or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple's Tim Cook in patent talks with Google CEO Larry Page
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

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

post #81 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shidell View Post

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.

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.
2010 mac mini/iPad OG/iPhone 4/appletv OG/appletv 2/ BT trackpad and keyboard/time capsule/ Wii
Reply
2010 mac mini/iPad OG/iPhone 4/appletv OG/appletv 2/ BT trackpad and keyboard/time capsule/ Wii
Reply
post #82 of 92
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.
post #83 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

Hopefully Apple won't license much away to Google.

 

Fandroids act as if they have a right to use Apple's patents and innovations on their phones and tablets. Guess what, they don't.

 

If it were up to me, fandroids and other Apple haters would still be using nokia, blackberrys and other ancient technologies.

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.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post


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)


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.

post #84 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shidell View Post

If this goes anywhere, it'll end in a cross-licensing deal with no royalties paid either way--and that would be ultimately what a fan of iOS or Android would want.

 

 

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. 

post #85 of 92
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
post #86 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

 

Reminds me of a quote from one of our ex-Prime Ministers, Paul Keating:-

 

Hewson: I ask the Prime Minister: if you are so confident about your view of Fightback, why will you not call an early election?
Keating: The answer is, mate, because I want to do you slowly. There has to be a bit of sport in this for all of us. In the psychological battle stakes, we are stripped down and ready to go. I want to see those ashen-faced performances; I want more of them. I want to be encouraged. I want to see you squirm out of this load of rubbish over a number of months. There will be no easy execution for you. You have perpetrated one of the great mischiefs on the Australian public with this thing, trying to rip away our social wage, trying to rip away the Australian values which we built in our society for over a century.

 

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

"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
post #87 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

 

 

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. 


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.

post #88 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by majjo View Post


That would be the best outcome.
Talented as jobs was at CEO, I'm glad he's dead as his thermonuclear war against android was unrealistic. Hopefully cook is a lot more level headed in dealing with such issues.

 

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.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #89 of 92
Originally Posted by majjo View Post
Perhaps, but is it the best course of action?

 

Yes.

 

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.

 

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

 

SIRI would be much improved if it had better integration with Google search, and access to other Google databases.

 

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.

 

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 the complete outcome yet
Did I miss anything?

 

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.

post #90 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by majjo View Post


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.
 

 

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.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #91 of 92

"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.  

post #92 of 92

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

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple's Tim Cook in patent talks with Google CEO Larry Page