At work, I hear many people talking about Apple Pay and how great it is, but I have researched it and don't see what the big deal is. I use a 2013 Nexus 5, so a three year old is quite old in the smartphone world. I may upgrade, but I feel that my current phone is adequate. The phone already has the Commonwealth Bank app, which allows you to use PayPass with your phone. The problem with this is that, in order to use PayPass on your phone, you need to first log into your phone and then enter a PIN in the app. It's far easier to use your credit card. An advantage of using your credit card is that you can hand the card to the person taking your order and have him do all the work of tapping the card and processing the payment. The only thing you need to do is say, "PayPass, please." (I sometimes use PayWave as well since I also have a Visa debit card.) Asking for Apple Pay, and then handing a giant phone to someone, just doesn't seem right. I know that handing over your credit card to someone is not the best in terms of security, but it's fairly easy to monitor how much money is coming out from your account using your phone (the Commonwealth Bank app has a widget that updates how much money is on your account on your home screen), so if you monitor your balance all the time and everything looks regular, there's no reason to not trust them.
I also admit that I have a bias against Apple products, and the people who always tell me to use iPhones and Apple products don't seem to be able to articulate a good reason for it other than blind faith that the product is good because of how great Apple products are.
Showing posts with label apple. Show all posts
Showing posts with label apple. Show all posts
12 June 2016
13 August 2013
Cheap iPhone will turn Apple into Samsung
Apple creates the iPhone 5 for $200 and sells it for $700. Google, on the other hand, makes zero or little profit on its Nexus devices (Nexus 4, Nexus 7, and Nexus 10).
Some people do not understand Google's philosophy, citing the fact that Google ads are found on Apple phones as well. The best way to understand Google's plan is to imagine what the world would look like if Googlr never invented Android and Apple controlled the entire smartphone market. Apple would make its iPhones for $200 and because they can they will charge $2000 for it to maximise profits. Because the price is so high, they will not sell much phones but because there profit margin on each phone will be so high, Apple is happy. Google makes money off advertising. If smartphones were all $2000 thanks to lack of competition as a result of monopoly, hardly anyone will use smartphones and therefore not many people would look at Google's ads and Google would not make much money. By creating Android, giving it away for free, and producing high-quality and cheap Nexus and Chromebook devices, Google is able to put pressure on Apple to bring its prices down and get the iPhone into more people's hands. Apple is content with selling fewer phones buy making high profit margins on each, explaining why Apple takes in 80% of smart phones profits even though 80% of smartphones run on Android.
The plan is working, and Apple is giving in. Apple will soon release a cheap plastic iPhone in an attempt to compete with Android at the lower end. Regardless of whether the cheap iPhone increases sales of Apple devices and steals market share from Android, it does not matter since Google ads are on Apple devices. A cheap iPhone will only dilute the Apple brand and transition Apple from a boutique low-volume high-margin company into a commodity mass-manufacturing, high-volume low-margin company. In other words, Apple will become Samsung.
22 July 2013
Stock Android is Overrated
http://www.theage.com.au/digital-life/mobiles/i-tried-the-android-now-give-me-back-my-iphone-20130719-2q92e.html
The opinion piece above from The Age has boiled my blood. I feel I need to address it. The piece claims that Android phones are bad because they are not pure Android phones and even if they are pure Android phones.
I currently have both a Nexus 7 running stock Android and a Sony Xperia Z running Android with Sony refinement. I find the Xperia Z to be much better than stock Android mainly because of added functionality, e.g. small apps and Bravia Engine. Many people actually want to pay more money for more features.
The Nexus devices make sense because they are cheap. The Xperia Z costs about $600 off contract compared to about $330 for the Nexus 4. It makes sense to pay less for something with lesser functionality and features. But $600 for a Google Play Edition Galaxy S4, which is the same price as the normal GS4? No thanks. The iPhone 5 is even worse, as you are paying $800 for an operating system with even less functionality and features than stock Android.
02 February 2013
Kogan Agora 10" Dual Core Tablet
Today I visited my father's house and noticed that my five-year-old half-sister held a 10-inch tablet in her hands. I asked my father about the tablet and he notified me that he had purchased two 10-inch Android tablets from online retailer Kogan.
Since one of her friends purchased a Sony tablet, my half-sister has been wanting a tablet for herself. I remember when we visited the shopping mall, she would say to her father, "I want an iPad!" and then point to a Samsung Galaxy Tab. It's not good to reward bad behaviour, but learning how to use a tablet can have educational benefits and can allow the child to familiarise herself or himself with the latest technology. Not to mention that fact that nothing mutes a loud and reckless child as effectively as a tablet PC.
In my opinion, Apple's main innovation is in its marketing. Their marketing and brand recognition is so strong that many children (and even most uninformed adults) refer to all tablets as iPads, regardless of whether they powered by the Android or Windows operating systems or whether it is made by a company other than Apple, e.g. Samsung, HTC, Sony, Motorola, or even Microsoft. But given that the latest iPad 4 would cost around $600, it just seemed stupid buying an iPad 4 for a child when the child would likely drop, break, or spill food on the device.
My cousin, thinking that she was saving hundreds of dollars by not buying the latest iPad 4, purchased instead an iPad 2 for $400. Given that it is an iPad 2, it has a low-resolution display (NOT the iPad 4's high-resolution 264ppi Retina display) and it only had a measly 0.5 GB RAM and used an ancient and weak 0.8 Ghz single-core A5 CPU. Why would you spend $400 on an iPad 2 with ancient technology when you can spend less than half that much ($180) and get a Kogan Agora 10" Dual-Core Tablet? The Kogan Agora tablet is more than two times cheaper than the iPad 2 yet also has a dual-core processor, has two times more RAM, and has a bigger battery.
That being said, the Kogan Agora 10" is not the best of the best. I would argue that the best tablets out now are the Nexus 7, Nexus 10, iPad 4, and Asus Transformer Prime. But these tablets are generally quite expensive whereas the Kogan Agora 10" is $180 whereas the smaller 8-inch Kogan Agora Dual Core Tablet is only $120. The Kogan Agora 10" also has a respectable 1 GB RAM, which is equal to the amount of RAM in the iPad 4. When I looked at the screen of the Kogan tablet, I noticed that the display was pixellated and blurry compared to the crispness of the iPad 4 and the Nexus 7. Nevertheless, for a $180 tablet, what do you expect? For most people, the low-resolution 132ppi display on the Kogan Agora tablet it is not a huge issue. It is approximately equal to that of the iPad 2. If you want high-resolution on your tablet, you'll need to pay more. The iPad 4 has an impressive pixel density of 264ppi Retina display but will cost you $600. The Google Samsung Nexus 10, however, has an even better pixel density of 300ppi and will cost you $500.
How is the battery? According to Kogan's website, the Agora 10" Dual Core has 8000 mAh. The website does not give the actual battery life of the tablet in hours, and I was not able to test it given the children were playing on it. Nevertheless, the iPad 2 has a 6,944 mAh battery and goes for about 10 hours, whereas the new iPad 4 has a 11,666 mAh battery, which is roughly 70% larger, yet still goes for about 10 hours as well given that the iPad 4 has a high-resolution Retina display and dual-core CPU, it consumed much more power. Given that the Kogan Agora has a dual-core CPU like the iPad 4 but has a low-resolution display like the iPad 2, my rough guess is that battery life will be around 10 hours as well.
I went into the Kogan Agora's browser and also played some Angry Birds to see if the tablet could handle it. It seemed quick and responsive, so it is likely that the dual-core CPU is doing its job. The kids installed various games on the tablet and played them. There seemed to be no issues with performance. The Kogan Agora also runs the latest version of Android, i.e. Jelly Bean, which is supposedly much faster than previous Android versions. All in all, I was impressed. When they carry it around with them, the children keep referring to the tablet as the "iPad," and I keep telling them, "it's a Kogan!" but they don't seem to understand.
Given that I am used to the Nexus 7, what surprised me about the Kogan Agora 10" Dual-Core is that it is quite heavy. Furthermore, even though the Kogan website says the tablet uses USB, the Kogan Agora does not seem to charge with a standard micro-USB charger but has a completely different charging connector, so if you run out of batteries at a friend's house, chances are you will not be able to use his or her charger. I would prefer it if the tablet used micro-USB, but given it's only $180, I'm willing to forgive.
The Kogan Agora 10" Dual-Core has a premium feel to it, even though it is plastic. Although it is heavy, it is thin, black, and sleek. Carrying it around gives off a premium look, that is, until people notice the "Kogan" logo on the back.
If you go to Kogan's Facebook page, you will notice that Ruslan Kogan receives many complaints. Reading his Facebook page, you'd think the man is completely incompetent. But my experience with him (as well as my family's experiences) has mostly been positive. I have purchased a Nexus 7 from him and a car charger. The items took a bit of time to come (maybe a month) but this was fully disclosed on the website and I was happy that it eventually came. Furthermore, Kogan seems to be able to sell goods that are much cheaper than the brick-and-mortar retailers. For example, the Google Asus Nexus 7 sold on his website is cheaper than the same tablet sold directly from Google Play. Kogan also sells a Kogan branded 5" dual-core phablet smartphone for only $150, which is absolutely incredible given most good smartphones from Samsung or Apple cost $600. Kogan may be a controversial figure who has upset many, but there is no question that he delivers for the customer.
Update 9/2/13: I have performed the Antutu benchmark test on the Kogan Dual Core tablet. It received a score of 11505. This is very good.
Since one of her friends purchased a Sony tablet, my half-sister has been wanting a tablet for herself. I remember when we visited the shopping mall, she would say to her father, "I want an iPad!" and then point to a Samsung Galaxy Tab. It's not good to reward bad behaviour, but learning how to use a tablet can have educational benefits and can allow the child to familiarise herself or himself with the latest technology. Not to mention that fact that nothing mutes a loud and reckless child as effectively as a tablet PC.
In my opinion, Apple's main innovation is in its marketing. Their marketing and brand recognition is so strong that many children (and even most uninformed adults) refer to all tablets as iPads, regardless of whether they powered by the Android or Windows operating systems or whether it is made by a company other than Apple, e.g. Samsung, HTC, Sony, Motorola, or even Microsoft. But given that the latest iPad 4 would cost around $600, it just seemed stupid buying an iPad 4 for a child when the child would likely drop, break, or spill food on the device.
My cousin, thinking that she was saving hundreds of dollars by not buying the latest iPad 4, purchased instead an iPad 2 for $400. Given that it is an iPad 2, it has a low-resolution display (NOT the iPad 4's high-resolution 264ppi Retina display) and it only had a measly 0.5 GB RAM and used an ancient and weak 0.8 Ghz single-core A5 CPU. Why would you spend $400 on an iPad 2 with ancient technology when you can spend less than half that much ($180) and get a Kogan Agora 10" Dual-Core Tablet? The Kogan Agora tablet is more than two times cheaper than the iPad 2 yet also has a dual-core processor, has two times more RAM, and has a bigger battery.
That being said, the Kogan Agora 10" is not the best of the best. I would argue that the best tablets out now are the Nexus 7, Nexus 10, iPad 4, and Asus Transformer Prime. But these tablets are generally quite expensive whereas the Kogan Agora 10" is $180 whereas the smaller 8-inch Kogan Agora Dual Core Tablet is only $120. The Kogan Agora 10" also has a respectable 1 GB RAM, which is equal to the amount of RAM in the iPad 4. When I looked at the screen of the Kogan tablet, I noticed that the display was pixellated and blurry compared to the crispness of the iPad 4 and the Nexus 7. Nevertheless, for a $180 tablet, what do you expect? For most people, the low-resolution 132ppi display on the Kogan Agora tablet it is not a huge issue. It is approximately equal to that of the iPad 2. If you want high-resolution on your tablet, you'll need to pay more. The iPad 4 has an impressive pixel density of 264ppi Retina display but will cost you $600. The Google Samsung Nexus 10, however, has an even better pixel density of 300ppi and will cost you $500.
How is the battery? According to Kogan's website, the Agora 10" Dual Core has 8000 mAh. The website does not give the actual battery life of the tablet in hours, and I was not able to test it given the children were playing on it. Nevertheless, the iPad 2 has a 6,944 mAh battery and goes for about 10 hours, whereas the new iPad 4 has a 11,666 mAh battery, which is roughly 70% larger, yet still goes for about 10 hours as well given that the iPad 4 has a high-resolution Retina display and dual-core CPU, it consumed much more power. Given that the Kogan Agora has a dual-core CPU like the iPad 4 but has a low-resolution display like the iPad 2, my rough guess is that battery life will be around 10 hours as well.
I went into the Kogan Agora's browser and also played some Angry Birds to see if the tablet could handle it. It seemed quick and responsive, so it is likely that the dual-core CPU is doing its job. The kids installed various games on the tablet and played them. There seemed to be no issues with performance. The Kogan Agora also runs the latest version of Android, i.e. Jelly Bean, which is supposedly much faster than previous Android versions. All in all, I was impressed. When they carry it around with them, the children keep referring to the tablet as the "iPad," and I keep telling them, "it's a Kogan!" but they don't seem to understand.
Given that I am used to the Nexus 7, what surprised me about the Kogan Agora 10" Dual-Core is that it is quite heavy. Furthermore, even though the Kogan website says the tablet uses USB, the Kogan Agora does not seem to charge with a standard micro-USB charger but has a completely different charging connector, so if you run out of batteries at a friend's house, chances are you will not be able to use his or her charger. I would prefer it if the tablet used micro-USB, but given it's only $180, I'm willing to forgive.
The Kogan Agora 10" Dual-Core has a premium feel to it, even though it is plastic. Although it is heavy, it is thin, black, and sleek. Carrying it around gives off a premium look, that is, until people notice the "Kogan" logo on the back.
If you go to Kogan's Facebook page, you will notice that Ruslan Kogan receives many complaints. Reading his Facebook page, you'd think the man is completely incompetent. But my experience with him (as well as my family's experiences) has mostly been positive. I have purchased a Nexus 7 from him and a car charger. The items took a bit of time to come (maybe a month) but this was fully disclosed on the website and I was happy that it eventually came. Furthermore, Kogan seems to be able to sell goods that are much cheaper than the brick-and-mortar retailers. For example, the Google Asus Nexus 7 sold on his website is cheaper than the same tablet sold directly from Google Play. Kogan also sells a Kogan branded 5" dual-core phablet smartphone for only $150, which is absolutely incredible given most good smartphones from Samsung or Apple cost $600. Kogan may be a controversial figure who has upset many, but there is no question that he delivers for the customer.
Update 9/2/13: I have performed the Antutu benchmark test on the Kogan Dual Core tablet. It received a score of 11505. This is very good.
02 November 2012
Google Releases the Nexus 4
A few days ago, Google released the Nexus 4 smartphone and the Nexus 10 tablet. These can simply be purchased online via Google (just click on "Play").
The Google Nexus 4 is now made by LG and has a quad-core processor, a 4.7 inch screen, 2 GB of RAM, 2100 mAh of battery capacity, and a 320 ppi screen. If these numbers mean nothing to you, the bottom line is that this phone is brilliant. It is fast, powerful, and the display is excellent. Compared to, say, the Apple iPhone 5 made by Hon Hai Precision Industries, the Nexus 4 is about two times better according to most performance metrics. For example, the iPhone 5 has a dual core-process, only 1 GB of RAM, a 4 inch screen, and 1440 mAh battery capacity. The iPhone 5 still continues to have excellent screen resolution at 326 ppi.
However, Apple's iPhone 5 cost around $800 to buy outright. The Nexus 4 only costs $350.
Why in the world would Apple create a clearly inferior phone and charge high amounts for it?
Apple's business model is completely different to Google's. Google wants as many people using its Android phone operating system as possible so that users will continue to use Google. This allows Google to make money from advertising. Apple's business model, however, is a traditional business model that focuses on keeping costs low by making sure hardware is cheap (hence the weaker hardware) but making sure demand is high through excellent marketing and reliance on brand loyalty.
Apple's brand loyalty is such that it can get away with taking a mediocre product, slapping an aluminium case with a shiny Apple logo on the back, and double the price.
There are only two main problems I can think of with the Nexus 4: the first is the phone only has normal 3G data transfer speed whereas phones like the Samsung Galaxy S3, Galaxy Note 2, and iPhone 5 have 4G LTE; and the second problem is that, unlike the Samsung Galaxy Note 2, the phone does not an in-built stylus. The number one phone at the moment, therefore, is the Samsung Galaxy Note 2.
The Google Nexus 4 is now made by LG and has a quad-core processor, a 4.7 inch screen, 2 GB of RAM, 2100 mAh of battery capacity, and a 320 ppi screen. If these numbers mean nothing to you, the bottom line is that this phone is brilliant. It is fast, powerful, and the display is excellent. Compared to, say, the Apple iPhone 5 made by Hon Hai Precision Industries, the Nexus 4 is about two times better according to most performance metrics. For example, the iPhone 5 has a dual core-process, only 1 GB of RAM, a 4 inch screen, and 1440 mAh battery capacity. The iPhone 5 still continues to have excellent screen resolution at 326 ppi.
However, Apple's iPhone 5 cost around $800 to buy outright. The Nexus 4 only costs $350.
Why in the world would Apple create a clearly inferior phone and charge high amounts for it?
Apple's business model is completely different to Google's. Google wants as many people using its Android phone operating system as possible so that users will continue to use Google. This allows Google to make money from advertising. Apple's business model, however, is a traditional business model that focuses on keeping costs low by making sure hardware is cheap (hence the weaker hardware) but making sure demand is high through excellent marketing and reliance on brand loyalty.
Apple's brand loyalty is such that it can get away with taking a mediocre product, slapping an aluminium case with a shiny Apple logo on the back, and double the price.
There are only two main problems I can think of with the Nexus 4: the first is the phone only has normal 3G data transfer speed whereas phones like the Samsung Galaxy S3, Galaxy Note 2, and iPhone 5 have 4G LTE; and the second problem is that, unlike the Samsung Galaxy Note 2, the phone does not an in-built stylus. The number one phone at the moment, therefore, is the Samsung Galaxy Note 2.
22 September 2012
Good Android Phones with Small Displays
People with iPhones go on about how small screens are great. One of my friends purchased an iPhone 4S outright for close to $1000 and claimed that he didn't mind getting a phone with a small display because it fits well in his hands. He claimed that the 4S's 3.5 inch display is the perfect size and that high-end Android phones all had large screens that don't fit in your pocket. Android phones with small screens were not "high-end" enough for him like the iPhone was.
First of all, not all Android phones have large screens. The Samsung Galaxy Ace has a 3.5 inch screen, just like the iPhone 4S and iPhone 4. Furthermore, who said the iPhone was ever a high-end phone? The iPhone 4 has a 800Mhz single-core processor with 0.5GB RAM, and the Galaxy Ace has those exact hardware specifications but comes at half the price. The iPhone 4S has a dual-core 800Mhz processor with 0.5GB RAM. The Samsung Galaxy Ace 2 also has those same hardware specs (but with slightly more RAM at 0.7GB) yet is around half the price of the Apple.
But then lo-and-behold, the iPhone 5 with 4 inch display comes out and all of a sudden my friend gets one and contradicts himself when he says that now he believes that 4 inch is the perfect size. It seems like he is just buying first and rationalising his purchase later.
First of all, not all Android phones have large screens. The Samsung Galaxy Ace has a 3.5 inch screen, just like the iPhone 4S and iPhone 4. Furthermore, who said the iPhone was ever a high-end phone? The iPhone 4 has a 800Mhz single-core processor with 0.5GB RAM, and the Galaxy Ace has those exact hardware specifications but comes at half the price. The iPhone 4S has a dual-core 800Mhz processor with 0.5GB RAM. The Samsung Galaxy Ace 2 also has those same hardware specs (but with slightly more RAM at 0.7GB) yet is around half the price of the Apple.
But then lo-and-behold, the iPhone 5 with 4 inch display comes out and all of a sudden my friend gets one and contradicts himself when he says that now he believes that 4 inch is the perfect size. It seems like he is just buying first and rationalising his purchase later.
13 September 2012
iPhone 5 Specs Not Released Yet
The iPhone 5 has been announced. It will have a 4 inch display and be lighter. Although Apple claims it has a A6 chip, there has been no announcement about the specs, such as how many CPU cores the phone will have. We therefore cannot speculate on how the phone compares to other phones, mainly high-end Android phones, the number one phone for now clearly being the Samsung Galaxy Note 2, which has a quad-core CPU with an incredible 2GB of RAM and over 3000mAh battery capacity. It also comes with an in-built stylus and a screen size greater than 5 inches. We will need to see the iPhones specs (including the price) and compare it.
The old iPhone 4S is a big disappointment. Long before the iPhone 5 came out, it sold for about $700 outright, which is about the price of high-end Android phones, yet the iPhone 4S only had a dual-core 1Ghz CPU with a mere 0.5GB RAM. The screen size on a 4S is only 3.5 inches. Screen size is very subjective, but in my opinion the main reason for getting a smartphone is to get internet access and, mainly, to read (and watch videos) online. You just cannot do that on a small screen without squinting hard and potentially destroying your eyes. If you just use for phone for making phone calls and texting, it's okay to have a small screen, but if you only make calls and text, why not spend $50 on a small dumbphone instead of spending $700 on a smartphone? It just doesn't make sense.
The weakness and cheapness of the iPhone 4S's hardware clearly explains why Apple makes massive 73 per cent gross margins on each iPhone it sells and why, even though Samsung is the number one phone company is terms of sales, Apple is the number one phone company in terms of profits. Apple is able to price their phones at the same price as high-end Android phones, yet their phones are weaker and cheaper to produce. Apple today is the world's biggest public company. Customers get less for what they pay.
Hopefully the iPhone 5 is better value for money.
The old iPhone 4S is a big disappointment. Long before the iPhone 5 came out, it sold for about $700 outright, which is about the price of high-end Android phones, yet the iPhone 4S only had a dual-core 1Ghz CPU with a mere 0.5GB RAM. The screen size on a 4S is only 3.5 inches. Screen size is very subjective, but in my opinion the main reason for getting a smartphone is to get internet access and, mainly, to read (and watch videos) online. You just cannot do that on a small screen without squinting hard and potentially destroying your eyes. If you just use for phone for making phone calls and texting, it's okay to have a small screen, but if you only make calls and text, why not spend $50 on a small dumbphone instead of spending $700 on a smartphone? It just doesn't make sense.
The weakness and cheapness of the iPhone 4S's hardware clearly explains why Apple makes massive 73 per cent gross margins on each iPhone it sells and why, even though Samsung is the number one phone company is terms of sales, Apple is the number one phone company in terms of profits. Apple is able to price their phones at the same price as high-end Android phones, yet their phones are weaker and cheaper to produce. Apple today is the world's biggest public company. Customers get less for what they pay.
Hopefully the iPhone 5 is better value for money.
03 June 2012
Facebook phone is a good idea
There is an article on The Age titled Facebook smartphone? Dumb idea that criticizes the idea that Facebook may create its own line of smartphones.
The article states that there is not much money to be made in smartphones. According to the article, there are two ways of making money in the smartphone industry: the Apply way, which involves creating a phone that is worth $150 and then selling it for $800, thereby making huge profits and making Apple one of the biggest publicy owned companies in the world; the Android way, which involves creating a phone at a cost that varies from $100 to $800 and selling it for only a little bit more, thereby making small profits. The article assumes that Facebook will opt for the Android way and maybe use the free and open Android operating system or create its own operating system and gain market share by heavily subsidizing the phone and lowering its cost considerably. Facebook intends to make money by gaining large market share and then putting ads on the phones.
I don't think this is a bad idea. However, the article states that this is a poor idea because Facebook is already integrated in most Android and iOS phones. This may be true but Facebook does not control the prices of these phones. Rather, Apple, Samsung, HTC, and so forth control the prices. If Facebook makes a phone, it can subsidize heavily and undercut the rest.
I wouldn't mind buying a supercheap phone and have ads on my Facebook. I'd rather see ads on my Facebook than pay more money on a phone. Comparing smartphones with 1GHz processing power only, currently you can buy a iPhone 4S outright for about $800. You can buy an HTC Desire HD smartphone with 1GHz processing power for $380 outright and unlocked. Suppose Facebook offered a smartphone that was only $150 outright and unlocked with Facebook installed with ads. I certainly would buy it. In terms of value for money, it makes sense. Anyone who is smart with money will do the same things. Facebook will steal customers from Apple, Samsung, and HTC phone users and make more money from advertising revenue. Sounds very smart to me.
The article states that there is not much money to be made in smartphones. According to the article, there are two ways of making money in the smartphone industry: the Apply way, which involves creating a phone that is worth $150 and then selling it for $800, thereby making huge profits and making Apple one of the biggest publicy owned companies in the world; the Android way, which involves creating a phone at a cost that varies from $100 to $800 and selling it for only a little bit more, thereby making small profits. The article assumes that Facebook will opt for the Android way and maybe use the free and open Android operating system or create its own operating system and gain market share by heavily subsidizing the phone and lowering its cost considerably. Facebook intends to make money by gaining large market share and then putting ads on the phones.
I don't think this is a bad idea. However, the article states that this is a poor idea because Facebook is already integrated in most Android and iOS phones. This may be true but Facebook does not control the prices of these phones. Rather, Apple, Samsung, HTC, and so forth control the prices. If Facebook makes a phone, it can subsidize heavily and undercut the rest.
I wouldn't mind buying a supercheap phone and have ads on my Facebook. I'd rather see ads on my Facebook than pay more money on a phone. Comparing smartphones with 1GHz processing power only, currently you can buy a iPhone 4S outright for about $800. You can buy an HTC Desire HD smartphone with 1GHz processing power for $380 outright and unlocked. Suppose Facebook offered a smartphone that was only $150 outright and unlocked with Facebook installed with ads. I certainly would buy it. In terms of value for money, it makes sense. Anyone who is smart with money will do the same things. Facebook will steal customers from Apple, Samsung, and HTC phone users and make more money from advertising revenue. Sounds very smart to me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)