Why Samsung dominance is bad for Android [Exclusive Guide]
this is a secret: the number 1 mobile for years already is other than Samsung, the Korean manufacturer that for the hand on entry, the middle and the high end for many consumers. We got done, but is it really beneficial to us consumers? In this case, we argumenterons that my dominance is ultimately harmful.
it is ten years now that we are used to a still young enough device: the smartphone. It for managed to enter our habits of consumption and entertainment at a staggering speed, witness of its used on a daily basis.
However, this particular market for always been anchored a strange hue: that of Apple, which he’s had 10 years went out the first iPhone , then Samsung which was the most popular representative of Android. Today, the market stagnates and my first 2 places them are acquired.
Although the domination of Apple is natural, being the only one to offer iOS exclusively, that of Samsung’s debate. It is after all only a representative among a multitude of offers of many builders in the Android universe.
And if the place given to Samsung in this landscape was ultimately harmful to the industry and the consumer? In this case, we we unlettered to understand why such domination is bad overall.
Relatively modest beginnings
Let’s first of all to see the place taken by Samsung on the Smartphone market. It should be noted first of all that the giant was already very present on the mobile before, and very well represented since it became number 1 in sales in the United States in 2008.
However, is that in 2009 that it would be my first device running Android: Samsung Galaxy. Yes, Galaxy, short. The Builder was trying so to tackle the iPhone, which existed since 2007 but was truly a massive success from the 3 G iPhone in 2008.
Previously, the Korean giant for tried to impose its own operating systems without success. This is by switching to Android that he will know a booming market, with successful but devices borrowing enormously to its competitor.
That’s where that comes from the idea that the brand is a “Chinese copy” of the iPhone, a feature that fades from year to year but remains in the collective imagination. It must be said that Samsung for not shone by its originality during this period, generally merely answer blow upon blow to innovations proposed by Apple.
Full on technologies
the manufacturer shone particularly on this industry through the technology he for made. The Galaxy S was the first to demonstrate the interest of Super AMOLED screens , when the Galaxy S2 popularized it and became a full House thanks to its superior technical specifications for the era and its relatively affordable price.
Since then, Samsung for expanded its presence in the smartphone universe providing screens, batteries, RAM chips and processors now. There are few avenues being not surveyed by the brand, few devices have no direct or indirect link with the manufacturer.
As a result, he could find my own identity in the marketplace which particularly materialized thanks to S6 and S6 Edge Galaxy . The curved screen for become a signature of the brand, as well as its design that finally moved away from its competitor of always.
Overall, Samsung is a quality Builder, almost foolproof although Galaxy Note 7 jeopardize this observation . He for proved it over long years, and will most likely continue to do so over the coming years.
why say that its dominance is harmful to the market? Hard to think that after having briefly reviewed sound. And yet, this is the case for a very simple reason: Android became Samsung, and Samsung’s Android.
my many efforts the brand became the spearhead of the Android universe. A fact that is not conspuera, but who had to make the general public alternatives waterproof. For many, “a Samsung” is used for naming a smartphone as well as “Nintendo” is for a console (or “PlayStation” for children).
Is power a monopoly to get to impose a brand instead of a product, as “kleenex” is called a simple tissue: an ownership such that it overshadows any competitor for the general public.
And it feels at retailers: even at the same price, it will be hard to advise a unit from a less known despite a technical record superior, brand as an automatic trust relationship is created for years with the giant Samsung.
The price of Fame
it is normal we say so, Samsung made after all that take advantage of the success he built over several years. And in many ways, this is the case. This close is not present on the high-end, which changes very much give.
The manufacturer floods the market on many lines, yet ‘old’ smartphones in terms of technical and raw power are always present on the shelves and sold every day. Yet, its competition offers much better devices at the same price, but who do not have power on the masses.
The middle range is probably the field the most upset by Chinese manufacturers in recent years, but there still Samsung takes advantage of my image to sell less powerful machines at the same price.
The general public, less informed than our readership, of course, can’t see that fire by trust with a big name for him offer the best capabilities at the rate given. Which is not necessarily the case, Samsung now selling well over its design than its performance.
The all participates to tarnish automatically competition in many sectors, when the Korean brand already dominates on the high end. The image of its Galaxy S falls on its Galaxy A, J, E and other letters of the alphabet to form an almost impregnable army despite weapons still more heavy in front of them.
A stunning communication
this is mainly due to a virtuous circle that Samsung for been able to implement: its phones are selling by the millions, with a massive return on investment for the brand which to reinject much on its communication, pushing sales once again.
They themselves have given him: if they attack Apple, it’s because it’s the right thing to do . And indeed: the fantasy around the devices created by Steve Jobs is still present 10 years after, and its pricing policy also.
This made many dream of iPhone, but lacked the means. It’s putting themselves and building in this field for years Samsung for managed to conquer the market, from a more flexible pricing policy to a policy of greater range, making back all naturally.
Problem being that rare are those who have the means to destroy this virtuous circle turned vicious for the competition. Get to integrate or destroy the loop requires a huge investment in its communication that cannot necessarily assume its rivals.
Currently, we notice that its competitors are forced to target specific segments of the population to achieve any success. If the Honor, and Huawei at my side, mark is doing currently, it is through communication based above all on a young segment of the population. There is not the strength of the message including Samsung.
Samsung do not play with others
a dominance in the General mentality, perfect communication and competition asphyxiated, certainly. But Samsung isn’t here by chance, why so blame him? Simply because that does not necessarily opening the Android system, which taints its evolution.
The beauty of Android is that system grew up for all, making the software innovations of the system always eventually reach the lower unit using the OS. Samsung for contributed to this with for example multi-window mode, now part of Android 7.0 Nougat .
The problem is that he is also the player least likely to market sharing, and proved it over and over again. my reluctance to use Android to debut ends as soon as any service innovative fate: a voice assistant for the entire platform? Samsung will use S Voice . A dedicated to watches OS? Samsung will use Tizen on its Galaxy Gear S3 .
Today in the era of artificial intelligence, the manufacturer wants to always impose my own assistant rather than grow a common basis. And that’s a danger which cannot be ignored: number 1 in smartphones, he could from one day to the next day deciding to give up Android for its own OS.
It already tempted him, but was not as dominant on the market. Now, it for way too many keys in hand to not be seen as a threat, and shows year after year that independence is more committed to grow the whole market open to all technology. No: Samsung wants to prevail until all competition to be killed.
To a single model
and in many ways, it for now become the Apple of the Android universe. But where it made sense to “copy” a competitor not using my common basis, as an alternative, the Samsung case is unique in this particular universe.
By forcing a direction on an ecosystem, it grows well under an alternative as a standardization of the entire platform. However, the best feature of Android is to be a platform free, editable shared wish: the last thing we would like is that she becomes iOS.
But we can already see the scars of the dominance of Samsung form on the market, then its curved screen design is done copy in turn by its competitors. All does not grow in diversity, but once again the standardization of what is a smartphone; or rather, a “Samsung” for the general public.
The danger is there, but attempts to counter were not successful in 2016. To get to topple the giant, its competitors are LG and Motorola gambled to push innovation in the market by offering the first truly modular smartphones.
You already know: the market for absolutely failed to respond, digging the finances of LG as never goes so give it up with G6 . Hope that it does not go even further by offering a curved screen, harbinger of a possible bad future.
Remember, however, that it is a vision of things, and took angle: in many ways, Samsung for also been positive for the Android universe. That’s what we’ll see in a future issue!