the relationship and the brand, yet they opted to play a risk game. This is what makes me astonished by Nokia move. Fool me once, shame on you fool me twice, shame on me. Sony, LG and some others and we will see a more competitive fight for sell.Īlso, I very much doubt that carriers and manufactures would like to repeat the scenario we had with PC computers where only Microsoft was making “good” money while everyone else were retorting to whatsoever they could to improve their profits. It seems to me that only now the big manufacturers companies that can play this game are getting their acts straight, i.e. If anything, we can look at a few companies who have fared worse as a result of Android (HTC, for example)Īnd how it can tracked to Android on this case and not on HTC business practices? It is really a big game and Samsung has the quality and the resources to play it well. The first is precisely what small manufactures lack (may lack quality too) and the last is what some known brands did not have for some time (and would lack the “proximity” Samsung has too). I think it is clear to everybody that carriers have a large impact on what is available to consumers and that Samsung has a very good business relationship with most of them (read incentives and availability), together with their product quality, it make consumers very inclined to get them. 99.9% of mobile manufacturers are still generating losses, barely breaking even, or occasionally posting inconsequential profits The data is very much clear that Android has had essentially no positive impact whatsoever on any company’s success (excepting the possibility of Samsung). I am not implying you, somehow, left this scenario tacit, it was only to illustrate one possible alternative and to leave, beforehand, an argument to the ones that fall toward this. I wouldn’t be convinced that Samsung’s success is a direct result of Android - rather than manufacturing, resources, marketing, and strategic causesįollowing your reasoning, how could Samsung compete without a good (enough?) mobile OS to use? Do you think should it pick MS mobile OS, and selling the volume they do, would Microsoft ask a little as it does now? I don’t think so, and it, very probably, would have a big impact on Samsung net profit. If anything, we can look at a few companies who have fared worse as a result of Android (HTC, for example). 99.9% of mobile manufacturers are still generating losses, barely breaking even, or occasionally posting inconsequential profits. However… as to your point of only comparing their own success with Android versus their own success without Android (a point I don’t agree with - hell, we could compare these billion dollar technology companies to some restaurants and show that Android doesn’t help profits - but I think worth considering): the data is very much clear that Android has had essentially no positive impact whatsoever on any company’s success (excepting the possibility of Samsung). Often? I’ve never seen this argument made at all by anyone who wasn’t a halfwit (I can only think of a tiny number of Microsoft fanboys who can’t accept that the company has missed the boat repeatedly for the last decade)… that didn’t require clear evidence that Samsung is relatively the only one benefiting from using Android (and again, as per below, even then I wouldn’t be convinced that Samsung’s success is a direct result of Android - rather than manufacturing, resources, marketing, and strategic causes.) ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |