Sure, blame the batteries. But it's not quite that simple.
During a press conference Sunday, Samsung said two separate battery defects caused both the original batch of Galaxy Note 7 phones and the replacement units to overheat.
The first battery, it said, suffered from a design flaw. The battery's external casing was too small for the components inside, causing it to short-circuit and ignite.
The second battery, which came from another supplier, didn't have the same flaw, Justin Denison, head of product strategy and marketing for Samsung's US arm, said in an interview ahead of the press conference. In the rush to pump out enough batteries for the replacement units, though, the supplier introduced a manufacturing defect that led to the same result, he said.
The explanation puts to rest the mystery behind the exploding Note 7, but it kicks off a new challenge for the embattled company: winning back your trust after a disastrous several months that included two recalls and the decision to kill the critically acclaimed phone. The Sunday press conference marked the start of a Samsung campaign to rebuild company credibility, which will include the upcoming launch of the flagship Galaxy S8 phone, as well as another Note later in the year.
"It was a painful crisis to me," D.J. Koh, Samsung's mobile chief, said in an interview ahead of the press conference. He called it the worst stretch in his 33 years with the company.
Having not one, but two batteries from different suppliers fail -- for different reasons -- is a bizarre coincidence that may surprise and frustrate some who were looking for a single, clean explanation.
On Sunday, Koh was joined by UL, Exponent, and TUV Rheinland, three independent testing firms that came to most of the same conclusions as Samsung -- that it was the battery, and not the phone's design or Samsung's manufacturing process, that cause the Note 7 battery issues.
"The electronics [designed by Samsung] did not contribute to the failure of either manufacturer's [battery] cells," Kevin White, principal scientist for Exponent, said Sunday during the press conference.
The Note, while not Samsung's top-selling phone line, is an important device for the company. It's one of two big flagship introductions each year, and the Note 7, in particular, was meant to take on Apple's iPhone 7 Plus, which hit the market in September. Samsung says its most loyal base of customers across all of its products are those who've bought Note models. Just look at the thousands of Note 7 users still on Verizon -- the carrier is routing calls to its customer service to get them to turn the phones in.
Samsung expects the Note 7 debacle, which resulted in 3 million recalled phones, to cost it more than $5 billion. That's not including the hit to its reputation, which could take months, or even years, to repair.
See also
Everything you need to know about the Galaxy Note 7 recall
Samsung kicks off CES event with Note 7 mea culpa
Verizon may have 'thousands' of Note 7 phones still in use
The biggest task for Samsung this year will be regaining consumer trust, showing customers and potential customers that its devices are safe and that the company won't make the same mistakes again. Its top executives, speaking with CNET, said Samsung hoped the transparency would mark a good first step.
"When companies do this right, on average 18 months is the time period for turning around a reputation," said Thomas Cooke, a professor at Georgetown's McDonough School of Business. "Samsung is on the way to recovery. I think it can be done."
So, what the heck happened?
Shortly after the Note 7 went on sale in mid-August, users started reporting overheating problems. Samsung originally tied the issues to a battery flaw and recalled all the Note 7 phones on the market. That didn't fix the problem, however, with the replacement devices also overheating. Samsung launched a rare second recall in October and stopped manufacturing the Note 7. Its focus then turned to finding out what went wrong.
Samsung tackled the Note 7 investigation as it approaches other challenges -- with a lot of manpower. It built a testing facility in each of the four locations it manufactures its phones: Gumi, South Korea; Hanoi, Vietnam; and Huizhou and Tianjin, China. Together, those sites tested more than 200,000 Note 7 devices with batteries and more than 30,000 batteries on their own. Samsung had more than 700 engineers from its mobile division dedicated to the testing process. (Samsung has more than 70,000 engineers in the broader company, but they're spread across its various divisions.)
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
The engineers looked at software, hardware, manufacturing process, quality and assurance testing, and supply chain. They looked at things like whether the iris scanner or software algorithms caused overheating, or if the device's fast-charging capabilities had an impact.
Initially, it was to no avail. "[There was] nothing in this round of hardware, nothing in the software, nothing in the processes, logistics, that could have contributed," Denison said.
Samsung turned its focus to the batteries themselves. Throughout the testing process, engineers were able to cause batteries to overheat, both in the device and on their own.
Samsung had two separate suppliers for its Note 7 batteries, which were custom-made for the Note 7. It specified the characteristics, like the voltage and physical size. Then it was up to its suppliers to design and manufacture the batteries as they saw fit. "If you open up Battery A and Battery B, they're different batteries," Denison said.
Samsung declined to confirm the names of the two suppliers, but the US Consumer Product Safety Commission said Samsung SDI (which is separate from Samsung Electronics but has the same parent company, Samsung Group) supplied the batteries responsible for the first recall. Hong Kong-based Amperex Technology acknowledged on its site that it was the second supplier. Amperex declined to comment following Samsung's report, while a representative from Samsung SDI said no one from media relations was immediately available.
In the first supplier's battery, dubbed Battery A, Samsung discovered a design flaw that caused the battery to short-circuit. The supplier created a pouch (the battery's outside casing) that didn't have enough space to allow the battery to expand and contract when going through normal charge and discharge cycles. That caused the positive and negative electrodes to touch, short-circuiting the battery.
(Some earlier reports speculated that Samsung's phone itself didn't leave room for the battery to expand. That wasn't the case, but Samsung plans in the future to leave even more room inside its devices for the battery.)
In the case of Battery B, from Samsung's second supplier, the flaw was related to manufacturing and quality issues. The initial batteries from that supplier worked fine in earlier Note 7 devices, but when Samsung increased its order and pushed that supplier to become its sole battery provider, the battery maker introduced errors. Some protrusions were left over from the ultrasonic welding process that caused the battery to short-circuit.
Samsung had asked the second supplier to build about 10 million new batteries. "Ultimately, they were not able to manufacture those with sufficient quality," Denison said.
What's Samsung doing now?
One of the biggest questions facing Samsung during the Note 7 fiasco was how its quality and assurance process (the tests its phones go through before being sold) didn't catch the problem.
Samsung would have had to do an X-ray test on Battery A to find the problem, while Battery B would have required Samsung to disassemble it to find the error. Neither of those were steps in Samsung's normal testing process but were handled by the battery manufacturers, Koh said.
Samsung is now changing its testing process for key mobile components. For its batteries specifically, Samsung is instituting an eight-point inspection process. Some of the steps previously were handled by its suppliers; some are new.
"There are going to be some tests we're going to do that we believe go well above and beyond the industry standard," Denison said.
One check is a durability test that examines the battery when it's been overcharged, punctured by a nail or exposed to extreme temperatures. Samsung will visually inspect each battery and do an X-ray test to check for abnormalities. It will put the batteries through a large-scale charging and discharging test, will simulate accelerated consumer usage scenarios, and will disassemble the batteries to inspect the overall quality. Other tests will look for leakage of the battery component and the complete device, or for any change in voltage through the manufacturing process.
The upcoming Galaxy S8, Samsung's new flagship phone expected to launch this spring, falls under the new inspection process, Koh said.
"When the second...recall happened, that was the exact time that we were starting the design of the battery for the S8," he said. "All [new] manufacturing processes are reflected on all 2017 models."
He added that the Note 7's issues didn't have a "huge impact" on the Galaxy S8's release date. "We added staff to make it safer," Koh said. "But that doesn't affect the schedule. Nothing meaningful."
Samsung also confirmed it wasn't giving up on the Note brand. The company plans to bring out a successor to the phone, the Galaxy Note 8, Koh said.
As for the Note 7, 96 percent of the 3 million Note 7 buyers around the globe have traded in their phones. In the US, the official tally is 97 percent, but Tim Baxter, president of Samsung's US arm, claims it's actually closer to 99 percent because more than half of the remaining units are no longer connected to cell networks.
Rebuilding trust
Beyond opening up about the problems, Samsung hopes taking a more industrywide view will help the company score some karma points.
Samsung is talking to global standards groups about sharing its new battery review process, Koh said. His hope is that everyone follows similar guidelines, which may address issues such as hoverboards catching fire.
"If we contribute this as a global standard, then I strongly believe that will definitely increase the lithium-ion battery safety," he said.
Koh added that Samsung would make its intellectual property around battery safety and standards freely available.
Ultimately, Koh understands it will take awhile to rebuild Samsung's lost credibility.
"For customers, we have to develop innovation, but customer safety is the priority," he said, noting that Samsung had to keep delivering products. "In the end, we can win the customers' trust back."
A copy and paste from a news site to post under your own account seems lazy (and no, I am not drawing parallels to journalism in general).
Pro-tip: if you want to share the news, link it, and provide some personal interpretation and critique.
Thread closed.
Related
looks like this will get nasty
We always knew the Apple / Samsung lawsuit would produce some major fireworks, and Samsung just lit off a corker: the company filed a motion Friday night asking Apple to turn over the iPhone 5 and iPad 3 as part of the discovery process. Seriously! Samsung claims that it needs to see Apple’s future products because devices like the Droid Charge and Galaxy Tab 10.1 will presumably be in the market at the same time as the iPhone 5 and iPad 3, and Samsung’s lawyers want to evaluate any possible similarities so they can prepare for further potential legal action from Apple. It’s ballsy, but it’s not totally out of the blue: the move comes just a few days after the judge ordered Samsung to hand over pre-production samples of the Droid Charge, Infuse 4G, Galaxy S II, and Galaxy Tab 10.1 and 8.9 so Apple could determine if those products should also be part of the lawsuit and potentially file a motion to block them from the market.
Now, the key difference between the two requests is that Samsung had already announced its products, while Apple has maintained its traditional iron silence about future devices. But there’s some additional nuance involved as well, as well as some bigger-picture implications — let’s walk through the entire situation, shall we?
Last week, Apple asked the court to order Samsung to hand over samples of the Galaxy Tab 10.1, Galaxy Tab 8.9, the Galaxy S II, the Infuse 4G, and the Droid Charge so Cupertino could figure out whether they should be part of the lawsuit — and whether to ask for a preliminary injunction preventing Samsung’s products from going on sale.
The court sided with Apple, in large part because Samsung had already released review units and photos of everything listed. In fact, the ruling came just days after Samsung handed out thousands of Galaxy Tab 10.1s at Google I/O, so really the only unreleased product on the list is the Tab 8.9 — a product that was announced in March and has been handled on video.
The court imposed one important condition on Apple in order to protect Samsung’s competitive edge, however: only Cupertino’s outside lawyers are allowed to look at Samsung’s pre-release hardware, not anyone from Apple itself. (Of course, there’s nothing stopping someone at Apple from running out and picking up a Droid Charge or Infuse 4G at retail, but pre-production samples that come from Samsung under this order are protected.)
Apple hasn’t yet filed for that preliminary injunction, nor has it said it’s going to anytime soon.
Now, given that most of the Samsung products on the list were already either available or fully disclosed, it wasn’t surprising that Apple won — in fact, it’s more interesting that Samsung had chose to fight back on such a minor issue in the first place, since it had so little at stake. (And it’s also somewhat interesting that Apple even asked for Samsung’s products in discovery instead of just filing for an injunction from the get-go, since they had all been announced already.) It’s a tell: no little compromises means no big compromises are in the works. So now let’s step through Samsung’s motion to see the iPhone 5 and iPad 3 and try to get a sense of what’s actually happening in context.
Samsung’s asking for a court order requiring Apple to produce “the final, commercial versions” of the next-generation iPhone and iPad and their respective packaging by June 13, 2011, so it can evaluate whether there’ll be confusion between Samsung and Apple’s future products. If the final versions aren’t available, Samsung wants “the most current version of each to be produced instead.”
Samsung doesn’t actually know Apple is planning to release a new iPhone or iPad; the motion is based on “internet reports” and “Apple’s past practice.” Obviously this is a critical difference between Apple’s request and Samsung’s — Samsung had already disclosed its new products, and Apple didn’t ask for anything that wasn’t already announced.
Samsung says it has to see the next-gen iPhone and iPad because it believes those are the products that will actually be on the market against future Samsung devices, so it has to be prepared for Apple’s potential motion for a preliminary injunction. That’s kind of a stretch: Apple can’t really file for a preliminary injunction based on potential confusion with unannounced, unreleased products, so Apple’s lawyers will almost certainly focus on confusion with the company’s existing products.
Indeed, Apple told Samsung on May 23 that any potential motion for a preliminary injunction “would be based on products Apple currently has in the market.”
Samsung says that doesn’t matter because Apple tends to discontinue previous products when it launches new ones, and it has to be prepared for what might be in the market when and if Apple actually files its motion. This is also a bit strange, since Apple kept both the iPhone 3G and iPhone 3GS on the market after launching new models. You can bet Apple will point that out.
Samsung’s also promised to abide by the same rules as Apple — only its lawyers will get to see anything Apple produces, not anyone at Samsung. (Or us, unfortunately.)
Lastly, Samsung says “fundamental fairness” requires Apple to give up its future products, since Samsung had to do the same. Tellingly, Samsung doesn’t reference any precedent or law to bolster this line of argument — it’s basically just asking the court to be nice.
So that’s Samsung’s motion. It’s pretty strange, if you think about it: Samsung is arguing that Apple might file for a preliminary injunction, and that it might happen sometime after Apple might release a new iPhone and iPad. That’s a lot of assumptions — and Apple can basically kill this entire line of argument dead by filing for that injunction Monday morning and saying that Samsung’s already-announced products should be blocked from market because they’ll cause confusion with the iPhone 4 and iPad 2 for however many months remain before the new versions are released. Neither the court nor Samsung really need to see Apple’s unreleased products to deal with that. And even if Samsung wins, Apple will definitely appeal the decision, putting the entire case on hold while things get sorted out… a process that will almost certainly stretch past the iPhone 5′s expected release in the fall, rendering this entire argument somewhat moot. And what happens if Samsung eventually gets the iPhone 5 and determines that the Droid Charge infringes Apple’s patents and trademarks? Is it going to change the Droid Charge? The potential outcomes aren’t entirely favorable here.
So why is Samsung even pursuing this? I think it’s a calculated gamble for additional leverage. Apple and Samsung held negotiations for a year before giving up and heading to the courts, and I’m reliably informed that there haven’t been any substantive settlement discussions since Apple first filed its complaint. That means talks have been at a standstill for a long time now, and I wouldn’t be surprised if Samsung was trying to put some additional heat on Apple to try and kick negotiations back into gear. It’s an interesting and aggressive move in its own right, but it also highlights the fact that neither Apple nor Samsung have addressed the actual merits of their complaints in formal replies — this is a minor skirmish before the real battle begins. We’ll see if this sideshow accomplishes anything beyond clever lawyerly maneuvering, but for right now it’s clear that Apple and Samsung aren’t planning to back down anytime soon.
click here !!!!
Doesn't samsung give apple most of the iphones parts...
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA Premium App
Jmatch said:
Doesn't samsung give apple most of the iphones parts...
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yup, I wonder if apple's lawyers took that into consideration before they brought up these charges
Wow Cheezynutz Nice long synopsis. Some of your ideas make sense about the tactics of these 2 companies, but here is the Gist of the whole thing:
Apple knows their market share is waning in the cell phone market so, trying to throw roadblocks is one tactic to delay the inevitable.
Apple has little chance to win this since the market that makes the difference is outside the USA It is all of the world and our court rulings no matter the outcome will have little to no bearing on that market. Compound that, along with some of the development problems Apple is having causing release delays (now 1st Q 2012) just translates into Android as a whole is like a Tsunami taking over everything. Beating on Samsung is nothing more than a side show, the real show is watching if Android consolidates their app market into more cohesive products and less version sensitive. That in itself will be the straw that breaks Apple's back. The hardware out there is not going to be the game changer at this point ads all of them are really very good.
Legal wrangling is not going to change any of this dynamic....... so to me I think Samsung actually wins all because the Apple legal team made the original demand to have access to Samsung products.......... Just like a chess Gambit Losing a piece early ends up giving you a winning position in the long run. Apple's legal team fell for it.... too .........And That is the most amusing part of all this....
Jmatch, yes samsung makes some of the components as does Foxconn (China) but I believe the final assembly is done elsewhere. Samsung pretty much has a lock on amoled
Great posting thanks !!!
That's the irony in this all, Samsung is actually apples provider. Lol and apple goes and sues them, that's really a dumb move on apples part.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA Premium App
I bet Samsung loses this one. IPad 2 was launched last month and Samsung is asking for non announced products, apple may release a IPhone 4S instead a IPhone 5, both are 5th generation. While Samsung products were announced and being released.
the fight between these 2 COs will never end.
Jmatch said:
Doesn't samsung give apple most of the iphones parts...
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The SoC's Apple uses are done on Samsungs Fab process just like their own, it's a different market from phones to phone parts.
lol x10
It is called discovery, right?
Apple products are very similar to previous versions so I doubt Samsung will have anything to gain besides annoying Apple. If it wasn't for the iPod touch I wouldn't even have anything to do with Apple.
Apple are arrogant regarding these kind of matters. "I have the genius I have the power" ... but that power without the manpower, the raw materials, the technology ... is nothing.
Meanwhile Apple products are churned out in Chinese factories, with poor pay and appalling conditions for the assembly workers.
It must be a relief for them to know that Apple have such a big legal team watching their backs. Oh, wait...
DirkGently1 said:
Meanwhile Apple products are churned out in Chinese factories, with poor pay and appalling conditions for the assembly workers.
It must be a relief for them to know that Apple have such a big legal team watching their backs. Oh, wait...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Samsung is out of Korea, and has shops in Korea and China. I don't think the conditions are that much better, plus it's foxconn that assembles the products. Apple only pays for the assembly. There really isn't a lot in this world anymore that isn't made in Chinese factories, with poor pay and appalling conditions for the assembly workers...
http://phandroid.com/2011/06/21/analyst-claims-iphone-5-will-be-kiss-of-death-for-android/
As an andorid fan boy , I broke in to laughter
We heard this one before, back when the iPhone 4 was first announced for Verizon: the carrier’s current smartphone subscribers would abandon their Android handsets for Apple’s phone after years of settling for less. As it turns out, that wasn’t quite the case. But if you’re wrong once, why not make the same prediction again and hope that it might come true this time. That’s what Needham analyst Charlie Wolf believes, anyway. After pinpointing a 3 percentage point drop-off in Android’s US market share in March following the release of the iPhone 4, Wolf claims that Android is only set to lose more ground.
His argument is based more on speculation than fact, but Wolf predicts the real damage will be done with the launch of the iPhone 5 concurrently on AT&T and Verizon. Why? Because Verizon subscribers knew better than to purchase an iPhone 4 mere months before the launch of Apple’s next-gen version of the smartphone. Yep, come then we will surely see most of Verizon’s Android users abandon their Google phones leading to the greatest decline in market share ever seen for a platform that saw tremendous growth in 2010.
We can’t deny that the release of the iPhone on Verizon’s CDMA network has had an effect on the smartphone market, but Android still holds nearly 50 percent to Apple’s 30 percent. Apple stands to gain more ground from floundering competitors such as RIM, not from Google’s platform. To think most Android users are simply biding their time until the right moment to pick up an iPhone just seems a bit silly. But it’s all speculation for now. Let’s revisit these figures when the iPhone 5 launches this fall
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
The Iphone 4 launch on Verizon wasn't a big success though. Yeah, it sells pretty decently, but then compared to the launch of other phones on Verizon, and then the launch of the 4 on AT&T, the CDMA Iphone 4 was almost nothing. Seeing that the 5 will be launched on both networks at the same time, might help it some and may give a bigger market share to Apple, but is it the kiss of death? Not at all, because even after the Iphone 5 is released there will probably be at the most 10 different Android devices released right after it.
aalupatti said:
http://phandroid.com/2011/06/21/analyst-claims-iphone-5-will-be-kiss-of-death-for-android/
As an andorid fan boy , I broke in to laughter
We heard this one before, back when the iPhone 4 was first announced for Verizon: the carrier’s current smartphone subscribers would abandon their Android handsets for Apple’s phone after years of settling for less. As it turns out, that wasn’t quite the case. But if you’re wrong once, why not make the same prediction again and hope that it might come true this time. That’s what Needham analyst Charlie Wolf believes, anyway. After pinpointing a 3 percentage point drop-off in Android’s US market share in March following the release of the iPhone 4, Wolf claims that Android is only set to lose more ground.
His argument is based more on speculation than fact, but Wolf predicts the real damage will be done with the launch of the iPhone 5 concurrently on AT&T and Verizon. Why? Because Verizon subscribers knew better than to purchase an iPhone 4 mere months before the launch of Apple’s next-gen version of the smartphone. Yep, come then we will surely see most of Verizon’s Android users abandon their Google phones leading to the greatest decline in market share ever seen for a platform that saw tremendous growth in 2010.
We can’t deny that the release of the iPhone on Verizon’s CDMA network has had an effect on the smartphone market, but Android still holds nearly 50 percent to Apple’s 30 percent. Apple stands to gain more ground from floundering competitors such as RIM, not from Google’s platform. To think most Android users are simply biding their time until the right moment to pick up an iPhone just seems a bit silly. But it’s all speculation for now. Let’s revisit these figures when the iPhone 5 launches this fall
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Considering that the iPhone leads and has always been in the lead, I can see it happening. Apple isn't about to rest on their laurels and just let the competition skate by unscathed. From what I read, Apple has some major upgrades in store for the iPhone with iOS5. Android is already struggling with fragmentation and other competition like WP7. If iOS5 is actually all that it is being portrayed as being, I can see Android succumbing to iPhone. But I prefer it if Android survives and Google greatly improves it. That's what competition is supposed to do...make things hard for the industry but sweet for the market.
WP7 is a competition to whom?
I want to be an analyst. Is that like a college degree?
BenKranged said:
I want to be an analyst. Is that like a college degree?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I dunno, but it's got "anal" in it.
Seriousy, WP7 succeeded in halving Microsoft's market share. Woot! Great result
Unless IOS5 gives users what Android can give them (customisation, funky live wallpapers to impress their friends, no need to be tied into specific software or websites, flash) then I can't see how it will regain the market lead.
With Android you have the variety of devices, so if people want a 4.3 or 5 inch screen they can, likewise if they want a smaller one, or one with a physical keyboad.
IOS5 is going to be a big song and dance just like all the other so called amazing versions of IOS, and they all have the same failing.
xaccers said:
I dunno, but it's got "anal" in it.
Seriousy, WP7 succeeded in halving Microsoft's market share. Woot! Great result
Unless IOS5 gives users what Android can give them (customisation, funky live wallpapers to impress their friends, no need to be tied into specific software or websites, flash) then I can't see how it will regain the market lead.
With Android you have the variety of devices, so if people want a 4.3 or 5 inch screen they can, likewise if they want a smaller one, or one with a physical keyboad.
IOS5 is going to be a big song and dance just like all the other so called amazing versions of IOS, and they all have the same failing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not so. The iPhone has been the most successful system in history. And it has done so with one line of phone and unchanging nature. Now Apple is changing it up. If the iPhone leads without being all that Android is, what will be the outcome if it adds features like Android?
Open minds and be rational.
MartyLK said:
Not so. The iPhone has been the most successful system in history. And it has done so with one line of phone and unchanging nature. Now Apple is changing it up. If the iPhone leads without being all that Android is, what will be the outcome if it adds features like Android?
Open minds and be rational.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Q1 2011 % market share:
Android 36
Symbian 27.4
Apple 16.8
Blackberry 12.9
Microsoft 3.6
Interesting definition of lead btw
xaccers said:
Q1 2011 % market share:
Android 36
Symbian 27.4
Apple 16.8
Blackberry 12.9
Microsoft 3.6
Interesting definition of lead btw
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Source please
Nah...nevermind, I looked for myself. That's excellent. RIM has finally fallen from the lead. I didn't think that would ever happen. I friggin hate Blackberrys and could not comprehend how they could be in the lead of marketshare being as crappy as they are. From what I see in a Google seach, Android is leading with around 33%, RIM with 27% and Apple with 25%. I am glad to see Android doing so well. From most online sites and news, the talk has always been that Apple was leading. Maybe they mean in a specific region. Nevertheless, I hope Apple can put out a highly refreshed and redone phone because stiff competition is never bad for the consumer.
When MS gets Mango out, I see WP7 taking a lot of marketshare down the line. That's going to be one fine system.
I just looked through the "new" features of iOS 5, and don't see anything really noteworthy that Android hasn't already done. Swipe down on any screen for notifications? I was impressed by that on my friend's G1 a few years ago. So unless Apple's keeping their cards close, it doesn't look like anything groundbreaking.
It's definitely not going to be the "kiss of death" for Android. That's kinda ridiculous. Apple fans are always going to buy the iPhone, but too many people will still buy Android for the flexibility. Whenever Apple releases a new Mac, or a new version of OSX, it's never been a "kiss of death" for Microsoft, PC manufacturers or Linux.
For an analyst to pop up and start claiming this months before it comes out makes me think that he's either biased already by the product, bought off by Apple, or both.
They said the same thing about iPhone coming to Verizon and look what happened.
MartyLK said:
I friggin hate Blackberrys and could not comprehend how they could be in the lead of marketshare being as crappy as they are.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because for guys like me they were great. I could check my work e-mail and easily reply using a real keyboard. I wasn't looking for entertainment or to play games with it. I wanted a phone that I could talk on for long periods of time and check my email. I love my Evo but for work purposes and for my particular situation my work BB is superior. But I use my Evo for all of my personal stuff because it's a lot more fun and has a ton of features.
Back on topic....the iPhone is always going to have market share and will always be popular simply because it's become an icon. I'm not sure they really need to do a lot of upgrading on it for it to sell. I know a LOT of iPhone users who don't use a fraction of what it can do. But it's like a Coach purse (one of the low end ones with the big "C" logo all over it) in that it sends a message to everyone around. It's a fashion accessory for a lot of people.
But is it going to kill Android or any of the other phones? Of course not and especially if they can keep the price competitive while providing a phone that's a good alternative. But I do think that Google needs to better advertise the OS. I don't think that everyone gets that Android is a Google product and knows all that it can do. I think they can be a LOT more aggressive against Apple and really help garner attention.
james
MartyLK said:
Source please
Nah...nevermind, I looked for myself. That's excellent. RIM has finally fallen from the lead. I didn't think that would ever happen. I friggin hate Blackberrys and could not comprehend how they could be in the lead of marketshare being as crappy as they are. From what I see in a Google seach, Android is leading with around 33%, RIM with 27% and Apple with 25%. I am glad to see Android doing so well. From most online sites and news, the talk has always been that Apple was leading. Maybe they mean in a specific region. Nevertheless, I hope Apple can put out a highly refreshed and redone phone because stiff competition is never bad for the consumer.
When MS gets Mango out, I see WP7 taking a lot of marketshare down the line. That's going to be one fine system.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh god don't get me started on the hellspawn that is blackberry
Bloody awful things.
They got their lead, like apple did initially, by MS basically not realising the potential of WinMo.
WinMo had MS Reader for years before kindle came on the scene, they had WMP before itunes, there are app stores like handango. All it would have taken would be a bit of faith, a more finger friendly interface (SPB managed it, HTC managed it, why not MS?) and some bright spark to put it all together and MS would have been ahead of the game.
When BBs started, it was the best way to get emails with a mobile, it is secure, and adds so much more control over the handset than Exchange does alone. But RIM got complacent, their BES customers aren't going anywhere, they've invested too much in licences, they were practically guarenteed the business market due to managerial sheep following what other companies do (the sort of people who believe the only smart phone is the iphone, that then believe the only way to get email on mobiles is with a blackberry).
It's so frustrating, especially even after seeing how mobile OSs can be done MS still get it wrong.
There's a map online showing the market share of different countries, it's quite interesting. Australia has iphone winning, while Tunisia has Nokia in the lead.
I'm sure IOS5 will get apple a wealth of new sales, and for a short time they may outsell Android, but a lot of people I know with iphones prefer the 3 to the 4, many decided against switching, and many of them wish they hadn't.
A colleague got the white one (which really looks awful in my opinion, like it's made of bakolite from a distance) as it's her first touch screen phone she admits to not knowing what she's missing with it, but already she's thinking of taking it back for something better.
I got to play the finger of signal death with it though
Finger off - 5 bars, finger on - 4 bars, finger off - 5 bars, finger on - ooo 3 bars.
Interestingly Apple are already making noises about going for the "elite" of the market, so they're preparing the ground to accept 3rd place. After all, they don't need to be no1, they just need to sell enough to satisfy the stock holders.
atypical1 said:
Because for guys like me they were great. I could check my work e-mail and easily reply using a real keyboard. I wasn't looking for entertainment or to play games with it. I wanted a phone that I could talk on for long periods of time and check my email. I love my Evo but for work purposes and for my particular situation my work BB is superior. But I use my Evo for all of my personal stuff because it's a lot more fun and has a ton of features.
Back on topic....the iPhone is always going to have market share and will always be popular simply because it's become an icon. I'm not sure they really need to do a lot of upgrading on it for it to sell. I know a LOT of iPhone users who don't use a fraction of what it can do. But it's like a Coach purse (one of the low end ones with the big "C" logo all over it) in that it sends a message to everyone around. It's a fashion accessory for a lot of people.
But is it going to kill Android or any of the other phones? Of course not and especially if they can keep the price competitive while providing a phone that's a good alternative. But I do think that Google needs to better advertise the OS. I don't think that everyone gets that Android is a Google product and knows all that it can do. I think they can be a LOT more aggressive against Apple and really help garner attention.
james
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's only one BB model I know of that you can actually use longer than 5 minutes before needing a recharge. And 4 of those minutes are spent trying to navigate the menu system and find stuff. The Bold is the only usable BB model that I know of that is decent. The rest of them are pure crap...I know from experience.
There will always be a large amount of people who hate Apple's proprietary and locked-down designs on principle.
Thus, unless Android support completely dies, there will always be a market for Android phones.
Sakabaka said:
There will always be a large amount of people who hate Apple's proprietary and locked-down designs on principle.
Thus, unless Android support completely dies, there will always be a market for Android phones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's true. But there's a very real aspect of the system that could cause Android harm: fragmentation. There are way too many versions of Android right now where devs have to code their apps to suit all of those different versions. With iOS and WP7, fragmentation isn't an issue. More and more devs will follow a system where they can put in less efforts for greater rewards. It could get to a point with Android where the devs just don't want to mess with it when they can make all their money on iOS or WP7. This could lead to less and less support for Android, which in turn would lead to fewer and fewer sales.
I'm not saying it can happen in a season. But it can happen. And given enough complacency from Google, it could actually happen, period.
MartyLK,
No offense man, but where you been living under? RIM has been falling since they released the Storm, which was totally a failure.
Ice cream that's all I have to say google doesn't do small updates besides gingerbread an its suppose to be 4.O that's a big number jump so i am looking for my phone to be able to float with next update lmao
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA Premium App
MrShides said:
MartyLK,
No offense man, but where you been living under? RIM has been falling since they released the Storm, which was totally a failure.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm referring to actual marketshare of RIM. RIM for a very long time has lead the market. Right now the only system to have breached it's strange lead has been Android. That has happened in the recent past...like within a couple months.
Samsung has released a new flagship smartphone, the Galaxy S3, including voice control, wireless beaming of content and exclusive apps, as it aims to consolidate its position at the top of the mobile sector.
The S3 has a super AMOLED 4.8in screen, larger than its predecessor the S2, with an 8 megapixel rear camera and 1.9MP front camera which offers "intelligent camera features" that the company says will adapt to what it sees you doing.
The phone runs on Google's Android 4.0 (Ice Cream Sandwich) software, but has a number of Samsung additions – including voice recognition and eye tracking.
The phone will go on sale on 30 May in the UK, with Orange and Phones4U already lined up to sell it. No price has yet been given. It will go on sale in the US this summer. Samsung said it will go on sale with 296 carriers in 145 countries. It can connect at "4G" speeds in compatible countries.
"S Voice" can respond to spoken orders such as "wake up" when its screen is off, "snooze" for an alarm, or to play a particular song, change volume settings, and take pictures. It also responds to gestures, so that lifting the phone to the face while sending a text message will dial the recipient's number instead.
Samsung has also souped up Google's Android Beam (which can pass data such as business card details) so it is capable of sending a 1GB file between two S3 phones in three minutes, or a 10MB file in two seconds by touching them together.
It comes in a 15GB or 32GB version, though the company said a 64GB model would come soon. Buyers can get an optional wireless charging pad, similar to that offered with the now-defunct HP TouchPad last year.
At 4.8in, the screen size is only just below the minimum 5in that most analysts class as a tablet – indicating Samsung's confidence that top-end users will want larger screens. The first-generation Galaxy S in 2010 had a 4in screen; the S2, a 4.3in screen.
The company sold an estimated 44m smartphones across its entire portfolio in the first quarter of 2012, more than any other company. It dominates the Android sector too, selling around 50% of phones on a platform which itself makes up 50% of smartphone sales.
Jason Jenkins, editor of CNET UK, said: "The Samsung Galaxy S3 is a cracker of a smartphone that makes the iPhone look a little like yesterday's model. It cements Samsung's place as one of the leading phone manufacturers and really puts the pressure on Apple to come up with something different for its next iPhone later in the year.
"It's also starting to look like this will be a two-horse race – Samsung and Apple fighting it out for the number one spot with everyone else left to pick up the crumbs. HTC, Sony, BlackBerry and Nokia are the ones with the real work to do."
Ian Fogg, an analyst at IHS Suppli, said: "What's striking is that Samsung is focusing on software and the experiences, more than the hardware (although that is excellent too). Features like Pop over, social tag, and S Voice all aspire to differentiate from the opposition through the user experience that Samsung's software customisation delivers.
"Samsung have been leading up to this for a while, but this is the first time they've led their product positioning on user experience and software."
Francisco Jeronimo, IDC's smartphones analyst, was downbeat, saying: "It is not an eye-catching device that will overwhelm consumers."
He noted that analysts had not been given the chance to try out the voice control in pre-release demonstrations of the phone. Of a brief test, he said: "Overall, [it] seems very similar to Siri, but my first impression was that is not as well integrated with the phone as Siri is with the iPhone."
Carolina Milanesi, smartphones analyst at the research group Gartner, said that Samsung was looking for ways to remain ahead of rivals in the Android space, as well as Apple.
"They need to push the boundaries in order to remain ahead," she said. "It will be interesting to see how many of these new features [in the S3] will be open to developers so that they can take advantage of them in their apps."
However, if developers start to target Samsung APIs for apps, that could potentially split the Android platform still further beyond the individual versions produced by Google – and would also tend to increase Samsung's control of Android.
Such an "embrace and extend" manoeuvre would build its control of the platform, where it already presently has half of worldwide sales and is the biggest profit-maker.
Jeronimo observed: "Samsung definitely embraced Android, and is extending it. We shouldn't also forget that Samsung has a quite opportunistic approach to market trends.
"If Android is now the new kid on the block that can best contribute to its success, they will invest and nurture it to maximise the opportunity. But if the trend changes (and they are very good at anticipating that), they will also change the platform they embrace in the future."
But, he added: "It is clear that Samsung has no other strong options at the moment."
No price was announced, though Milanesi suggested that it would be priced similarly to the Google-branded (but Samsung-made) Galaxy Nexus, released last October, and that prices of the year-old Galaxy S2 would be cut to boost Samsung's already dominant share.
Milanesi was generally impressed with the device, though with some reservations. "The design is much improved, and despite the fact that it is still plastic it feels much less cheap than the Galaxy S2 and the Nexus," she said.
But she thought the S Voice control was less convincing: "It came across as a little gimmicky when I played with it. But to me the main issue is that these features are quite buried in the device, so might not be that obvious to consumers. S Voice is not as complex as Siri – more like voice activation for simple commands."
Overall, she suggested: "I think Samsung has similar challenges to Apple but with a less convincing overall package and a weaker brand."
But Fogg suggested that the real problem would be for other companies. "For Nokia, this must be deeply concerning," he said. "One of Nokia's stated reasons they opted for Windows Phone was because they believed that it would be impossible to differentiate using Android.
"Samsung is showing with the the Galaxy S3 that it's perfectly possible to innovate with Android software. In fact, Android is enabling faster innovation than any handset maker has managed with Windows Phone."
But the new Galaxy S3 could also pose problems for the smaller players in the Android space, Fogg suggested. "Samsung's marketing spend and brand awareness are second to none. This combination of marketing spend and channels will cause serious problems for smaller handset makers such as HTC, LG and Motorola."
Jeronimo warned that Samsung needs to consolidate its position: "Samsung needs to come up with unique features and not to catch-up once again with other vendors. What is there that's completely unique on the S3 that we haven't seen on other devices? Maybe slight differences on the features, but nothing disruptive.
"They entered a new era. The only way to succeed is to set the pace of innovation. I believe that's exactly what they want to do, but they still suffering from the 'follower-syndrome': to improve what others created. That's why consumers will compare the S Voice to Siri and not the other way around."
If you're going to copy/paste an article that someone else wrote, I believe common courtesy would be to cite the source. Also, what is the point of starting a thread like this? There are already a ton of other GS3 threads, why not post your OWN opinions in one of those threads instead of starting a new thread with someone else's words?
All that said, I don't think Sammy is going to dominate anything with this phone, it is downright hideous. I really hope the US variants look a lot nicer.
Hi all, I wanted to make sure that everyone was aware of the fact that there is widespread false information regarding this component of the A9.
EDIT: Both HTC and Corning have confirmed the device uses GG 3.
Timeline of events:
Oct 20: A9 announced as having Gorilla Glass 4
Oct 20: Internet is filled with articles repeating this information
Oct 28: Reviews of A9 appear online, some reviewers such as: The Verge, SlashGear, and PocketNow state that the device uses Gorilla Glass 3., most others (ArsTechnica, GSMArena, AndroidPit, etc) all mention the use of Gorilla Glass 4.
Oct 28: HTC silently edits the website to remove the number '4' from any references to the Gorilla Glass on the A9.
Current state: 95% of the information posted online about this phone states Gorilla Glass 4, but there is good reason to believe this is incorrect. HTC did not make a statement to it's customers, even to those of us who pre-ordered during the time where it was advertised as having Gorilla Glass 4.
Nov: Consumers who contact HTC are told the device uses GG4.
Dec: Corning confirms that HTC is using GG3.
Dec: HTC confirms GG3 via twitter
Sources:
The current USA htc.com page no longer specifies the version of Gorilla Glass.
"The HTC One A9 features a super-thin metal frame with an elegant finish, expandable SD card memory and edge-to-edge Corning® Gorilla® Glass. "
Current HTC USA site
HTC USA site on Oct 21 2015, and shown on Canadian HTC website as of Dec 3.:
"The HTC One A9 features a super-thin metal frame with an elegant finish, expandable SD card memory and edge-to-edge Corning® Gorilla® Glass 4. "
It is listed by Corning as using Gorilla Glass 3, and also by the following review sites: Slashgear, PocketNow, The Verge, Engadget, and ZDNet.
So what do you think about this - Does it even matter? Is it the last straw?
I'll admit that the screen on my A9 has performed just fine so far (other than the brightness control), but regardless I feel like HTC has pulled a fast one.
Note: User cameron1292 has contacted HTC and was told the A9 uses GG4. Posted here
Dec Update:
Corning provided the following statement:
Corning said:
Hi ...,
Thanks for your note. HTC’s official product website (http://www.htc.com/us/smartphones/htc-one-a9/buy-b/)
simply references Corning® Gorilla® Glass.
However, we’ve reached out to HTC and they have confirmed that the One A9 uses Gorilla Glass 3. They have expressed confidence in the proven performance of Gorilla Glass 3 and have indicated the device passed a stringent set of drop, scratch and bend tests conducted by both HTC and their operator partners worldwide. If you have further questions, you can reach out to HTC directly.
Thank you,
The Gorilla Glass Team
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Kardon403 said:
Edit: User cameron1292 has contacted HTC and was told the A9 uses GG4. Looking for more confirmation.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just wanted to confirm. Was it HTC USA that confirmed GG4?
If I wasn't on my phone I would have posted the chat. The two said I can assure you it's cornering 4. And I said are you positive because there is widespread online talk about it being 3. And they assured me again that it was 4. That could be a deal-breaker for me and I might call att and try and get it swapped. Their site also says 4
---------- Post added at 09:32 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:31 PM ----------
Haz04 said:
Just wanted to confirm. Was it HTC USA that confirmed GG4?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes USA
The fact that HTC intentionally removed the reference to GG '4' from the online description really says it all. There is fairly solid evidence that the device is not what they say it is, if it's true then this is some genuine widespread false advertising. HTC knew about the error sometime around the end of Oct, it's nearly been a month and the device is still advertised as using Gorilla Glass 4.
Kardon403 said:
The fact that HTC intentionally removed the reference to GG '4' from the online description really says it all. There is fairly solid evidence that the device is not what they say it is, if it's true then this is some genuine widespread false advertising. HTC knew about the error sometime around the end of Oct, it's nearly been a month and the device is still advertised as using Gorilla Glass 4.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeppppp. It's still on ATT website as 4. I'm thinking about calling them and getting a different phone. I like this one a lot but the fact that I'll be paying 500 for a phone now with gorilla glass 3 not 4 and the false advertising kind of pisses me off.
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Corning has provided the following statement:
Corning said:
Hi Kardon,
Thanks for your note. HTC’s official product website (http://www.htc.com/us/smartphones/htc-one-a9/buy-b/)
simply references Corning® Gorilla® Glass.
However, we’ve reached out to HTC and they have confirmed that the One A9 uses Gorilla Glass 3. They have expressed confidence in the proven performance of Gorilla Glass 3 and have indicated the device passed a stringent set of drop, scratch and bend tests conducted by both HTC and their operator partners worldwide. If you have further questions, you can reach out to HTC directly.
Thank you,
The Gorilla Glass Team
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Feel free to bury your head in the sand if you think the A9 uses GG4.
It was certainly a downer when I came across this too ... but then again it didn't affect my buying decision.. Wish HTC had got it right the first time though.
A GG3 confirmation from HTC twitter.
https://twitter.com/CozyTech/status/672162126350434304
Well it's settled then, thanks for the info. At least I can say my a9 screen still looks perfect after 2+ weeks of use
I appreciate knowing the truth about the glass, although it is really an unimportant issue IMHO. Many phone makers don't say which glass they are using - often because they don't use Gorilla Glass and consumers neither know nor care about competitors.
What bothers me here, and on the other thread, are the accusations of dishonesty on the part of HTC. I suppose those saying such things are not very experienced with what it takes to do a simultaneous world-wide product introduction. In an earlier life I was a high tech product manager, and I do understand how mistakes like this can happen, and are not fixed in an instant (and particularly for such a small detail). My guess is that the A9 was originally planned (likely from a year or more ago) to have GG4 (and the 617 SoC). By the time the phone was in prototype stage the preliminary marketing materials (brochures/datasheets/website/PRs/manuals/support & training materials/etc) were being finalized, and included the description at that time. Then sometime before production started a decision was made to revert to GG3 - possibly for cost or availability reasons. To then go back and change all of those materials was a substantial effort, and was never going to happen instantly. Consider that every national subsidiary, every carrier that is handling the phone, every web page in every country (and language) had to be corrected, and each of those was likely not under the direct control of the HTC product manager for the phone. All work-in-process needed correction. And everyone who had already been trained had to get the message, and then remember the new description. And then how to remove all of the old references? In short, it is a huge task, and one not done quickly. Meanwhile this is happening at crunch time. The crucial holiday shopping season has begun, customers (and carriers) are clamoring for product, and there is either a supply shortage, unexpectedly high demand, or both. Product development is still continuing on the Verizon and Sprint models, production has been delayed on the red and gold versions. A response was quickly organized to contact the disappointed pre-order customers, another distraction.
Keeping all of the above in mind, do you really think it reasonable to expect an instant and total fix to such a small detail?
Cut some slack folks.
CarinaPDX said:
I appreciate knowing the truth about the glass, although it is really an unimportant issue IMHO. Many phone makers don't say which glass they are using - often because they don't use Gorilla Glass and consumers neither know nor care about competitors.
What bothers me here, and on the other thread, are the accusations of dishonesty on the part of HTC. I suppose those saying such things are not very experienced with what it takes to do a simultaneous world-wide product introduction. In an earlier life I was a high tech product manager, and I do understand how mistakes like this can happen, and are not fixed in an instant (and particularly for such a small detail). My guess is that the A9 was originally planned (likely from a year or more ago) to have GG4 (and the 617 SoC). By the time the phone was in prototype stage the preliminary marketing materials (brochures/datasheets/website/PRs/manuals/support & training materials/etc) were being finalized, and included the description at that time. Then sometime before production started a decision was made to revert to GG3 - possibly for cost or availability reasons. To then go back and change all of those materials was a substantial effort, and was never going to happen instantly. Consider that every national subsidiary, every carrier that is handling the phone, every web page in every country (and language) had to be corrected, and each of those was likely not under the direct control of the HTC product manager for the phone. All work-in-process needed correction. And everyone who had already been trained had to get the message, and then remember the new description. And then how to remove all of the old references? In short, it is a huge task, and one not done quickly. Meanwhile this is happening at crunch time. The crucial holiday shopping season has begun, customers (and carriers) are clamoring for product, and there is either a supply shortage, unexpectedly high demand, or both. Product development is still continuing on the Verizon and Sprint models, production has been delayed on the red and gold versions. A response was quickly organized to contact the disappointed pre-order customers, another distraction.
Keeping all of the above in mind, do you really think it reasonable to expect an instant and total fix to such a small detail?
Cut some slack folks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I understand what you're saying, I might have sensationalized the issue somewhat. Still, they didn't even bother mentioning it to customers who pre-ordered the device. Not only did they do a poor job correcting the information, they intentionally made it ambiguous by not specifying '3'.
I don't care about the glass, I just think the way they handled it is questionable. This is why I made a poll, everyone seems to have a different opinion on the matter which is great. I don't expect an 'instant' fix, but over a month after release is a bit much. It only takes a second to add it to the bottom of the notice email all pre-orders received regarding the delay on shipping + verizon support. The biggest thing for me is that they updated the site right away, but when doing so they intentionally left out the new information. I guess I expect too much.
Kardon403 said:
they intentionally made it ambiguous by not specifying '3'.
they intentionally left out the new information.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The problem is that you keep assuming ill intent without any evidence whatsoever. You obviously have no clue about how hard it is to propagate changes at the last minute in a large operation. My guess is that the product manager did send out an email announcing the change in spec, but there is no way his distribution would go directly to all who needed to know, and we all know how messages morph as they pass through multiple hands. I can well imagine that the website coder got the message to remove the "4" without specifically being told to replace it with a "3", and not wanting to risk further errors did not add the "3" on his own. That is how these things happen. No dishonest intent, just imperfect humans.
The thing is, HTC has gone out of their way to preserve good will. I have never heard of a consumer goods company actually calling customers to apologize for a delay and offer alternatives (an expensive and resource-consuming effort). And to offer customers a credit for 25% of the value of the product is very generous. I think that is clear evidence of their intent to treat their customers well. They do not deserve to have their reputation impugned.
It is worth noting that this introduction has suffered from poor planning and/or implementation. I do sympathize with the delays in coding and FCC approval of the carrier-specific models (each one needing a separate approval), and the apparent delay in availability of the colored aluminum cases. It is a very difficult choice to delay the introduction until full availability or hit the Xmas sales season, but not both. Still, these problems should not be leaking out into the customer base.
It is a popular trope to see corporations as evil. A corporation is not a person (regardless of what our flawed Supreme Court may say); it is an organization of many people. While there certainly are executives who do bad things, much of what goes wrong is the result of human error. I have found it best to remember: never assume a conspiracy when simple incompetence is a sufficient explanation.
Greg
So you're saying at the end of Oct, when they updated the site, they didn't know it was 3? They sure knew it wasn't 4. Is it too much to ask for them to have emailed the people who pre-ordered to let them know of the mistake? Is it too much to expect that when customers call in to ask, they would not be lied to?
Wouldn't you think the instruction to update the public facing website would be fairly specific? This is probably the most popular page on their site.
I just don't understand why HTC deserves so much 'slack'. They still haven't updated the Canadian website and it's December. When I was a teenager I worked at a job maintaining accurate prices/info on 100's of items, it's not actually that difficult. I don't see why I shouldn't expect more from such an established brand.
I don't think HTC is evil, I like the brand, I still have my first HTC phone and it works like new. I bought the A9, I like HTC, but I don't like seeing them operate like this.
I guess you are taking the point of view that it was a honest mistake, but I think the move to omit the new found information was completely intentional, which is why the site is not currently reading "Gorilla Glass 3" and it probably never will.
Note: I've edited some of my previous posts, in case anyone wondering what CarinaPDX is referring to.
Want to bump this. Did anyone else hear about this more? HTC told me via e-mail that the phone *in the USA* still uses GG4.
I have lots of tiny scratches on my phone already. USA a9 with a dot view case. I had a screen protector, but it kept sliding on my phone. I took it off about a week ago, and since then, scratches.
TehPwnd said:
I have lots of tiny scratches on my phone already. USA a9 with a dot view case. I had a screen protector, but it kept sliding on my phone. I took it off about a week ago, and since then, scratches.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
are you serious? My A9 never had a screen protector and it has been a month now.. around 4-5 times dropped on the wooden floor, but absolutely no scratch on glass/body. Try wiping those scratches (if you used dot view case, it looks like scratches, but when you wipe them, it should be clean again) and post how it goes. I need to order a screenguard too maybe
---------- Post added at 02:15 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:14 AM ----------
km8j said:
Want to bump this. Did anyone else hear about this more? HTC told me via e-mail that the phone *in the USA* still uses GG4.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I had the same response multiple times
CarinaPDX said:
The problem is that you keep assuming ill intent without any evidence whatsoever. You obviously have no clue about how hard it is to propagate changes at the last minute in a large operation. My guess is that the product manager did send out an email announcing the change in spec, but there is no way his distribution would go directly to all who needed to know, and we all know how messages morph as they pass through multiple hands. I can well imagine that the website coder got the message to remove the "4" without specifically being told to replace it with a "3", and not wanting to risk further errors did not add the "3" on his own. That is how these things happen. No dishonest intent, just imperfect humans.
The thing is, HTC has gone out of their way to preserve good will. I have never heard of a consumer goods company actually calling customers to apologize for a delay and offer alternatives (an expensive and resource-consuming effort). And to offer customers a credit for 25% of the value of the product is very generous. I think that is clear evidence of their intent to treat their customers well. They do not deserve to have their reputation impugned.
It is worth noting that this introduction has suffered from poor planning and/or implementation. I do sympathize with the delays in coding and FCC approval of the carrier-specific models (each one needing a separate approval), and the apparent delay in availability of the colored aluminum cases. It is a very difficult choice to delay the introduction until full availability or hit the Xmas sales season, but not both. Still, these problems should not be leaking out into the customer base.
It is a popular trope to see corporations as evil. A corporation is not a person (regardless of what our flawed Supreme Court may say); it is an organization of many people. While there certainly are executives who do bad things, much of what goes wrong is the result of human error. I have found it best to remember: never assume a conspiracy when simple incompetence is a sufficient explanation.
Greg
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow! Do you work for HTC??? "The thing is, HTC has gone out of their way to preserve good will."
My experience has been anything but 'HTC going out of their way...'
I pre-ordered my unlocked A9. Received an email from HTC acknowledging my order and another stating a delay. That was the last time I EVER heard from HTC regarding my order. I've never received my order either.
I've contacted HTC numerous times to cancel my order and finally just the other day received an email from HTC acknowledging my cancellation request. From the time I pre-ordered until the email regarding my cancellation, I contacted HTC numerous times and was repeatedly told my order was still being fulfilled even though during my previous contact I canceled. This happened on at least 4 different occasions. I was never contacted by HTC offering me any discount or even an apology. I ended up buying my unlocked A9 off of ebay and paying more than my pre-order price at HTC.
They are complete idiots in my book. I've been supporting HTC for quite awhile, M7, two M8's and now the A9. If you look up, 'one hand doesn't know what the other hand is doing', you will see the company HTC.
Really liking the phone though, but like most everybody else, am not liking that they switched the specs and dropped GG4 without so much as a $*#@ you very much! Absolutely horrible customer service.
No, I don't work for HTC. In fact purchasing this phone is the first time I have had any dealings with them.
My point was that an error in published spec, likely the result of a late spec change, is in no way a sign of evil intent. Even the best managed corporations make small mistakes like this. Stuff happens.
I will stick with my positive comments about personal phone calls and discounts. Somebody was trying to help out customers, at considerable expense to HTC. I suspect that the effort got called off before everyone was reached as it became apparent how many resources were being tied up in the process.
On the topic of incompetence, well yes they have demonstrated heroic levels of it. They seem to be flailing around trying to fix things, only to raise expectations that then aren't met. In my case a few days after receiving my A9 (after cancelling and re-ordering per HTC) I was sent 3 emails at the same time that alerted me to the fact that the original order that was cancelled had indeed just shipped, that it was a mistake and that a return authorization was issued, and how to properly return it. Oh, and my account was charged another $400 which they would give back when they received the phone. Also, for a single day many accessories were offered at deep discounts, but since some were out of stock it was impossible to order to lock in the price. Why offer a sale price when the customer can't actually buy the product, or for that matter why have a one-day sale at a time that many customers still haven't received their pre-ordered phones?
What is distressing is the seeming randomness of the preorder process. Some buyers received the products without problems. Others got phone calls and/or emails regarding the problems. Others apparently heard nothing. And for some of us that were helped by re-ordering the product, we found an additional product shipped (and billed).
So far I really like the A9. It does seem that HTC has their product act together. But their North American marketing/sales arm has a remarkable resemblance to the gang that can't shoot straight - something we can agree on. I hope they get someone in there who knows their product management, and who has the authority to get the IT system fixed. The home team in Taiwan should be pretty upset about this.
Greg
If GG3 or GG4 i do not care. I have no scratches in my Display. No tiny Scratches, no big Scratches. The Display is very good. On iPhone 6 i had after three Days tiny Scratches. On HTC One A9 after three Weeks no Scratches.
Smartphones (and to some extent laptops too) have evolved to be an end product in themselves, instead of being tools to communicate and get work done.
Until this (unfortunate) nature of smartphone changes, it is unlikely that the product transforms into the category of 'consumer durables' where people would simply buy it and then forget about buying a new one for years, until the existing one starts giving problems, even if that means more than 10 years of usage.
Hardware used on smartphones are maturing in terms of the experience they provide. Every year the newer iteration is marketed to be x% more efficient, y% more powerful, etc. All those improvements are seen only on paper.
My Samsung Galaxy Note 2 that I purchased in 2012 was giving me 4 to 5 hours of SOT (initially). My Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra that I purchased almost 10 years later in 2022 is also giving me just about 4 to 5 hours of SOT. This despite the CPU, GPU and other components becoming more powerful, more power efficient with each passing year. Also, the new phones have significantly bigger batteries than before. One can argue that the quality of apps, games, display, etc. are significantly better than what they used to be 10 years back, and they come at the cost of drawing more power. Still, these do not even remotely explain the numeric gains reported by tech companies. Or in other words, the numbers reported are manipulated and would be true only in very specific conditions, which are far from real life usage.
While many users complained about batteries being non-removable, RAM and other components being non-replaceable/ repairable/ upgradeable, etc., the direction taken by manufacturers seem to suggest that the market doesn't care as much about these factors.
Miniaturization and sealing components to the motherboard that result in slightly smaller form factor are not only profitable for the OEMs, but also seem to be acceptable to the market. This actually comes at the cost of damaging the environment, a complete opposite of what OEMs claim.
Just as Type-C has become mandatory, should there be laws that make modularity/ repairability/ component replaceability a must for products? This will eventually transform this product into the 'consumer durables' category, which will not only save the environment, but also make lives much better and healthier.
I think this is unlikely to happen unless a new (life changing) product category is developed and people start perceiving smartphones (and laptops) as mere tools to communicate and get work done. Currently, the amount of time people spend on smartphones doing useless stuff is a criminal waste of time that can otherwise be spent in doing productive things, that will not only make their own lives better, but also contribute to improving the environment and the economy that would improve everyone's lives.