Hacker News Reader

Comment by danmaz74 | Hacker News Reader

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.

View on HN

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.

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.

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...

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.

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 :)

> 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?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com