How Samsung is out-innovating Apple
edition.cnn.com
edition.cnn.com
I think Apple's next big innovation is probably not on the mobile platform, but in the living room instead. There have been rumours of an Apple-branded TV for quite some time now and Steve Jobs himself noted in an interview how he was annoyed that television sets were still pretty hard to use. I'm betting Apple will release a television in 2013 with no remote control, using Siri instead. Perhaps a nice iTunes integration as well for on-demand television. Perhaps Siri-controlled iTunes integration. When that happens people will remember why Apple is known to innovate and others are known to follow Apple's lead.
That said, it will be interesting to see what features iOS 7 and the iPhone 6 (5S?) will bring. There's been some changes within Apple. With Jonathan Ive responsible for UI interaction we might expect some big changes. It will be interesting to see what his influence will be.
I assume that's different from Apple TV from 2006, which is an HTPC? So we are talking about the big large screen, but which can not act like a computer screen. The product currently in heavy decline from the "young" generation ie those under 40.
Im curios, what benefits would a TV have now days over a home theater system with a computer screen? Larger display to lower price, but with often lower resolution*? It seems a odd product feature to base a company future on. The price difference is also only about 50% cheaper price today on a TV, a number that has shrunk consistently faster for each year.
I'm sure lots of people still prefer to watch a programme like Game of Thrones behind a television set in the living room compared to on a tablet, laptop or PC. People also hate commercials and want on-demand television and there's still plenty of opportunity in this market (in most of Europe we don't have Netflix yet, for example and many other on-demand services are rather expensive).
There's a huge number of people who watch moving images in their living rooms. Now, and in 500 years from now. Why not make a better product for that market? (That's basically how Jobs explained iPod)
And, for the record, Apple had ripped off so many features from Android and re-labeled it as 'revolutionary features'.
As for Samsung, without Google's help, I think there is a reason why they're #1 on the international display market. Do you know how many companies use Samsung's displays? Even my Sony Vaio and my Sony bravia use their displays under the hood. The display segment is where one simply cannot sustain without innovating. Samsung's leadership in displays are evidence that they can innovate alone, which is the answer to the question you've asked me. I bet the display with which you're reading HN now, uses Samsung's technology in some form or the other - That's the depth of their remarkable engineering and innovation. Can you say the same for Apple? They're just re-packagers. Someone else manufactures something for them and then they just add their logo and increase the prices by 4x, which you purchase and don't want to feel bad for, by labeling rational arguments as trolls on a public forum.
Instead of blatantly labeling me as a troll, I'd love to see you provide evidence in support of Apple's 'innovation'. Don't talk about profits, just pure innovation. You'd be surprised how little you have to talk in favor of (Apple), when it comes to innovation.
Does the retina screen count as innovation? If so who is the innovator: Apple for realizing that it should be used in phones, tablets and computers, or Samsung for designing and making it and working on the fundamental process innovations required?
Answer: both.
Both companies are obviously hugely innovative. Arguing which is more innovative is just fanboi dick waving.
in short: "I suggest you avoid the article at all costs. It is one of the most idiotic things I have ever read on the Internet, and I have read every single article by Dan Lyons!"
In short, it's the kind of tripe he claim's the CNN article is, and it's absolutely unsubstantiated fanboy drivel.
The way the author casually condescends the digitized stylus and larger size -- features that drove 15,000,000 sales in under a year -- reminds me of Apple itself, who likely also writes off this entire market segment.
Honestly, when you get this kind of a vulgar response to your article, you know you're hitting on a nerve.
And I agree with the original article: Apple's software has been playing catchup for multiple versions, isn't introducing novel features and is barely keeping up with the competition.
I agree because I recently ditched iOS for Android for this very reason!
but seriously, it's all very silly. I see it all as good fun, like cheering for your team at the footy - of course the other team sucks!
Playing catchup with what? Please enlighten me, what innovative great features have other platforms introduced since -let's say- iOS 4, that Apple has been forced to 'catch up' with in iOS 5 and 6?
The only thing I can think of is Apple Maps, which desperately needs to catch up with Google Maps. But considering you can still use Google Maps on iOS I don't really think we can write off iOS because Apple Maps is weak.
But this article was shit. If you like a stylus fine. But that is not innovation. I have 50 Treo styluses to sell you.
Stop calling things "not innovation" just because it doesn't impress you. No one put out a stylus like this, in a device like this, with software like this. The old Palm's don't compare.
Microsoft's platform is most likely Windows 8 but what's about 'Android'? There are many different GUIs for Android devices after all …
How about setting up the device without having to tether it to a "real" computer? Android came out, day one, as a self-contained, empowered computer. iOS came out as a device that was expected to have an umbilical to a computer.
How about multitasking? Apple's flavor of multitasking (the freeze-drying of processes, etc) was a virtual mirror of Android's.
I would say notification center, but the notification center in iOS is absolutely atrocious (it is almost entirely a spam vehicle for games to post solicitations). It is years behind Android there.
The widely heralded iCloud offers functionality (device backup, etc) in Android years earlier. Voice commands...in Android years earlier. Apple is brilliant at marketing every difference, but they most certainly were behind.
My iPad (3rd generation) is a glorious web appliance (Safari on iOS remains by far the best mobile browser), however iOS itself feels incredibly stale in comparison to my GS III or my wife's Nexus 4.
Most of Apple's "innovations" in iOS weren't terribly innovative by that standard either, from what I recall.
This article may be pro-samsung in a way in which most pro-apple articles are anti-samsung, but it would be unfair for us to faun over one of them but exclude the other one, it just leads to fanboyism - if we are going to have biased articles, we may as well be unbiased about the directions of the bias. (that was a mouth full!)
Here's the rub, iOS has gone down a very straightened route. It's a managed, curated, locked down experience. The static icons are because Apple wants the OS out of the way as much as possible because you're not there to stare at that, you're there to fondle whatever app you want. Android has thrown much niceness in for customising, and having windowing, non-static tiles, information widgets and what not because they know that's what some consumers want.
Lets all take a breath. It's all okay. Android is a great OS! So is iOS! They do different things which work better for different people. Look at it this way, having two companies making excellent operating systems, and two companies making excellent hardware can only help to get other companies to similarly up their game.
For what it's worth I wouldn't say Samsung is necessarily out-innovating Apple, but they are putting things together in a very, very nice way. I see as many Samsung Android devices on my commute as I do iPhones and that's not a bad thing, but I can't think of anything that Samsung has done recently that's stood right out as a massive innovation, but I don't pay as much attention as I should.
s/duck/ad/g
s/a\sduck/an ad/g
Can be done
>transfer a file via bluetooth to another phone that's not an iPhone
Can't be done (AFAIK) but is possible to transfer using more normal and useful internet protocols.
> install an app that wasn't released on the market without jail-breaking
Can be done. I do it all the time.
Can be argued that iOS not operate exactly as Android, and the opposite. Some operations are more convoluted than others (in both). However, iOS work, in average, better for the end-user than the alternatives (is very telling that the evidence in how Android is best than iOS is, mainly, in niche cases, complex operations, dev-stuff, and things that are not normal for the average user).
I don't get it.
I bought 4 weeks ago (and last week it got destroyed in a flood :( ) a resistive-screen 7 inch tablet, and I loved it.
At first, I got annoyed, because light touches did not worked, until I remembered that I could use plastic stylus with it, also my nails, other random objects, and so on.
Then I started to use it primarily instead of my Xperia Play, even having way worse hardware, because it was so much easy to use, with the stylus I can visit non-mobile webpage and click small links without issues, also I can draw, and so several other things, much easier.
But hey, I always hated touchscreens (I own a Xperia Play because at least to play games it has buttons, and I needed a smartphone, because after 5 years developing for them, not owning one was silly at least), so, don't mind me.
I wonder how it stacks, long term, against finger-based on-screen keyboard of current breed of iDevices.
On the surface they're a downright goofy looking non-necessity, but as a dude that spends all day developing a touch UI, with that much interaction I had to get one and now I can't go without one personally or professionally.
Styluses are good when emulating a pen or pencil or paint brush is good. Painting and drawing apps on tablets are pretty awesome. I really wish Apple would integrate Wacom technology.
But I don't want to pull out a stylus to browse a website or play a game or make a call, or type a message.
I hate to say this as I will either get downvoted to hell or start a fanboi war, but I really do think that if Apple had produced a stylus device for the iphone/ipad, those that are complaining would be saying quite the opposite.
It is not dissimilar at all to a mouse, or a pen, or a screwdriver, or any of those things. It's just that those are older tools compared to the touch interfaces we currently have and use to great effect, without styli. And that is awesome. That is a great thing, a beautiful simplification, and it works, and that's amazing.
You're of course welcome to use them if you prefer, but what Apple did (hey, you started it) was create a device which was simple enough and useful enough without a short stick to make that short stick as antiquated as a mouse or a pen.
They made the short stick obsolete, because it adds unneeded additional complexity. I resent your assertion that people believe this is a better method just because Apple made it that way; as though all logic and truth comes from the Great Jobs in the sky and is as He said it, amen. Quite simply, screw that. It's better because it's a simpler basic design, that's all.
The irony is that people are buying those little rubber iPhone/iPad styli like hotcakes these days. I really wish I were the person who came up with that, because the royalties must be rolling in. And damn they're good for Draw Something; you should see my girlfriend's mom's drawings, they're incredible. I admit that styli are excellent for those specialized purposes.
But for the basic use of a touch-sensitive device? As an integral part of the UI experience? No thanks. Keep it simple, stupid.
Doesn't the irony you highlight in your post regarding people buying "those little rubber iPhone/iPad styli like hotcakes these days", indicate that people find it easier to use a stylus for certain things? A stylus is certainly a part of the UX, but not an integral part.
Using your finger is not the best option for all scenarios, if that was the case we would have been dipping our finger in the ink pot instead of a quill.
?
I didn't say that.
Mobile device have been and continue to be a bit shit on the "get anything done" front for a bucketful of reasons anyway, so I tend not to care all that much if I carry around a stick in the same jacket pocket as my bluetooth mini-keyboard. Unless you count dicking around on twitter and facebook as getting things done, its a fight to do anything with a mobile interface, I'll take whatever advantage I can get.
Larger phones have been bashed with ferocity. Until the iPhone 5, of course, when (I suppose), it was done "right".
Smaller tablets were bashed with ferocity. Until the iPad Mini, of course, when it was done "right".
We've seen the same thing over and over again. It can never be that Apple is behind or isn't moving quickly enough -- it has to be spun that they're ahead by moving so slowly.
Plenty of things are bashed by the Apple-sphere, what ever that is, and those products don't do well. Since you've turned this into some weird Android vs. iOS thing I'd like to point out that very few manufacturers, of handsets/tablets running Android, are doing well.
"Larger phones have been bashed with ferocity. Until the iPhone 5, of course, when (I suppose), it was done "right"."
So what's new here? I still don't like larger phones and probably never will. I'm actually not sure why you wrote this or what conclusion you feel it supports.
"Smaller tablets were bashed with ferocity. Until the iPad Mini, of course, when it was done "right"."
No source cited so I'd just like to point out that the actual tablets were being bashed not the size.
"We've seen the same thing over and over again. It can never be that Apple is behind or isn't moving quickly enough -- it has to be spun that they're ahead by moving so slowly."
It also can never be that Apple is doing just fine. Honestly I'm not even sure what you mean by 'behind.'
You doubt the existence of something, yet make firm statements about it. That is an odd choice of statements (where you essentially want to have it both ways).
There is an industry of pundits and mouthpieces who exist on the backs of Apple's fanbase, with John Gruber and Philip Elmer-Dewitt being two of the most obvious: They make a living essentially heralding whatever Apple does, linking to others who do the same, and deriding and belittling those who do otherwise. This does not exist for most other industries (is there even an Android equivalent to John Gruber? I mean, there are probably people trying to be, but most people don't need that confirmation of their likes so such a tactic is simply unprofitable in most other realms).
Since you've turned this into some weird Android vs. iOS thing I'd like to point out that very few manufacturers, of handsets/tablets running Android, are doing well.
What a rejoinder. Few handset/tablet makers running anything but iOS are doing well, aside from Samsung. Which, of course, is the topic of this discussion.
No source cited so I'd just like to point out that the actual tablets were being bashed not the size.
That is the revisionist history to try to make lemonade out of lemons. Only when Steve made his infamous statement Android had already (for years) had a density-independent layout structure that adapts screen elements to size (quite unlike iOS, if that contrast needs to be made). The argument was utter nonsense, and it remains nonsense.
I might not agree with what was posted but I'd like to give the benefit of the doubt.
Guess the source:
"Well, one could increase the resolution of the display to make up for some of the difference. It is meaningless, unless your tablet also includes sandpaper, so that the user can sand down their fingers to around one quarter of the present size. Apple's done extensive user-testing on touch interfaces over many years, and we really understand this stuff. There are clear limits of how close you can physically place elements on a touch screen before users cannot reliably tap, flick, or pinch them. This is one of the key reasons we think the 10-inch screen size is the minimum size required to create great tablet apps."
Mini-fying devices doesn't quite cut it as innovation. Although Apple is doing it exceptionally well.
But just because they aren't releasing anything monthly, and in 10 different form factors, does not mean they aren't developing stuff to be released when they think it is ready.
Most companies pump stuff out and let the consumer decide. Rather than building one perfect phone, they release 20 and call it innovation.
Apple never works that way.
"The four-product lineup is long gone. Today, Apple ships 24 distinct iPhone hardware models in two screen sizes. The iPad is even more diverse: 48 distinct hardware models, two screen sizes, and two densities of the larger size. They also sell 34 iPods, and a surprisingly diverse and conflicted notebook line."
The 4-product lineup Marco is talking about was the old Apple Matrix of Consumer/Pro and Desktop/Mobile comprising the iBook, PowerBook, iMac, and PowerMac.
Some will object that's a user hack. Well, it's also a user hack that lets the Note 10.1 use more than the 20 apps designed for it to also multi-window.
"XXX is an evil company!"
"Not as bad as XXX, who are much worse!!"
"No way, XXX are worse!!! You're just an XXX fanboy!!!!"
http://www.businessinsider.com/commenter?id=4cc19fa8cadcbb92...
It is bizarre how people are either desperately telling people that they needn't look at this article -- for it shall pervert their minds -- or are attacking the author. I haven't even read the article but it must be good if it yields this sort of knee-jerk response.