▲ 85 ▼ Samsung sees 95% drop in profits for a second consecutive quarter (www.androidauthority.com) submitted 3 years ago by L4s@lemmy.world [M, B] to c/technology@lemmy.world 209 comments fedilink hide all child comments Samsung sees 95% drop in profits for a second consecutive quarter::Today, Samsung posted its Q2 2023 financial results. The report says Samsung's profits have dropped considerably compared to last year.
[–] Zeth0s@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago (2 children) Software updates are the problem unfortunately permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 1 point 3 years ago (3 children) Developers require money, and software maintenance requires lots of developers, testers and other people. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] donut4ever@lemm.ee 1 point 3 years ago That's why the bootloaders of phones should be required to be unlocked by law. You can always root your phone and install a custom ROM on it to keep up to date. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Wooki@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago No not really, formula is no more than 10% production costs pa unless w produced poorly to begin with. It’s even less if you’re running multiple versions of roughly the same thing then the costs are spread over those versions. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Zeth0s@lemmy.world 0 points 3 years ago Yes and no. Installing last version of android on a pixel 4 is most likely absolutely fine. And keeping at least security support is likely not a big deal. 3 years of security update support it is clearly a finance department decision. Why 3, why not 3 and half? Why not 4? Just because they need predictability in sales, and they attached the support to the "classical" number of years after which you'd like a customer to buy a new tech product. 3 years has always been a magic number for hardware companies, since forever permalink fedilink source parent [–] Giooschi@lemmy.world 0 points 3 years ago (2 children) I wonder why this is not a problem for pcs though permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] jaywalker@lemmy.world 3 points 3 years ago (2 children) Because PCs are from a time before tech monopolies. They are based on a spec that allows different vendors to work together. As a result there is more competition, more options for repair, etc. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] redwall_hp@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago Yes, though technically they started out as reverse engineered clones. There were tons of incompatible microcomputer brands before the IBM PC. Then companies like Compaq put out "PC compatible" clones based on specs that came from reverse engineering of the IBM PC. Over time, things evolved toward deliberate standardization. Imagine the dumpster fire of legal action, which courts would likely side with, if someone put out hardware that was 1:1 compatible with the iPhone and iOS would run on it. That's basically what happened, though MS DOS was produced by an additional party instead of IBM. permalink fedilink source parent [–] deus@lemmy.world 0 points 3 years ago (1 child) I wonder how long this will last. We're already seeing Apple getting some crazy performance with their M chips with integrated RAM and GPU, wouldn't surprise me if PCs start becoming less and less modular as time goes on. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] kapx132@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] Thadrax@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago It kinda is. Windows 11 won't run on older hardware and end of life of the latest version of Win 10 is coming up in 2 years or so. And a bunch of PCs weren't really ready for Win 10 when that replaced Win 7/8 and again, support for those dropped at some point. Lifetimes are usually more lenient with PCs, but it still happens. You can switch to Linux of course, but then there are alternatives for many smartphones as well. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 1 point 3 years ago (3 children) Developers require money, and software maintenance requires lots of developers, testers and other people. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] donut4ever@lemm.ee 1 point 3 years ago That's why the bootloaders of phones should be required to be unlocked by law. You can always root your phone and install a custom ROM on it to keep up to date. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Wooki@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago No not really, formula is no more than 10% production costs pa unless w produced poorly to begin with. It’s even less if you’re running multiple versions of roughly the same thing then the costs are spread over those versions. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Zeth0s@lemmy.world 0 points 3 years ago Yes and no. Installing last version of android on a pixel 4 is most likely absolutely fine. And keeping at least security support is likely not a big deal. 3 years of security update support it is clearly a finance department decision. Why 3, why not 3 and half? Why not 4? Just because they need predictability in sales, and they attached the support to the "classical" number of years after which you'd like a customer to buy a new tech product. 3 years has always been a magic number for hardware companies, since forever permalink fedilink source parent
[–] donut4ever@lemm.ee 1 point 3 years ago That's why the bootloaders of phones should be required to be unlocked by law. You can always root your phone and install a custom ROM on it to keep up to date. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Wooki@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago No not really, formula is no more than 10% production costs pa unless w produced poorly to begin with. It’s even less if you’re running multiple versions of roughly the same thing then the costs are spread over those versions. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Zeth0s@lemmy.world 0 points 3 years ago Yes and no. Installing last version of android on a pixel 4 is most likely absolutely fine. And keeping at least security support is likely not a big deal. 3 years of security update support it is clearly a finance department decision. Why 3, why not 3 and half? Why not 4? Just because they need predictability in sales, and they attached the support to the "classical" number of years after which you'd like a customer to buy a new tech product. 3 years has always been a magic number for hardware companies, since forever permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Giooschi@lemmy.world 0 points 3 years ago (2 children) I wonder why this is not a problem for pcs though permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] jaywalker@lemmy.world 3 points 3 years ago (2 children) Because PCs are from a time before tech monopolies. They are based on a spec that allows different vendors to work together. As a result there is more competition, more options for repair, etc. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] redwall_hp@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago Yes, though technically they started out as reverse engineered clones. There were tons of incompatible microcomputer brands before the IBM PC. Then companies like Compaq put out "PC compatible" clones based on specs that came from reverse engineering of the IBM PC. Over time, things evolved toward deliberate standardization. Imagine the dumpster fire of legal action, which courts would likely side with, if someone put out hardware that was 1:1 compatible with the iPhone and iOS would run on it. That's basically what happened, though MS DOS was produced by an additional party instead of IBM. permalink fedilink source parent [–] deus@lemmy.world 0 points 3 years ago (1 child) I wonder how long this will last. We're already seeing Apple getting some crazy performance with their M chips with integrated RAM and GPU, wouldn't surprise me if PCs start becoming less and less modular as time goes on. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] kapx132@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] Thadrax@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago It kinda is. Windows 11 won't run on older hardware and end of life of the latest version of Win 10 is coming up in 2 years or so. And a bunch of PCs weren't really ready for Win 10 when that replaced Win 7/8 and again, support for those dropped at some point. Lifetimes are usually more lenient with PCs, but it still happens. You can switch to Linux of course, but then there are alternatives for many smartphones as well. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] jaywalker@lemmy.world 3 points 3 years ago (2 children) Because PCs are from a time before tech monopolies. They are based on a spec that allows different vendors to work together. As a result there is more competition, more options for repair, etc. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] redwall_hp@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago Yes, though technically they started out as reverse engineered clones. There were tons of incompatible microcomputer brands before the IBM PC. Then companies like Compaq put out "PC compatible" clones based on specs that came from reverse engineering of the IBM PC. Over time, things evolved toward deliberate standardization. Imagine the dumpster fire of legal action, which courts would likely side with, if someone put out hardware that was 1:1 compatible with the iPhone and iOS would run on it. That's basically what happened, though MS DOS was produced by an additional party instead of IBM. permalink fedilink source parent [–] deus@lemmy.world 0 points 3 years ago (1 child) I wonder how long this will last. We're already seeing Apple getting some crazy performance with their M chips with integrated RAM and GPU, wouldn't surprise me if PCs start becoming less and less modular as time goes on. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] kapx132@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] redwall_hp@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago Yes, though technically they started out as reverse engineered clones. There were tons of incompatible microcomputer brands before the IBM PC. Then companies like Compaq put out "PC compatible" clones based on specs that came from reverse engineering of the IBM PC. Over time, things evolved toward deliberate standardization. Imagine the dumpster fire of legal action, which courts would likely side with, if someone put out hardware that was 1:1 compatible with the iPhone and iOS would run on it. That's basically what happened, though MS DOS was produced by an additional party instead of IBM. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] deus@lemmy.world 0 points 3 years ago (1 child) I wonder how long this will last. We're already seeing Apple getting some crazy performance with their M chips with integrated RAM and GPU, wouldn't surprise me if PCs start becoming less and less modular as time goes on. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] kapx132@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[+] kapx132@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Thadrax@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago It kinda is. Windows 11 won't run on older hardware and end of life of the latest version of Win 10 is coming up in 2 years or so. And a bunch of PCs weren't really ready for Win 10 when that replaced Win 7/8 and again, support for those dropped at some point. Lifetimes are usually more lenient with PCs, but it still happens. You can switch to Linux of course, but then there are alternatives for many smartphones as well. permalink fedilink source parent