or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple woos chip design guru away from Samsung
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple woos chip design guru away from Samsung - Page 2

post #41 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

Yes it does, but to claim that Apple is creating "original" items, and Samsung isn't is purely naive.

 

So, to take a single example, you wouldn't consider the iPhone, as Apple introduced it in 2007, as an original product?

 

There were plenty of examples of this kind of device before 2007?

 

I'm aware of multiple Samsung devices, but not even one example that changed the world in the way that Apple has, not once, but multiple times.

 

Provide some examples where Samsung has done the same.

Pot is legal in North Korea.
That explains a considerable amount.

"The United States will respond proportionally at a place and time we choose..."
Reply
Pot is legal in North Korea.
That explains a considerable amount.

"The United States will respond proportionally at a place and time we choose..."
Reply
post #42 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

You're hilarious. 

 

By your definition, the concept of originality doesn't exist.

 

It is hard to be original these days as so much has already been done.

 

Apple has done some great things but I'm at a loss at what they have done that is truly original I did some research and come up with the following:

 

iPod.               No. The MPman was done 4 years earlier in 1997

iTunes Music   No.  Ritmoteca.com was out  5 years earlier in 1998

iTunes Player   No.  Winamp was around in 1997

iPhone.           No.   Palm Kyocera 6035 was around 6 years before the iPhone (2001)

App Store.       No.  Handago/InHand was 5 years earlier than the App Store (2008)

iPad                No.  Nokia 7770 Internet tablet was released in 2005.

Siri.                 No.  Google Voice Search was available a year earlier (though the search was not personafied as Siri is)

Maps.              No.  Mapquest, Google Maps, etc...

GUI                 No.  Xerox with the Alto PC (not sold commercially) and the Star.

All-in-one

Computer.        No.  HP put out the first all in one computer in 1972 though Apple turned the concept into commercial successes with the Macintosh and the iMac.

 

So what I've learned from this little research exercise was that while Apple may not have come up with the idea at first, they are extremely good at improving it and making it attractive to the average consumer.   I don't know the innards of Apple history like some people do on this board but I'm open to hearing about Apple's inventions.

post #43 of 88
Why is it these executive level people that always get the credit? It's probably some low level genius engineer's obscure decision that he didn't tell anyone about (and if he had, this guy probably would have been against it because it delays delivery 1 week) that is the reason the chip runs 25% faster than the competition and causes the product to be more of a success.
post #44 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by tooltalk View Post

or work for a copycat for the rest of your life?


It seems like Apple's business strategy  is largely consisted of stealing Samsung's business partners (Intrinsity, Anobity) or stealing employees from Google Maps or Samsung's semi team.  Can Apple do anything original? 

Maybe they can steal you to save us reading your troll posts.
By the way why are you on here ?
post #45 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

Like Apple, Samsung are evolving products that existing previously.

Show the proof.
That's right you can't.
Now back to your troll den to hibernate until you next think up some more utter garbage.
post #46 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

And claiming something paid for is the same as something stolen is very IAU of you.

Pardon? When did I claim anything of the sort?
post #47 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post

So, to take a single example, you wouldn't consider the iPhone, as Apple introduced it in 2007, as an original product?

No I wouldn't
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post

There were plenty of examples of this kind of device before 2007?

Phones? Yes, billions of them. Smartphones? Yes, millions of them sold. Like I said, Apple evolved what was current available.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post

I'm aware of multiple Samsung devices, but not even one example that changed the world in the way that Apple has, not once, but multiple times.

Changing the world? That isn't what you said, you said orignal products, have you finally realised what you said?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post

Provide some examples where Samsung has done the same.

Done what? Your original claim, or the one you have changed to now?
post #48 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

No I wouldn't
Phones? Yes, billions of them. Smartphones? Yes, millions of them sold. Like I said, Apple evolved what was current available.
Changing the world? That isn't what you said, you said orignal products, have you finally realised what you said?
Done what? Your original claim, or the one you have changed to now?

There were billions of types of different phones ? Really !
In your warped logic nothing is original ?
You are wrong on so many levels, even you can't believe yourself and keep a straight face.
So the word invention is meaningless ? You kill me with your brilliant logic.
post #49 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by hfts View Post

There were billions of types of different phones ? Really !
In your warped logic nothing is original ?
You are wrong on so many levels, even you can't believe yourself and keep a straight face.
So the word invention is meaningless ? You kill me with your brilliant logic.

1. I didn't say types, that was you
2. I have already answered that question, read the thread before making false assumptions
3. If I am wrong on so many levels please explain, if you can't, why?
4. What? Why are you confusing the word invention, with the word original? They are different, if you don't understand that, maybe that is why logic escapes you??
post #50 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

 

This is a really good point, but in my experience, the number of folks running parallels (or any kind of Windows virtualisation), on their Mac is dropping off quite a bit lately.  I only see one of these setups every three or four months lately whereas I used to have to deal with them all the time.  I think a lot of folks did the virtualisation thing only as a way of justifying the fact that they were leaving Windows behind, which they eventually did.  

 

Would it be possible to have some kind of co-processor box that runs through Thunderbolt?

post #51 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post


Not one of Apple products etc are original, they are evolution of an existing product or service. Don't confuse a successful item with an original item


By your logic if a scientist comes up with a cure for baldness in a form of a pill, he did not invent anything because pills existed before that.  All he did was improve on a existing product such as tylenol.  That is great logic.  How can anyone ever again be an inventor in your world?  The iPhone wasn't just an improvement on existing products it was a revolution and very original.  Go back and look at the history of apple and take a look at the products they came out with only to have the industry follow in their foot steps (sometimes to close *cough* *cough* Samsung *cough* *cough*).

 

Samsung isn't a slouch, of course they come out with better products year after year because technology improves so that's a given but you can't possibly say they are on Apple's level for creativity.  Samsung slavishly copies whatever the new technology fad is, Apple the majority of the time starts those fads. 

 

We get it though, you hate Apple, but give credit where credit is due.

post #52 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jivanile View Post


jfanning you sir are an idiot.  I don't like to insult people but I'm making an exception this one time.  You need to know it so you can maybe think before you say things.  By your logic if a scientist comes up with a cure for baldness in a form of a pill, he did not invent anything because pills existed before that.  All he did was improve on a existing product such as tylenol.  That is great logic.  How can anyone ever again be an inventor in your world?  The iPhone wasn't just an improvement on existing products it was a revolution and very original.  Go back and look at the history of apple and take a look at the products they came out with only to have the industry follow in their foot steps (sometimes to close *cough* *cough* Samsung *cough* *cough*).

 

Samsung isn't a slouch, of course they come out with better products year after year because technology improves so that's a given but you can't possibly say they are on Apple's level for creativity.  Samsung slavishly copies whatever the new technology fad is, Apple the majority of the time starts those fads. 

 

We get it though, you hate Apple, but give credit where credit is due.

 

Haters let hatred affects their judgement, you know.

post #53 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Now, we like to throw the word 'trolling' around a lot, and it's mostly valid, sometimes not.

 

Explain how the content of this post is not anything but pure, unacceptable lying. This is not a request.


Intrinsity was a Samsung partner that developed the Hummingbird soc for Samsung.  Apple bought Intrinsity after they had worked for Samsung. So what he said is not a lie, unless you want to redifine the term, which wouldn't surprise me.

 

The very topic of this article involves Apple poaching talent from Samsung, as he stated, so if he's lying, so is this AI article.

 

Here is the AI article about Apple hiring Google Maps engineers to fix their own mess: http://appleinsider.com/articles/12/09/23/apple_allegedly_luring_ex_google_maps_engineers_to_work_on_ios_6_maps

 

 

Quote:

Apple confirms Anobit acquisition: A strategic hit to Samsung?

...

But perhaps worryingly for Samsung -- an Anobit customer

 

 

As a moderator, you should not be slandering people.

post #54 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post


Intrinsity was a Samsung partner that developed the Hummingbird soc for Samsung.  Apple bought Intrinsity after they had worked for Samsung. So what he said is not a lie, unless you want to redifine the term, which wouldn't surprise me.

 

The very topic of this article involves Apple poaching talent from Samsung, as he stated, so if he's lying, so is this AI article.

 

Here is the AI article about Apple hiring Google Maps engineers to fix their own mess: http://appleinsider.com/articles/12/09/23/apple_allegedly_luring_ex_google_maps_engineers_to_work_on_ios_6_maps

 

 

Intrinsity was not 'poached', it was bought. It was a company, a separate entity from Samsung.

 

Apple didn't hire Google Map engineers; they hired 'ex' Google map engineers. This implies they weren't working for Google when Apple approached them, so again, there was no poaching.

 

And of course, the IT press will use the word 'poached' because it makes hit-worthy copy. In reality, he probably saw an ad in a trade journal, sent his resume, went for an interview, was offered a job, and left Samsung. That's what 95% of the population does.

 

It's called 'getting a better job'.

post #55 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jivanile View Post


jfanning you sir are an idiot. 

Maybe you should read the rules of this site then, personal insults are not permitted, but if that is the only way you can argue something, then what do I expect?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jivanile View Post

We get it though, you hate Apple, but give credit where credit is due.

That's right this is Appleinsider, what is it, Rule 99? If you disagree you are labelled a hater? Now of course I could reply to this, but someone will pop up another AI rule that rubbishes what I say.

I don't hate Apple, I don't like lies used as truth.
post #56 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

Maybe you should read the rules of this site then, personal insults are not permitted, but if that is the only way you can argue something, then what do I expect?
That's right this is Appleinsider, what is it, Rule 99? If you disagree you are labelled a hater? Now of course I could reply to this, but someone will pop up another AI rule that rubbishes what I say.
I don't hate Apple, I don't like lies used as truth.

I'm going to have to agree with Jivanile on this one, fanning.

What you're wafting our way doesn't smell very nice.

I've seen some pretty staggering claims on this site but, as a rule, generally the person making the claims actually believes what they are saying. But to openly claim lack of recognition of what the iPhone did? Nobody could be that stupid.

Could they?

And what would be the point of discussing anything with a person with such an incredible lack of perception?

If they couldn't see that, they're never going to see anything.

Try not to 'blow' so much in the future, fanning.
Pot is legal in North Korea.
That explains a considerable amount.

"The United States will respond proportionally at a place and time we choose..."
Reply
Pot is legal in North Korea.
That explains a considerable amount.

"The United States will respond proportionally at a place and time we choose..."
Reply
post #57 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post


Yes it does, but to claim that Apple is creating "original" items, and Samsung isn't is purely naive.

 

I don't want to be mean to you, but you're understanding of mobile technologies pre-iPhone era seams to be pretty narrow. 

 

Apple greatest strength always has been it's abilities to take heavy and experimental technologies and bringing it to mass market.  Apple has done it countless times upon is +30 years of existence with many of their products. 

 

Now, was the iPhone is in the same innovation league of the nuclear bomb? Sure not, but looking back of the past 30 years, the iPhone is still a undoubtful hallmark in the still short computer's history. 

post #58 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMac2 View Post

I don't want to be mean to you, but you're understanding of mobile technologies pre-iPhone era seams to be pretty narrow. 

Narrow? Nope, at a guess I would assume it is well in excess of your understanding. To claim that there wasn't phones before the iPhone is naive, to claim there wasn't smartphones before the iPhone is naive, to claim there wasn't touch screen phones before the iPhone is naive.

Apple has evolved the smartphone, touchscreen, they are not an original device.

To compare it would be like Samsung releasing a new TV and everyone claimed it was original, it can't be, they are have around for decades, they are just evolving previous ones.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMac2 View Post

Apple greatest strength always has been it's abilities to take heavy and experimental technologies and bringing it to mass market.  Apple has done it countless times upon is +30 years of existence with many of their products. 

What does that have to do with someone claiming all Apple products are original?
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMac2 View Post

Now, was the iPhone is in the same innovation league of the nuclear bomb? Sure not, but looking back of the past 30 years, the iPhone is still a undoubtful hallmark in the still short computer's history. 

Again, do you understand what the work original means?

Let's look at the Apple dictionary…

original |əˈrɪdʒɪn(ə)l, ɒ-|
adjective
1 present or existing from the beginning; first or earliest: the original owner of the house | the plasterwork is probably original.
2 created personally by a particular artist, writer, musician, etc.; not a copy: original Rembrandts.
3 not dependent on other people's ideas; inventive or novel: a subtle and original thinker.

Well for number 1, nope, number 3, nope. Number 2, well I suppose you could throw Apple in there, but then every company that creates something can be called original (afterall Samsung made the oven I have)
post #59 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post

I'm going to have to agree with Jivanile on this one, fanning.

What a surprise
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post

What you're wafting our way doesn't smell very nice.

When reading this all I can picture is someone with their hands over their ears shouting "nah nah nah I can't hear you"
post #60 of 88

So Apple used to have spy in samsung's ground?

post #61 of 88
Originally Posted by fatusmiles View Post
So Apple used to have spy in samsung's ground?

 

No, that's not at all what this says.

 

We really need to have a Hindi-translated page, apparently.

post #62 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

No, that's not at all what this says.

 

We really need to have a Hindi-translated page, apparently.

 

 

 

FYI i am not Hindi...so tell me what have been said?

post #63 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post


Narrow? Nope, at a guess I would assume it is well in excess of your understanding. To claim that there wasn't phones before the iPhone is naive, to claim there wasn't smartphones before the iPhone is naive, to claim there wasn't touch screen phones before the iPhone is naive.
Apple has evolved the smartphone, touchscreen, they are not an original device.
To compare it would be like Samsung releasing a new TV and everyone claimed it was original, it can't be, they are have around for decades, they are just evolving previous ones.
What does that have to do with someone claiming all Apple products are original

Wow this is comical.  TV went from black & white to color a very long time ago.  Went from tube to flat screens not that many years ago.  If you think those were not significant and just pass them off as minor improvements tells me a lot about your hard to please attitude.  A TV going from 40 inches deep to 2 or 3 inches deep and hanging up on a wall is innovation, not just a improvement.  It's not just creating a new case for it, it involves a lot of engineering.  Those are just a few examples and I don't know the history of Televisions to know how much Samsung is involved in any of those inventions but I know what I see when I go to a electronic store or a Appliance Store and that is Samsung products look just like all the others which makes me believe they play it safe and copy. 

Just because it's a existing product doesn't mean it can't be re-invented. 

Blackberry was a smartphone available before the iPhone made its debut.  What was so smart about it, you could recieve emails and send them out.  Obviously for people in certain job fields it was necessary.  It was not ideal for anything else we associate with smart phones today which brought it to mass appeal.  It wasn't used to browse internet the way smart phones are used today, it wasn't a gaming platform for so many like it is today, it wasn't used to keep track of people's various accounts with apps, it wasn't used as a gps like it is today, It wasn't a multimedia player like it used today.  In fact no smartphone prior to iPhone did anything of practical use and those are just a few examples. 

For some people like my girlfriend, since getting an iPhone 4, she hasn't used her laptop in months.  Her laptop had died, I put some money into fixing it and she used it 3 or 4 times, at the beginning, after I fixed it and upgraded it to Windows 7, and has since not been turned on, which was 3 or 4 months ago. 

Guess your right iPhone 4 didn't change a thing just put a little paint on the smart phones that existed before it and fooled us all into thinking they changed the game. 

post #64 of 88

Innovation makes our work easier and better. Though, some of them are quite stressful... Not working app and complaining about the this and that stuff.

post #65 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jivanile View Post

Wow this is comical.  TV went from black & white to color a very long time ago.  Went from tube to flat screens not that many years ago.  If you think those were not significant and just pass them off as minor improvements tells me a lot about your hard to please attitude.  A TV going from 40 inches deep to 2 or 3 inches deep and hanging up on a wall is innovation, not just a improvement.  It's not just creating a new case for it, it involves a lot of engineering.  Those are just a few examples and I don't know the history of Televisions to know how much Samsung is involved in any of those inventions but I know what I see when I go to a electronic store or a Appliance Store and that is Samsung products look just like all the others which makes me believe they play it safe and copy. 
Just because it's a existing product doesn't mean it can't be re-invented. 
Blackberry was a smartphone available before the iPhone made its debut.  What was so smart about it, you could recieve emails and send them out.  Obviously for people in certain job fields it was necessary.  It was not ideal for anything else we associate with smart phones today which brought it to mass appeal.  It wasn't used to browse internet the way smart phones are used today, it wasn't a gaming platform for so many like it is today, it wasn't used to keep track of people's various accounts with apps, it wasn't used as a gps like it is today, It wasn't a multimedia player like it used today.  In fact no smartphone prior to iPhone did anything of practical use and those are just a few examples. 
For some people like my girlfriend, since getting an iPhone 4, she hasn't used her laptop in months.  Her laptop had died, I put some money into fixing it and she used it 3 or 4 times, at the beginning, after I fixed it and upgraded it to Windows 7, and has since not been turned on, which was 3 or 4 months ago. 
Guess your right iPhone 4 didn't change a thing just put a little paint on the smart phones that existed before it and fooled us all into thinking they changed the game. 

You seem to be getting a little bit emotional about all of this.

How can you claim what Apple does is original, then claim Samsung does nothing original?

The above rant has nothing to do with the claim that is being discussed, absolutetly nothing.
post #66 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post


Narrow? Nope, at a guess I would assume it is well in excess of your understanding. To claim that there wasn't phones before the iPhone is naive, to claim there wasn't smartphones before the iPhone is naive, to claim there wasn't touch screen phones before the iPhone is naive.

 

Comparing iOS to Symbian of PalmOS is more like comparing DOS and Windows95. In that case, name me one original product, you will found any.

Before the iPhone their was no smartphone OS on par with Desktop OS functionality and development environment, most of them was using Java based apps only, you fail to acknowledge this. The iPhone has redefine what is a smartphone and rendered every smartphone made before obsolete, falling to see how the phone industry was change because of the iPhone is naive

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post


Again, do you understand what the work original means?
Let's look at the Apple dictionary…
original |əˈrɪdʒɪn(ə)l, ɒ-|
adjective
1 present or existing from the beginning; first or earliest: the original owner of the house | the plasterwork is probably original.
2 created personally by a particular artist, writer, musician, etc.; not a copy: original Rembrandts.
3 not dependent on other people's ideas; inventive or novel: a subtle and original thinker.
Well for number 1, nope, number 3, nope. Number 2, well I suppose you could throw Apple in there, but then every company that creates something can be called original (afterall Samsung made the oven I have)

 

Again according to your "cultural" definition of original works you can't find any example of original tech gadget, all tech gadget that have been created is based on previous technologies.  You may dismiss the iPhone "Originality" but you can't ignore the iPhone "innovation", in this regard Apple got the best examples of original products when you compare with other tech corp who's only following someone else path.


Edited by BigMac2 - 10/17/12 at 10:37am
post #67 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMac2 View Post

Before the iPhone their was no smartphone OS on par with Desktop OS functionality and development environment, most of them was using Java based apps only, you fail to acknowledge this. The iPhone has redefine what is a smartphone and rendered every smartphone made before obsolete, falling to see how the phone industry was change because of the iPhone is naive

Actually no, before the iPhone (and remember the iPhone when released was not a smartphone, it couldn't run native apps) the vast majority of smartphones ran S60, which ran native apps. This is one reason why I have "failed" to acknowledge it, the second reason is you have only just raised it.

Making every smartphone before it obsolete? Wow, I think you won with that one. You seem to be confusing innovation with an original item. I have no issue in seeing what impact the iPhone has had, I am happy to admit that it did a lot better than I thought it would do. Does that make it an original item, no sorry it doesn't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMac2 View Post

Again according to your "cultural" definition of original works you can't find any example of original tech gadget, all tech gadget that have been created is based on previous technologies.  You may dismiss the iPhone "Originality" but you can't ignore the iPhone "innovation", in this regard Apple got the best examples of original products when you compare with other tech corp who's only following someone else path.

My "cultural definition"?? Nope, Apple's. Now in saying that, you can call the iPhone original if you want, but you can't then claim that Samsung doesn't do anything original, because they do.
post #68 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post


My "cultural definition"?? Nope, Apple's. Now in saying that, you can call the iPhone original if you want, but you can't then claim that Samsung doesn't do anything original, because they do.

 

Looking back at Apple history, you see who is leading the path and who's following. 

post #69 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMac2 View Post

Looking back at Apple history, you see who is leading the path and who's following. 

Samsung makes a lot more than just cellphones and laptops
post #70 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jivanile View Post

By your logic if a scientist comes up with a cure for baldness in a form of a pill, he did not invent anything because pills existed before that.  All he did was improve on a existing product such as tylenol.  That is great logic.  How can anyone ever again be an inventor in your world?  The iPhone wasn't just an improvement on existing products it was a revolution and very original.  Go back and look at the history of apple and take a look at the products they came out with only to have the industry follow in their foot steps (sometimes to close *cough* *cough* Samsung *cough* *cough*).

You seem to be getting confused quite easily with this simple concept, why are you trying to a pill to an implementation of a pill? Do you group all consumer electronic items into one category?

Also, how is Samsung following Apple in the design of TV's, Ovens, Fridges, Washing Machines, heavy engineering etc?
post #71 of 88
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post
Also, how is Samsung following Apple in the design of TV's, Ovens, Fridges, Washing Machines, heavy engineering etc?

 

Gotta be smarter than that. It's not Apple they copy, but they certainly copy.

post #72 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post


Samsung makes a lot more than just cellphones and laptops

 

And of which Samsung is leading? none.

post #73 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Gotta be smarter than that. It's not Apple they copy, but they certainly copy.

If you are making claims like that then please follow up with the evidence
post #74 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMac2 View Post

And of which Samsung is leading? none.

Well for starters they are the top sellers of cellphones in the World, that is one measure of "leading". They are also top in TV sales (which isn't necessarily a good thing considering how much these companies lose on TVs). They also seem to be leading in a number of their industries
post #75 of 88
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post
If you are making claims like that then please follow up with the evidence

 

Sure thing.


Originally Posted by jfanning View Post
Well for starters they are the top sellers of cellphones in the World, that is one measure of "leading".
 

McDonald's sells the most "food". They must be "leading". 

 

Your argument is nonsense.

post #76 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Sure thing.

Super, lets see it
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

McDonald's sells the most "food". They must be "leading". 

Your argument is nonsense.

No it isn't. You just don't like that fact that it is correct. So you can prove it wrong please post that proof
post #77 of 88
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post
No it isn't. You just don't like that fact that it is correct. So you can prove it wrong please post that proof

 

Are you frigging kidding me. Is this a real… 

 

😞

post #78 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Are you frigging kidding me. Is this a real… 

😞

Hmm strange, I replied to this, but now it is gone? Strange, all I did was to ask you to show me the evidence, or shutup, but the post has been deleted. How strange, any reason why? And while you are at it, how about providing said proof that Samsung is not an industry leader in fields they compete in?
post #79 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post


Well for starters they are the top sellers of cellphones in the World, that is one measure of "leading". They are also top in TV sales (which isn't necessarily a good thing considering how much these companies lose on TVs). They also seem to be leading in a number of their industries

 

So you are defining leadership has the one who move the most crap in distribution channel, because the last time I've check Samsung only gave shipped number not sold.  Beside the Galaxy S III can you name me another world leading product from Samsung? Guess not.

post #80 of 88
Originally Posted by BigMac2 View Post
Beside the Galaxy S III can you name me another world leading product from Samsung? Guess not.

 

Why are you setting that aside? It doesn't even fit the bill, either.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple woos chip design guru away from Samsung