Apple vs Samsung, court orders Samsung to show Apple 5 new phones

dmcg said:
apple are such a scummy company
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I agree with that.

Only problem with Apple is their pricing. But if people are willing to pay for style & substance, vs substance. Then let them. It's how Apple are making their billions.

Apple create something, it catches on. Other companies mimic the product for cheaper. Seems to happen a lot.

Ipod, Iphone, Tablets.

I dont mind it in the slightest personally, I had an ipod and an iphone. Back when they were the best. Then when the other companies released better versions, cheaper but maybe not as pretty. Well I bought one of those instead.
 
Theophany said:
Of course, it's an entirely hypothetical and highly unlikely scenario, but you give the impression that Samsung are a delicate little flower that are dependent on Apple. I'm not convinced that there is much truth in that.
Click to expand...

Of course he will. Moreover even though a fair chunk of Samsung's profits are from consumer products(not only phones and tablets), they have their fingers in loads of industries including defence and things such as ship building.
 
Last edited:
Glaucus said:
Again why would Samsung lose a massive chunk in profits? Lose share. Price and everything else. For. What is a normal day in the office.
Click to expand...

Just going on what I know, never claimed to know everything. I know there will be things I don't know and I don't refute that. It's so often though that Apple are launching frivolous lawsuits though. I remember them trying to get the Galaxy S3 banned when it first came out, the S2 as well. Their guidelines for making a smartphone that 'don't infringe on their patents' are absurd.

I grew tired of hearing of lawsuits being thrown around by everyone, they should all stop it. But suing a company and trying to get their products removed from sale, while relying on them for your own products too is potentially very self damaging.
 
sargatanas said:
Just going on what I know, never claimed to know everything. I know there will be things I don't know and I don't refute that. It's so often though that Apple are launching frivolous lawsuits though. I remember them trying to get the Galaxy S3 banned when it first came out, the S2 as well. Their guidelines for making a smartphone that 'don't infringe on their patents' are absurd.

I grew tired of hearing of lawsuits being thrown around by everyone, they should all stop it. But suing a company and trying to get their products removed from sale, while relying on them for your own products too is potentially very self damaging.
Click to expand...
Just look at the chart, apple has very few cases.

Some off them have 19000 cases. That's cases over the last 4years.
However apple does have a very strong non FRAND patent portfolio, so when cases are brought forward by apple it can be very successful as they are not FRAND.
 
Glaucus said:
Just look at the chart, apple has very few cases.

Some off them have 19000 cases. That's cases over the last 4years.
However apple does have a very strong non FRAND patent portfolio, so when cases are brought forward by apple it can be very successful as they are not FRAND.
Click to expand...

I did look at the chart, but for me at least, it's very small and cant make out a lot of the text. To me it looks like Apple have more arrows pointing to them than anyone else.

Not trying to nitpick, but it is very small to me, running at 1920x1080. Can you provide a link to it where it could be bigger?
 
sargatanas said:
I did look at the chart, but for me at least, it's very small and cant make out a lot of the text. To me it looks like Apple have more arrows pointing to them than anyone else.

Not trying to nitpick, but it is very small to me, running at 1920x1080. Can you provide a link to it where it could be bigger?
Click to expand...

http://visual.ly/tech-patent-wars

Look at the numbers

I'll correct my previuse statement. Number of patents contested rather than cases.
 
Glaucus said:
That's not the impression give it at all.

But apple is a huge buyer and smasung in a lot of countries has not outsold the iPhone at all.
Click to expand...

You do know that Samsung are the biggest smartphone vendor in the world, right? And by a sizeable margin. So they may not have outsold the iPhone in Guatemala - on the global scale they are the biggest. They did what Apple couldn't do - dethrone Nokia.

Glaucus said:
The. Fact is they are not going to Vut their nose off to spite there face. Patent wars are normal. Different company departments are not going to do anything like that.
Click to expand...

Hence why I caveated with "hypothetical and highly unlikely" :)

Glaucus said:
And also destroy their numbers? So you know the contract is expiring do you so they can instantly withhold components? It's also not like apple can't and don't have agreements in place with others.
Click to expand...

I know Apple have agreements in place with a number of other vendors, I know Apple have a shrewd tactic of essentially buying out their partners' entire supply lines. That doesn't change the fact that each time a new product goes to market their supply chain hits a glut and they experience enormous waiting times. If one of their existing suppliers walked away, this would be exacerbated.

The point is, Apple may be the world's biggest by market cap but in terms of sheer selling power, Samsung aren't even playing the same sport, let alone being in the same ballpark. Of the two, Apple has a metric **** tonne more to lose.

Also, I'm guessing your keyboard is totally knackered? :D
 
Glaucus said:
http://visual.ly/tech-patent-wars

Look at the numbers

I'll correct my previuse statement. Number of patents contested rather than cases.
Click to expand...

I stand corrected then, must just be that people love apple so much they're the only business they talk about.

Still would love to see all this patent crap end, and royalties paid where needed. I try not to take sides but I grow tired of hearing about all the ridiculous things Apple claim more than anyone else it seems.
 
Purdy said:
What can be patented and what can't all seems a bit make it up as we go along.

Also if you copy what someone does, take it and make it better you are just hurting the consumer by restricting that kind of development, like I had said which has been going on since forever?
Click to expand...
Patents have been around for a long time and the arguments over what is and isn't applicable have been raging just as long. It's something that people are going to disagree on pretty much forever.
Really they are all out to shaft each other, have no interest in innovation and care little for the consumer, but I do find it very hard to like apple despite enjoying their products for what they do. (Except Macs, joke product.)
Click to expand...
To claim that they have no interest in innovation is amusing, considering Apple have re-invented the smartphone, tablet computer and laptop (Ultrabooks, anyone?) in the past five years alone.
FoxEye said:
Have you *seen* some of the software patents that are being granted? Most of the time, there is no "invention" at all!

Double-click to zoom an "invention", you say?
Click to expand...
That particular patent isn't just double-tap to zoom, it also covers determining what the user has double-tapped on and zooming in so that the item the user specifically double-tapped on is centred on the screen. It's easy to claim this is obvious now, but I don't know of anybody who actually implemented this before the iPhone. Mobile browsers prior to the iPhone didn't use a double-tap to zoom feature, for example.
 
Glaucus said:
Mobile phones dropped last year, at least in the USA, apple was the only company to expand in the USA. Android sold several million less units and lost just under 6% market share. Where apple coupntinued to grow.

So no you have no point.
Click to expand...

Where did you get those numbers from?

http://newyork.newsday.com/business...g-extends-google-android-domination-1.3893581

There were four Android phones for every iPhone shipped in the second quarter, research firm IDC said Wednesday. That's up from a ratio of 2.5 to 1 in the same period last year.

The success of Samsung's Android phones helped Google's operating system extend its dominance in the smartphone market.

Samsung Electronics Co. and other phone makers shipped nearly 105 million Android smartphones in the April-June quarter, giving Android 68 percent of the worldwide market, up from 47 percent last year.

The gains came largely at the expense of BlackBerry phones made by Research in Motion Ltd. and Symbian phones made largely by Nokia Corp. Each saw its market share drop below 5 percent. Nokia is now making phones that use Microsoft Corp.'s Windows system.

The market share for Apple Inc.'s iPhone, powered by its iOS software, fell slightly to 17 percent, from 19 percent. But the company shipped more iPhones than a year ago. Apple is the No. 2 smartphone maker, behind Samsung, and is likely to get a boost when it releases its new iPhone model as expected this fall.
 
I said in the USA. You know where this case was.
scaled.php


And apple/smasung split in USA

http://www.engadget.com/2012/08/08/npd-q2-2012/

Apple 31% of market
Samsung 24% of market
 
Last edited:
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
So if we took the US numbers out,Android is probably even doing better overall in the rest of the world

Its more popular than I thought.
Click to expand...

That's a granted, there's a lot of poor countries and apple only do high end phones. There's no real Compton for androi in the lower end of the market. Other than about 1 windows7.5 phone by Nokia.
 
Glaucus said:
That's a granted, there's a lot of poor countries and apple only do high end phones. There's no real Compton for androi in the lower end of the market. Other than about 1 windows7.5 phone by Nokia.
Click to expand...

OTH,high end Samsung phones also do have good sales figures especially in Asia ,so its not only bottom barrel stuff.

Edit!!

The same arguments were made for Windows too,but its hardly only the bottom barrel sales now.
 
Last edited:
Glaucus said:
So come on what is the point?

People simply don't understand patents and think its simply pinch to zoom, that is not the patent.
Click to expand...

Their patent should never have been granted. It has so now the correct thing to do would be to have it invalidated.

Before you harp on again about it being not just pinch to zoom (now being called P2Z from here on in) but is actually a very limited and precise method of P2Z, my point is this -

The patent is based on a widely used tech. Just because they have managed to get it granted on a very small subset of the technology i.e. a precise method of someone USING it does not make it any more acceptable.

If the USPTO felt the need to significantly narrow the context of this patent then does this not hint that it should never have been granted in the first place?


P2Z - a tech that has been around long before Apple patented it (see the Fractal thing which was pre-2005 when the patent was applied for). To then patent the most common way it is actioned by an end user (to pinch zoom, remove contacts then pinch zoom again within a specified time window) IS basically patenting the whole thing. This is because the entire tech of P2Z cannot NOT have this method of interaction by the end user.


Not sure if I am being clear but basically can you (Glaucus) tell me how anyone can implement P2Z without paying Apple and without falling foul of this patent?

If you can't then Apple have effectively (not literally) indirectly patented P2Z.
 
I want to know, how was the Jury able to sort this in 2 days!?
If brought in they would be completely fresh to all the cases brought to this, all the patents...2 frigging days?
 
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
OTH,high end Samsung phones also do have good sales figures especially in Asia ,so its not only bottom barrel stuff.

Edit!!

The same arguments were made for Windows too,but its hardly only the bottom barrel sales now.
Click to expand...

:confused:
I'm not saying its only bottom barrel stuff, far from it. But it does go a fair way to explaining the higher world wide marketshare.A lot of that percentage will be lower end. Just look how much lower end stuff sales in theuk, let alone poorer countries.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom