Help
Post your comments for What the Apple-Samsung verdict means to you here
What the Apple-Samsung verdict means to you
#2
pawhite524 
- Member
-
- Group: Macworld Insiders
- Posts: 664
- Joined: 19-May 11
Posted 24 August 2012 - 05:24 PM
This is exciting news IMHO and is going as I have wished given the evidence presented. Apple did get screwed by Samsunk (this spelling stands at least in this case!).
I wish they could have negotiated a settlement.
I'm reading crap on other sites like "this will make Apple a monopoly and Apple either is/will become a bully."
As has been well stated many times and many places, Apple does not seek the huge market-share needed to be a monopoly, it seeks to be the most profitable. That it does have such a robust share of the 10" tablet business is from lousy competition from its competitors not from creating a business model where no competition is allowed as MS did when it was deemed a monopoly.
In my life, a "bully" did not get that rep for defending his own, his family's, or his friend's stuff. A bully was an antagonist who provoked and intimidated by initiative a la the relationship between Popeye and Bluto (aka Brutus). Popeye was not considered to be the bully when he eventually clobbered him.
And still, the long term "ripple effect" of this will be unclear for quite some time to be sure. Apple may get hurt in some ways by this. Think of sporting events: The NY Yankees are "despised" for their successes (I am not a Yankees fan) and people are happy to see them beat for that reason alone, "They have enough pennants, give someone else a chance!"
I wish they could have negotiated a settlement.
I'm reading crap on other sites like "this will make Apple a monopoly and Apple either is/will become a bully."
As has been well stated many times and many places, Apple does not seek the huge market-share needed to be a monopoly, it seeks to be the most profitable. That it does have such a robust share of the 10" tablet business is from lousy competition from its competitors not from creating a business model where no competition is allowed as MS did when it was deemed a monopoly.
In my life, a "bully" did not get that rep for defending his own, his family's, or his friend's stuff. A bully was an antagonist who provoked and intimidated by initiative a la the relationship between Popeye and Bluto (aka Brutus). Popeye was not considered to be the bully when he eventually clobbered him.
And still, the long term "ripple effect" of this will be unclear for quite some time to be sure. Apple may get hurt in some ways by this. Think of sporting events: The NY Yankees are "despised" for their successes (I am not a Yankees fan) and people are happy to see them beat for that reason alone, "They have enough pennants, give someone else a chance!"
#3
rob53
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 196
- Joined: 06-March 09
Posted 24 August 2012 - 05:37 PM
The analysts statements about the verdict causing the other companies to be more creative misses the whole point of this lawsuit. The other companies would have designed different devices if they could. I'm not so sure they have the resources or designers to come up with anything creative. PC vendors have always been me-to designers with little creativity.
#5
AussieTrev
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 29
- Joined: 05-July 10
Posted 24 August 2012 - 06:17 PM
This whole issue reminds me of a scene from the movie "Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines" the japanese competitors just took two models of the other planes and swapped the wings over and that became their plane. This is what Samsung and others have been doing to western innovation for years. It is stealing and cheating.
#6
zarmanto
- Veteran
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1,659
- Joined: 11-February 04
Posted 24 August 2012 - 06:39 PM
rob53, on 24 August 2012 - 05:37 PM, said:
The analysts statements about the verdict causing the other companies to be more creative misses the whole point of this lawsuit. The other companies would have designed different devices if they could. ...
I wholeheartedly disagree... I think that is the entire point. Apple is suing all of these other companies because they chose to copy Apple, instead of coming up with their own concepts and designs. To illustrate that point, Apple pointed (oh, so ironically) at Microsoft's latest offerings in the mobile realm, which, from what I understand, bears no resemblance to either Android or iOS. If it were entirely impossible to create a smartphone without copying Apple, then Apple's lawsuits would most likely have been promptly thrown out of court, as frivolous. Mind you, it certainly would have taken longer and been more expensive to get a truly innovative competitor to the iPhone out the door... but once again, that's the entire point: You can't just sit back and watch someone else build the tallest building in the world, and then put your own flag on top and claim you built a taller building!
Unfortunately, we are nowhere near the end of this... this ruling still has to hold up in whatever appellate courts are available to Samsung. Still, it makes for an interesting lead in to that court room.
- 24" iMac: 2.33GHz Core2 Duo/3GB RAM/2TB HD/GeForce 7600 w/256MB VRAM
- Hackintosh: 2.3GHz AMD Quad-Core/4GB RAM/multiple HDs/GeForce 8600 GTS w/256MB
- Verizon iPhone 4
- AppleTV (2nd Gen)
- 1TB Time Capsule
- 80GB iPod Classic
- Hackintosh: 2.3GHz AMD Quad-Core/4GB RAM/multiple HDs/GeForce 8600 GTS w/256MB
- Verizon iPhone 4
- AppleTV (2nd Gen)
- 1TB Time Capsule
- 80GB iPod Classic
#7
Ulath
- Newbie
-
- Group: New Members
- Posts: 2
- Joined: 24-August 12
Posted 24 August 2012 - 08:10 PM
"Apple does not seek the huge market-share needed to be a monopoly,"
And it shouldn't try. Porsche is a very profitable company and it also has a very small market share relative to companies like Toyota or Ford. And no, I'm not saying Apple is the Porsche is the computer/electronic world. I'm just saying market share isn't a prerequisite for success. Apple succeeds on its design and user experience and sticking to its target market. No reason to change that.
And consumers should benefit quite a bit if Android smartphone makers now start shaking up their designs. Consumers will have more, and better, choices. Look what happened when Apple dropped Google Maps on iOS. They introduced Maps which looks to be a much better experience. In response, Google added features to Google Maps. I'm sure it won't be long before Mapquest releases an update.
And it shouldn't try. Porsche is a very profitable company and it also has a very small market share relative to companies like Toyota or Ford. And no, I'm not saying Apple is the Porsche is the computer/electronic world. I'm just saying market share isn't a prerequisite for success. Apple succeeds on its design and user experience and sticking to its target market. No reason to change that.
And consumers should benefit quite a bit if Android smartphone makers now start shaking up their designs. Consumers will have more, and better, choices. Look what happened when Apple dropped Google Maps on iOS. They introduced Maps which looks to be a much better experience. In response, Google added features to Google Maps. I'm sure it won't be long before Mapquest releases an update.
#8
MarioChavez
- Newbie
-
- Group: New Members
- Posts: 1
- Joined: 24-August 12
Posted 24 August 2012 - 08:48 PM
Edge35, on 24 August 2012 - 05:45 PM, said:
Ok Apple, I've been a long time customer. How 'bout you pass a little of that award money my way???
Once you stop laughing then get back to me...
Once you stop laughing then get back to me...
Hahahahah, very funny. One way is to buy Apple stock (which I did some years ago). Apple paid dividends this month. Sweet!
Nonetheless, I wish I had had the foresight to buy Apple shares in 1999, for example. Oh, well...
#9
walfy
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 85
- Joined: 02-January 04
Posted 24 August 2012 - 09:58 PM
Apple may have landed on the most intuitive design that today's technology can allow, just like it happened with the paper book: its design has changed little for the last few centuries (talking about the non-electronic versions). It will be very difficult, maybe, to come up with a whole new paradigm on how to interact with a touch screen device with your finger. Maybe it's unfair that Apple gets licensing rights for something as basic as the scrolling "bounce-back," the zoom pinch, scroll flicking and such. The first person who sewed stacks of written papyrus together to make a book couldn't expect to get a patent and fees. It sounds absurd, I know! Just saying that Apple may have landed on fundamental design concepts that cannot be improved on for hundreds of years. I'd love to be proven wrong. It would be great for the copycats to "think different."
#10
DanielMcKenzie
- Newbie
-
- Group: New Members
- Posts: 1
- Joined: 25-August 12
Posted 25 August 2012 - 12:15 AM
iphone is #1 all others are nonexistent
#13
DWFields
- Member
-
- Group: New Members
- Posts: 22
- Joined: 13-August 12
Posted 25 August 2012 - 05:38 AM
Ulath, on 24 August 2012 - 08:10 PM, said:
"Apple does not seek the huge market-share needed to be a monopoly,"
And it shouldn't try. Porsche is a very profitable company and it also has a very small market share relative to companies like Toyota or Ford. And no, I'm not saying Apple is the Porsche is the computer/electronic world. I'm just saying market share isn't a prerequisite for success. Apple succeeds on its design and user experience and sticking to its target market. No reason to change that.
And consumers should benefit quite a bit if Android smartphone makers now start shaking up their designs. Consumers will have more, and better, choices. Look what happened when Apple dropped Google Maps on iOS. They introduced Maps which looks to be a much better experience. In response, Google added features to Google Maps. I'm sure it won't be long before Mapquest releases an update.
And it shouldn't try. Porsche is a very profitable company and it also has a very small market share relative to companies like Toyota or Ford. And no, I'm not saying Apple is the Porsche is the computer/electronic world. I'm just saying market share isn't a prerequisite for success. Apple succeeds on its design and user experience and sticking to its target market. No reason to change that.
And consumers should benefit quite a bit if Android smartphone makers now start shaking up their designs. Consumers will have more, and better, choices. Look what happened when Apple dropped Google Maps on iOS. They introduced Maps which looks to be a much better experience. In response, Google added features to Google Maps. I'm sure it won't be long before Mapquest releases an update.
Remember the Android phones that had slide-out keyboards? Apple didn't squawk about those. Nor did the squawk about the dual-screen phones, the part-screen/part keyboard phone... Really, there are a lot of designs that don't look anything like Apple's yet still offer a desirable phone.
#14
jimajamy
- Newbie
-
- Group: New Members
- Posts: 1
- Joined: 25-August 12
Posted 25 August 2012 - 06:05 AM
This is a very sad day for the the tech world and this nothing more than a thinly veiled attack on android os support using apples extremely vague patents (but I guess if you have the funds) this will definitely slow innovation. What happened to the apple we grew to love who sought victory through innovation as opposed to filing patents on basic features used years before apple entered the mobile market. Rant over. I AM SAD.
