Hello! And welcome to our Friday column, Worst of the Week. There’s a lot of nutty stuff that goes on in this industry, so this column is a chance for us at RCRWireless.com to rant and rave about whatever rubs us the wrong way. We hope you enjoy it!
And without further ado:
I think it might be time for Samsung to have an intervention.
This week, the consumer electronics giant unveiled its latest Galaxy smartphone, which according to my memory is the 39th iteration of that device in the past three weeks. This despite the fact that research from Recon Analytics found that U.S. consumers are replacing their mobile devices every 21.7 months. In that amount of time, Samsung is on pace to unveil 543 new devices.
Not that there is anything wrong with a constant stream of consumer electronics devices being rolled out to a willing public that can’t seem to get enough. But, me thinks Samsung is getting a bit out of hand with at least the Galaxy S(insert rapidly increasing number here) line of devices to the point where maybe someone needs to step in.
The latest example sports just about every bell, whistle, kitchen sink, acronym, super power available on this planet or at least those closest to us. Look at some of these specifications: 5-inch screen that is beginning to push this smartphone out of the smartphone market; front and rear cameras that can be used to take pictures and video … at the same time (what the what the?!?); and an octa-core processor. Let that last one sink in for a minute. An octa-core processor. I have no idea what that even means, but the last time I heard the prefix in front of something it turned out sort of bad for those involved.
Samsung is showing no mercy.
Samsung began this Galaxy escapade in mid-2010 with the original S, that sold pretty well, but nothing in the numbers that would lead anyone to suspect the company was about to go on some sort of binge. It was also overshadowed by the then new iPhone 4 model that sported an all-glass case that led to increased consumer droll, decreased ability to connect to a cellular signal and hilarity when the whole things shattered when dropped.
The Galaxy S model was followed up by the obviously named SII in May 2011, that did manage to show some improvements, even more so when compared to the warmed-over iPhone 4S that Apple pushed back the launch of by several months from its typical early summer timeframe and was the first indication that perhaps Apple was just phoning it in.
Buoyed by that success, Samsung quickly followed suit with the Galaxy SIII in May 2012, which by that time had become a stronger alternative to the iPhone line due to its larger screen and bolstered feature set. Apple did take back some of the limelight later in 2012 with its bigger-screened iPhone 5, but by that time the tide appeared to have turned and people were actually starting to ask for a Galaxy device.
And, now here we are just 10 months after the still compelling SIII hit the streets and Samsung is set to yet again throw another numeral onto a flagship device. Well done?
(Let me remind you that all of this is just for one model line from Samsung and does not include the dozens of other smartphone launches from the company, let alone tablets and a smartphone/camera/cyborg.)
By contrast, Apple seems to be still on its (at least) once per year cycle of rolling out enhanced or new iPhone models. At first, even this timeline looked a bit excessive, but now is starting to look like perhaps Apple is getting a bit lazy.
I think we all should have really taken note of Samsung’s problem when it released the Galaxy Camera last year. I have already touched on the absurdity of this device in the overall ecosystem of mobile devices, but to re-hash: Here is a camera with some of the most powerful smartphone specification on the market today, yet it can’t make a traditional voice call.
I know Samsung is all about stamping its authority on the smartphone space, but this obsession is getting to be a bit like Joan Rivers and plastic surgery. A little is probably a good idea, but once you no longer look human, you might have a problem.
So please, someone with access to Samsung, please take the company aside and tell them to take a vacation or something. Or at least let the swelling go down before going back under the knife.
OK, enough of that.
Thanks for checking out this week’s Worst of the Week column. And now for some extras:
–Speaking of the crazy device market, BlackBerry’s hail marry for relevance was set to receive some potential lift this week as mega-carrier Verizon Wireless began taking orders on the device makers Z10 smartphone. The device has to this point be available in a handful of markets outside the United States save for a small mobile virtual network operator selling the device for full price.
With Samsung dominating the Android space (see above) and Apple still the apple of many consumers’ eye, domestic carriers are desperate now more than ever for some sort of alternative for their smartphone/OS needs. It’s just crazy to think that brands like BlackBerry, Nokia and Microsoft are the ones carriers’ are needing to bolster in order to get that mythical third option.
–The usefulness of smartphones is set to take a turn for the weird as a company with possibly the worst name ever, Breathometer, is set to unveil a product and corresponding application that will transform that germ-covered smartphone into a germ-covered smartphone that you will now be putting your mouth on.
I am sure that the product is a well-meaning addition to our world, but couldn’t this company have at least put a bit of thought into a better name? I am guessing that whoever came up with that name was in no way in need of using that product. Don’t people know that all the best names are devised only after you’ve had one too many?
–At some point there needs to be a book done on Clearwire. I would love to have the luxury of time and money to dig into all the wheeling and dealing that has gone on related to this company just to see how mismanaged this whole affair has been, specifically surrounding the 2.5 GHz spectrum holdings that is at the heart of the company.
For example, Sprint Nextel recently released a report conducted by an independent research firm (though how independent is up for question as obviously Sprint Nextel had the research done) downplaying the actual value of Clearwire’s 2.5 GHz spectrum holdings in order to bolster Sprint Nextel’s current $2.2 billion bid to acquire the remaining stake in Clearwire. Fair enough.
I just wonder if Sprint Nextel passed along any of those concerns regarding the value of that spectrum when it managed to talk a number of tech firms into investing billions of dollars into Clearwire’s re-launch in 2008?
–Finally, my love of spectrum auctions took a hit this week when it was reported that the Czech Telecommunications Office stopped the country’s auction of 800 MHz, 1.8 GHz and 2.6 GHz spectrum licenses because bids were getting too high. Bidding too high in a spectrum ?!? Is that even possible?!?
I know many are still a bit squeamish after some European operators went EBay crazy for 3G licenses more than a decade ago, but who can deny that seeing wireless operators run by what are supposed to be intelligent people throwing money around like they were at a bachelor party was not awesome.
According to analyst firm Analysys Mason, Czech regulators figured that too-high-of-prices would lead to those costs being transferred to consumers, which is probably true. But, couldn’t they have just voided the auction after it was all finished or something? Why kill a good financial free-for-all when it’s going so well?
I welcome your comments. Please send me an email at [email protected].
Bored? Why not follow me on Twitter?
