Apple's Tim Cook in patent talks with Google CEO Larry Page - Page 3

Samsung is just a component manufacturing company. If Google and MS refuse to give OS to Samsung, they will not be able to sell a single phone in the market. THat would be really funny.

Koreans just know how to assemble parts. They will not be able to make a decent OS in the next 50 years.
 

 

They have Bada and could use Brew, there are alternatives.

if you think Stock Android is somehow a rip-off of iOS despite the blatant differences then you'd definitely feel the same about Bada

You are "glad he's dead"..... very sub human of you.

Do you really not know what he means by that statement?

Or are you offended over semantics?

 

Do you really think that any context or pretense for saying that is acceptable?

 

Does it matter? Whether you want to accept it or not, members of this site will be "glad" when Andy Rubin is gone too.

 

It's the nature of fanboyism.

 

The difference is we don't have to accept anything we don't want to here. We don't accept spam, so it's expunged, you see.

Really? You mean the ultimate reward for a stolen product is... legitimacy through cross licensing deals? Why would a fan of iOS want that? (not that it's all being done for their benefit)

Have you ever tried Bada? I for one have not but you seem to be sure it's a better alternative or at least a non infringing one. It doesn't look much different from Android.
Edited by dasanman69 - 8/30/12 at 6:52pm

 

 

So what relevance does your post have to my response to the original post?

 

You seem to be attributing a strange power of things not existing based on how you think I feel about them.

 

 

I did not offer an opinion on whether it's better or non-infringing, I merely pointed out that alternatives exist and that, in spite of what the post I was replying to was saying, Samsung has options besides Android and Mobile Windows Windows Mobile Metro Tango Mango (whatever the f**k they want to call it).

That's an interesting assumption. I'm a member of this site and I certainly don't wish nor would I be glad that anyone at Google, Samsung, HTC, etc. we're dead.

I do not agree with his wording but I don't think he's literally GLAD that Jobs is no longer alive. I would've worded it differently, but to act as if it's the end of the world is a bit ridiculous.

That's a problem with any technologies. As companies are in it longer, they start to build up baggage. Right now Apple is likely feeling some sense of design restriction as they don't want to break apps. It happens. Anyway on the topic of cross licensing, assuming Apple needs access to something that belongs to Google, it has to be an equitable deal. It's likely that Google wants to include things in stock Android that would be close enough to some of Apple's broad patent interpretations. This means it's easier to have licensing in place and avoid leaving it as an unknown factor. If you look at many of Apple's claims, the ones I've seen have little to do with stock Android.

 

 

Has it ever been proven as a stolen product? I'd like to know why you guys think Andy Rubin ended up on Apple's board apart from his past experience at Android. Whether or not you believe it, the official record is that he waited outside during meetings which would result in a potential conflict of interest.

 

 

Yea, right. Perhaps that was the deal Apple made with Microsoft. Google, however, mostly only owns standard essential patents that it has to license to Apple. As seen by the Samsung's lawsuit, Apple's patents are far more valuable. If this were to happen, Google would pay something. 

More likely than all the silly fantasies proposed here, Tim probably just wants Google to ask OEMs to stop molding android into an iOS clone. Android itself is not a clone of iOS. Touchwiz.. maybe you have some argument there. After all, Google DID ask Samsung to divert from their me-too path of imitating Apple

 

Haha, Keating did some great work ripping shreds off of opposing politicians. Alot of it is on youtube, too.

That's not necessarily true. The default rate offering may be much  higher than Apple would like, and really we don't even know what patents each company wishes to use. It's just too little information to really form a solid conclusion.

 

You think a patent lawsuit is a valid reason for being pleased someone is dead? So if I wanted to throw the legal system at whoever stole my car last year, would you be glad to see me dead? I guess so. And that makes you some kind of psychopath.

Perhaps, but is it the best course of action?
If Apple went the Microsoft route and license their patents to Samsung... ok, so Samsung refused at $30/handset. Say Apple offers it at $1 per patent, so $3 for all 3 utility patents, an offer Samsung would be retarded to refuse. Well Samsung sells 30ish million smartphones per quarter, so that's 90M back to Apple every quarter. In less than 3 years they would've made that 1Billion they just won, AND have lucuative contracts going forward, AND not have nearly as much legal expenses.

In addition, They wouldn't be actively trying to move away from Samsung and end up sourcing subpar LG screens for their iPads, or be flat out refused an exclusive agreement with TSMC.

Plus without the bad blood between Google and Apple, they wouldn't have to dedicate resources to developing their own mapping software, and SIRI would be much improved if it had better integration with Google search, and access to other Google databases.

Of course:

Australia: Injunction against the tab has been overturned
Netherlands: Apple loses against tab on appeal
UK: Apple lost and has to publically apologize to Samsung (stayed, as noted)
Germany: Apple wins aganist the tab, but has its slide to unlock claim thrown out, and is in danger of having its bouceback patent invalidated
South Korea: Tie I think? They both infringe, don't know what that really means yet

Did I miss anything?
Edited by majjo - 8/30/12 at 9:33pm

 

Yes.

 

 

Guess who offered to license. Guess who turned them down and stole the IP anyway.

 

 

I doubt that. Access to Google databases is something many people would be against, even without Android. Google's not too big for their britches, but they're growing eyes out the wazoo.

 

 

Yeah, the point. They won in the US. I don't meant to sound exceptionalistic or isolationist when I say that, but they got the big one and they got it good. It's the first step to getting the other companies too scared to continue business with Android, at least in the US. And that's where it matters.

 

Now that Samsung has been found guilty, it is a lot easier for Apple to go for triple damages, suddenly getting THAT money back over nine years of licensing doesn't look so good.

I disagree. I see the potential gains of a good relationship with Samsung and Google as much more rewarding than a desire for revenge.

At the price Apple was offering; I'm saying its still better at $1 per than to litigate.
lol. Your language is colorful as always. Have it opt in then. I think you overestimate the amount of people actually concerned about their privacy. Have you looked at what people post to facebook lately?
That said, I've been using Google services (search, primary e-mail, maps) since 2004. I've had no issues with privacy.

I'm sorry, but while the US is the most visible market, globally, its not the end all be all of everything. China alone is approaching (or has surpassed) the US' size. Add that to Europe, Japan and the rest of Asia, and I don't view the US market as that important. EU, for the most part has rejected Apple's claims. Asia remains to be seen.

edit: and Japan just ruled against Apple as well, another large market.
Edited by majjo - 8/30/12 at 10:10pm

Based on what I've read about the case, it seems like triple damages are unlikely.

and keep in mind my numbers were low, only included the 3 utility patents, and only for Samsung, just to show how much potential there is in terms of licensing.

"Having a phone conversation" and "ongoing discussions" are extremely vague phrases.  You could pretty much let your imagination run wild on the subject.  The topic of the call could be anything from "Eric, this is your last warning" to "How are the kids?" (if Schimdt has kids) and everything in between.  I know the rumor-mill is working overtime recently, but really?  Who knows, maybe Tim found Eric's keys in the boardroom or something.  Hardly worth reporting unless there is something a little more descriptive.  On the other hand, it did get me to respond, so I guess the article did its job.  

Does the word Cartel still have coinage in the American language?