Apple V Samsung

[Patrick]

Just seen on Newsnight Apple has won it's court battle with Samsung regarding Patant infringements.
Be interesting what the knock on effects could be.
Speculation than Samsung will have to withdraw products, phone manufacturers in general will have to pay Apple to use the desputed technology.

I also find it interesting what will Samsung's policy will be about future supplies to Apple, as they make a number component parts for Apple, including monitor panels.

Patrick

[Ian]

Re: Apple V Samsung

I think Apple needs to tread very carefully - I sense an increasing number of people regarding Apple as an aggressive commercial monster that they no longer want to have anything to do with.

The company now has nothing to do with the image it protrayed in 1984 as the David versus the IBM Goliath. Apple is now the Goliath.

Complex technologies that are the result of investment in R&D should be protected by patents. But how much of this applies to the Apple versus Samsung case? Apple complains that Samsung violates a patent whereby if you double tap the screen you can zoom the text display. Or that Samsung products look like Apple products. Etc.

In the smartphone and tablet market Apple is beginning to feel the heat because its competitors are rapidly eating into its market. I believe that's because buyers now believe that Apple products are too expensive, not flexible enough and competitor products are actually better.

The battle between Apple and Samsung masks the real issue and that is Apple v.s. Google and Google's Android OS for smartphones, tablets and other devices (like Nikon compact cameras!). Samsung has been targeted because it is the largest manufacturer of Android devices - and by a huge margin, too. Fundamentally, Apple iOS and Android are completely different, both in concept and execution but they do share details like the way touch screens work. Some of these technologies are already cross-licensed but no doubt Apple will make its lawyers work hard to build a case against Google.

Apple is already copying Google in major ways - developing an alternative to Google Maps, for example, complete with its own version of Google Street View. Is Google suing Apple over this? These companies are constantly copying each other.

In the end the main loser in all these global corporation battles is the end-user. Android devices cover the range from the cheapest affordable smartphones to the luxury end of the market. Apple is only interested in the profitable end of the market. Their actions could end up hurting those that can barely afford a smartphone.

Apple has listed 8 Samsung smartphone and tablet devices that it wants to see banned in the US. Most of these are old models anyway. I can't see any justification for banning newer products like the Samsung Galaxy S3, which looks nothing like an iPhone and is a very distinctive smartphone in its own right, but I am hearing that Apple may go after the S3 as part of a punitive action.

Just remember, in the end, we the consumers will be the losers.

Ian

PS My guess is that if Samsung even tried to pull the plug on supplying Apple with screens, flash memory, camera modules, etc. Apple would sue them for being anti-competitive.

[Ian]

Re: Apple V Samsung

[ame="www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAtje5weAU0"]Apple kills Star Trek - YouTube[/ame]

[Patrick]

Re: Apple V Samsung

[QUOTE=Ian;67032]I think Apple needs to tread very carefully - I sense an increasing number of people regarding Apple as an aggressive commercial monster that they no longer want to have anything to do with.

The company now has nothing to do with the image it protrayed in 1984 as the David versus the IBM Goliath. Apple is now the Goliath.

Complex technologies that are the result of investment in R&D should be protected by patents. But how much of this applies to the Apple versus Samsung case? Apple complains that Samsung violates a patent whereby if you double tap the screen you can zoom the text display. Or that Samsung products look like Apple products. Etc.

In the smartphone and tablet market Apple is beginning to feel the heat because its competitors are rapidly eating into its market. I believe that's because buyers now believe that Apple products are too expensive, not flexible enough and competitor products are actually better.

The battle between Apple and Samsung masks the real issue and that is Apple v.s. Google and Google's Android OS for smartphones, tablets and other devices (like Nikon compact cameras!). Samsung has been targeted because it is the largest manufacturer of Android devices - and by a huge margin, too. Fundamentally, Apple iOS and Android are completely different, both in concept and execution but they do share details like the way touch screens work. Some of these technologies are already cross-licensed but no doubt Apple will make its lawyers work hard to build a case against Google.

Apple is already copying Google in major ways - developing an alternative to Google Maps, for example, complete with its own version of Google Street View. Is Google suing Apple over this? These companies are constantly copying each other.

In the end the main loser in all these global corporation battles is the end-user. Android devices cover the range from the cheapest affordable smartphones to the luxury end of the market. Apple is only interested in the profitable end of the market. Their actions could end up hurting those that can barely afford a smartphone.

Apple has listed 8 Samsung smartphone and tablet devices that it wants to see banned in the US. Most of these are old models anyway. I can't see any justification for banning newer products like the Samsung Galaxy S3, which looks nothing like an iPhone and is a very distinctive smartphone in its own right, but I am hearing that Apple may go after the S3 as part of a punitive action.

Just remember, in the end, we the consumers will be the losers.

Ian

PS My guess is that if Samsung even tried to pull the plug on supplying Apple with screens, flash memory, camera modules, etc. Apple would sue them for being anti-competitive.[/

I was just pointing out how interesting the situation could be.
I don't know how close the technical workings of the disputed technologies are. But if Apple have spent millions on developing something and they think their patents have been infringed then you can't blame them for sueing.
As to look alike there are presidents in law, the fashion business is full of seccesesfull law suits, as in photography Hemet Newton successfully sued someone for making a photograph that copied the style of one of his famous pictures.
For my part I think both sides could have agreed licence agreements, without sueing each other.
The old order at Apple was very keen on litigation but there is evidence the new is not quite as keen on this route.
As to a David & Goliath situation Samsung is hardly a David.

When it comes to the consumer being fed up with Apple just visit any Apple store
I was in Manchester today in the Apple store in the Ardale centre, the store was packed out it was easily the business shop in the centre as was the case a few weeks ago when I was in the Trafford centre Machester it's the same story in Birmingham and Solihull. They often have security men to control how many people can enter at a time. sales are again up in total so far this year by I think 15% (could check) so perhaps not quit as good as this time last year of 20%. That's still a two year growth of 35%, how many companies can match that or even half that?
The consumer are not the least interested in general regarding who owns what patents , or who is David and who is Golioth they are simply interested in if they want the product & service.
In the case of the Samsung galaxy yes it has given Apple a big fright out selling it in recent months but none the less sales of iPhone increase year on year this year being no exception. The release very soon of the iPhone 5 will push the pendelem back
No other tablet from anyone comes near to the iPad for sales figures, in fact if you add up the total sales of tablet from all other manufactures, it's still a fraction of iPad sales.
So it all begs the question why has a company that was dying on its feet and bailed with money from Bill Gates now the world most valuable Company?
Simple, they now give large number of people what they want and they are happy to pay.
That's simply good business.

Yes at some piont in the future they may ride to a fall, many similarly dominant companies in the past have suffered such a fate.

Patrick

[Ian]

Re: Apple V Samsung

I don't want to get into a long drawn out debate about this as most of it has already been said previously, but just to underline my point of view, this year Samsung overtook and raced past Apple in terms of smartphone sales, globally.

Ian

[Patrick]

Re: Apple V Samsung

I don't want to get into a long drawn out debate about this as most of it has already been said previously, but just to underline my point of view, this year Samsung overtook and raced past Apple in terms of smartphone sales, globally.

Ian

Agreed, i did cover that in my reply.

Patrick

[Ian]

Re: Apple V Samsung

Quite surprised that a Japanese court has ruled in favour of Samsung, which is of course a Korean company:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19433019

Ian

[Patrick]

Re: Apple V Samsung

Quite surprised that a Japanese court has ruled in favour of Samsung, which is of course a Korean company:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19433019

Ian

Which underlines one thing I said why don't they both simply get round a table and negotiate it out and agree licence deals.
Each and every county they litigate in will come up ith different decisions, it will become a total mess for both companies.

Patrick

[Kurt]

Re: Apple V Samsung

With these patent disputes we only see the tip of the iceberg. It is interesting that Nokia receives lots of dish from each iPhone that is sold.