backtop


Print 83 comment(s) - last by TakinYourPoint.. on Jul 10 at 12:56 AM

Apple scores a second victory this week against Samsung

Apple has been handed its fair share of defeats in court with regards to its patent lawsuits against various Android handset/tablet manufacturers. However, Apple’s fortunes in the U.S. court system have taken on a decidedly more positive note this week. 
 
On Wednesday, it was reported that Apple scored a pre-trial injunction on the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 in the U.S. courtesy of Judge Lucy Koh in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Judge Koh ruled that Samsung infringed on key Apple design patents, and admonished the company, stating:
 
Although Samsung has a right to compete, it does not have a right to compete unfairly by flooding the market with infringing products. While Samsung will certainly suffer lost sales from the issuance of an injunction, the hardship to Apple of having to directly compete with Samsung’s infringing products outweighs Samsung’s harm in light of the previous findings by the Court.
 
Given that the Galaxy Tab 10.1 is an older tablet that hasn't seen much sales success in the United States to begin with, the ban isn't much of a hindrance to Samsung. In addition, its follow-up -- the Galaxy Tab 2 10.1 -- isn't affected to the sales ban.
 
However, a ruling that was handed down late Friday is a much more serious threat to Samsung's fortunes in the U.S.
 
I. Apple Scores its Second Victory This Week, Galaxy Nexus Ban Granted

On Friday, Judge Koh dealt Samsung its second blow for the week in the form of a pre-trial injunction against the Galaxy Nexus smartphone. The Galaxy Nexus was introduced late last year as the poster child for Android 4.0 "Ice Cream Sandwich".


Samsung Galaxy Nexus
 
As she did earlier in the week with regards to the Galaxy Tab 10.1 ban, Judge Koh once again pointed out that Apple was clearly wronged by Samsung's infringements. "Apple has made a clear showing that, in the absence of a preliminary injunction, it is likely to lose substantial market share in the smartphone market and to lose substantial downstream sales of future smartphone purchases and tag-along products," stated Judge Koh in her Friday ruling.
 
The pre-trial injunction will go into effect as soon as Apple pays a $95 million bond to enforce the ban.
 
II. Patents, Patents, and More Patents.
 
The original motion filed by Apple indicated that Samsung's infringed upon the following patents:
 
U.S. Patent No. 8,086,604 -- Describes a method for retrieving user information from a "variety of locations" from a single interface
U.S. Patent No. 8,046,721  -- This is Apple’s infamous “Slide to Unlock” patent
U.S. Patent No. 5,946,647 -- Details detection methods that create functional links from actionable data items like phone numbers, dates, email addresses, or web pages.
U.S. Patent No. 8,074,172 -- Describes touch screen input methods along with display of current character strings or word suggestions as users "type" on the screen
 
According to Dan Levine, reporting for Reuters, the Galaxy Nexus ban was granted based on infringement of U.S. Patent No. 8,086,604.
 
III. Apple, Google Respond
 
There's no question that Apple is delighted with this recent turn of events, having scored two legal victories against Samsung this week. However, the company only issued its standard canned response to Friday's ruling:
 
It's no coincidence that Samsung's latest products look a lot like the iPhone and iPad, from the shape of the hardware to the user interface and even the packaging. This kind of blatant copying is wrong and, as we've said many times before, we need to protect Apple's intellectual property when companies steal our ideas.
 
The four patents being used against Samsung in the case against the Galaxy Nexus revolve around design implementation in Google's Android operating system. For its part, Google issued this response to the ruling:
 
We're disappointed with this decision, but we believe the correct result will be reached as more evidence comes to light.
 
Samsung has yet to respond, but we have the feeling that they will go straight for an appeal as they did with the pre-trial injunction handed down against the Galaxy Tab 10.1.

Sources: Reuters, The Verge



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

I used to be Apple was cool
By BZDTemp on 6/30/2012 5:23:30 AM , Rating: 5
But it is a long time ago.

Since they succeeded with all the iCrap it has become clear they are the scum of the industry. Not only is Apple doing their utmost to force their customers to stay in the Apple world but on top there is whole abuse of the patent systems rather than competing on innovation.

Fortunately more and more people are seeing what is going on. Not only is mainstream media giving Apple free advertising by covering product releases now the shenanigans in courts is also covered.

PS. The Dilbert of today says it pretty good.




RE: I used to be Apple was cool
RE: I used to be Apple was cool
By Mitch101 on 7/3/2012 10:33:58 AM , Rating: 2
Anyone consider the Judges might hold Apple stock?


RE: I used to be Apple was cool
By Mike Acker on 6/30/2012 8:44:14 AM , Rating: 3
Amen, brother
I will not buy anything from Apple because they whole outfit is a bunch of jerks just like their dearly departed boss


RE: I used to be Apple was cool
By bupkus on 6/30/2012 2:40:23 PM , Rating: 2
Death to Apple!...??

Okay, maybe just a small festering sore... on a big toe... where 'someone' dropped an iPad.

---Professor Chaos


RE: I used to be Apple was cool
By bupkus on 6/30/2012 2:51:59 PM , Rating: 5
Joking aside, I don't see myself EVER buying an Apple product.

It seems these days everything of importance goes to the courts. So whoever installs their "right thinking" judges define the future decisions for us all.

The only possible change will come when people finally take to the streets and take back this nation. Unfortunately, we are so divided as to the right course of action we will expend our energies on fighting each other. So, it would seem that whoever controls the media controls the effective division of the masses.

Ok, a correction is in order-- only when the ex-middle class is so squeezed as to place them in welfare conditions and the welfare system is then in threat to being shut down will Americans take to the streets.


RE: I used to be Apple was cool
By epollyon on 7/3/2012 11:20:25 AM , Rating: 2
What does your enlightened rant have to do with Apple? DT is hilarious.


RE: I used to be Apple was cool
By Nortel on 6/30/12, Rating: -1
RE: I used to be Apple was cool
By Motoman on 6/30/2012 9:59:22 AM , Rating: 5
They should never have been granted such patents. They should have been reasonable enough to never have sought them, and they should be un-scumbag enough not to use them to troll other companies now.

There is no virtue in Apple.


RE: I used to be Apple was cool
By Iaiken on 7/1/2012 12:57:38 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
There is no virtue in Apple.


Bingo!

Apple is not in the business of being your friend, they are in the business of getting as much money out of you as humanly possible as fast as possible. So in other words, they are just like practically every single fortune 500 company out there, only more popular.

Now the thing that interests me is what will happen if this #boycottapple trend on G+, twitter and facebook doesn't blow over. Depending on how serious people are about it and how far it reaches, Apple may find their actions can turn public opinion against them and hurt them financially. Social media has created a public dialog is more far-reaching than the traditional spoon-feeding approach taken by traditional news media.


By TakinYourPoints on 7/1/2012 10:20:49 PM , Rating: 1
RE: I used to be Apple was cool
By BZDTemp on 6/30/2012 6:42:01 PM , Rating: 2
Plenty of companies have loaded them self with patents in case someone like Apple tries some stupid suing shit rather than going on the offensive with them.

So yes, there are companies allowing others to do what is covered in the patents the hold. Like for instance IBM which hold so many patents they are second to non so if they wanted they could pretty much put the whole industry on hold - and IBM did not even buy their patents they invented real stuff and patented that.

What Apple is doing is benefiting only the lawyers in the long run.


RE: I used to be Apple was cool
By tayb on 6/30/12, Rating: -1
RE: I used to be Apple was cool
By BZDTemp on 6/30/2012 6:50:03 PM , Rating: 3
OK, here is just two examples.

I can hook up an Android device or a Nokia or a Windows phone to pretty much anything and transfer stuff back and forth. With an iCrap device I need to run iTunes to transfer data.

I can view Flash on pretty much anything except iCrap where I can only do it on the computers. Why - because Apple want to control what apps run on their stuff.

Everyone isn't suing but some are and it's mainly to get back at Apple or to force settlements.


RE: I used to be Apple was cool
By tayb on 6/30/12, Rating: 0
RE: I used to be Apple was cool
By dark matter on 7/1/2012 12:46:22 PM , Rating: 1
Correction:

Apple decided they didn't have to pay motorola for the FRAND patents if they didn't agree on the price.

That's like you or I going to the car hire company and driving around for free because we didn't like the charges the car hire company offered us.


RE: I used to be Apple was cool
By tayb on 7/1/2012 6:47:24 PM , Rating: 1
False. Apple was willing to pay for the FRAND patents but not the sums Motorola and Samsung were charging. Motorola and Samsung were asking exorbitant prices that were not remotely consistent with the prices they typically ask. Do you know what FRAND stands for? Fair Reasonable And Non Discriminatory.

quote:
That's like you or I going to the car hire company and driving around for free because we didn't like the charges the car hire company offered us.


Horrible analogy that underscores your complete lack of knowledge on the subject.


By darkhawk1980 on 7/2/2012 7:53:43 AM , Rating: 2
Actually, I think you need to go back and read the article. Apple DIDN'T want to pay it, so they didn't. Even though it was reasonable given the volume of phones.

What was NOT reasonable, was what Apple wanted to charge for use of their patents. It was multitudes more than what the FRAND patents were, given the volume of phones that Motorola has been selling as of late.

Why? So Apple could litigate them to death.

Hey, feel free to continue spinning the your Apple. We all know it's rotten to the core.


By TakinYourPoints on 7/1/2012 10:25:48 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
I can hook up an Android device or a Nokia or a Windows phone to pretty much anything and transfer stuff back and forth. With an iCrap device I need to run iTunes to transfer data.


Completely false, there are numerous applications you can use for file transfers or cloud syncing.

quote:
I can view Flash on pretty much anything except iCrap where I can only do it on the computers. Why - because Apple want to control what apps run on their stuff.


Also false, neither Blackberry nor WP7 supports Flash, and Windows 8 RT also doesn't support Flash. Flash for Android is dead in the water and no longer being developed. It always ran like crap compared to an HTML5 video player or a native application. Adobe had years to get their mobile runtime in order and they failed.


By TakinYourPoints on 7/10/2012 12:56:58 AM , Rating: 2
Only on DT can a post full of wrong information get a +3. Fanboys.


RE: I used to be Apple was cool
By jeffkro on 7/1/2012 12:42:14 AM , Rating: 2
Ha, ha evil apple empire I alreay have mine.


RE: I used to be Apple was cool
By jeffkro on 7/1/2012 12:43:18 AM , Rating: 2
PS absolutely awesome phone, the only thing missing that is showing up in new phones is qualcomm's krait processor.


Pure Google experience
By Omega215D on 6/30/2012 5:23:55 AM , Rating: 2
Considering the Nexus brand is supposed to be a "pure" Google experience device why are they going after Samsung and not Google? Also, last time I checked the sheep still line up for blocks just to get the latest iphone so how did the non-similar looking Galaxy Nexus hurt Apple?




RE: Pure Google experience
By SkullOne on 6/30/2012 8:16:57 AM , Rating: 5
Because Apple doesn't have the balls to take on Google directly because they know they will lose. So they'll prey on the OEM's instead.

Litigation instead of innovation FTW!


RE: Pure Google experience
By johnnycanadian on 6/30/12, Rating: -1
RE: Pure Google experience
By jeffkro on 7/1/2012 12:44:22 AM , Rating: 2
Samsung is also a giant of a company.


RE: Pure Google experience
By Daemyion on 7/1/2012 2:54:46 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Because Apple doesn't have the balls to take on Google directly because they know they will lose. So they'll prey on the OEM's instead.


One of the biggest myths perpetuated in this context. They CAN'T take on Google directly because Google doesn't build a product (only source code). And Google apparently likes it this way, because from their point of view this situation is very easy to rectify. All they have to do is offer their OEMs indemnification as part of the OS license.

OEM indemnification is standard practice in the industry for anyone BUT Google. It's why no patent trolls sue Microsoft OEMs, or IBM/HP/Oracle end users. Because of the indemnification clause, any suit filed against them (the end users/OEMS) automatically passes through to the software supplier.


RE: Pure Google experience
By tayb on 7/1/2012 10:21:05 AM , Rating: 1
There is no OS license. It's open source software.


RE: Pure Google experience
By adiposity on 7/2/2012 3:57:09 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Because Apple doesn't have the balls to take on Google directly because they know they will lose. So they'll prey on the OEM's instead.


Actually, I think it's because it's easier to block the import of hardware than to prevent the existence of software, or sue on that basis. They can ban devices relatively quickly and the ITC is easier to deal with than US courts.


RE: Pure Google experience
By Flunk on 6/30/2012 10:09:24 AM , Rating: 2
Google has too many patents, they wouldn't have much of a chance and might end up with an agreement by which they couldn't sue anyone for Android. They don't want that. Going after Samsung, HTC or the other hardware guys for software patents is much easier for them to do.

It's manipulating a system that was never designed to deal with things like this. The court system simply doesn't have the precedent or technical knowledge to really handle these cases.

Microsoft provides legal protection to companies that buy it's OSes against this sort of thing. This is why you don't hear about lawsuits against handset makes for Windows Phone. Google doesn't because their OS is free and legal defence is costly.


RE: Pure Google experience
By Tony Swash on 6/30/12, Rating: -1
RE: Pure Google experience
By danjw1 on 6/30/2012 12:17:18 PM , Rating: 2
Google bought Motorola Mobile, which has a fairly large patent portfolio. But a lot of that is FRAND patents. Which aren't all that great for defense. The truth is the whole concept of software patents is broken and stifles innovation.


RE: Pure Google experience
By silverblue on 7/1/2012 3:33:33 AM , Rating: 2
I wonder what proportion of patents at the USPO are IT-related. I also wonder what would happen if the USPO were to reclassify a whole bunch of those as FRAND (you know, obvious candidates such as the shape of a bloody phone).

I will also point out that Windows Phone also allows the ability to pool user information together via their People app. Does this satisfy patent 8,086,604? If so, will Apple decide, or dare to, sue Microsoft over it?


RE: Pure Google experience
By erple2 on 7/1/2012 12:12:12 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
patents at the USPO are IT-related. I also wonder what would happen if the USPO were

Technically it's the USPTO (United States Patent and Trade Office).

However, they wouldn't need to - just file an injunction against Nokia, Samsung or whoever makes windows phones.


RE: Pure Google experience
By tayb on 6/30/2012 11:24:45 AM , Rating: 1
Google does not have nearly the patent portfolio of Apple, not even close. Apple has been in the hardware business for decades, Google still isn't really in the hardware business. The Motorola acquisition will bring a lot of mobile patents on board though but I doubt Google will extend those to partners like Microsoft does.


RE: Pure Google experience
By Schadenfroh on 6/30/2012 1:44:46 PM , Rating: 2
Because only the brave... or the foolish (Oracle) take on Google.

BTW, Verizon's Galaxy Nexus is anything but a "pure" Google experience.


RE: Pure Google experience
By jeffkro on 7/1/2012 12:45:57 AM , Rating: 2
mine is, running cyongen


RE: Pure Google experience
By StormyKnight on 7/2/2012 11:42:58 PM , Rating: 2
Then what is it?


Retards
By Motoman on 6/30/2012 9:58:23 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
It's no coincidence that Samsung's latest products look a lot like the iPhone and iPad, from the shape of the hardware to the user interface and even the packaging.


...no, it's not a coincidence. Know why? BECAUSE IT'S A PHONE. That's pretty much what they have to look like, in order to be useful. You know what else looks a lot like iPhones and iPads? EVERY OTHER PRODUCT ON THE MARKET. BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO IN ORDER TO BE USEFUL.

It's like Kleenex suing Puffs because their tissues look an awful lot like Kleenex tissues. Or Shell suing BP because their gas smells an awful lot like their gas. Or Levi's suing Wrangler because their jeans look an awful lot like their jeans. Etc. ad nasuem.

Kill Apple and all other patent trolls.

Disband the patent office and invalidate all patents.

Rebuild the patent office with competent personnel who know what the f%ck their doing.

And introduce new legislation that bans the sale of products from companies attempting to abuse the patent system for the period of one year worldwide.




RE: Retards
By Reclaimer77 on 6/30/2012 10:08:51 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
...no, it's not a coincidence. Know why? BECAUSE IT'S A PHONE. That's pretty much what they have to look like, in order to be useful. You know what else looks a lot like iPhones and iPads? EVERY OTHER PRODUCT ON THE MARKET. BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO IN ORDER TO BE USEFUL.


LOL I know. Can we say "duh"?

Samsung should just make a line of completely round phones and tablets, then when everyone laughs at them because nobody buys them, maybe people will get the idea.


RE: Retards
By johnnycanadian on 6/30/12, Rating: 0
RE: Retards
By ProZach on 6/30/12, Rating: 0
RE: Retards
By foolsgambit11 on 6/30/2012 6:56:30 PM , Rating: 2
It's an interesting conundrum. Apple apparently won the injunction for its patent on multisearch. It describes a method where you input search criteria into a single user interface, and receive results from multiple sources, each of which is searched in its own way. There are multiple optional refinements included - dealing with ranking results from different sources, for instance.

The question is, is there another way to do multisearch? Or have they patented the concept of multisearch by being so broad in their description of their 'method'? It's a tough distinction to make.


RE: Retards
By Mint on 7/1/2012 9:37:28 AM , Rating: 2
It's one of the dumbest patent ever. WTF is "multisearch"? If you're not looking for results everywhere, then you're not doing a very good search.

Apple is basically trying to patent search, saying everyone else must handicap their search. It's like going to your doctor, and hearing, "Sorry, I know what's wrong with you, but I can't tell you. Please restrict the category of your illness to one of the following fields: cardiology, nephrology, gastroenterology..."


RE: Retards
By TakinYourPoints on 7/1/12, Rating: 0
RE: Retards
By bigboxes on 7/2/12, Rating: -1
RE: Retards
By WalksTheWalk on 7/2/2012 5:57:59 PM , Rating: 2
Look, we all know that Samsung is known for copying designs. This is nothing new to Samsung or a whole host of companies. Samsung is allowed to do that unless they try to brand their product as an iPad creating confusion with consumers about whether something is an iPad or not. There are knockoffs of products in the fashion industry all of the time: clothes, purses, etc. and they are allowed to exist as long as they don't claim to be the actual product they are emulating.

The problem here is not with aesthetics, but the over-broad Apple patents that were being used long before Apple filed the patent, like everyone else is pointing out.

Take the multi-search patent for example. There were computer search engines that searched multiple sources, file types, etc. and displayed them in specific ways long before Apple came along and filed the patent for it.

The problem with these patents is that the court has to assume the patent is valid, since the USPTO issued it. A patent can only be declared invalid it is issued and there is a lawsuit filed specifically for invalidating it; separate from a suit that determines infringement. Effectively, Samsung, HTC, etc. would need to go on the offensive and file separate lawsuits for each Apple patent to get them invalidated, which will take years. In the meantime Apple can sue everyone's pants off because the patents were issued by the USPTO and have to be assumed valid by the court. It's a messed up system that can be gamed and clearly is by Apple.

And you try to tell everyone that Apple isn't patent trolling. Wow!


Competition?
By BugblatterIII on 6/30/2012 8:06:16 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
"Apple has made a clear showing that, in the absence of a preliminary injunction, it is likely to lose substantial market share in the smartphone market and to lose substantial downstream sales of future smartphone purchases and tag-along products,"

Erm yeah, it's called competition.

That's sounding more like she wants Apple to get the sales because they're a US company, not because of any patent infringement.




RE: Competition?
By IranTech on 6/30/2012 8:46:41 AM , Rating: 2
That is true. The American patent system is created to enhance the American business and capital. All that nonsense about creativity and competition is just that, nonsense.

Hopefully, more and more companies will come to the conclusion that the American market is something that they can, or rather are better off, avoiding. It is a big world.


RE: Competition?
By Warwulf on 6/30/2012 6:22:30 PM , Rating: 2
And compete where? In the wonderfully booming tech market of Iran?

Pfft. The only ones who stand to make a profit there are antivirus makers.


RE: Competition?
By IranTech on 7/1/2012 3:49:44 AM , Rating: 1
Yes, exactly; in the wonderfully booming tech market of Iran. And multitudes of other countries as well.

Anyway, doing more business in America for dollars is putting lipstick on a Benjamin Franklin. At some point revulsion sets in.

Pfft. The only ones who stand to make a profit there are antivirus makers.

American terrorism is an issue of course, but nobody except America takes the idea of deriving profits from terrorism very seriously.


RE: Competition?
By dark matter on 7/1/2012 2:21:09 PM , Rating: 1
America is not the ONLY market in the world.

Besides, how's the debt working out. Can you guys even AFFORD to buy anything any more?


Time yet again to say it...
By LordSojar on 6/30/2012 6:26:47 AM , Rating: 5
F**k you Apple... compete on the open market!




Dear America
By probedb on 6/30/2012 2:07:35 PM , Rating: 4
Please fire everyone in your patents department. They appear not to understand what a patent is for. I'm going to fly over and patent a piece of cheese, I'm sure I'll get it and then I can sue anyone who makes cheese.




Google+ isn't so quiet today!!!
By IronChef75 on 7/2/2012 1:20:46 AM , Rating: 2
Google+ has seen a massive jump in activity. The cause? Anti-Apple sentiment.

https://plus.google.com/u/0/s/%23BoycottApple#s/%2...




By IronChef75 on 7/2/2012 2:10:48 AM , Rating: 2
Sorry for the double post. DT was doing something weird.


Dear Court and Apple
By seamonkey79 on 6/30/2012 12:57:35 PM , Rating: 3
I wasn't going to buy Apple's stuff anyway. They're not losing sales because they're being 'copied' they're not making sales because people aren't buying their stuff. A good portion of the reason people aren't buying their stuff is because they're getting suing on basic concepts of how computers and information works and is accessed and how fingers naturally want to slide across a phone. Case dismissed.




Cost
By eagle470 on 6/30/2012 5:11:37 PM , Rating: 2
I really wish someone would look and see how much apple has really made off of all these bans. I would think they would alienate customers and lose money on this, more than anything else.




Is it becasuse ...
By xeizo on 7/1/2012 12:51:04 PM , Rating: 2
Apple grew too big and became the evil empire, it used to be Microsoft ....

Anyway, doing stuff like Apple do it, effectively blocking out innovation and progress is really terrible. Apple is one company where they should be ashamed of themselves; instead of competing their main focus is on destroying competitors. A real farse.

That the law is broken by default and that they are not the first practising dirty business is no excuse!

I once bought an Iphone 3GS, that was before the patent wars, I will never do such a thing again. I never liked Apples philosophy of conformity, sort of a scent of communist Russia to the whole concept, and now I like them even less. Free competition ftw!!!!




Google+ is no longer so quiet.
By IronChef75 on 7/2/2012 1:26:06 AM , Rating: 2
Google+ has seen a spike in activity recently. The cause? Anti-Apple sentiment.

The number one trend on Google+? #boycottapple




works online
By PittmanKen18 on 7/7/2012 12:02:43 AM , Rating: 2
what Michelle said I'm blown away that you able to profit $6099 in 1 month on the internet. did you see this web page makecash16 com




Pointless complaining on the net
By B3an on 6/30/2012 1:27:07 PM , Rating: 1
Everyone needs to just stop buying Apples inferior junk. And get everyone they know to do the same, it's what i've been doing for a long time.




By stm1185 on 7/1/2012 7:31:27 PM , Rating: 1
Apple bans take so long they might as well just let Samsung remove it from the marketplace. As the Galaxy Nexus is officially shit now that the Galaxy S3 is out.




ummm..
By Beavermatic on 7/2/2012 8:27:55 AM , Rating: 1
So Apple acts like hardasses here with piece of shit judges supporting them here in the states.

BUT, they just paid some fraudlent group in China $60 million USD to make them stop using the iPad name?

So who wants to move to China with me, outside of their legal jurisdiction, start using their product names, and net a hefty profit when they pay us off to stop?

I hope everyone everyone at Apple is castrated, and then chocked to death with their own tweeters (and then forced to continue to suck rod in hell for all eternity). Scumbags.




A few corrections
By Tony Swash on 6/30/12, Rating: -1
RE: A few corrections
By retrospooty on 6/30/2012 9:56:07 AM , Rating: 4
" Apple's sales will continue to grow strongly"

I don't think so... What you are seeing now is the peak. They will certainly sell well, and make buckets full of money, but the growth is about over. iPhone 5 will probably sell better than the 4s but not by huge margins like we have seen in past. The growth simply cant continue. It will sell well, plateau and remain high, but not continue to grow.


RE: A few corrections
By Tony Swash on 6/30/12, Rating: -1
RE: A few corrections
By retrospooty on 6/30/2012 12:34:22 PM , Rating: 3
Highly doubtful, but we'll see.


RE: A few corrections
By marsovac on 6/30/2012 2:47:57 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
The best way to envisage how big Apple is likely to become is to think of Apple as having the same size, weight and importance in the mobile markets as Microsoft and Intel did combined in the old PC market.


If Microsoft and Intel suddenly disappeared half the world would stop, and for a few months the economy would be completely blocked.

If Apple disappeared suddenly we would just buy another tablet and phone.

I hope you understand how silly your claim is :)


RE: A few corrections
By retrospooty on 6/30/2012 3:03:32 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly... Apple is highly profitable, but not at all important. Apple makes really nice toys. Intel and MS make the hardware and software the entire world runs off... Including the factories that Make iPhone,iPad,iPod and Macs.


RE: A few corrections
By Tony Swash on 6/30/12, Rating: -1
RE: A few corrections
By Camikazi on 6/30/2012 11:59:52 PM , Rating: 2
Intel powers all Apple computers (and no tablets and phones are not computers) almost all PCs, a LARGE amount of servers around the world and many other things. MS, like it or not, runs on a large majority of the PCs in the world and a rather large part of Apple comps as well, kill off those 2 companies and the world will stop for quiet a while that is how much the companies of the world depend on Intel and MS products. Nothing Apple makes will ever equal what MS and Intel make, they are a brand that makes popular, shiny devices but nothing that will stop the world if they all disappear. There will always be other smartphones, other tablets, other PCs to replace Apple products.


RE: A few corrections
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/1/2012 1:47:56 AM , Rating: 3
He knows this but he is trolling you and everyone else to the highest order. Hasn't anyone learned this yet? Quit feeding him, and he most likely will go away.

I just wonder how much he gets paid to troll...it must be quite a bit to make himself look like the tool he is.


RE: A few corrections
By themaster08 on 7/1/2012 4:37:23 AM , Rating: 2
Tony's a shill.


RE: A few corrections
By themaster08 on 7/1/2012 4:36:50 AM , Rating: 1
Absolutely, because businesses now run on OS X servers and iPads.


RE: A few corrections
By retrospooty on 7/1/2012 10:04:31 AM , Rating: 2
"Absolutely, because businesses now run on OS X servers and iPads."

Yup. I am an IT admin and am currently in the process of setting up Apple's client/server ecosystem and the associated enterprise apps to run accounting, customer relationship management software, and various other enterprise apps. Then I woke up.


RE: A few corrections
By tayb on 6/30/12, Rating: 0
RE: A few corrections
By bupkus on 6/30/2012 2:56:07 PM , Rating: 2
Yes... Resistance Is Futile. You Will Be Assimilated!


RE: A few corrections
By themaster08 on 7/1/2012 4:41:00 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
People have been saying that for quite a while. The really amazing thing about Apple's growth is that they have built a business selling just phones (leaving aside the other stuff they sell) that is already bigger than Microsoft's entire business but they are barely into double digits in terms of addressing the potential market.

But the fact remains that there are more Windows 7 PCs out there than Macs, iPhones, iPods and iPads combined.


RE: A few corrections
By Tony Swash on 7/1/12, Rating: -1
RE: A few corrections
By themaster08 on 7/1/2012 11:42:46 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
What do I mean by hegemonic? We are already in a world where the money in computing is no longer made predominantly in the world of the PC, where the bulk of software development is no longer centred on the PC, where more people (soon most) experience computing, gaming, the web, digital culture and communications on mobile devices.
Yes, and all of what you listed is part of content consumption. It's much more convenient to check your Facebook status updates on your phone. For anything like that, of course it's inevitable that phones and tablets will succeed, because they offer the same results in a faster, more convenient fashion.

However for content creation it's a completely different story. Please show me some evidence where the market for content creation is being cannibalised by mobile devices? This is a huge market, one which spans across all types of media, science and business. It is the driving force for the content created for consumption on mobile devices.

quote:
The current generation of school children are already living in a world where they may never encounter, yet alone use, software made by Microsoft or hardware powered by Intel.
If they live in a world where all they do is consume, maybe. Your view is entirely consumer orientated. People do more with their PCs than just consume data and media, and perhaps write a few self-obsessed blogs that no one cares about. Please tell me when you've ever known anyone do anything on an iPad or an iPhone that is orientated towards content creation or business that has offered them increased flexibility or conveneince, other than reading their emails and to-do lists, which they receive at the same time, on both devices, causing a redundant overlap and complete pointlessness?

I'm not saying there aren't scenarios where mobile devices may be more beneficial within these realms, however they're merely comlementary devices, offering convenience when on the move.


RE: A few corrections
By erple2 on 7/1/12, Rating: 0
RE: A few corrections
By Tony Swash on 7/2/12, Rating: -1
"This is from the DailyTech.com. It's a science website." -- Rush Limbaugh














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki