Apple could collect $10 for every Android device sold, expert says - Page 3

Japanese companies e.g. Sharp.

Samsung would be screwing themselves, NO-ONE could trust them enough to enter into contracts with them, if they were so cavalier with existing Apple contracts.

This is why stupid fandroid argument No. 22 is such a total fail.

How about Android phones using multi-touch, otherwise known as the patent Apple just received?


Apple gave Xerox the right to purchase 100,000 shares of pre-IPO stocks for letting them examine the PARC GUI. In the end, Apple only took the base ideas of the GUI and completely reengineered them to fit the Apple team's ideas as to how the consumer would interact with a computer. The IPO stock that was worth Over $17 million dollars less than a year later, so it's not like Xerox didn't make anything on the deal.

Only Google didn't have the decency to offer Apple anything for Schmidt 'peeking under the kimono' the way Apple did with Xerox.

Is that why Foxconn is shutting down Apple plants in China?

Oh, hang on THEY ARE EXPANDING THEM and opening another in Brazil.

China has over five thousand years of MONEY being the major motivator of their culture and Apple has that in spades.

If Apple and perhaps specifically Steve Jobs didn't think that Schmidt, and by extension Google, was going to offer value to Apple by being on the Board I can't imagine why he would have pushed for it.

Schmidt had some value to Apple.

Read the patent better. Apple doesn't own multi-touch like you think they do (and wish they do or whatever else you people long for)



How is being inspired by a successful product copying?

If Android was purchased in 2005...and Schmidt was on the board in 2006 and iPhone was released in 2007 and Android as inspired (or copied in this new Apple world) was released in 2008 (after a few demos around the time (actually after) iPhone's release that showed a different design....how was the Android that existed after iPhone was officially released stolen by Schmidt on the board? Why would they wait so long to implement these Schmidt-stole ideas? It doesn't really make sense.

He actually said "copy". It's weird, but you know, Schmitt is known for putting his foot into his mouth.

Remember some other odd things he's said?:

http://allthingsd.com/20110919/will-...l-he-need-one/

It they took the money, the Apple Brand would henceforth be on its way to commoditization. What price can be set on Apple's creative mindset as embodied by its core intellectual properties? None ...for it's priceless, for it generates profit as if profit came out of its own printing press.

Apple has no peer for creating value out of the blue. A winning proposition that is worthy of being brought before a Court of Law and the court of Public Opinion, ...with extreme prejudice to commoditization.

Sony and Apple seem to get on really well together, it seems to stem from mutual respect for each other.

Sony/SonyEricsson are conspicuous by their absence from ANY lawsuits involving Apple.

Their Android handsets are differentiated from iPhones with innovative designs.

Sony also probably makes a lot selling their music/movies via iTunes.

All in all Apple and Sony seem to pursue fairly similar goals.

Elimination of competition through litigation?

Agreed he suffers from Hoof and Mouth, but I still don't think he ever said they "copied" iOS. Your link, while offering a smorgasbord of poorly conceived Schmidt statements, didn't indicate he ever served that one up either.

Of course they did, but that doesn't mean they got the value they expected. Apparently, Schmitt is going around, now that Jobs is gone, and it's safe to do so, and changing history, as the article says:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericjack...rtner=yahootix

First off, Samsung is a South Korean company, and yes they do a lot of manufacturing in China, but I am pretty sure that the Chinese government would not take sides in a S. Korean Vs US fight.

Apple has totally dumped contract manufacturers before and did not have any problem making up the difference. The real value is in the software, design, user experience and marketing.

Additionally, Apple is Samsung's overall biggest customer. I don't think they would want to lose them, it would not make sense in the long term.

This is where Schmidt's bragging is going to bite Google on the rear. It's pretty clear that their number is inflated as there is no way for them to avoid double counting some devices. Anyone want to be that when it comes time to pay royalties that Google says the number of devices is much smaller?


Which would you rather have - $630 M or 5,670 M?

Those aren't actual business statements directed at another. They're general statements he made, and I don't know the timing of this statement. It could have come after the articles.

Apple now has a patent for multi-touch. Which other Android handset maker has such a patent? Since I'm sure you fully understand the Apple patent completely, please inform us as to how the Android multi-touch not violating Apple's patent?




Once a disruptive technology hits the market, it takes time to see whether it's worth copying. Had the iPhone been a total flop, the Android of 2011 would probably look exactly like Blackberry's OS, a la the prototype Android phone. As for the delay between the iPhone's release and the Android knock-off offerings, even the best copy-artists need time to get all their crap in one sock.

Why would Apple have to pay themselves $10 for each iDevice to use their own patents?

They don't make $600 per iSmart (???) user.
Over half that $600 is simply for materials to build the products then there's everything else that goes along with the product (manufacturing costs, sales, marketing, boxes, literature, etc.)

In the short term it appears Apple strategy is a losing one but over time they may win very very big if Android is found to be stealing IP.

I think that we can all agree with that.

M$ has always done bass ackwards stupidity. For decades now. They set the whole PC market back by a decade in the 90's.

I couldn't agree more. The answer to your last question is a resounding ... " Nope!"

In fact they did start pursuing legal action immediately but it takes time to map out a legal strategy and put together a case properly. Their strategy is to keep the entire Android marketplace off balance and to keep applying pressure. They aren't about to let happen with Windows blatantly ripping them off without a fight. As a stockholder I want them to stay mad as hell and keep the pressure on. Google is in fact the new evil and needs to be raked over the coals for their outright theft of Apple IP.

I wish I had a short term, losing strategy that earned me $6 billion per quarter.

And that sock full of crap, i.e. a touch UI bolted on the BB rip off at the last minute, has some pretty bad flaws that nothing but a rewrite from the ground up will cure. That would break existing apps. Ain't life a bitch.

It's a cloven hoof too!

If apple were to licence there features to android and everytime they can out with a new device samsung or others copied the designs this would cause huge damage to apple and there credilibity ...where would apple's unique products be then.

i think if apple were able to just hold onto there IP and overtime more and more people will move from android to a better phone and operating system which is really where i see it going as people get more educated about there phones and its uses,this method could lead to android producing there own unique patents and then the public will become the winner.

Apple has build it rep over many many years and is winning not against android but from within and to its old and new audience...its producing a large amount of products to a large audience...and people are not leaving them.

Reciprocity does not always help.

<deleted>

Last minute is right...

The phone below is what Palm announced just 2 days before Apple announced the iPhone.

In fact... most smartphones of the day looked like this. NONE of those companies had any idea what was coming... and I doubt they would have stumbled upon the next big thing on their own.

This is the type of phone that manufacturers were producing back then... and I'm pretty sure Android would have found its way onto phones just like this. We've even seen the prototype.

Now... there was a full-touchscreen Android protoype as well... but would manufacturers be quick to launch a new type of phone running a brand new OS?

I'm not so sure. Palm and RIM were doing their own thing... so Android would be of no use to them.

Samsung, HTC, Motorola and LG were already making smartphones using a variety of OSes. They were using PalmOS, Windows Mobile, or their own proprietary OS. Android could have been an option... but I'm not sure they were convinced of its usefulness quite yet.

Then the iPhone came.

And the scrambling began. What were these companies gonna do? PalmOS and Windows Mobile were not the answer. And their hardware wasn't up to snuff anyway.

The fact that it took a full year after the iPhone to come up with the first Android phone is proof that none of these companies had any plans in the works. Samsung's first Android phone was 2 years after the iPhone.

The manufacturers got caught with their pants down... and Google was now their savior.

So what did Google do? Take cues from Apple. A lot of cues. I'm pretty sure Android would look nothing like it did if it wasn't for the iPhone.

Why would it? Android would have been competing against the Blackberry and the Treo. I don't think even Google had the next big idea... but they sure knew what to do after the iPhone.

Unlike Microsoft who is truly a Software Corporation Apple is the entire end-to-end solution.

To license their hard earned IP for 3rd parties to clone is to cannibalize their n-tier sales.

It's not going to happen.

Apple owns the profits in the Embedded World.

Apple is now the embodiment of Steven P. Jobs.

Get over the idea that they will change course and pull a Scully.

It's never going to happen.

Android will be destroyed by Oracle and Apple, unless it changes it's violations of both Java [and other Oracle IP] and Apple's IP.

People used to ask us @NeXT how come the Openstep Initiative failed.

SUN Microsystems wanted 100% of the Profits and to provide a small percentage of sales to NeXT in order to run Openstep on SUN Hardware.

SUN just couldn't get it.

Now we have the OS and the Hardware married like NeXT, but in mature markets and now we have the same foundation in the Embedded space driving both markets.

Apple is growing all categories of their hardware and software.

The perceived increase in Revenue from licensing will be dwarfed by one quarter of iTV sales and the iPad 3 sales 5 years of licensing could ever offer.

It's economically insulting and ethically insulting to the very mantra of Apple's ethos.

hard to improve on your comments. Android is stealing and $10 or $100 per device doesn't compensate for that. The rhetorical question would be, "Is it OK for a pickpocket to give the police $10" for every wallet he 'borrows'?"

Android has never had a bounce. Ever.

OEM skins did.

Android and iOS barely share any superficial similarities and hardly any functional ones. Period. So far no one has listed how they are. Without bringing up cases based on broad IP.

Also. What is wrong with competition evolving rapidly, slowly, failing, succeeding, after a market paradigm dramatically shifts?

If a game changer is introduced is no one else allowed to play the new game?

You seem sure that Android OS has never utilized any bouncing of texts or elements but are you sure there is nothing in Android OS that assists developers in making f text and elements bounce by supplying an API?

That is quite an insight. Thanks for that. But you know it is a lost cause - you are trying to have a discussion with a troll. Nothing you say will make him change his opinion.

Speaking of which, whatever happened to Occupy Signature?

My point was.... look at the phones everyone else was releasing at the time. Palm, RIM, Samsung, Motorola and others made a certain type of smartphone for years... and none of them had anything new on the horizon.

Then phones started looking like what Apple was doing... and they were all running Android.

Coincidence?

Google had obviously been working on Android for years. But was the plan all along to complete Android and ship the HTC Dream G1 in October 2008?

Or did Google and the manufacturers have to step back and say "oh shit... we gotta do something else" after January 9, 2007?

The timing is suspicious. Apple produces a game changer... and everyone else changes what they're doing.

My issue is not with any similarities that iOS and Android share now.

It's that Google/Android and the manufacturers probably had no desire to start making full-touchscreen phones until Apple did it. It's the principle of the matter.

Hell... even RIM made the Storm. Would RIM have even attempted that abortion of a phone if it wasn't for the iPhone?

No. And wp7 wouldn't have existed as is nor would webOS nor any modern OS. That's life. That's technology. That's progress.

It's been that way for centuries. Yet now companies look to block all elements of inspiration through litigation.

Or it will be a very good day because nothing makes more sense than collecting a ton of additional revenue from your reviled rival.

They don't set the terms of a licensing agreement. Apple could effectively name their price, then offer the same licensing deal to every single manufacturer. Result = unending revenue enhancement while Apple plows their newfound lucre into R&D.

Well... if one company believes another company is using their ideas.... their hard work... without any sort of compensation... I think they have the right to be pissed.

This sorta reminds me of a quote from my favorite movie:

"I'll tell you the problem with the scientific power you're using here: it didn't require any discipline to attain it. You read what others had done, and you took the next step. You didn't earn the knowledge for yourselves, so you don't take any responsibility for it. You stood on the shoulders of geniuses to accomplish something as fast as you could, and before you even knew what you had, you've patented it, and packaged it, you've slapped it on a plastic lunchbox, and now you're selling it..."

You're right... that's progress. Everybody borrows from everybody else.

Now imagine if Windows came before the Mac... the G1 came before the iPhone... and the Galaxy Tab came before the iPad. But they didn't.

Apple provides a lot of inspiration... huh...

But wait a minute... why couldn't Microsoft have made WP7? Are you saying they don't have the skills? Why couldn't Palm have made WebOS? Certainly RIM could have dreamed up a touchscreen phone, couldn't they?

You basically just admitted that all these other companies have no vision... no motivation to go in a new direction... unless Apple shows them the way.

Actually... that's not progress at all... that's laziness

I've always thought this was merged in the litigation plan.
With already a "they made us do it" in the mindset customers will more easily accept alternative technology supplies.