Samsung is imploding in China | Hacker News Reader

Samsung is imploding in China

uk.businessinsider.com

150 pointscarlchenet146 comments

Samsung smartphone/tablet hardware is fine, but their Android "support" is a joke. No Android updates after a few weeks. Samsung still sells some Android 2.3.x and 4.1.x devices and most of their devices never received the 2.3->4 and 4->5 update. Some of their flagship devices are also a bit overpriced. They used to offer a replaceable battery and an SD-card slot, but its gone in their latest flagship S6 Edge as well.

Many early Samsung smartphone/tablet customers turn away after their experiences. LG, HTC, Sony, Lenovo and many little known Chinese products are cheaper and usually better nowadays.

Samsung TVs already use Bada/Tizen OS, and Samsung announced that their S5 flagship phone would be released also with Tizen. The question is why Samsung hasn't switched to Tizen yet? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tizen , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bada

I just got my 5.0.1 update for Verizon Samsung S4. 5.0 has been out for how long, I'm thankful I didn't get the original included memory leak

I believe I received it for my S4 (AT&T) about 3 weeks ago, and it's having trouble installing for whatever reason. I'm pretty peeved it took so long to get it and will probably switch back to Apple the next go around.

> The question is why Samsung hasn't switched to Tizen yet?

This might be one of the reasons: http://what.thedailywtf.com/t/enlightened/8795

(hits Wikipedia) ... “The Enlightenment Foundation Libraries (EFL) are a set of free and open source graphics libraries that grew out of the development of the Enlightenment window manager”

“...And did I mention EFL is the basis of all applications on Tizen?”

Oh dear.

One of the trolls on that page says that it's impossible that Evas is faster with software rendering than other window managers are with openGL accelleration.

this means none of them have used EFL for anything more than a Toy; Every E convert knows that Raster's Software renderer is an absolute beast in performance.

I have bought my two Samsung phones through Verizon because they have the best coverage in the mountains where I live.

Verizon slowly but surely seems to roll out updates.

Unless you have an unlocked phone, your carrier determines if/when updates happen, right?

I think it depends on the device. I'd wager that most carrier-branded handset variants are indeed set up to only allow updates pushed by the carrier but I'm not sure that applies to everything. I believe iOS updates can still be initiated by the user. I'm not experienced with iOS on Verizon so I don't know if they managed to screw that up too but as far as I know, Apple has held firm on that front.

I don't use Verizon but friends who do tend to complain that they are often stuck waiting for updates. Even when the unbranded version of a handset has updates available, there is no easy way to install them on a Verizon phone due to locked bootloaders and such. If the VZW variant has different hardware, then even a standard factory image won't do you any good since they will be built for the "everyone else" version.

I really do feel for people whose only choice is Verizon. At least with AT&T you can usually just buy the standard hardware and pop in your SIM to avoid carrier obstructionism. With VZW, they really get you by the short hairs.

If you have an iPhone, the carrier has nothing to do with your updates.

Every middleman slows the update process down. Nexus devices get the Android updates first, then unlocked phones and then telekom provider. Some phone manufactures are known to provide updates faster than others or at all, some provide it only for a few weeks. It's all your choice with Android.

If you want/need a very good signal quality, buy one made of mainly of plastic instead of metal material; or an external antenna. The brand doesn't matter that much.

SD card slots on Android 4.4+ are next to useless anyway.

SD card slot works fine in Android 5.x, a similar experience as in Android 2.3. One can install apps there, one can put private files there, it even support per app-storage there. Sure some old apps may not work with the newer Android 5 APIs, but there are usually alternatives. What do you miss, what do I miss?

And it's far cheaper to insert a 128GB SD card than buying a phone with such storage capacity upfront. Also changing a SD card or upgrading one is possible too.

Replaceable sim-cards/sd-cards/battery/etc are good for the consumer.

So much for all those who said that Android is "only Samsung". In China there is an explosion of local brands which sell Android, and they're eroding Samsung in a still booming market. That's the fact.

Basically Samsung is getting eaten from the bottom much like they did to Nokia a decade ago.

Effectively the same thing Samsung did to Sony.

When people said it, it was true. Even now Samsung make the majority of money in the Android world.

Yes, but the argument IIRC was that Samsung had attained an unassailable position, so Android being open wasn't really making any difference.

Instead, in the latest ads that came to my mailbox (snail mail in Italy), I was struck by the fact that most of the advertised phones were from Chinese brands I had never heard of before...

I too see many cheap Android devices for sale from noname Chinese brands. But are you tempted into buying them?

Considering I'm a poor startupper... yes :)

Are the brands you are referring to, by any chance Xiaomi and Huawei?

Here in India at least, these Chinese brands along with Lenovo have pretty much become household names in respect to mobile phones.

And they do make good, solid, innovative products at half the cost of their Korean counterparts. From an Indian perspective, It is no surprise that Samsung is bleeding to these (at least in the low and mid segments).

What is truly amazing to me is the pace with which the reputation of these mobile companies were built. It took years and even decades for the Koreans (Samsung and LG in electronics, and Hyundai in cars) to be taken in the same respect as the Japanese. The trust and reputation of the chinese brands (in the mobile space at least) were built almost overnight (and sooner in cases like OnePlus). There is certainly a Tom Sawyer effect in play with use of marketing tactics such as invite-only and flash sales.

The OnePlus invite-only marketing tactics was very successful, from what I heard. Even their reputation seem to be good.

Though 5.5" is very big. Most chinese built smartphones are 5" or bigger.

There are only three high end flagship smartphones that are below 5" (ca. 4.5"): Apple iPhone6, Sony Xperia Z3 Compact and Samsung Alpha.

Their reputation is good because they spam the internet as part of their marketing ploy. They've got very real, and very serious touchscreen issues that basically every phone will suffer from at some point.

And they either don't know how to fix it, or know how to fix it and aren't willing to spend the money to do so. Do a google search of "oneplus touchscreen issue" and let the light of reality shine on your head.

Good to know. A workmate owns one.

I don't get the huge screen size trend anyway. About 4.5" (iPhone, Samsung Alpha, Sony XPeria Z3 Compact, etc.) is already the physical limit to fit comfortable in many pockets and is certainly big enough. Tell that to most manufactures who produce the mass of 5.5" phones.

Z3c is by far the best phone I've ever owned. I ended up returning it, however, because Sony's version of android sucks. I want a pure android experience (or close to it), and somewhat quick updates. A Z3c with stock android is literally my dream phone. Perfect size, waterproof, great camera, just an all around awesome phone (other than Sony's poor software).

Actually not, I was very surprised because they weren't either of those - which I already knew, especially Huawei. There were also a couple of Huawei ones, but there were plenty of other ones I had never heard about.

> Even now Samsung make the majority of money in the Android world

Making the majority of money is completely irrelevant to actual market-share. Who makes the majority of devices?

Why would market share numbers be interesting when the switching costs are so low? You live by the commodity market, you die by the commodity market.

As a customer and consumer I prefer a diverse market full of smaller actors, than a market dominated by one Giant actor doing whatever the fuck it likes, just because it can.

This should be the natural state of any market. Why do you prefer monopolies charging you more than they need to? What do you find better or more "interesting" about that?

The point is that in saying that Samsung derives benefit from market share, you have to acknowledge that that benefit is reduced because there's no good way for Samsung to use that market share advantage to keep people attached to their platform, because they don't have control over their platform.

Making money is the only significant metric. They may have a large market share but if they're not making money from it who cares?

As a non-stock-holder in said companies, I couldn't give a rats ass in who makes the most money.

Having a dozen companies each making a little money represents a much healthier market than one giga-corp taking the lions-share. What we're seeing in China is the market moving to a healthier, more natural and sustainable state.

I find that much more important. As a consumer/customer that benefits me.

Whose interest do you have in mind?

This is like celebrating that the Windows PC market is no longer "Dell" and "Gateway" circa 2000. True, but eMachines and similar low-margin makers don't necessarily portend a healthy, innovating market. The Chinese upstarts look promising, but with razor-thin margins, there will be strong incentive to include crapware and cut corners (RAM, sourcing internals from spotty suppliers to save a few cents,etc). Without an Android high end, it will be a lot harder for anyone to fast follow Apple features and accessories.

This is what really bums me out about Motorola. I couldn't stand Motorola when they were making those "DRROOOOIIIIDDD" phones for Verizon. They always seemed slow, unreliable, and overpriced.

Then when Google took over they really nailed it with the Moto X and the unusually capable budget models like the Moto G. My Moto X wasn't quite as cheap as my Nexus 5 ($450 vs $350) but it still wasn't the $650-800 of the usual higher-end Galaxies and iPhones. The build quality is excellent, the customizations are subtle and unobtrusive (active display, etc), and I've been on Kitkat since shortly after it was released.

But more recently, I'm not as confident that they'll keep it up post-Google. I had to deal with their support team for an issue with another device and it was maddening. I really hope that isn't indicative of things to come, especially since Google seems to be positioning Nexus as more of a competitor in the contract/subsidy market with $650+ phones and deals with carriers.

I really like having a company that makes more reasonably priced (and still not crappy) options but I think I'll still choose paying more over ever going back to Samsung again. With them, you pay top prices but get mediocre results at best.

Koreans are also extremely image conscious and love parading around with prestigious international luxury brands - possibly even more so than the Chinese. They are also extremely proud of Korea as a nation and tend to favor Korean brands in everything other than luxury prestige goods. And Samsung is basically their national icon.

So I imagine the average Korean must be quite in conflict when buying a smartphone - the recognized international symbol of smartphone prestige and luxury (the iPhone) vs the nationalistic Galaxy. But given their booming economy, I guess many just buy both...

Same as any nationality, ever.

Certainly not everywhere. In many nations people scoff at their local brands in favor of international ones, and people tend to buy what is popular and offers more features, regardless of where the company is based.

> In many nations people scoff at their local brands

maybe because it's shit and that people know they can't be lied to?

I have certainly seen truth in this with regards to beer. I moved to Spain a few years ago, and was drinking San Miguel.

Someone asked me, "Why are you drinking that crap?" "This is San Miguel, premium lager" "No its not, that's the crap struff"

Its marketed as a Premium lager in the UK. Likewise in Mexico, Corona is the bog standard crap lager, yet it is sold as a moderately expensive lager in many other countries.

And Budweiser is sold as premium in Europe, Asia.

Nah, even we know it is shit.

Yeah, the "import" tag does seem to work that way. I guess the idea is that something worth importing from overseas must offer something you can't get for less at home. In reality, it's a great way to rebrand and market.

When I studied abroad in Ireland back in the 90's, Guinness was generally as cheap as any other mainstream domestic beer (about £2 a pint at the local) while Budweiser was a more expensive import. Here in the states, Bud is your cheap, bog-standard beer...not a discount brand but nothing a "beer fan" would care about.

And they brand Stella Artois and Carling as fancy import beer over here but everyone I know from Europe jokes that those are the sorts of beers you get when you just want to get drunk and get in fights.

Then there's Fosters....do they even sell that in Australia? Not super popular over here in the US but it's still marketed as some sort of quality import while I've never met an Aussie who touches the stuff.

It goes both ways.

Swedes really liked Ericsson phones. They also really liked Nokia phones.

Finns really liked Nokia phones. They also really like iPhones.

Americans really like iPhones. They also really like Samsung Galaxies.

Etc.

Downvoters, look up Dunning-Kruger.

It's not that simple.

Many Koreans adore Samsung as a national icon, and it is indeed true that Samsung's electronics division alone accounts for a sizable percentage of Korea's GDP. But there are also a lot of Koreans who resent Samsung and go out of their way to avoid buying from them. The influence of chaebol [1] on the Korean economy and politics is a contentious topic, often split along ideological lines.

In addition, the smartphone market in South Korea is extremely convoluted. Sticker prices are artificially inflated, and manufacturers, carriers, and retailers all throw around arbitrary discounts as a weapon to steal their competitors' customers. For a lot of people who just want a phone that works, the choice has less to do with the brand or the features, and more to do with whichever model happens to be the best deal at any given hour. Nobody praises anyone for buying a Galaxy or chastises anyone for buying an iPhone. And if you don't like either, you just buy LG.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaebol

> Sticker prices are artificially inflated, and manufacturers, carriers, and retailers all throw around arbitrary discounts as a weapon to steal their competitors' customers.

Sounds fairly similar to the state of the US market (minus the competing part). Devices marketed as "flagships" sell for $600-800+ but carriers use heavy discounts to get people to sign long service contracts. Lots of people would rather spend $200 up front and sign a 2-year contract for $90/mo than spend $400-500 up front with a SIM and $30-45/mo prepaid service. Since you're in a contract, you only really have to think about it every two years and at that point, most find it easier to just re-up, drop another $200, and get whatever the current must-have device is.

It's a bit different. Flagship models typically have an inflated sticker price in the $1000 range, and a long-term contract is only one component (and a rather insignificant one) of the overall discount.

Manufacturers and retailers often add arbitrary discounts and rebates on top of it, so if you're really lucky, you can get a brand new flagship phone for free. But the next person will have to pay $700 for it, even with the same contract, while the store across the street sells it for $400 because they're getting a big rebate from the carrier this week.

And most of the above are straightforward discounts and rebates, not something that is sneaked into the monthly plan like in the U.S. The price of the phone after the discount is divided by 24 or 30 and tacked onto the phone bill as a separate line item. You can pay it off anytime you want.

The government is trying to regulate the industry into making the pricing structure more transparent to customers, but the general consensus is that the government is failing.

The Samsung-branded Android is horrible, though.

I really think Google's permissiveness in allowing vendors to bundle their crapware really kills any prestige the brand might have had. iOS really isn't anything special, but when compared to the literal dogshit that Samsung puts on their phones, it's hard not to make a favourable comparison in favour of Apple's operating system.

I used to think Android had bad performance until I got my first Nexus-series device, at which point I realized that "Vanilla Android" is actually a pretty good OS. It's bothersome that seemingly nobody's out there making this point.

Samsung's insistence on bundling crapware is killing Android.

I'm always amazed at the crap that people put up with on Android phones. My Moto G is half as powerful as my wife's Samsung, and feels massively more responsive, and I don't have to put up with their god awful UI "enhancements".

This. When my Galaxy S3 went for a swim, I "downgraded" to a first-generation Moto G. The lack of crapware and Samsung "enhancements" makes it a far better phone -- for less than half the price. Unless their OS philosophy changes, there's no way I'd buy Samsung again.

> literal dogshit that Samsung puts on their phones

Since when do Samsung literally put dogshit on their phones?

Google isn't exactly setting a high standard with their buggy OS updates and crappy apps like hangouts.

> crappy apps like hangouts.

What's wrong with Hangouts? I quite like having an all-in-one text message + internet message + phone and video call app that I can use from my phone and computer web browser seamlessly...

messages that don't send

people that never appear online, even when you appear online to them

the ui disaster, and how I had to google to figure out how to sign out of it

my phone staying signed in and eating messages that I would much rather have had delivered to my laptop where I was actively conversing

all of this on a nexus running stock 4.4.latest

I prefer NOT to have it take over SMS messaging because I want to know that the person will receive the message. If I wanted to get in touch with you, there is a conscious decision as to whether I instant message you, ring you, video call you, send an SMS, visit you in person or send you a letter. This shouldn't be removed or hidden - the reliability of the transport medium is important!

Half of my contacts never get messages from me in Hangouts. This makes it unreliable, and therefore useless.

Additionally, if I video call someone (eg my wife sat the other side of the room), Hangouts informs me that she is not available for a video call. But she has zero notifications or alerts or ringing or ANYTHING.

The inability to see if someone is online/offline also makes it useless. If I am having a conversation with someone sat next to me, I would like to know if they're sat next to me else I'll be talking to a wall. Chatting with people on Hangouts is like talking to a wall.

It truly is bad.

EDIT: I noticed the INSTANT downvote after writing this. Are you disagreeing with me on Hangouts or something? Or are you saying that I made all of this up or something? Hangouts does not work for me, full stop. I have used Android since 1.5 and Talk was far superior. The lack of proper UI (screen-width listview for contacts????) and behaviour on Hangouts (I am using a tablet) does not encourage decent applications. Compare the quality of Hangouts to GMail on a tablet for reference.

Weird, I've found hangouts to be nothing but great with no missing messages.. however i (and pretty much everyone i talk to) just use it on iOS/chrome and not tied into sms like iMessage. The only issue I've had is it tends to chow through my battery.

When i was playing around with an andriod you could choose to have it take over sms or not, is that no longer an option?

> When i was playing around with an andriod you could choose to have it take over sms or not, is that no longer an option?

No it's still an option. They just didn't bother to look for it, or don't realise that they may not have the phone number and Google profile of their contacts synced...

But yes, if the person you're messaging has a phone number and Hangouts profile, and those are applied to the same contact, you can choose to SMS them or send a Hangouts message.

I have it disabled for SMS messages. I am not so much complaining that it offers SMS tie-in, more that it is unreliable in its transportation, so knowing how you're sending a message is more important if you want the person to receive it.

The problem exists for iPhone users as well I think - Messages will send via SMS or Internet and there is confusion amongst my relatives with regard to it. They don't know if they've sent an SMS or if it's gone via the Internet, so I won't get messages on my Mac/iPad because it's gone via SMS etc. etc.

Muddying the method of communication is a disservice.

The problem is you don't even try to make hangouts work for you. You complain that you can't even choose between SMS and instant chat, yet hangouts offers that effortlessly. And you ca see someone online/offline, you can even see exactly the last time they opened the app.

It's fine to not like Hangouts, but your complaints are just plain false.

No. The more reasonable explanation is that the OP is experiencing issues that don't manifest in your situation. It doesn't mean his complaints are necessarily false.

You seem to act like software never has bugs.

>> You seem to act like software never has bugs.

So every piece of software ever made sucks?

The quality of hangouts shouldn't be decided on anecdotal bug findings.

you should have told him he's using it wrong

I do try and make Hangouts work for me. I ring my brother using Chrome on my Mac and he doesn't get notified.

My other brother will send messages to me via Hangouts from his phone and it doesn't appear on my phone (running Talk), and won't appear as a notification every time on my tablet (running Hangouts). Only when I log into Gmail on my laptop do I get a popup regarding the message. This makes it unreliable.

I also attempt to video call my family from my tablet using Hangouts - they don't get notified, either those running Talk or those running Hangouts. I try ringing them from my laptop and they don't get notified.

If I call my brother from my phone running Talk, he gets notified. If I call my brother from the SAME ACCOUNT on my tablet running Hangouts, he doesn't get notified.

Your understanding of online/offline is different to mine then. If I am talking to someone next to me and they walk off, knowing when they were last next to me is of no use to me if I wish to continue talking to them. I need to know that they are still right next to me.

This is the way it used to behave in Talk and also the way it STILL behaves in Gmail chat, just NOT Hangouts on mobile. Hangouts tells me when they were last seen yet lists everyone I know in the contacts list. It would be far far far far far more useful to show those that are online NOW, not were online 2 days ago in my list. This is the way IM has behaved since I don't know when: for examples, see MSN Messenger, Yahoo! Messenger, Google Talk, ICQ, face-to-face conversation etc. etc. etc.

I've had an issue where messages will appear out of order, or the end user won't get it at the time, but then it will just randomly pop into the conversation like 20 minutes later

Not disagreeing with your experiences (because they're yours, not mine) but I've been pretty happy with Hangouts. I default to Hangouts because most everyone I chat with has it installed and it performs better (for me) than SMS/MMS which can be slow, limited, and compress the hell out of attached media.

But if someone doesn't use it, or isn't online, I can just tap the little voice bubble icon (mobile version) on the bottom of the chat where you type in your message and it lets you switch to SMS and back.

Also that is weird that you don't see people as online/offline. Mine (again, mobile version) shows the person with a green voice bubble if they are online or a grey one if they aren't. It shows the last time they were seen and inside the chat, it shows their little avatar/icon below the last message they read.

I can certainly understand wanting to use a different SMS client (which I'm pretty sure you can do easily) and being able to choose different default apps is one of the things I like about Android in general. I haven't used it on a tablet since I broke my Nexus 7 but from what I've seen in the web version and the phone version (both iOS and Android), it's gotten much better since the initial move from Talk to Hangouts.

Hangouts gets slower with every version, to the point that my older dual-core phone can no longer run it at all -- it just hangs.

It's a bit half-assed, at least on phones, especially with its SMS handling.

And most "branded" Android distributions still manage to be worse.

I just wish they'd made a real effort to make Android more open - say make a real push to get commitment from all OEMs to support ASOP. That way it would've been much easier to make different Android distributions, than it is now. Unfortunately, Google does not only seem to not care about that, but is actively moving much of the useful APIs to closed source, locked down Google properties.

At least we still have Linux and Mozilla (and Canonical), so I still think more open mobile/tablet/phone platforms are comming. They might run Android apps -- or might not. They might be able to work with a workable for-profit/pay marketplace/app-store (AFAIK the only working such market place for open OS' is Steam -- maybe Valve will eat everyone's lunch in the end. Steam for mobile apps and games? Why not.).

Hangout exemplifies everything that is bad with the path Google is on. It replaces a system based on open standards, that (mostly, except for federation?) welcomed any and all existing clients -- and a system that allowed for having separate apps for handling IM and SMS (say, maybe you wanted your IM to alwasy use OTR, but not for SMS).

The sad thing is, contrary to what Google claims, I don't think publishing a Google app that did most things would have been untenable while basing the work off of existing standards. I think it would probably have been easier.

Adopt an standardized OS would push manufacturers out of business.

They don't want to be recognized as another android phone, because then consumers would simply move tho the cheapest capable ( or faster, or better camera) android phone.

My thought is that Samsung need that it's phones be seen as a totally ( and worth) product that Moto X. So they can monetize on this perceived value.

I don't think they'll be able to hold off comodization of the handset market much longer. Then again: Apple is doing well on x86 (laptops). We'll see.

Google is on the forefront of bundling crapware. Why do I need freaking Cloud Print, Google Docs and other crap I did not ask for explicitly? I did not ask for it. Only expect two things by default: the store app and Chrome.

honestly, I am underwhelmed by android chrome, switched to mobile firefox (with adblock plus) and removed chrome icon. On desktops, I don't get the appeal of chrome at all... too resource-hungry for my taste.

The more somebody thinks he know whats better for me than myself, and pushes stuff down my throat, the more I resist, regardless of added value. same for school, same for these things

slightly off-topic, but i'm looking really forward to having firefox released on iOS. Ads really are killing the whole mobile web experience..

You can get rid of ads on iOS now by using something like Weblock¹ (or use your own proxy server).

――――――

¹ — https://www.weblockapp.com/

Not sure if I trust weblock, but my Raspberry Pi functions as a DNS server with a few ad domain lists and it works 99% of the time. No need for a proxy server.

To be fair Apple have a load of crapware too. The whole ecosystem runs off of iTunes. This alone is enough to ensure I will never buy an iOS device. I agree wholeheartedly that the Samsung Android is really annoying too. There is nothing worse than having a bunch of apps you can't uninstall but also have no interest in using. Now they want to even bundle facebook! Pointless.

It hasn't really run off iTunes for 3-4 years now. I can't remember the last time I had to launch it. Besides, whilst iTunes isn't great, if most crapware was even as good as iTunes then there wouldn't be much of a problem.

I agree. IMHO iTune is definitely a poor excuse for something that would be better run with tabs in a browser but I'm more concerned with things like the Apple Watch application or The Weather Channel that I can't remove from my iPhone.

The non-removable Apple apps on iOS that exist only to up-sell other Apple "value add" services like Newsstand, Apple Watch, iBooks, Game Centre even iCloud to lesser extent are far more annoying to me.

You can probably disable them from the child lock section, which just outright hides the app.

What ?

(a) The whole ecosystem doesn't run off iTunes. You can setup, manage, buy etc without needing it. It's needed on OSX for buying music/movies/books but that's hardly surprising.

(b) There has never been any talk of or intention to bundle Facebook. It would actually be a pretty bad move for Facebook since it could be seen to be a pretty anticompetitive move.

To be fair, most OEMs have tuned down their customizations compared to the 2.x era.

The Moto G runs a relatively clean version of Android but even in that case some of the additions of Motorola made me cringe. It generates 'help' messages in the first days of usage that I have found very confusing for new smartphone users.

I wish that Google would control its software more tightly, OEMs just can't be left to their own devices, they will always feel the need to make their phones stand apart by any mean necessary.

I would like to be wrong, but I doubt it will happen anytime soon, Google would lose way too much marketshare with such a move.

It doesn't make sense to mention "Moto G". Google owned Motorola during that era. In the meanwhile Google sold Motorola again and recent models come with a new customized UI.

Most companies like Samsung, HTC, Sony, Motorola, etc. customize Android. Some more (Samsung), some less (Sony, Motorola). Plain Android are on Google and Chinese devices.

AFAIK, Motorola started lightening their custom skin before Google bought them and continues to ship lightly skinned devices.

"Samsung's insistence on bundling crapware is killing Android."

Sadly, the same thing applies to all smartphone manufacturers, Nexus being the exception. The amount of useless apps that hog scarce resources and that the everyday user can't uninstall end up compromising the user experience.

To give a counter-opinion in favour of Samsung, I am using a Galaxy Tab S 8.4, and I find useful some of their custom ROM features like Power Saving mode (which restricts background data and runs in black-and-white mode), the split screen mode (very useful when say comparing excerpts from 2 book, or say running a calculator and another app.

Yes, they do try to bundle a few additional third-party apps like Flipboard, Evernote, and Dropbox. I wouldn't call these bloatware as these are high quality apps that most people would actually like and find useful, but I am mildly annoyed at the imposition. They also have a few of their own google-like apps and services like S Voice, S Planner and S Finder. These are basically attempts by Samsung to pull a Google (which frankly, they don't have the chops for). On the whole, i would say these additions are only mildly annoying since performance hasn't been much impacted, probably because of the hardware(but this may change with time and updates).

After buying each of my Samsung phones from Verizon, I spent about an hour researching which apps I could safely remove. I wanted to buy a Google phone, but I was told that there were problems using unlocked phones on Verizon. Is this true?

I see it a lot like Windows PC OEMs. Microsoft makes Windows. You can install it on anything that will run it. On its own, it has its strengths and weaknesses but it is a generally capable PC operating system.

But anyone who has dealt with Windows PCs for the past decade or two are familiar with the concept of doing a wipe and a fresh install on some poor chump's laptop or desktop because it came loaded with so much garbage from Dell or Gateway or HP that the thing ran like utter shit.

Thankfully, with a desktop OS, you can do that but on mobile, since the OS needs to be built with all sorts of proprietary drivers "baked in" it's not a matter of just installing base Android and running an update process to install the drivers for chipset and radios and other stuff.

It was bad enough when cheap PCs gave the entire platform a bad name because in theory you could fix that with an hour or two of work. But with something like a phone, it can be damn near impossible to get hold of "stock" Android properly ported to your device. Even when a factory image exists, it may require more tweaking and bypassing than most people are comfortable with to get the thing installed.

This does indeed reflect poorly on the OS as a whole but since OEMs only see Android as the solution to a "we need an OS for our hardware" problem, they don't seem to have much stake in the overall impression of Android.

After having a couple of HTC phones and a Samsung phone, I just started buying Nexus or Nexus-like devices (like the Moto X) because, like you, I actually enjoy using Android when my devices aren't kept on outdated versions and loaded with unwanted addons.

I hate how every 2 months I get some random app automatically installed by Samsung on my Galaxy S4.

The blame is also with the customers that insist on buying Samsung (to then complain about their phones being crap) instead of giving other manufacturers a try.

The UI of HTC phones has consistently been very good (I prefer it to stock Android by a mile) and the Sony one is quite decent. It's mainly Samsung TouchWiz that sucks, and it's a pity because that's all the Android most people see.

You've accurately stereotyped but no Korean I know would be in conflict...I mean for a minute I thought you were talking about North Korea.

North koreans prefer the iPhone because the logo resembles something edible

Korean here. I know you are generalising but there are a lot of Koreans who hate Samsung. They are above the law, the Lee family is like the aristocrats before the French revolution, wield monopolistic powers and are a big bully.

Problem is, Koreans don't have a lot of choices when it comes to phones. You could either buy a Samsung phone, which are extremely cheap, have a big screen, nice colours and are overall good phones, or you could buy an LG which is seen to be inferior in every aspect. Then you have Apple and honestly, a lot of people do choose Apple but the price of a typical Samsung is so much cheaper.

So I guess a lot of Koreans buy Samsung because they don't really have another choice.

Re your comment about Koreans being image conscious and materialistic, I could not agree with you anymore. We are the most materialistic race on the planet probably. Not to mention proud.

So it's like: fuck you Samsung but thanks for making Korean a little bit more relevant in the tech industry.

Samsung makes a lot of the components for the iPhone and other smartphones. Even if their branded devices crater, they'll be fine.

Apple routinely bounces back and forth between suppliers.

I would imagine Samsung would much prefer the guaranteed income into their components division from Samsung phone sales rather than intermittent incomes from Apple.

One more Korean here.

"fuck you Samsung but thanks for making Korean a little bit more relevant in the tech industry."\n

-> I would have concurred 3-5 years ago, but I disagree now. I think now Samsung is the bottleneck which functions as an engineer hog and nefariously undermines their productivity/potential.

Take Tizen. An Army of 1,000+ developers have been working on it for years. What do they have now?

I am living in Finland which used to be the country of Nokia and the country is rebuilding itself post-Nokia. South Korea can do the same "without Samsung".

> the country is rebuilding itself post-Nokia

Surely you mean "post financial crisis". Nokia was big, but not that big, certainly not compared to the might of Samsung. Finland has been doing fine ever since joining the EU, and the ups and downs have been the same as most EU countries, with or without Nokia.

I think what is meant is "the Finnish tech industry is rebuilding since Nokia left".

The difference between Nokia and Samsung is that Nokia does not have supermarkets, home appliances, television channels, healthcare products, and more (although chaebol aren't supposed to have retail banking I believe still). Samsung going out of business for Korea would be like Google, Halliburton, GE, and Ford going out of business at the same time to the US economy - rather devastating I'd imagine and would take a good while to recover even though there's still a bit of competition across areas that they do business in.

Not to mention Techwin: http://www.samsungtechwin.com/product/product_05_01_01.asp

Why is LG seen to be inferior in every aspect? I personally think LG has better phones than Samsung, especially the UI. TouchWiz is horrible.

Agreed the LG UI is very nice (in comparison to Samsung's). I have an LG G3 and absolutely love it. Correction: I used to love it until I received the Lollipop upgrade which essentially blocks a small little feature not many users care about - notifications. Yes since upgrading I can no longer receive notifications unless I disable wifi. And even then notifications sometimes appear several hours later [1][2]

[1] http://forums.androidcentral.com/lg-g3/520160-updated-lollip...

[2] http://www.reddit.com/r/LGG3/comments/32l4xj/verizon_is_awar...

> Re your comment about Koreans being image conscious and materialistic, I could not agree with you anymore.

I think you meant "I could not agree with you any more" (it is not possible for me to agree with you more than I already am).

What you've written reads more like "I used to agree with you but something has changed to make me update my beliefs".

I got your point, but it confused me at first. English can be weird sometimes.

I could not agree with you more.

> So I imagine the average Korean must be quite in conflict when buying a smartphone - the recognized international symbol of smartphone prestige and luxury (the iPhone) vs the nationalistic Galaxy.

I think you mean the one flavour of international symbol of smartphone prestige (Samsung Galaxy) vs another flavour of international symbol of smartphone prestige (iPhone).

Outside silicon valley, Android is actually quite well perceived and you're not looked at as an hobo or weirdo for using anything not an iPhone.

It may be hard to believe, but try to think differently every once in a while ;)

less than scientific surveyor here:

I was all over Korea for a month last Summer and it definitely seemed that Samsung/LG phones were 90% of what I saw. Especially on the metro in Seoul. The few iPhones I saw were all older models. If you have something like an LG G3 and above, you can get LTE Advance speeds in Seoul which is quite astounding to experience. 300mbit on your phone!

Do they have sufficient storage on them to store all that data they're downloading? I notice that Apple is still offering 16GB devices which I can only imagine will be full within nanoseconds given LTE Advance speeds (although they probably don't sell the GSM model with 16GB, right?). Do Android devices still come in 16GB models over there? I am always saddened to see such small storage on devices.

EDIT: Someone's on a downvote party for my comments today I think.

Most Koreans are interested in streaming services, not downloading. Streaming video, Podcasts, movies etc.

On top of that the system works underground in the subway

and on top of that there's digital tv everywhere also

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Multimedia_Broadcastin...

Many phones in Korea support DMB (and it also works on the subway).

Thanks, very informative.

Most Koreans have a love/hate relationship with Samsung. The family that runs it is generally not thought well of, but it's so pervasive a company that it's virtually impossible to avoid. The electronics division alone is larger than Apple, and you can almost go cradle to grave living in, wearing, driving, eating Samsung products made by their other sizable divisions. And your life insurance might also be from Samsung, so when you die, your funeral costs are covered.

In what sense is the Samsung Electronics division larger than Apple?

More revenue.

Samsung makes almost everything Apple does plus TVs, DVD players, cameras, printers, air conditioners, refrigerators and more. They have a huge product line.

Don't forget that most of what apple makes has most of the guts made by Samsung.

Samsung and LG are both chaebols and it's not like Hyundai will step up to the plate and challenge either of those two.

And as another Korean, have to agree on how superficial Koreans can be. It just never made any sense how conformity and outward displays of success became so important culturally. It's tough for me to ever associate with other Koreans given these are literally the opposite of my own personal values, but I always have to wonder what some of the advantages or insights such a culture might have that I'm missing. Doesn't matter how much Korean I speak or read or even write... I just can't get it to gel with me. It's like reading the Bible for me and an atheist.

I'll just clarify one misconception: it's not really the case that iPhone is considered an international symbol of prestige and luxury. While they are expensive, they aren't that expensive, compared to Samsung phones. Anyone who can afford a top-line Samsung phone can easily afford an iPhone.

In addition, South Korea's dreadful web ecosystem (you can't buy anything using Mac OS) has the effect of substantially reducing the appeal of Apple products. IMHO, using Apple products in Korea is more viewed as being "that weird guy who is being different just for the sake of being different" rather than having an "international symbol of prestige," whatever that means. (Of course both are exaggeration: people don't really care that much what kind phone you use.)

Also there's the matter of Apple's customer service: for some reason they have a reputation of being absolutely horrible in Korea, which leads to fewer sales, which again makes Apple think it's not worth the trouble to set up decent customer service in Korea...

* About Samsung being Korea's national icon.... haha serves me right for not fighting hard enough to throw its leaders into jail, I guess.

Apple taking 93% of all the profits in the smartphone industry is terrifying.

I'm intrigued by the 42%+ marked as 'Other'?

That would be Xiaomi and other local chinese brands.

Probably also HTC and other "also ran" companies.

Actually, Xiaomi is on that list at #2, behind apple. There are several other local brands though.

I slowly saw all of my Samsung-fan co-workers/partners transition to iPhones or atleast other Androids during my 2 year stay in Beijing. Ancedotal evidence at best but the quality of their phones and the software was subpar. I've had my Galaxy S2 for four years and only had to replace it last week. But their Samsung phones seemed extremely glitchy, would freeze at the most inappropriate times and have random battery issues.

Interesting. When I visited China last year, Samsung was the brand of phone I saw most often (which was apparently true given the data in this article). Yet when your competitors offer phones nearly as reliable and feature-full at half the price, it's no surprise there's a shift happening. Though the increase in Apple suggests that this is not only a concern of price (the price of high-end Samsung phones were comparable to the price of iPhones).

Maybe it's a matter of Samsung products being somewhere in the middle. Apple's phones feel like they have better construction, and a greater level of prestige associated with them. Xiaomi's phones, again, have a solid construction and decent features (in some instances, more features) at a vastly lower price point than Samsung's phones. Maybe Samsung's phones right now don't satisfy the wants of either camp, and are hurting now as a result?

Edit: Not to mention Apple finally competing on phone size.

When I visited China last year, Samsung was the brand of phone I saw most often

I bet most of those were not real Samsungs, but generic clones with the Samsung name on them.

Do you have a source for this, or are you just guessing?

Samsung phones are popular in China from the mid-market to the high end, and I've never seen or heard of a fake Samsung. (Fake iPhones, yes.)

I've seen plenty of fake Samsung phones... the majority of them come out of the factory as unbranded generic Androids based on the MTK platform and look just like the Galaxy series; the vendor will ask if you want the Samsung logo on it (at no extra cost) when you buy one, and apply it then.

I wasn't aware of that, thanks.

In Apple's most recent earnings call, CEO Tim Cook used the term "switchers" five times (a record!), and indicated that Apple is targeting further down the market — into traditional Android territory — than it ever has before.

Interesting, as this is something that is new to Apple. They've always been content to live at the top end of the market, selling quality (but expensive and high-margin) hardware. Are they risking their position as a status symbol of sorts? Once I'm no longer making a fashion statement by owning an iPhone, why would I pay a premium for one?

For most places in the US at least, given the ubiquity of the iPhone, I think the days of it being considered exclusive are long gone. If you want to make a fashion statement, there's always the 17k Apple Watch.

At least in the U.S. an iPhone is a "status symbol" in the same way as Olive Garden is "fine dining." It's marketed as the premium option, but still priced such that most people can afford it.

At least some of the german car makers have been able to keep the cake and eat it. It seems to be that the cheaper entry level models which many are not offering haven't destroyed the brand. Maybe the secret has been to make those cheap models distinct enough from the more expensive ones.

This made me snort. Apparently other non-fashion based reasons are incomprehensible to straw men.

So much for the small hand of Asians making it difficult to work with bigger device argument, if we agree with this article's assumption that bigger iphone model has been appealing to Chinese market.

I also read 3.5" iPhone was the perfect size ergonomic for Asian hands but Apple gave up years of ergonomic study in favor of larger screens if earlier some people were right.

The true victim of phablets will be iPad and tablets IMHO.

I think the iphone 6+ is about the size limit for fitting into pockets and holding it to your ear and taking pictures non awkwardly. Theyll need to figure out a way to physically expand and compact the screen to make a true universal device.

> but Apple gave up years of ergonomic study in favor of larger screens if earlier some people were right.

It turns out Apple was optimizing for the wrong ergonomics. People want it to be more comfortable to see the screen, not use one hand. Huge phone have been the norm in Asia for years before they showed up in the West. The largest models available today still aren't available in the U.S.

You can just use both hands to work with a device.

My (Chinese) parents prefer large screens because they have bad eyes.

Does anyone have an inside scoop as to whether there are political causes, given the rising tension between China and South Korea?

It seems like the explanation is pretty simple - Samsung's competitors are delivering an extremely similar product for half the price. As these Chinese OEMs expand into other markets, Samsung is going to see this same trend happen worldwide. Apple takes the high-end, image-conscious market segment, and huawei and xaomi take the low end, and there isn't a whole lot of room for a high-price low-prestige product.

Okay, good to know it's just normal market dynamics.

Thanks.

China and South Korea are actually in their best relationship because of Japan's Abe government.

I don't like the conspiracy theory behind it. Apparently, China and US are not getting along recently on a list of issues, like Russia and Internet dispute, while at the same time, Apple has reached its peak in terms of popularity in this market. Galaxy S5/Note 4 is a universal flop for Samsung in various of markets, in China, it faces even stronger competition from local players like Xiaomi and Huawei, whose products are cheaper and comparable in feature. Just that simple.

China and South Korea are actually in their best relationship because of Japan's Abe government => this statement is getting to be less true. Recently Xi Jinping met with Abe which came as a direct hit on the apologize-or-no-meeting hard line of the South Korean government. South Korea is budging to mend the diplomatic fences with Japan, lean back to the United States, and steps back from China a bit. The general perception here is that South Korea is not ready to go all-in for China.

> This explosive growth — at Samsung's expense — is due to the breakout success of the iPhone 6 and 6 Plus. The larger size of the smartphone made it far more appealing, especially in Asian markets, and helped Apple generate the most profitable quarter of any company ever.

Uhhh... Because Samsung doesn't have any phablets or 5 inch phones???

that explanation is so lame it makes the whole article look sketchy.

I think the argument is that people were only willing to use the Android device because it had the large screen they wanted: as soon as Apple entered that corner of the market, so now, "with a large-screened iOS device available, consumers have turned away in huge numbers from high-end Android manufacturers like Samsung, with devastating results".

I observed a bit of that effect here in Thailand. Apple is considered more prestigious by many Thais who are willing to spend a month's pay to buy an iphone. But many were quick to convert to Samsung when larger screens came out - the little iphone looked like a toy next to the big screen Samsungs so they handed down their little iPhones to younger siblings. Apple seemed silly to insist that people didn't want bigger screens. Now that they finally caved to the demand they are clawing back some market share from Samsung. And the Xiaomi Mi4 is coming to Thailand soon so Samsung is going to take another hit.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com