"I was there.
I've never been wrong.
I used to work in the record store.
I had everything before anyone ...
But I'm losing my edge to better-looking people with better ideas and more talent
and they're actually really, really nice.
I'm losing my edge!"
-- "Losing My Edge" by LCD Soundsystem
James Murphy's iconic lines might as well have been written by Nokia (NYS: NOK) CEO Stephen Elop or Research In Motion (NAS: RIMM) chief Thorsten Heins -- a few years ago.
Like Murphy, they were there when the mobile industry was new, fresh, and exciting. And just like Murphy's persona in the song, Nokia and RIM lost their winning edge when the new kids arrived on the scene. Apple (NAS: AAPL) started the revolution with the first iPhone, and then Google (NAS: GOOG) piled on with its Android solution. These days, the former kings of the mobile hill are scrambling for lifelines, desperate to stay relevant and alive. The following chart illustrates the situation with a certain kind of grim authority:
But what if one of these fallen giants works up the gumption to stage a comeback? The bounce back from today's rock-bottom state of desperation could pay off very handsomely for shareholders. So let's take a look at which turnaround looks more likely: RIM or Nokia.
RIM's knight in shining armor
For the Canadians, the turnaround hinges on one very specific play with no Plan B in sight. The BlackBerry 10 software update is supposed to revolutionize RIM from the bottom up.
Heins recently reinforced this point in a interview with CIO Magazine: "In January with the full touch device and the QWERTY coming, I think we will reinstall faith in RIM," he said. "You will see that this is a true mobile computing platform that allows BlackBerry to even explore other domains and spaces, like automotive, in cars."
In a separate Reuters sit-down, chief marketing officer Frank Boulben goes a few steps further. Delaying the BlackBerry 10 launch into the first quarter of 2013 is no big deal, he says, because "we will have much more attention and focus and ability to leverage our carriers." In fact, the platform will be so darn good that it basically markets itself by word of mouth: "The most natural thing to do from a marketing standpoint is to put that experience in the hands of our fans and let them do the marketing job, so to speak."
That's a lot of responsibility for software that RIM bought off Harman International Industries for just $200 million. Pull it off, and management will look like geniuses. Fail, and watch the unhappy hordes of shareholders gathering in Waterloo, Ontario, with torches and pitchforks.
Before weighing the odds of that binary outcome, let's have a look at the competition.
Are the Finns finished?
Nokia embarked on its own supposedly game-saving quest in 2011 by betting the farm on Microsoft's (NAS: MSFT) mobile platform. So far, that gambit does not look good.
The Finnish company's stock trades at 18-year lows, dating back to the company's very earliest days on the American stock market. That's because the Windows Phone-based Lumia series isn't selling in the torrential volumes Nokia needs. But unlike RIM, Nokia hasn't super-glued its cart to just one horse.
The Microsoft agreement wouldn't stop Nokia from trying its hand at selling Android phones, the fledgling Firefox platform, or -- if RIM surprises everyone by licensing its most prized asset to others -- even BlackBerry 10 handsets. The company also sits on a cash cushion of $6.4 billion (net of $6 billion in debt), which gives Nokia more wiggle room for new strategies than RIM's $2 billion net cash position.
Of course, Elop hasn't announced anything like another wholesale strategy change. Getting a whole new platform off the ground in terms of design, quality, marketing, and user acceptance would be a tall order even for Nokia's deep pockets to handle. But the door is ever so slightly ajar to try another play if the Microsoft idea doesn't work out.
Drum roll, please ...
First, both of these stocks are in the dumps for very good reason. By now, Apple and Google have the kind of head starts an Olympic runner would give to an arthritic turtle in a fairly handicapped race. And those front-runners are still loping across the track like cheetahs on steroids.
That said, nothing is impossible. I'd give both Nokia and RIM about a 20% chance to salvage something useful out of their favorite gambits. That would still be nothing more than a 10% market share -- a stay of execution while the company works up a better plan. But since the stocks are priced for abject failure, that should be enough to create a decent share-price pop. But the long-term stories are still murky, even if this happens.
And the tiebreaker comes from the risk each stock poses to your invested capital -- one could be a total loss in 12 months while the other should survive a bit longer.
If the BlackBerry 10 platform really is all its promoters have cracked it up to be, RIM would have a bigger upside than anything Nokia can whip up today. On the other hand, the unfortunate post-holiday introduction of said savior creates enormous risks that management seems to ignore.
So if everything plays out the way I expect it over the next year, Nokia will still muddle along in search of a workable strategy. RIM, on the other hand, will be sold for parts as the BB10 gamble fails. So I don't advise anyone to bet big on either of these turnaround bets, but Nokia gets the nod if you really must choose one. Your capital is just a smidgen safer in Finland.
Of course, you could just go with one of the companies eating these guys' lunch, Apple. In our brand-new premium research report on Apple, our top tech analyst provides everything investors need to know about Apple's opportunities and threats going forward. Better yet, it comes with a full year of updates, too.
Samsung Galaxy S3 Vs Galaxy S2 Smartphone Shootout: Are You Upgrading? - mobilenapps.com
- Samsung Galaxy S3 Vs Galaxy S2(Photo: Samsung | Mobile & Apps)
The dust is just settling from the Galaxy S2 versus iPhone 4S smartphone wars and a new battle is looming ahead – Galaxy S3 against iPhone 5. With the debut of Samsung Galaxy S3, iPhones 4S sales are cooling down in the global market. However, the reason behind it could be the iPhone 5 that Apple fanboys are waiting for. After all, we should not blame Galaxy S3 for everything.
Samsung Galaxy S2 versus Apple iPhone 4S was one of the most exciting smartphone war the industry have ever seen. However, the successor to the Galaxy S2 has arrived and now it's time for the Galaxy S3 to shine. But, some people who own the Galaxy S2 doubt whether the new smartphone is worth upgrading.
Like Us on Facebook :
We are here to solve the riddle with the detailed comparison of both these smartphones.
Design and Display
Kicking off with the Galaxy S2, it has 4.3-inch Super AMOLED Plus display with a resolution of 480 X 800 pixels, topped by Corning Gorilla Glass protection. The device is 8.5mm thick and weighs 113 g. On the other hand, the Galaxy S3 has a massive 4.8-inch Super AMOLED display with resolution of 720 X 1,280 pixels. The display is protected by second-generation Corning Gorilla Glass. It has a uniform 8.6mm thickness and weighs 133 g.
The Galaxy S2 is smaller, lighter and fits in the pocket easily. On the other hand, the Galaxy S3 is bigger, but build quality remains the same - both the smartphone have plastic body. The Galaxy S3 comes in white and blue editions with so-called "hyperglazed" layer on the top of plastic. Samsung Galaxy S2 comes in black, white and pink colors with patterned backcover. However, the build quality of both the Samsung smartphones cannot be compared to eye-popping polycarbonate or aluminum unibodies.
When it comes to display, RGB (Galaxy S2) and PenTile (Galaxy S3) displays are often compared, where RGB is found to be superior display technology. Galaxy S2's display produce perfect black dark pixels, but it can never match the sharpness of HD displays; we are comparing WVGA @217ppi with HD display having 300+ pixel density here.
Processor, Memory and Storage
Samsung's latest flagship model runs on quad-core 1.4 GHz Cortex A9 processor fitted on Exynos 4 Quad chipset, accompanied by Mali 400MP GPU. It has 1GB of RAM, 16/32GB of internal storage and microSD card support up to 64GB. A 64GB edition of Galaxy S3 is due to debut later this year.
Samsung Galaxy S2 has dual-core 1.2 GHz Cortex A9 processor, same Mali 400MP GPU, 1GB of RAM and 16/32GB of build-in storage. Fortunately, 64GB microSD cards are also compatible with the smartphone.
The LTE variant of Galaxy S3 comes with dual-core Snapdragon S4 processor, but 2GB of RAM, while Samsung Galaxy S2 LTE has slower Snapdragon S3 processor and same 1GB of RAM.
Connectivity
Most of the Android smartphones have identical connectivity offerings. The scenario is same here, but the latest Galaxy S series smartphone takes the game with added benefits. S Beam app, which is based on NFC chip, allows users to share big file in a matter of few seconds. GPS with GLONASS support locates your exact location with a significant margin, before Galaxy S2 does that. Both the smartphone can do Bluetooth 3.0 high speed transfer, but Galaxy S3 again has an advantage with Bluetooth 4.0 support for device's with low power requirements. In addition, the notification LED is back in Galaxy S3, which is missing from the dethroned Samsung king.
User Interface
Both the smartphones run Android 4.0 Ice Cream Sandwich - Galaxy S2 with OTA update and Galaxy S3 out-of-box, but the Galaxy S3 takes things a step further. The difference could be easily noticed from the homescreen - Galaxy S3 has 5 row stationary dock, while there dock has 4 rows in the Galaxy S2. In addition, Samsung Galaxy S3 packs a couple of smart features like Smart Stay, S Voice, Direct Call, Pop-up Play, AllShare Cast, etc.
Camera
With 8-megapixel rear camera loaded in both these smartphones, the quality of still shots remains the same. However, Samsung does some tricks in Galaxy S3 by updating the camera with low shutter lags, photo capturing while recording HD videos and burst camera mode to take up to 20 continuous shots. In addition, both the smartphones shoot 1080p videos at 30fps at 17Mbps in MP4 format with 130Kbps audio bitrate and 48 kHz sampling. The Galaxy S3 gives slightly better quality under low light conditions. The secondary camera in Galaxy S3 is 1.9-megapixel that records 720p HD videos at 30fps. Secondary camera in Galaxy S3 is 2-megapixel, but it records 480p videos only.
Battery
Samsung Galaxy S3 has 2,100 mAh battery with 450 mAh added capacity than its predecessor, which gives a talk time of 10 hours, 5 hours of web browsing and 10 hours of video playback. Battery in Galaxy S2 is 1,650 mAh that gives more than 8 hours of talk time. Galaxy S2's battery lasts 5 hours on web browsing and 7 hours on video playback.
Conclusion
Galaxy S3 has gigantic HD display, double number of processor cores, software intelligence and rapid-fire camera. The Galaxy S2 isn't quite as good as its successor. Like always, newer smartphone is better, but Galaxy S2 will easily be one of the best smartphones in the market for another one year. If you already have the Galaxy S2, you probably might not be so keen for an upgrade. And, if you're a first time Galaxy buyer, you can get the Galaxy S2 at much cheaper price than the Galaxy S3. For U.S. users, Galaxy S2 have some exclusive LTE variants too, one of which come with bigger HD displays.
Will the next Galaxy S smartphone, which is likely to be called the Galaxy S4, change the whole game with eye-popping design, 12-megapixel camera and superior features? Meanwhile, let us know whether you own the Galaxy S2 and are thinking of buying the Galaxy S3. If so, why?
No comments:
Post a Comment