Posted on 11/21/2015 5:29:56 PM PST by Swordmaker
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
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
It’s not that, it’s your vigor for everything Apple.
See my next post.
Just more of your Apple propaganda. I don’t see why Jim puts up with it unless you are paying him.
I quoted Steve Jobs, enough
No, dila, you may think you have, but you have not. Enough.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.