Samsung wows investors with futuristic tech that Apple's iPhone is already delivering

Apple Insider ^ | November 20, 2015 | Daniel Eran Dilger

[Swordmaker]

Speaking at Samsung Electronics' 2015 Investors Forum, a series of company executives spent hours saying very little, while talking about "innovations" such as phase detection Focus Pixels and camera sensor Deep Trench Isolation that iPhones already have.

Source: Samsung

Samsung will "lead by following" Apple Watch

Samsung LSI marketing team head Kyushu Hong spoke at length about "Innovation for the next mobile experience," outlining plans to introduce a "Bio Processor" chip that packed a series of components related to health related data recording.

Source: Samsung

Asked when the new chip would be introduced and when Samsung expected it to become a meaningful revenue generator, Hong stated that it was expected to ship early next year and might be used in some kind of band or other product focusing on activity, not necessarily from Samsung.

Source: Samsung

Source: Samsung

And while his presentation discussed "wearable device trend" and the potential of wearables to grow dramatically in shipment volumes, there was no discussion of how Samsung was actually performing in the smartwatch category it largely introduced, before partnering with Google on Android Wear and then going solo with its own Tizen-based Gear watches, all without achieving any success along the way, before being steamrolled by the arrival of Apple Watch.

At the same time, the "trends" Samsung identified for wearable devices included authentication and payment, features Samsung's Galaxy Gear models continue to lack. Apple Watch introduced Apple Pay last fall, but the company's own new "Samsung Pay" is a feature still confined to Samsung's phones.

The primary unique "feature" Samsung added to its watches that Apple didn't was a small, low quality 1.9 MP camera, which gave it a creepy voyeur-vibe reminiscent of Google Glass while failing to capture images of any useful quality.

Samsung's Galaxy Gear lineup hasn't attract many buyers. Instead, the watch ended up with Best Buy seeing more than 30 percent of its sales being returned by unsatisfied customers, according to a report by Ars.

Samsung unveils some existing camera technology

Focusing next on photography as a feature of smartphones, Hong introduced "fast and accurate auto focus" using phase detection. Apple calls this "Focus Pixels," and introduced it last year as a feature of iPhone 6 (using sensors developed by Sony). While much attention is devoted to imaging how Apple's innovations and technologies will be commodified by Android, the reverse actually seems to be happening

Samsung had earlier introduced phase detection autofocus in its Galaxy S5, but its speed to market didn't change the fact that the S5 was outsold by Apple's iPhone 5s models without the feature. iPhone 6, with Focus Pixels of its own, further trounced the Galaxy S6.

While much attention is devoted to imagining how Apple's innovations and technologies will be commodified by Android licensees, the reverse actually seems to be happening: any technical advantage introduced by others is eventually adopted by Apple (examples include LTE, NFC and barometers), while Apple's technical leaps remain largely unmatched by rivals (such as Touch ID, Continuity and 3D Touch).

Source: Samsung

Source: Samsung

Other "futuristic" ideas the company addressed included using multiple exposures composited to achieve wide dynamic range and "ISOCELL technology" that puts a barrier between pixels to increase light sensitivity and effectively "controls the absorption of electrons."

Source: Samsung

If that sounds familiar, it's because Apple introduced the concept as "deep trench isolation," in explaining its efforts to increase the pixel count within the iPhone 6s camera sensor without also increasing the noise commonly experienced as pixels get smaller as they are packed more densely to increase overall resolution.

Samsung rushed high resolution camera sensors to market before Apple, but their high megapixel counts didn't result in better photos. Instead, it resulted in low light noise and less accurate color reproduction.

While Apple explained that it was using this new technology to increase iPhone camera resolution without losing quality, Samsung stated that its goal for the same process (under a different name) was to reduce pixel size in order to help reduce the overall thickness of its phones.

Source: Samsung

Samsung stated it was reducing the pixel size of its 16MP sensor from 1.12um to 1.0um to achieve 1mm of reduced thickness. Apple reduced the pixel size of iPhone 6 from 8MP at 1.5um to 12MP at 1.22um, not primarily to reduce device thickness, but to increase photo and video capture resolution without losing quality, maintaining larger pixels than competing sensors. Pixel size reduction on its own simply makes each pixel less sensitive to light.

It's noteworthy that while Apple uses a custom version of Sony's camera sensor for iPhone 6/6s, Samsung also uses Sony's IMX240 sensor in its Galaxy S6/S6 Edge, at least in the versions it sends to reviewers. Regular users are finding that Samsung might also swap in its own ISOCELL camera sensors to save money, resulting in reduced image quality.

This all happened before

Overall, Samsung's investor conference seemed far less ambitious and confident as its event from 2013, where JK Shin, Samsung's president and chief executive of IT & Mobile, promised that the company would "play a key role in the premium smartphone market."

As AppleInsider noted at the time, this was a direct contradiction of the warning Samsung had earlier given its investors of slowing profits.

It also belied the reality that most of the phones Samsung had been—and was currently selling—were low end devices, not premium phones. Further, Samsung has been—and continues to repeatedly note—that its premium sales remain static (rather than experiencing any tremendous growth in demand as promised) and that its unit growth is coming from low end devices, which are eroding its Average Selling Price.

Source: Samsung

Back in 2013, Samsung focused upon screen resolutions, forecasting that by this year, it would be selling smartphones with 3840x2160 displays. Instead of that happening, the company is still selling "WQHD" screens, and even those are plaguing Samsung's high end devices with excessive screen resolutions that its relatively anemic Application Processors aren't quite capable of driving competitively.

Source: Samsung

In 2013, Samsung also laid out a plan for delivering 64-bit cores just like Apple had in its A7, but then actually spent two years trying to catch up.

Based on the company's still-vapor promises regarding the performance of its Exynos 8, it will remain slower at real world tasks than the A9 chip Apple has already sold by the millions in its iPhone 6s phones.

[dila813]

Just because you don’the desire them, many do. I can’t possibly control your desires.

Desire is indicated by sales at a higher price

Some of these phones are markably higher

[Swordmaker]

The point is there is a greater universe of hardware within the Android ecosystemarket

No, dial, there is FRAGMENTATION and junk. The vast majority of Android hardware is low end crap. . . not quality hardware. It just isn't and a large percentage of it cannot even connect to the Internet. That is fact.

[dila813]

Your Opinion is just that....yours

I am shopping for that junk right now, and I am willing to spend 3-6X the price for said junk.

Have an apple

[Swordmaker]

I am shopping for that junk right now, and I am willing to spend 3-6X the price for said junk.

So you say you are willing to pay 3-6 times the price for low end Android tablets and phones from white box makers who build junk they install older versions of Android on that can never be upgraded? Why would you do such a delusional thing, dila, because that is the large percentage of Android tablets and phones I was referring to. Many of those Android devices lack the ability to be updated or even connected to the web. If you WANT to buy that junk, more power to you. . . But that is what about 40% of the reported Android devices are. Junk. . . Suitable only for landfills, which is where many of them wind up because they don't sell.

Even Samsung's product mix turned out to not be what they represent. Under court order, Samsung was forced to reveal they actually ship a product mix of only about 30% smartphones, 40% feature phones, and another 30% basic dumb phones, all listed under the umbrella of their "smartphone" phone shipped statistics! Many Android makers do not even attempt to compete in the smartphone category, choosing to concentrate on the feature phone market instead because of bandwidth concerns in much of the second and third world where smartphones are of little use.

[Swordmaker]

I am shopping for that junk right now, and I am willing to spend 3-6X the price for said junk.

So you say you are willing to pay 3-6 times the price for low end Android tablets and phones from white box makers who build junk they install older versions of Android on that can never be upgraded? Why would you do such a delusional thing, dila, because that is the large percentage of Android tablets and phones I was referring to. Many of those Android devices lack the ability to be updated or even connected to the web. If you WANT to buy that junk, more power to you. . . But that is what about 40% of the reported Android devices are. Junk. . . Suitable only for landfills, which is where many of them wind up because they don't sell.

Even Samsung's product mix turned out to not be what they represent. Under court order, Samsung was forced to reveal they actually ship a product mix of only about 30% smartphones, 40% feature phones, and another 30% basic dumb phones, all listed under the umbrella of their "smartphone" phone shipped statistics! Many Android makers do not even attempt to compete in the smartphone category, choosing to concentrate on the feature phone market instead because of bandwidth concerns in much of the second and third world where smartphones are of little use.

[Swordmaker]

Just because you don't he desire them, many do. I can't possibly control your desires.

Desire is indicated by sales at a higher price

Some of these phones are markably higher

You do realize you're talking to someone with a degree in Economics who is also a retired corporate CEO, don't you? Apparently not. . . but you're wrong.

You're trying to tell me something that is patently untrue when these "higher priced" products don't sell for the manufacturer's asking price and have to be drastically discounted to attract any buyers at all. In other words, dila, desire has to be manufactured and then the price where that desire matches the buyers' willingness to part with his money has to be found. In sheer numbers, nothing matches the numbers of consumers who desire Apple's products. That's an incontrovertible fact. These other makers are merely wishing that high-price hype will convince consumers their products must be worth the asking price.

The value very seldom meets the hype and they either drop their pricing or go out of business with a large inventory of unsold, expensive product on their hands. Samsung dropped the high prices of their Galaxy S6 and Edge by almost half from their introductory asking price within four months because those products did not generate the desire required to sell in sufficiently large numbers to make a profit. Apple has seldom had that problem. . . but they did bulldoze thousands of unsold $10,000 Lisa Computers into a deep landfill in an undisclosed location in the late 1980s. Atari did the same with tens of thousands of ill conceived unsold ET video game cartridges.

You're welcome to your opinions, but not to your own interpretation of the laws of economics. For your spin to be true, those products have to sell in sufficient quantities to demonstrate a large, overwhelming demand that supports the asking price so that there are more consumers wanting the product than the supply can provide. They just don't do that, not even close. Gimmicks never do.

[dila813]

If you are who you say you are, then why are you spending so much energy arguing about things other people wrote with me.

I would think a former CEO knows better than that.

Like the ramblings of a mad man, arguing with anyone who would attempt to engage him in polite conversation with all the vehemence of an attack on the writings and statements of others.

Do you break out in an argument when you see a non-apple product user on the sidewalk?

How close to physical violence do you come?

Do you have medication?

At the very start of this, I complemented Apple as the Mercedes of phones. I don’t dislike Apple, but they are “Computing for the Masses” which I do not want for this very reason.

[ImJustAnotherOkie]

Boy are you posting to the wrong political forum. I bet you throw up in your mouth a little bit every time you read the conservative postings.

[bmwcyle]

My S4 Galaxy has outlived all the other iPhone of friends and family. I have the option of a large battery and my Galaxy needs charging every third day under heavy use. I stick with Galaxy.

[Swordmaker]

Like the ramblings of a mad man, arguing with anyone who would attempt to engage him in polite conversation with all the vehemence of an attack on the writings and statements of others.

I have not insulted you . . . but you now devolve to ad hominem attack and personal insult, the sure sign of someone without facts to back up their position in any debate. You've done this before in this discussion and I ignored it. So pathetic.

I have not rambled but have been quite succinct and stated only the facts necessary to make my point. I have not been vehement, but have countered your examples with reasoned argument, which you cannot seem to abide, being unwilling to accept criticism of your position. I have politely given you legitimate reasons why your examples did not meet the challenge. I took the time to correct your chart with up-to-date, accurate information. I did not dismiss them out-of-hand or insult you. My criticism was based on the factual nature of what you posted. . . not on your postings.

In exchange you imply that I may be violent and in need of medication when it is you who have not provided rational examples of your position. . .

You claim that Apple products are "computing for the masses" when you choose the actual platform that is followed by the vast majority of the masses. Do you not see the fallacy and illogicality of your position?

[Swordmaker]

Boy are you posting to the wrong political forum. I bet you throw up in your mouth a little bit every time you read the conservative postings.

There you go again, imputing Liberal motives to a fellow Freeper based merely on their choice of computing platform and other devices they use. You are really a bigot, Okie, with a really nasty attitude. I am probably more conservative than you will ever be.

[ImJustAnotherOkie]

It’s not that, it’s your vigor for everything Apple.

See my next post.

[CodeToad]

Just more of your Apple propaganda. I don’t see why Jim puts up with it unless you are paying him.

[dila813]

I quoted Steve Jobs, enough

[Swordmaker]

I quoted Steve Jobs, enough,/I>

No, dila, you may think you have, but you have not. Enough.