[naveenroy]

Originally Posted by nishantbhatia84

But since you've bought up this topic, looking at the ridiculous amount of phones Samsung is selling, I'm sure they've got something better in their phones compared to others!

Well, IMHO, I think it is just peer pressure. People want to just say that they own a Samsung - not a "cheap" Micromax or Karbonn mobile. That contributes to the sales. For me - I really cannot bring myself to buy a mobile phone for 30k - something a Micromax can give me for 15k. But each his own.

[tsk1979]

Originally Posted by nishantbhatia84

I agree with you on that, but take a closer look and you'll notice an obvious quality difference.

Like what please elaborate. I cannot comment on HTC/Sony quality. However, from looking, the 10-12K Samsungs and the 10-12K Karbonn did not have any difference. If anything, Karbonn is far better with a brighter screen. As for body. Both samsung budget range, and the Karbonn flagship have the same lousy plastic stuff. Only the Lumia 520 in that price range looks solid and well build. But then as they say, Win phone or not, Nokia is nokia

Originally Posted by nishantbhatia84

Mate, i guess you're getting me wrong. I'm not going pro-Samsung or any other company here. I'm talking about all major phone brands (htc, Samsung, sony, lg, apple) compared to brands like Micromax & Karbonn. I've never said or pointed at Samsung being the best.
But since you've bought up this topic, looking at the ridiculous amount of phones Samsung is selling, I'm sure they've got something better in their phones compared to others!

I could not figure out what as far as the 12K samsung is concerned. But you have to also see that samsung made the first real phablet which took off (Galaxy note), and that too with a stylus when everybody had written off the stylus.
So innovation does get you places.
And it also makes you sell your lower end phones.

For example, in the comparison between 12K samsung and 12K micromax, a poster here brought up AMOLED discussion. Quite funny, because only high end phones from Samsung have AMOLED.
Having a high end market also boosts your low end sales. Known fact.

Originally Posted by nishantbhatia84

Absolutely! Micromax is doing everything right in the sub 20k handset range. My point is that still have a long way to go before they can match the flagship devices of other companies. So instead of trying to sell average phones as flagships to unsuspecting customers, they should focus on delivering a handset to really match flagships! That's what my point has always been.

If we talk about flagship, then samsung is cheating people by saying its 30K phone is flagship. Only Apple 50K phone is flagship.
See its all relative.
Karbonn S5, Micromax canvas etc., all are flagship phones, but at a different price range. For example, we call the Sonata as Hyundai's flagship car. We don't say that Flagship car is a 5 crore Lambhorgini and so Hyundai should not sell its 20L car as flagship.
Infact Hyundai Elantra cracked the US market by going head to head against the more expensive honda and Toyota, and then stealing their thunder.
If Micromax and Karbonn do not screw up on the "service front", the next 10 years will see their rise to all over the world. However, I have seen, service is usually not part of the equation for most Indian setups, even if the Indian subsidiary of a foreign entity.

Originally Posted by naveenroy

Well, IMHO, I think it is just peer pressure. People want to just say that they own a Samsung - not a "cheap" Micromax or Karbonn mobile. That contributes to the sales. For me - I really cannot bring myself to buy a mobile phone for 30k - something a Micromax can give me for 15k. But each his own.

Not necessarily. If I were in the market for a 12K phone, I would buy a Karbonn, but for the 30K phone I bought it for
1. GSM bands - Micromax/Karbonn won't work in America
2. Barometer and other such sensors
3. Stylus
4. 2GB RAM
5. GLOSSNASS
6. Magnetic Compass
7. Atleast 8GB inbuild memory

Then there is also the "suspect" quality. All phones are made in china, and when you go bottom shopping often you get poor quality. I want my phones to last 2-3 years. Maybe 4. Will Karbonn do that, I dunno.
So updates etc., become important.
These companies have to prove to the market that they are not shipping phones where charging port does not last the required 10,000 connect disconnect cycles.
Or the headphone jack is poorly built.
But then, now is use and throw culture and after 1.5 years, old is thrown out. So many do not notice.
So the high end phones of Samsung can make sense if you need specialist features.
But as far as low end phones of Samsung are concerned, I would rate their quality to be slightly better than those unbranded dhinchak chinese phones at gaffar market. I have owned some cheap samsungs, and they are rubbish in quality. Worse than Micromax/Karbonn etc.,

[naveenroy]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

Not necessarily. If I were in the market for a 12K phone, I would buy a Karbonn, but for the 30K phone I bought it for
1. GSM bands - Micromax/Karbonn won't work in America
2. Barometer and other such sensors
3. Stylus
4. 2GB RAM
5. GLOSSNASS
6. Magnetic Compass
7. Atleast 8GB inbuild memory

Yes, you paid a premium for using these features. But I see a lot of people buying a Samsung 30K phone just to say its a Samsung. Most of them don't even know why they need a compass

[adg_andy]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

1. GSM bands - Micromax/Karbonn won't work in America
.,

It was right till now. Canvas turbo (the one promoted by Hugh Jackman) and the later ones are all going to be Quad Bands. I too went for the grand duos (as opposed to canvas hd ) for the quad band.

[tsk1979]

Originally Posted by adg_andy

It was right till now. Canvas turbo (the one promoted by Hugh Jackman) and the later ones are all going to be Quad Bands. I too went for the grand duos (as opposed to canvas hd ) for the quad band.

With great celebrities come great price
See it won't be a 10K phone anymore. It will be a 20K phone!

[carboy]

Originally Posted by nishantbhatia84

No offence to any users of Micromax, Karbonn and other brands, I have nothing against these companies, but i just don't agree with their attempt to pitch their products against high-end devices from other companies. Why not create a market segment of their own - for their price range instead of trying to fool customers into believing they are getting a handset similar to a high-end Samsung, HTC, Sony for about half the price! That's not fair to the consumer.

What is it exactly that you think they should do inorder to avoid fooling the customers? Should they put a disclaimer in their advertisements or box saying - "Buyer beware, this phone is not as good as ones from Samsung, Sony and HTC"?

Originally Posted by naveenroy

Well, IMHO, I think it is just peer pressure. People want to just say that they own a Samsung - not a "cheap" Micromax or Karbonn mobile. That contributes to the sales. For me - I really cannot bring myself to buy a mobile phone for 30k - something a Micromax can give me for 15k. But each his own.

I think peer pressure and status is a big thing. People regard their phone as part of who they are. Otherwise you won't have people buying phones they can barely afford or even taking a loan for buying a phone etc.

[Saanil]

With respect to the Tier 1 vs. Tier 2 brands, I just have one question - does a quad-core processor from MicroMaxx (of Mediatek) give similar performance to a quad-core processor from Samsung (say Exynos?) - assuming both are clocked at the same speed (say 1.5Ghz). For some reason, I think it is not so but just wanted to know the facts. Anyone here has any idea about this?

[NetfreakBombay]

No, CPU from Tier 1 supplier will perform better.

1. Will consume less power due to lithography process (E.g. : 28HPM , 20nm on Radar)
2. Better instruction set (Latest CPU from Mediatek is still A7, Even CPUs used in Galaxy S3 has A9, Nexus 4, S4 and above are A15)
3. Higher Memory bandwith between CPU and DDR3

It would be visible in games like Real Racing 3.

Tier 1 Examples are Qualcomm, Samsung, Intel, Nvidia etc.
Teir 2 Examples are Mediatek, Rockchip, Marvell etc.

[VishnuNarayanan]

Originally Posted by Recompose

Shape and size are generic. Samsung's build quality is quite bad - even for S3 and S4s. Compare them to the HTC flagship and then as you said, you'll notice an obvious quality difference.

Samsung phones are made with plastic which makes it feel a little cheap. I have migrated to an S4 after having owned a Nokia C7-00(still have it), S3 , Samsung Tab 2 and a Lumia 720(yes, I am little crazy when it comes to smartphones).
The C7-00 is built to last. It would take any abuse without any complaints. But I am not confident with the present day lumias because my 720 shattered its screen in its first fall itself, that too when it fell down from my lap.
After having experienced various brands, I don't think that samsung build quality is bad. It can take majority of the falls with ease.
Sir , don't judge a product just by its apperance alone.

Originally Posted by tsk1979

If we talk about flagship, then samsung is cheating people by saying its 30K phone is flagship. Only Apple 50K phone is flagship.
See its all relative.

May you please explain the above statement ?
If you google the word FLAGSHIP it only means the best or most important thing owned or produced by a particular organization.
What is wrong in samsung terming its latest high end offering as 'flagship' ?What is the speciality that makes the '50K apple' to be the only eligible to be termed 'flagship'?

[arvind71181]

Originally Posted by VishnuNarayanan

May you please explain the above statement ?
If you google the word FLAGSHIP it only means the best or most important thing owned or produced by a particular organization.
What is wrong in samsung terming its latest high end offering as 'flagship' ?What is that speciality that makes the 50K apple to be the only eligible to be termed 'flagship'?

I think it was tsk's response to another post which you have quoted. He also is saying exactly what you are trying to say, that a flagship is relative between companies

[VishnuNarayanan]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

If we talk about flagship, then samsung is cheating people by saying its 30K phone is flagship. Only Apple 50K phone is flagship.
See its all relative.
Karbonn S5, Micromax canvas etc., all are flagship phones, but at a different price range. For example, we call the Sonata as Hyundai's flagship car. We don't say that Flagship car is a 5 crore Lambhorgini and so Hyundai should not sell its 20L car as flagship.
Infact Hyundai Elantra cracked the US market by going head to head against the more expensive honda and Toyota, and then stealing their thunder.
If Micromax and Karbonn do not screw up on the "service front", the next 10 years will see their rise to all over the world. However, I have seen, service is usually not part of the equation for most Indian setups, even if the Indian subsidiary of a foreign entity.

Originally Posted by arvind71181

I think it was tsk's response to another post which you have quoted. He also is saying exactly what you are trying to say, that a flagship is relative between companies

Please refer to the above post. Those words marked in bold italics makes the confusion flagships at different price ranges ??

[ckranjan]

Indian brands cant crack the western market untill unless they deliver on service and innovation front. They have to do what Hyundai did with their cars. I dont understand how brands like Micromax can succeed in long term. Indian brands are not capable of designing and manufacturing a decent phone all by themselves. What they do is brand and market Chinese reference designs. So essentially they are a marketing company. Now lets take for example New canvas and Nexus 4. Which phone would u buy? The price is almost same.

So any company which can innovate will succed in todays fast changing scenario. Im not against any product but its the reason why foreign companies sell most of the cars as well as mobile devices.

[bluevolt]

Need to take part in an android app making competition.

Any innovative app ideas which are still not on playstore?

[drsingh]

Originally Posted by bluevolt

Need to take part in an android app making competition.

Any innovative app ideas which are still not on playstore?

I wish someone would make something like axcrypt (windows) for android.

Specifically the ability to send a decrypt package, the person on the other end doesn't need to install axcrypt. I can send an encrypted package including the decryption program by email,chat,torrent, dropbox etc.

[bhp_maniac]

Originally Posted by carboy

I think peer pressure and status is a big thing. People regard their phone as part of who they are. Otherwise you won't have people buying phones they can barely afford or even taking a loan for buying a phone etc.

Completely agree with that. I know persons who upgraded from their last year's smartphone to S4's and HTC One's and does nothing other than e-mail. The app list is so small with a couple from Play store and nothing more. And one of them is planning for a Note 3 upgrade soon. And the thing is, he never knew that it has a stylus before I told him so

There is a big bunch of such people who just buys a flagship to beat the crowd around them. So for such people, brand and the name "flagship" matters. No matter what, they'll simply swap it for the next year's flagship too. When it comes to usability there are no much differences between brands other than some of them. For eg, I am still to find a usable stylus equipped Note series replacement from any other manufacturer.