or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple files countersuit against Nokia
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple files countersuit against Nokia - Page 5

post #161 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Are you an IP lawyer, or just biased?

That's right, anyone that has opinion than the Apple-zombie-brigade or is not trying to live in Steve Job's pants is biased.

My bad. Apple is the salt of the earth. They never do anything wrong. The world is out go get them. Steve Job's for galactic overlord. Free iTunes for everyone.

Sorry to assume that you would be able to distinguish between a fact based claim and an opinion. I'll try to keep it simpler next time.
post #162 of 278
Quote:
Android and Google repeats Windows (Unix, Linux, etc) way - the same OS on different hardware sets. And iPhone is pure Apple ideology - single OS on VERY limited hardware configurations.
Let check the market share of Windows/Unix/Linux and MacOS - I think you will something interesting

Your logic doesn't work well at all for handsets. Seeing the tight integration work its magic on a phone is now making Google and Microsoft copy Apple's business model.

Where have you been the last 2 years where Microsoft ditched all its "Plays for Sure" partners to clone the ipod ecosystem with the Zune?

Btw, from what was already posted about this, why should Apple pay a dime to Nokia when they buy a GSM chip which they should have paid any fees for licensing?
post #163 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobabyrtrns View Post

That's right, anyone that has opinion than the Apple-zombie-brigade or is not trying to live in Steve Job's pants is biased.

My bad. Apple is the salt of the earth. They never do anything wrong. The world is out go get them. Steve Job's for galactic overlord. Free iTunes for everyone.

Sorry to assume that you would be able to distinguish between a fact based claim and an opinion. I'll try to keep it simpler next time.



Hows the job hunting going anyway?
post #164 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by monstrosity View Post

Hows the job hunting going anyway?

You must have me confused with someone else or you are making a feeble attempt (key word being feeble) at being humorous.
post #165 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobabyrtrns View Post

Sorry to assume that you would be able to distinguish between a fact based claim and an opinion. I'll try to keep it simpler next time.

Get off your high-horse. Can you name one fact-based claim you've made above before, say, making wild assertions like 'Apple infringed...' and 'Apple violated...patents'?

I have no trouble with opinions. Not in the least. But attaching credibility to it requires some semblance of a basis in fact. Opinions pulled out of thin air, or from a hunch, or based on a bias, or with an axe to grind, or are simply knee-jerk, etc. are simply facile, and unworthy of someone seemingly as smart as you.
post #166 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Get off your high-horse. Can you name one fact-based claim you've made above before, say, making wild assertions like 'Apple infringed...' and 'Apple violated...patents'?

I have no trouble with opinions. Not in the least. But attaching credibility to it requires some semblance of a basis in fact. Opinions pulled out of thin air, or from a hunch, or based on a bias, or with an axe to grind, or are simply knee-jerk, etc. are simply facile, and unworthy of someone seemingly as smart as you.

Here's the deal in a way we can both agree on. Neither one of us has been invited into the lawyers chambers to hear what is being said. You get a snippet here and there from a blog, and I do the same. The "legal" minds render their completely worthless judgments into the ether for all to consume, gestate, then produce an opinion. Is any of it fact based? Maybe a bit. Is all of it conjecture up to this point? Sure is. So, unless you can provide a fact, your opinions carry about as much weight as mine. The one difference is, I see Apple as no better than Microsoft, or Motorola, or Nokia, etc... They are in it to make money. Steve Jobs is not your friend. He would sell you Air 1.0, and make you upgrade to Pollution 2.5 if he could get away with it. Steve Jobs is only loyal to the shareholders, the current Mrs. Jobs, and his kids, not necessarily in that order. Those on this site who delude themselves into thinking Apple is a force for good are well, stupid. That's another opinion as well.
post #167 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobabyrtrns View Post

That's right, anyone that has opinion than the Apple-zombie-brigade or is not trying to live in Steve Job's pants is biased.

My bad. Apple is the salt of the earth. They never do anything wrong. The world is out go get them. Steve Job's for galactic overlord. Free iTunes for everyone.

Sorry to assume that you would be able to distinguish between a fact based claim and an opinion. I'll try to keep it simpler next time.

Nice can you be a tad bit more rude and dismissive? No really go on a try a bit harder. Mod - I think we have studlytech lurking under a different moniker here.

But to respond to the baby's returns, let's look at the questions posted and see who has the correct answers here. Now I will assume you have no real knowledge of how the technology licensing works, so I'll use short words and simple sentences so you can easily follow along - just call out if you get lost along the way.

A little over 22 years ago a consortium (baby - that means big group) of telecommunications companies (large groups of people working together to manufacture devices that talk to each other) created (what was then known as Group Speciale Mobile, then became) Global System for Mobile communications, or GSM. The group of 15 or so companies established the first set of standards. Nokia was one of those companies. In the following years, Nokia developed, patented and then provded those technologies (voice codecs, and transmission technologies for example - go with me on this one baby). The Nordic Mobile Telephony standards were used to build an agreed upon standard for most of western Europe, which became the core of GSM in use today. All of Nokia's IP (that's Intellectual Property, or ideas and inventions that Nokia developed and registered in support of the GSM standard) became a part of the standard and therefore became subject to a restricted licensing process known as F/RAND, which is established as a part of the IPR (Intellectual Property Rights) policies governing royalty payments. F/RAND is "fair/reasonable and non-discriminatory policies established by the governing Standards Setting Organisations (SSOs). These standards dictate what limits are placed on what an IP holder can require as a royalty on the use of the IP it produced in support of the standard.

Nokia is accused (by Apple) of trying to double-dip on Apple - they want not just their royalties, but reciprocity on key Apple technology patents. Apple claims that it already is paying into those royalties by using existing 3rd party technologies which have already paid the royalties.
post #168 of 278
http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1224645




This is for smartphones.

When considering all cellphones/handsets (dumb ones included), Apple is just over 1% I believe, or 2%.

Obviously, it's rather silly to compare an iPhone to a cheap, disposable device by Nokia, that barely does anything beyond calls.
post #169 of 278
Get a grip. You're spouting utter BS at this point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobabyrtrns View Post

Here's the deal in a way we can both agree on. Neither one of us has been invited into the lawyers chambers to hear what is being said.

That silly statement of an obvious fact is one thing I can agree on.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobabyrtrns View Post

You get a snippet here and there from a blog, and I do the same.

You have no idea where I get my snippets (if I do). Talk about yourself without making attributions about me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobabyrtrns View Post

The "legal" minds render their completely worthless judgments into the ether for all to consume, gestate, then produce an opinion. Is any of it fact based? Maybe a bit. Is all of it conjecture up to this point? Sure is.

I am not a lawyer, and I could care less about lawyers. But when I hear you make a statement such as 'legal minds render completely worthless judgments' you are way off-base (just as you are when you make statements such as 'Apple violates patents' and 'Apple infringes on patents...').

Incidentally, the US constitution was the product of many 'legal' minds. Completely worthless?

Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobabyrtrns View Post

So, unless you can provide a fact, your opinions carry about as much weight as mine.

I have provided zero opinions on legal issues surrounding Apple v. Nokia. Zilch. Nada. Zip. Unlike you, I know when to keep my mouth shut: when I don't have the facts or the knowledge.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobabyrtrns View Post

The one difference is, I see Apple as no better than Microsoft, or Motorola, or Nokia, etc... They are in it to make money. Steve Jobs is not your friend. He would sell you Air 1.0, and make you upgrade to Pollution 2.5 if he could get away with it. Steve Jobs is only loyal to the shareholders, the current Mrs. Jobs, and his kids, not necessarily in that order. Those on this site who delude themselves into thinking Apple is a force for good are well, stupid. That's another opinion as well.

Where did anyone, least of all me, say that Apple doesn't or shouldn't care about its shareholders!? Are you delusional? As an Apple shareholder, I damn well want Apple to put that front-and-center in everything they do. (Indeed, Nokia has horrendously failed its shareholders in the past couple of years, and I am shocked that no butts have been kicked yet).

As to the rest of your rant -- pollution, Mrs. Jobs, his kids, force for good, etc -- I have no view whatsoever (except to say, GROW UP).
post #170 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Really? So we're going to start citing an out-of-some-bloggers ass percentage number based on global cell phone users to try and pretend the iPhone isn't doing fantastically well? As opposed to Apple's skyrocketing share of the smartphone market? Which of course is the only metric that makes any sense?

Why?

Well I would beleive him over a lot of the stats tossed around here. But if there are 4.6 billion mobile connections in the world, and they have sold 35 million iPhones, how can you try and prove that they don't have a 0.7% market share?

Why are you restricting Apple to the Smartphone market, when Steve Jobs originally said he wanted a share of the total market?

If you read that article, it proves that the iPhone isn't as big as people in parts of the US make it out to be.
post #171 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

Well I would beleive him over a lot of the stats tossed around here. But if there are 4.6 billion mobile connections in the world, and they have sold 35 million iPhones, how can you try and prove that they don't have a 0.7% market share?

Why are you restricting Apple to the Smartphone market, when Steve Jobs originally said he wanted a share of the total market?

If you read that article, it proves that the iPhone isn't as big as people in parts of the US make it out to be.

Please compare an iPhone to a cheap garbagephone by Nokia that does not do much more than make calls. Compare a Blackberry to the same phone. Compare a Pre to the same phone. BIG difference.

Smartphones are still quite different from dumbphones. That's why the figures are often separated. Separate markets.
post #172 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

If you read that article, it proves that the iPhone isn't as big as people in parts of the US make it out to be.

Oh, it's big. Huge, in fact. Within-2%-of-RIM-and-growing huge. 17.1% of wordlwide smartphones in only two years huge. Forcing Nokia to change its game huge. Making RIM look ancient huge. Burying Windows Mobile and destroying all mobile progress made by MS in the last decade huge.
post #173 of 278
Apple's rebuttal here is simple:

Nokia offers technology to everyone else for say, $500 (i know its not $500, but hear me out) and then offers it to Apple only with $500 AND the multi touch tech. They're using their patents on GSM to force Apple to give them multitouch.

But those patents nokia has are STANDARDS anyway! You can't use standards tech as a bargaining chip!

If this were possible, then anyone who wants to make a better phone on a GSM network must give that technology and know-how to Nokia. Thus Nokia is saying "we'll licence it as long as you do our R&D for us, and then we'll steal your tech - no one is allowed to do a better GSM phone than Nokia" - hmm - something wrong here???!!!

Its preposterous, its bad for business, its bad for consumers, and it should be illegal.
post #174 of 278
To recap in summary what has been, in fact revealed in various news venues over the time since Nokia first brought their suit, that is facts, not speculation:

As Nokia began to build out its approach to the next generation of smartphones from its base on the Nokia 9XXXX and E90 series (developed out of its Nokia Communicator line), it found itself faced with having to meet the emerging challenge of touch-screen telephony devices which to date culminated in the Apple iPhone and the Motorola Droid, but is also well-established in other competitor lines from LG, HTC, and Palm, for example. Without the immediate research into this interface within its own walls, Nokia went hunting for IP it could leverage in its smartphone development. It's dispute with Apple over royalty claims for its IP under GSM standards gave Nokia an opportunity to get Apple's own interface IP on the table, since Apple had been counter-claiming that Nokia was asking for a second royalty payment from Apple, which was supposed to be covered by royalty payments made by the chipset manufacturers that Apple was using, and that Apple was therefore not going to pay "a second time". Hence the lawsuit by Nokia for IP infringement, and Apple's counter suit to defend it's own IP from predation from Nokia. The key difference here is that Nokia's IP is under control of GSM IPR policies as a part of the standard, while Apple's IP is not part of any standard. As far as baby's claim that Apple couldn't make the iPhone without Nokia's IP - that is technically true - for GSM standards. If Apple so chose, it could discontinue GSM and go to CDMA which has no Nokia IP attached to it. But in so doing it would then lose its penetration into the rest of the world market - which is mostly GSM.

So in short, no Apple doesn't technically NEED the Nokia IP - but has chosen to use it as it represents the larger share of world market under GSM. And it remains to be seen if Nokia needs Apple IP. All indications are that they want it badly enough to file suit to get it and risk an INternational Trade Commission intervention in order to get it. Sounds like a NEED to me.
post #175 of 278
The fact is, it looks like at this point, Nokia has no real game plan moving forward in terms of smartphones. It's just an attempt to rehash what's already been done.
post #176 of 278
One other thing to note here. sapporobabyrtrns hails from Helsinki, Finland home base of Nokia. Just for the record, Nokia is one of, if not the largest Finnish company, accounts for a significant chunk of the capitalization in the Finnish stockmarket, a respectable percentage of the Finnish exports market as well as its own Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Nokia is highly regarded in Finland, in fact it inspires a frothy- mouthed loyalty in the normally stoic and reticent Finns, not seen since the hey-days of ABBA. I would not be a bit surprised to find out that sapporobabyrtrns is a stockholder or employee of the firm.

sapporobabyrtrns, Älä nakata poron paskaa, poika. Se saa heitti takaisin sinulle. But my Finnish is terrible - so take that in the best possible way.
post #177 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by masternav View Post

One other thing to note here. sapporobabyrtrns hails from Helsinki, Finland home base of Nokia. Just for the record, Nokia is one of, if not the largest Finnish company, accounts for a significant chunk of the capitalization in the Finnish stockmarket, a respectable percentage of the Finnish exports market as well as its own Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Nokia is highly regarded in Finland, in fact it inspires a frothy- mouthed loyalty in the normally stoic and reticent Finns, not seen since the hey-days of ABBA. I would not be a bit surprised to find out that sapporobabyrtrns is a stockholder or employee of the firm.

I think he works for the US State Department (if I recall correctly from his having said so in the past; I sincerely apologize in advance if I am wrong about this fact.).

Not sure that, if I were him, I'd be broadcasting that fact in an internet Forum, though.

----
Yeah, I was right. From an 11-06-09 thread (notice the arrogance dripping from every sentence):

Originally Posted by Tofino
way to drop the f-bomb all the way from Helsinki! Does everybody in Finland work for Nokia?


sapporobabyrtns' reply: Way to ask a totally inane question based completely in ineptitude. Does someone working for the State Department mean that someone works for Nokia. They are handing out clues. Pick up a box.
-------
post #178 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobabyrtrns View Post

Really. Ok all knowing global moderator. Enlighten us with your unsurpassed telecommunications knowledge.

1. Do Nokia phones need Apple invented/developed/designed technology to work? Simple yes or no will do. Key word being: NEED.

2. Does the iPhone need Nokia invented/developed/designed technology to work: Again, a simple yes or no answer will suffice. Once again, the key word being: NEED.

3. While you may want to pontificate and expound, the facts are pretty clear in the questions I asked. Maybe the simplicity of their very nature was lost on a high-brow person such as you.

Clock is ticking. Two answers on deck.

The law is very clear. Nokia cannot charge Apple any more to license its GSM et al general standard patents than it charges anyone else. IF it has tried to - and the facts will speak for themselves once we see them - then it is toast in court. as to the merit of Apple's claim about its patents, that is a technical question that no independent party has yet had time to evaluate and report. so i don't - and you don't either - know if it holds water.

now for opinion. IMHO, Nokia is desperate, and its suit is a sad hail mary. the suit is a tactical miscalculation because it tells the whole world they are desperate. the next Sony.

PS: actually, after spinning off its Hollywood media company that never fit with the Japanese tech company anyway, Sony should merge with Nokia. get all that obsolete consumer tech into one outfit, and focus on Asia which is the one market where both are still relevant.
post #179 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

The fact is, it looks like at this point, Nokia has no real game plan moving forward in terms of smartphones. It's just an attempt to rehash what's already been done.

And how do you really come up with that?

What has apple brought to the party? cut/paste, video recording, mms, weeeeeeee.... It's just an attempt to rehash what's already been done.
post #180 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Smartphones are still quite different from dumbphones. That's why the figures are often separated. Separate markets.

The figures are seperated to make their share look larger than it actually is. Just like all stats for Apple, they are restricted to small subset of the market to make it look bigger than it is. And to think, just a few weeks back everyone here was bitching because the Microsoft stats for bing was doing the same thing.
post #181 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

The figures are seperated to make their share look larger than it actually is. Just like all stats for Apple, they are restricted to small subset of the market to make it look bigger than it is. And to think, just a few weeks back everyone here was bitching because the Microsoft stats for bing was doing the same thing.

Right. Gartner is in cahoots with Apple. As is NPD, IDC, and AdMob.

The figures for ALL smartphones are separated from the rest of the handsets. Not just Apple's.



Smartphones (plural)


Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

And how do you really come up with that?

What has apple brought to the party? cut/paste, video recording, mms, weeeeeeee.... It's just an attempt to rehash what's already been done.

What has Apple brought to the party?

Umm . . . the iPhone.The device the also-rans are trying furiously to imitate, unsuccessfully. The device that revolutionzed the entire mobile industry overnight. Where have you been the last two years??
post #182 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

Well I would beleive him over a lot of the stats tossed around here. But if there are 4.6 billion mobile connections in the world, and they have sold 35 million iPhones, how can you try and prove that they don't have a 0.7% market share?

Why are you restricting Apple to the Smartphone market, when Steve Jobs originally said he wanted a share of the total market?

If you read that article, it proves that the iPhone isn't as big as people in parts of the US make it out to be.

Youre being disingenuous again by comparing the installed base to unit sales. You know very well that Jobs stated that they were going after a 1% of the marketshare not installed base.

According to Gartner for Q2-2009 lists Apple selling 5.4M iPhones with the number of mobiles sold were 286M. That is 1.9% of the entire handset market for Q2-2009. (source)

Gartners results for Q3-2009 has Apple selling 7M iPhones with the number of mobiles sold were 309M. That is 2.28% of the entire handset market for Q3-2009. (source)
Quote:
So game consoles. 26 million game consoles were sold in 2006 worldwide, actually a little smaller than you'd think. It's not such a big market. Digital cameras dwarfed it at 94 million. MP3 players 135 million. And PCs, about 209. Mobile phones, just about a billion last year, worldwide. So what does this tell you? What this tells you is, that 1 percent market share equals 10 million units. This is a giant market. One percent market share, you're going to sell 10 million phones. And this is exactly what we're going to try to do in 2008, our first full year in the market, is grab 1 percent market share and go from there. So we're going to enter a very competitive market, lot of players, we think we're going to have the best product in the world, and we're going to go for it and see if we can get 1 percent market share, 10 million units in 2008, and go from there.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #183 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

The fact is, it looks like at this point, Nokia has no real game plan moving forward in terms of smartphones. It's just an attempt to rehash what's already been done.

It does appear that they are without focus right now but I wouldnt count Nokia out. They have a strong following and like Apple, Nintendo and many other companies they have a long time before well even have to consider if theyre going to go under. Even if it takes them a couple years to get another great device in the HW and OS that people are falling over to get that is fine.

They have plenty of money, and therefore time to regroup yet theyve already started off well already by getting with Mozilla to port Firefox 3 to QT that they bought last year. Mozilla really needs Nokia more than Nokia needs Mozilla who could simply go with WebKit or Opera if they wanted, but Firefox has a strong following and this could be decent draw for future Nokia phones running Maemo.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #184 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Youre being disingenuous again by comparing the installed base to unit sales. You know very well that Jobs stated that they were going after a 1% of the marketshare not installed base.

All you have done is agreed with me, steve compared to the entire mobile market, so did I
post #185 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

All you have done is agreed with me, steve compared to the entire mobile market, so did I

Ok. So what? What point are you trying to make?

Apple doesn't make a "dumbphone." Only a smartphone. Apple has redefined the entire smartphone market, and now commands a 17% share of it, at least. Are you implying this is a disappintment for Apple, or that Steve Jobs is somehow unhappy about this??

Did you honestly think Apple was going to compete in the cheap, disposable dumbphone market with the iPhone? Does holding a 17% share in the smartphone market in two years and a 2% share overall mean the iPhone is a failure?? Does the fact that more people are buying Nokia 1200s rather than iPhones mean the iPhone is lacking in some area or can't keep up with the 1200?

What are you trying to say?
post #186 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Right. Gartner is in cahoots with Apple. As is NPD, IDC, and AdMob.

AdMob is a joke, it has been proven over and over again, so bad example there. And people here like to rubbish Gartner when they favor MS, but it is acceptable when they favor apple?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post


Umm . . . the iPhone.The device the also-rans are trying furiously to imitate, unsuccessfully. The device that revolutionzed the entire mobile industry overnight. Where have you been the last two years??

Umm... Phones aren't new, they existed before the iPhone, they sold a lot of them as well. Touch screens, nope, they aren't new either. cellphones have had them for a long time, App Store, nope, not new, Apps, not new, acutally they was just a rehash from Apple that everyone else already had. Sure the iPhone was a great thing to come out in the US, but in the last two years Apple hasn't brought anything new to the table, all rehashes of what everyone else was already selling.

Infact, I have seen a grand total of two, maybe three iPhones in the wild in the last two years, in multiple countries, all with over 100% usage, that is including a grand total of one in the last year.
post #187 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

All you have done is agreed with me, steve compared to the entire mobile market, so did I

Are you really this daft? Nothing I wrote is in agreement with your silly comments. You pulled up a number out of your ass for the INSTALLED BASE while Steve pulled a number for SALES OVER ONE YEAR. An INSTALLED BASE is a measure of the number of units in use, as opposed to MARKET SHARE which only reflects sales over a particular TIME FRAME.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #188 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

What are you trying to say?

The iPhone is over rated, and its users have a unrealistic viewpoint of it's popularity.
post #189 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Are you really this daft? Nothing I wrote is in agreement with your silly comments. An INSTALLED BASE is a measure of the number of units in use, as opposed to MARKET SHARE which only reflects sales over a particular TIME FRAME.

Are you really this daft. We were talking about the entire market (you know with all phones included. you know smartphones, "dumb" phones as you guys like to call them etc).

You mentioned steves dream of getting 1% of the previous years sales values, ie all phones, not restricted to just smartphones.

If you don't understand this, then maybe your Apple shares are clouding your viewpoint
post #190 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

Are you really this daft. We were talking about the entire market (you know with all phones included. you know smartphones, "dumb" phones as you guys like to call them etc).

Yes, MARKET not INSTALLED BASE. The MARKET he mentioned was 1B units to be sold, not 4.6B units sold. You can add basic maths and economics to the reading comprehension classes you need to take.

Quote:
You mentioned steves dream of getting 1% of the previous years sales values, ie all phones, not restricted to just smartphones.

And as everyone realizes, but you, Apple has exceeded that goal. Even more than doubling it in the last quarter.
Worldwide handset sales for Q3-2009 — 308,869,300
Apple’s iPhone sales for Q3-2009 — 7,040,400
Apple’s percentage of worldwide handset marketshare — 2.28%
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #191 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Yes, MARKET not INSTALLED BASE. The MARKET he mentioned was 1B units to be sold, not 4.6B units sold. You can add basic maths and economics to the reading comprehension classes you need to take.

Yes, he mention he wanted to match the market from the previous year, so what, that market increased by something like 10% in the next year. As you are a stated apple shareholder, you are not in the place to suggest anything to anybody, the fact you own the shares clouds your viewpoint, and devalues your statements.

Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

And as everyone realizes, but you, Apple has exceeded that goal. Even more than doubling it in the last quarter.

Yes they have, they have now sold 35 million phones, into an existing market of 4.6 billion phones. Everyone seems to understand this but you
post #192 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

AdMob is a joke, it has been proven over and over again, so bad example there. And people here like to rubbish Gartner when they favor MS, but it is acceptable when they favor apple?

Then where exactly do you plan on getting your numbers from? Do you plan on setting up your own market research firm? Are you saying Gartner and the others who reported the same numbers year after year are all wrong? So YOU have the inside track on market research and analysis??

And anyone who fails to acknowledge what the iPhone has brought to the table (to this date unmatched) needs their head examined. LOL, So how do you stand on the whole "earth is round" theory? Do you believe we descended from lower forms of life or do you think we all rode dinosaurs to church?
post #193 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post



Yes they have, they have now sold 35 million phones, into an existing market of 4.6 billion phones. Everyone seems to understand this but you

Right. So what's your point? Do you expect the iPhone to compete with the Nokia 1200 or something? We're talking smartphones here, not regular cell phones. Are you going to complain about RIM as well? Because they too, sell ONLY smartphones, and are barely 2% above Apple worldwide.

Yes, of course there are many, many more dumbphones than smartphones. We all know this. Again, what's your point??

Solipsism is stating facts. Anyone can do that (and should), and has no bearing on them being a shareholder or not.
post #194 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

As you are a stated apple shareholder, you are not in the place to suggest anything to anybody, the fact you own the shares clouds your viewpoint, and devalues your statements.

I’m not a paid analyst so I can discuss any of the companies I own. I have backed up every word here with sources, which is something I can’t say you have done. Even after multiple posts you still don’t understand what an INSTALLED BASE and what MARKET SHARE is.
Quote:
But if there are 4.6 billion mobile connections in the world, and they have sold 35 million iPhones, how can you try and prove that they don't have a 0.7% market share?

BTW, Apple has sold 35M iPhones but that doesn’t mean there are 35M iPhones still in use. The INSTALLED BASE will be lower than the total sold since users buy new phones and sometimes they retire them or they break them. Either way the number of TOTAL SALES will not equal the INSTALLED BASE. If you continue to compare INSTALLED BASE to the stated measure of MARKET SHARE by Jobs you will continue to make yourself look foolish.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #195 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by brucep View Post

BINGO
APPLE has multi multi touch swipe tech patents
hundreds of patents
f--nokia
crush nokia
boil their bones


go apple

Is that you Gollum
post #196 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by masternav View Post

One other thing to note here. sapporobabyrtrns hails from Helsinki, Finland home base of Nokia. Just for the record, Nokia is one of, if not the largest Finnish company, accounts for a significant chunk of the capitalization in the Finnish stockmarket, a respectable percentage of the Finnish exports market as well as its own Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Nokia is highly regarded in Finland, in fact it inspires a frothy- mouthed loyalty in the normally stoic and reticent Finns, not seen since the hey-days of ABBA. I would not be a bit surprised to find out that sapporobabyrtrns is a stockholder or employee of the firm.

sapporobabyrtrns, Älä nakata poron paskaa, poika. Se saa heitti takaisin sinulle. But my Finnish is terrible - so take that in the best possible way.

Wow, what an ASSumption. Being in Finland does not make me a Finn. I just happen to work here at the moment. Whether or not Nokia is the largest, smallest, middle, infinitesimal company in the world is of no consequence to me. They could fold tomorrow and it would not affect me one bit. In short, I do not care. There you go, I saved you the surprise. Can't help you about the ASS.

By the way I do not speak Finnish and could not be bothered to use Google Translate, but I cordially invite you to: Foxtrot, Oscar, Echo, Sierra, Alpha, Delta. From me to you, up close and personal.
post #197 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Then where exactly do you plan on getting your numbers from? Do you plan on setting up your own market research firm? Are you saying Gartner and the others who reported the same numbers year after year are all wrong? So YOU have the inside track on market research and analysis??

No, my question is, why is Gartner acceptable when they are talking positive about Apple, but when they talk postive about Microsoft they are rubbish?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

And anyone who fails to acknowledge what the iPhone has brought to the table (to this date unmatched) needs their head examined. LOL, So how do you stand on the whole "earth is round" theory? Do you believe we descended from lower forms of life or do you think we all rode dinosaurs to church?

What have they brought to the table then?
post #198 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Right. So what's your point? Do you expect the iPhone to compete with the Nokia 1200 or something? We're talking smartphones here, not regular cell phones. Are you going to complain about RIM as well? Because they too, sell ONLY smartphones, and are barely 2% above Apple worldwide.

Yes, of course there are many, many more dumbphones than smartphones. We all know this. Again, what's your point??

Your lord almightly Steve pitted himself against the entire market, but it is not ok for you to?

Also, you may want to look up "percentage points", versus a percentage, I will help you on your way, especially since you like your facts.

With your example data, RIM is on 20.8%, Apple on 17.1%

If RIM was 2% above Apple, then RIM would on 17.442% (that is 2% different), if they were 2 percentage points, they would be 19.1%, notice the difference?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Solipsism is stating facts. Anyone can do that (and should), and has no bearing on them being a shareholder or not.

Hmm, hit a nerve, you wouldn't happen to have a couple of shares also, would you?
post #199 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Im not a paid analyst so I can discuss any of the companies I own. I have backed up every word here with sources, which is something I cant say you have done. Even after multiple posts you still dont understand what an INSTALLED BASE and what MARKET SHARE is.

Yes you can discuss what you want, still doesn't change the fact that your comments can be taken with a grain of salt.

Yes I know the difference, Nokia has a large install base, and market share, Apple has a small install base and market share.

Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

BTW, Apple has sold 35M iPhones but that doesnt mean there are 35M iPhones still in use. The INSTALLED BASE will be lower than the total sold since users buy new phones and sometimes they retire them or they break them. Either way the number of TOTAL SALES will not equal the INSTALLED BASE. If you continue to compare INSTALLED BASE to the stated measure of MARKET SHARE by Jobs you will continue to make yourself look foolish.

No more follish than someone overstating the impact of the iPhone internationally
post #200 of 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by masternav View Post

Nice can you be a tad bit more rude and dismissive? No really go on a try a bit harder. Mod - I think we have studlytech lurking under a different moniker here.

But to respond to the baby's returns, let's look at the questions posted and see who has the correct answers here. Now I will assume you have no real knowledge of how the technology licensing works, so I'll use short words and simple sentences so you can easily follow along - just call out if you get lost along the way.

A little over 22 years ago a consortium (baby - that means big group) of telecommunications companies (large groups of people working together to manufacture devices that talk to each other) created (what was then known as Group Speciale Mobile, then became) Global System for Mobile communications, or GSM. The group of 15 or so companies established the first set of standards. Nokia was one of those companies. In the following years, Nokia developed, patented and then provded those technologies (voice codecs, and transmission technologies for example - go with me on this one baby). The Nordic Mobile Telephony standards were used to build an agreed upon standard for most of western Europe, which became the core of GSM in use today. All of Nokia's IP (that's Intellectual Property, or ideas and inventions that Nokia developed and registered in support of the GSM standard) became a part of the standard and therefore became subject to a restricted licensing process known as F/RAND, which is established as a part of the IPR (Intellectual Property Rights) policies governing royalty payments. F/RAND is "fair/reasonable and non-discriminatory policies established by the governing Standards Setting Organisations (SSOs). These standards dictate what limits are placed on what an IP holder can require as a royalty on the use of the IP it produced in support of the standard.

Nokia is accused (by Apple) of trying to double-dip on Apple - they want not just their royalties, but reciprocity on key Apple technology patents. Apple claims that it already is paying into those royalties by using existing 3rd party technologies which have already paid the royalties.

Zzzzzzzz..... Sorry. Didn't mean to doze off.... Didn't see anything of interest here. Still waiting though. I'm sure you have it in you to deliver something of value. You just have to believe. I believe in you.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple files countersuit against Nokia