If there is one thing I have learned in my years on this planet, it would be that it is human nature to staunchly choose sides. Whether it is Republican or Democrat, Coke or Pepsi, and Mac or PC, people love to rally behind the products they love and disparage the ones they don’t.
In the case of the smartphone industry, this product battle was an evolution, albeit a slow one. Smartphones had been around for some time before the Apple iPhone changed the industry. Suddenly, smartphones were cool and, to be cool, one naturally had to forgo their BlackBerry or Nokia for an iPhone and it’s simple, intuitive iOS operating system and iPod integration. Just like anything designated “cool” by the masses, a counter-culture to the iPhone phenomenon had to exist for those who didn’t want to “conform” to the masses and purchase an Apple handset. When Google introduced the Android OS, the opposite crowd rallied behind it and the argument became Apple vs. Android.
Samsung then introduced the Galaxy S handset. Incorporating the Android OS platform and a similar approach to design like Apple, Samsung took a design approach of giving consumers more than what the current version of the iPhone could offer. Give them everything the iPhone can do, and then give them MORE. The Galaxy S became the flagship handset not only of Samsung but also of the Android platform.
The Samsung Galaxy SII built up the success of the S upon its release and helped pull Android’s usage numbers ahead of iOS. Then came the handset that firmly established Samsung as the choice of the handset counter-culture—the Samsung Galaxy SIII. The SIII, offering many features that its competitor, the iPhone 4, could not match, was a resounding success—selling over 40 million units since its launch. A larger, high-resolution screen, a more powerful quad-core processor (or dual-core for some models) and LTE coverage offered by the Samsung Galaxy SIII helped create new battle lines. You were now in one of two camps—iPhone or Galaxy S.
Editor's note: This analysis and slideshow were created by TechInsights, a provider of
technology research and services. To get the full teardown report, visit
TechInsights' web page.
CM: The size of the LPDDR3 is 2GB and it features two DRAM die within the package in a stacked architecture. It is in a PoP orientation with the Octa processor. There is very little gap between the two packages as we had to decap both at the same time to salvage the die.
"Even with a locked bootloader you have access to non-approved apps or can write your own."
can write your own app in iphone also..
"Futher, the Android modding community is very strong. It shouldn't be long before there's an exploit to allow root and custom ROM's." which is equivalent to doing jailbreak in iOS, afterwhich you can do most of the same stuff. And the iOS JBing community is pretty strong also.
Comparing IOS with an Android phone with locked bootloader is like comparing Apples to Oranges. Even with a locked bootloader you have access to non-approved apps or can write your own. Try to do that with an Iphone that hasn't been jailbroken. Futher, the Android modding community is very strong. It shouldn't be long before there's an exploit to allow root and custom ROM's. My Droid Bionic also has a locked bootloader, but I was able to play arround with ICS and JB custom ROM's well before they released an official version.
That is correct. The original Google mantra of the "open" Android system has since essentially been closed by the US carriers as far as the consumer is concerned. The maintenance of the original galaxy S phones were discontinued years ago, yet I had the most recent Android jelly bean on my 3 year old phone simply because it was flashable and therefore self-serviceable. Now I've lost hot spot, flashability, and some other carrier crippled features as a consequence of "upgrading".
David Patterson, known for his pioneering research that led to RAID, clusters and more, is part of a team at UC Berkeley that recently made its RISC-V processor architecture an open source hardware offering. We talk with Patterson and one of his colleagues behind the effort about the opportunities they see, what new kinds of designs they hope to enable and what it means for today’s commercial processor giants such as Intel, ARM and Imagination Technologies.