Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Google should ditch Samsung
- Thread starter miketheapplegui
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You've been direct and clear how you feel about Samsung and Google. If you believe them to be unethical and you have no respect for them, what companies do you believe are ethical and that you have respect for?And how does that bear any relevance to the fact that they're unethical? ya know... it's not entirely beyond the bounds of decency and common sense for unethical companies to shape up and become transparent and ethical - that way, noone would lose their jobs (except, possibly for the few who created the poor policies and crooked ethics, at the top).
If that's what it takes - and they DO go under, who's to blame? The management who make these terrible decisions - noone else. Of course that is not ideal, but who is to be held accountable for terrible decision and ethics causing a companies liquidation, except those making the crucial management decisions?
You imply that the public (who don't run the company - just to clarify that for you) should feel guilty, were said companies to go under as a result of poor management and moral standing - what possible logic is there to that notion?
If every phone ran stock Android it would be a disaster. We wouldn't have as many choices as we do today because Samsung would have won already. Currently my top phones are the Nexus 6 and Note 4 and right now its a pretty tough decision for me. But if both ran stock software with unlocked bootloaders the Note 4 would win hands down. Just the fact that the Nexus 6 lacks removable battery and sd card support would give it the win. And during one video I saw the Note 4 have the better screen than the the Nexus 6.
I really don't understand the hate for Samsung. They didn't want to make a metal phone but they did because people criticized them for using plastic. They didn't have to tone down touchwiz but they did people people criticized them for bloat. While everyone started moving away from removable batteries and sd cards they stuck with it. And unlike Apple the Note 4 automatically comes with 32GB of storage out the box.
So far Samsung is the only company doing something about the criticism they receive. A company like Apple has repeatedly ignored customer criticism. There is no reason why a iPad in 2014 should have 16GB at $500. It's complete highway robbery. And the iPad mini 3 has to be the worst revised product in Apple's history. The mini would have been excellent if they gave all the ipad air 2 updates to the mini. And just wait until Apple does the same crap to one of the iPhones.
I really don't understand the hate for Samsung. They didn't want to make a metal phone but they did because people criticized them for using plastic. They didn't have to tone down touchwiz but they did people people criticized them for bloat. While everyone started moving away from removable batteries and sd cards they stuck with it. And unlike Apple the Note 4 automatically comes with 32GB of storage out the box.
So far Samsung is the only company doing something about the criticism they receive. A company like Apple has repeatedly ignored customer criticism. There is no reason why a iPad in 2014 should have 16GB at $500. It's complete highway robbery. And the iPad mini 3 has to be the worst revised product in Apple's history. The mini would have been excellent if they gave all the ipad air 2 updates to the mini. And just wait until Apple does the same crap to one of the iPhones.
We're going under the assumption that copying is bad and so is advertising. Somehow they're unethical, until Apple does it.
And how does that bear any relevance to the fact that they're unethical? ya know... it's not entirely beyond the bounds of decency and common sense for unethical companies to shape up and become transparent and ethical - that way, noone would lose their jobs (except, possibly for the few who created the poor policies and crooked ethics, at the top).
If that's what it takes - and they DO go under, who's to blame? The management who make these terrible decisions - noone else. Of course that is not ideal, but who is to be held accountable for terrible decision and ethics causing a companies liquidation, except those making the crucial management decisions?
You imply that the public (who don't run the company - just to clarify that for you) should feel guilty, were said companies to go under as a result of poor management and moral standing - what possible logic is there to that notion?
No, I'm implying that people who either wish them to fail (or are ambivalent to the issue) aren't thinking about anything under than a stupid brand issue. Neither are likely to go under anytime soon. I was simply trying to point out how ignorant your point of view is.
Note 4 is great all around. No. They shouldn't ditch Samsung, their most prominent manufacturer.
samsung is spineless, by that i mean characterless. ever heard of the expression 'throwing spaghetti on the wall'? while i understand they are a business with 'profit first' mentality, just like apple, they should have at least a little bit more style and character. you can describe apple and its mentality by a few words, samsung you cannot because they are everything, whatever you want them to be, like some people. hence, spineless
google, on the other hand, sells 'people', their usage habits and data, while apple sells concrete material objects with one time payment. i dont really trust businesses for whom im a product, not a costumer. also, i dont care for their 'pot head teenage tinkering tron tech' vibe and their multiple innovations without a cent of monetization. i mean really, robotics and self driving cars? leave that to professionals google, like tesla
although i dont deny apple gathers data, but thats googles main and almost only business. while that may not be enough for some, its certainly enough for me.
this is not necessarily an ethic question. in this case, people have the option to choose their currency and i definitely prefer using money as a currency, not my usage habits and data.
disclaimer: words stated above are only and exclusively my opinion.
I still don't understand, no disrespect intended. So they throw stuff out and see what sticks, how does this make them spineless? I'm completely baffled. I LOVE a company that does that, that isn't afraid to try new things even if they are failures, that's the opposite of spineless to me, it's courage, courage to lose money, courage to disappoint your stockholders, courage to lose consumer confidence. But with all those risks great rewards may come, look at the phablet segment, look at stylus use, etc. Things which when released seemed like they were thrown out there, but ended up being VERY smart decisions.
Style and character are VERY much opinion driven. My Note 4 has MUCH more style and character than an iPhone 6 plus, but this is obviously my own personal decision and preference. I think Apple's last time they really had style was the iPhone 4, that was a beautiful premium phone, but since then I haven't been very impressed with the quality or feel of their phones.
I don't disagree on Google, but it's not like they aren't totally transparent about their business model.
In any case thanks for posting your thoughts as at least we can have a discussion, unlike other detractors who just cry "Samsung is evil" but put forth NO salient points whatsoever, they just keep yelling with no logic.
Years ago, supermarkets used to pay companies to walk around their stores and watch how people shopped, what they bought, what they didn't buy, where they male, female, their ages, did they have the kids with them, what time of the day did they shop. The supermarkets then bought and used this data to deliver better service, products , better product placement, better offers etc.
How is this any different from Google? This kind of data has been collected since the dawn of time - the only difference today is that instead of people watching what I'm doing in a supermarket, you have companies watching where I'm shopping online,what I'm interested in and then using this data to deliver products, offers and more my way. It's exactly the same.
Some businesses build physical products. Some provide services (a stockbroker, a petrol station, a supermarket etc). Google is a little of the first and a lot of the second. Without the likes of Google then the companies in the first box (the physical product makers) would have a very tough time finding the customers so that they can continue to sell their product.
I don't see anything wrong with Google as a business. They are doing what market research companies have done for years and that is collecting information on people and selling this to the widget makers. It's always been like this and always will be.
How is this any different from Google? This kind of data has been collected since the dawn of time - the only difference today is that instead of people watching what I'm doing in a supermarket, you have companies watching where I'm shopping online,what I'm interested in and then using this data to deliver products, offers and more my way. It's exactly the same.
Some businesses build physical products. Some provide services (a stockbroker, a petrol station, a supermarket etc). Google is a little of the first and a lot of the second. Without the likes of Google then the companies in the first box (the physical product makers) would have a very tough time finding the customers so that they can continue to sell their product.
I don't see anything wrong with Google as a business. They are doing what market research companies have done for years and that is collecting information on people and selling this to the widget makers. It's always been like this and always will be.
well, thats certainly one point of view.
i, on the other hand, dont really appreciate companies trying to get in everyones hole
. i prefer companies with their own vision (not market research or hit and miss m.o.), executing it stubbornly and fearlessly. i dont think tesla did market research about how many people would want an electric car.also, i think it takes much more courage to execute ones vision with focus, putting all your eggs in one basket than to try everything and see what sticks.
they said it before, i'll say it again, theres a thousand no's to every yes, and i definitely agree.
thank you for posting
btw, anandtech review of note 4 is out, not sure youre interested since you apparently already bought one. they have very nice reviews.
im not sure i said thats necessarily bad. but im also not sure how i feel about using os designed and built by a market research company. as ive said before, i prefer using money as currency, not my usage and data.
While ASOP is free, Google Play Services (Play Store and other related apps) are not. So for Google to cut Samsung off would mean that Samsung would have to offer their own app store. Much like Amazon (and the Fire Phone) it is likely that Samsung would start having problems moving ASOP based phones. Which brings in Tizen
exactly. whats up with that? they even said its gonna run android apps.
the premise of this thread is wrong. samsung is ditching google not the other way around. benefits of the vertical integration are too big.
Actually, only Apple advertises on TV for it's mobile phones in the UK that I can remember these day's. The only ads we have currently for Samsung are for their mobile device screens, primarily their tablets?
I can't find it on You Tube, but a guy basically has camouflage and goes on about the AMOLED screens.
As are the risks. Apple has spent more than a decade building up their ecosystem to what it is today. Samsung is not going to be able to replicate this overnight.
I am of the opinion that any platform developed after 2010 is doomed to fail, because there is just no way you can match the scale of iOS and Android.
yeah, you maybe right, but there are certainly some ways samsung could make it happen, eg. by running all of the android apps available on tizen.
so, a new galaxy comes out, running tizen which looks exactly like touchwiz, runs all of your apps and samsung controls every part of it. i dont think most people would even notice.
That could work, but I question if you are simply delaying the inevitable. If Tizen runs Android apps, what incentive do developers have to create apps for the Tizen platform? What would the benefit be? What if Google releases some stealth patch that disables this one day?
What do you think sells more Beat head phones or Audio Technica headphones?
----------
In Sandor Clegane voice: You type a lot for someone who doesn't care.
well, thats certainly one point of view.
i, on the other hand, dont really appreciate companies trying to get in everyones hole
Too late! As long as you use any electronics device like your phone or even post your comment here, you're "screwed"!
Tizen running Android apps would likely be like BB10 running Android Apps. For the most part things will be fine. Of course you will have to side load, as there won't be any Play Store Access. I guess all bets are off if there are Apps that expect Google Play Services to be present.
im thinking more along the lines of samsung opening its own app store that requires developers only to transfer their existing android apps, no modifications needed.
i dont think samsung would even start developing tizen if this wasnt the case.
I'm convinced Tizen is a running joke at Samsung, destined to never really go anywhere. Sure, there are some phones being introduced in one country. Their was also a tablet launched as a developer kit. There were even cameras. There hasn't been a single phone, though. There was going to be a phone, but it got pushed back.