or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by tooltalk

    I don't think there is any denial that Samsung tries to emulate Apple's success (and packaging designs), but consider the following    "... When Apple was developing its campaign to promote the first iPhone, it considered – and rejected – advertisements that touted alleged Apple ―firsts with the iPhone. As one Apple employee explained to an overly exuberant Apple marketer, I don‘t know how many things we can come up with that you can legitimately claim we did first....
  I said less than $15.. Microsoft's initial asking price was $15, but nobody pays the asking-price - HTC was known to have struck a deal with Microsoft for $5. Samsung makes low / high end smartphones and is known to be paying anywhere between $1 - $5 per unit (or ~1% of total cost).    You seriously don't think Microsoft is collecting $5B in Android patents licensing fees alone, do you?
  I believe the licensing fee Microsoft is collecting is quite trivial - less than $15 per unit.   The presentation doesn't seem to cover any design patents (look & feel) in question - so I'm guessing that the patents listed in the presentation are either trivial or invalidated.  If I remember correctly from last year's lawsuit in Austrialia, Apple was willing to license non-core/junk patents only.   Well, consider that no courts in Netherland, Austrialia, Germany or UK...
    hardly anything to cry about.    That's still 75% vs. Apple's ~25% gain.   anytime
; ;   there, I found Nielson's Q2 2012 data..  so that's 8% in Q2, 2011 to 17% in Q2, 2012 - that's still 100+% gain.  Apple's share increased from 28% in Q2, 2011 to 34% in Q2, 2012 - that is only 20+% gain.  Nielsen's numbers are ased on # of US mobile subscribers.
deleted
    Why?    According to Nielsen, Samsung had only 8% of the US smartphone market in Q2 2011; now it's 24%.  Yes, that's 300% gain.   Apple's share went from 28% to 31%; 10+% gain.       
eh? This sounds a bit crazy..  So after $1.1+ billion in marketing between 2008-2010, 35%, or 1/3, of consumers still can't link it back to Apple? 
    yeah, I thought it was mildly funny, but not edgy as MadTv's Apple parody http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rw2nkoGLhrE
well, based on trials held in Neherland, Germany, Australia, only one court in Germany found Samsung violating "unfair competition" law there, but they found no design infringement. So I think Samsung's chance is pretty good. Samsung will probably have to appeal given Apple's home advantage.
New Posts  All Forums: