or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Samsung points to anti-Apple ads as 'tipping point' for company
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Samsung points to anti-Apple ads as 'tipping point' for company - Page 2

post #41 of 92
Advertising is intended to compliment well-designed products that literally sell themselves. If you have to advertise "against" a competitor, you are doing something fundamentally wrong.
post #42 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by 11thIndian View Post

Sorry.  I don't get how ads that insult the user make me want to use their product.  And I think ads like these fly right over the heads of people who aren't "techie enough" to be aligned with any particular platform.

I don't think it's all that important to understand what Samsung's feature does. For a lot of people that see the commercials they only remember that Samsung phones do some kind of cool stuff that iPhones don't. They just don't really remember exactly what that cool stuff was. That's my opinion anyway.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #43 of 92
It's not surprising to hear of the company's continual investment in R&D. Espionage is getting more and more expensive these days.
post #44 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmncl View Post

I'll never buy anything sold by Samsung.

Apple uses a lot of Samsung parts in their iOS devices. Are you going to boycott Apple?

 

Edit: andrzejls beat me to it

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #45 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrzejls View Post


How is you iPhone and iPad doing?. You will have to trow them away, they have a lot of Samsung parts. But you just to stupid to know it.

Or maybe he's smart enough to realize that the Samsung components divisions do not have the history of blatant theft of Samsung's mobile division.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #46 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by 11thIndian View Post

Sorry.  I don't get how ads that insult the user make me want to use their product.  And I think ads like these fly right over the heads of people who aren't "techie enough" to be aligned with any particular platform.

Because the overwhelmingly majority of iPhone buyers don't wait in line so many of them wouldn't feel insulted.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #47 of 92
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post
"if you think about it, we're a Korean company starting to really mess with the order of things."

 

And if you think about it, all the US has to do is pull its troops off the peninsula and say, "have at 'er," to really mess with the order of things. I'm sure Samsung wouldn't mind communism; they already operate under the belief that no one owns anything. 

post #48 of 92

Apple should hire a small ad agency to make a series of "unofficial" viral ads which really put Samsung in their place.  These ads should not be officially connected to Apple, but should do what the Swiftboat ads did to John Kerry or the 47% thing did to Romney.  Funny and raw viral films which make people think what side they want to be on.

post #49 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


Or maybe he's smart enough to realize that the Samsung components divisions do not have the history of blatant theft of Samsung's mobile division.


I am pretty sure that some of their floor sweepers do not have that history, so what is your point?. You still have Samsung components in iPhone and iPad. Please let us know where you will be trowing Apple products so we can go and pick it up.

post #50 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikilok View Post

You know Samsung's just a cheap carbon copy of the iPhone. They are only there because of the inefficiencies in the patent system internationally.

In another day and age with stronger patents and faster outputs, companies like Samsung wouldn't even exist. So Samsung's not a challenger, but a cheap skate copy cat.

And what do you know people buying Samsung phone's are actually liking them for all the stuff they copied from the iPhone.

 

Of course, if the patent system worked like you wanted it to internationally, Apple would never have been able to get off the ground.  I think Xerox would have stopped their initial work, then MS would have stopped them in the 90s with more patents, and then apple wouldn't be able to make a smart phone at all, because the patent minefield owned by the likes of nokia, samsung, motorolla, qualcomm, etc would have stopped them in their tracks.  The system needs a balance between benefiting existing patent holders while at the same time not strangling up and coming companies from doing anything that builds upon systems that have already been built.

 

The entire tech industry has built off itself incredibly rapidly, this wouldn't have happened if companies could patent every basic idea that is obvious, and then block anyone else from using anything that remotely builds off the idea.  Although there are countless patent trolls extorting money from everyone, for the most part, they can't block people from using their technology.

 

The majority of Apple's iphone patents are slowly being proven to be unenforceable (rubberbanding, pinch to zoom, etc), and rightfully so.  At the bare minimum, the courts are not going to ban every other company from building products that also leverage these patents.  Apple has made hundreds of billions of dollars by being the first company to come out with this technology.  Their research has paid back tremendously.  Of course, the apple zealots out here won't be happy until Apple is given a monopoly based solely on their initial achievements.  

 

At the end of the day, you can't have it both ways.  You should be happy that Apple has been so successful in the past by coming out with revolutionary products (while simultaneously building upon the work of countless other companies).  They couldn't do that if a company was allowed to completely block competition with their patent portfolio, and the consumers of the world would be completely screwed by the power of the resulting corporations.

 

But, anything that doesn't make apple stronger must be eliminated...

 

Phil

post #51 of 92
I think marketing and ethics are related. Apple as far as I know has not mocked the customers of their competitors except indirectly in the 'I'm a PC and I'm a Mac' ads. That was very gentle.

The Samsung campaign is negative campaigning. Its Capitalism, but it's not the best ethics, and today the ethical basis of contemporary Capitalism is in question. I feel there is something nasty rooted in Samsung's corporate culture and it emerges in various different ways.

To achieve their relative success against Apple they have had to a) spend considerably more on marketing b) employ negative campaigning c) use astroturfing methods on web forums. In the case of the latter two elements I don't find this terribly ethical.
post #52 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmncl View Post

I'll never buy anything sold by Samsung.

Apple uses a lot of Samsung parts in their iOS devices. Are you going to boycott Apple?

 

Edit: andrzejls beat me to it

different things.

 

samsung sells the best screens to apple, for example. They prefer to use worse screens on their own devices, like the s4. Nice strategy to fool ignorant people.

 

Heck, their new ativ book 9 plus won't even use the same fast SSDs the macbook air uses, not to mention weaker intel graphics. It's all about misinformation and fooling those retards. The screen itself is already outdated by the 2012 gen retina MBP, despite higher resolution, and Samsung sold at least a few of those screens.

 

But some "parts" of samsung are awesome. They can't design or engineer something by themselves without the brains from other companies (like Apple designing the chips) but they for sure can manufacture stuff. On the other hand, their lack of brains and honor is what kills industries. They have a whole country to support them and close their eyes when needed. I bet even Hwaei and ZTE are jealous.

 

Having said that, samsung is shitty and bad at engineering something new. It makes you think that even the s4 needs a snapdragon 600, already surpassed by the s800 used on other devices (but even spec whores don't care.. why? stupidity) and the s600 beats the sh*t out of the exynos octa on real world usage.

 

Besides the manufactoring, it's a sub-par company based on corruption lies and stupidity.

 

jmncl is right.

post #53 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendergast View Post


Aren't we talking modern Apple, i.e. post-iMac?

The issue was whether Apple's famous Mac vs PC ads are different that Samsung's current anti-Apple ads.

Well the OP said "The PC USER was never brought into the comparison in Apple's ads, only the machines" and I was pointing out that they indeed mocked the PC user.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #54 of 92
Yes, Samsung has done well lacquering itself with Apple stickers.
post #55 of 92

Not to mention all the work Apple has given to so many of the pacific rim countries but particularly to Samsung. 

post #56 of 92

Those Samsung ads we're mean spirited, belittling, condescending , and misleading.

 

That works on a lot Americans.

post #57 of 92
Apple did the exact same thing but more cleverly with I'm a Mac. I'm a PC.

MS is trying to do the same with ads poking fun @ Siri.

Apple threw the first rocks so they better throw some more or toughen up their elegant glass house.
post #58 of 92

>Apple did the exact same thing but more cleverly with I'm a Mac. I'm a PC.

 

No, they did not.

 

Apple attacked a PRODUCT in their ads, Samsung attacked USERS of products.

 

Apple says: PCs computers aren't good.

Samsung says: iPhone USERS aren't good.

 

Microsoft is doing what Apple did - just much less successfully.

post #59 of 92

Negative advertising is all they got. Nobody wants a Samsung.

post #60 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by philgar View Post

Of course, if the patent system worked like you wanted it to internationally, Apple would never have been able to get off the ground.  I think Xerox would have stopped their initial work, then MS would have stopped them in the 90s with more patents

No need to go beyond that point. Clearly, you don't have a clue what you're talking about.

Hint: Apple LICENSED what they got from Xerox. They didn't steal it.

http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/08/10/xerox-parc-the-apple-inc-macintosh-innovator-duplicator-litigator
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #61 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleZilla View Post

Negative advertising is all they got. Nobody wants a Samsung.

So whowere those 100 million galaxy s+s2+s3+s4+note+note2 users?

post #62 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by pedromartins View Post

So whowere those 100 million galaxy s+s2+s3+s4+note+note2 users?

A whole lot of nobodies.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #63 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


Well the OP said "The PC USER was never brought into the comparison in Apple's ads, only the machines" and I was pointing out that they indeed mocked the PC user.

 

And if you'll note, my original reply was specifically in reference to a message about the MAC/PC campaign.

post #64 of 92

F U Samscum!! At the end of the day it doesn't matter who sells more phones.. or who makes the most profit.. quality products will always have a market. Even if Apple sells a Million phones per quarter.. It will still be a relevant brand and people who appreciate and are loyal to that brand will always purchase their products. Just like how different brands of cars sell differently in volume.  Ford sells X amounts more than Mercs but do Mercedes give a pigs shit?

I must also stress.. the reason why the S4 is so shit and lack of any innovation is because they are always waiting on Apple to bring out the next big functionality so they can copy it.

post #65 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

And if you think about it, all the US has to do is pull its troops off the peninsula and say, "have at 'er," to really mess with the order of things. I'm sure Samsung wouldn't mind communism; they already operate under the belief that no one owns anything. 

Not over a copyist. Besides, commercial interests aren't enough to motivate troop movements. The cold war is still on with North Korea, and a withdraw would not be wise for the security of the entire region.

"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 #66 of 92
Samsung's cheek in advertising may come back to bite them in the rear. You know, what goes around %u2026

Based on their copying and infringing antics and marketing tactics I will never buy any product Samsung manufactures. They should think about how customers react to negative business tactics.
post #67 of 92

New Androids handsets come out weekly..

 

Only goes to show, you throw enough shit at the walls, eventually some sticks I guess.

post #68 of 92

Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post
Not over a copyist. Besides, commercial interests aren't enough to motivate troop movements. The cold war is still on with North Korea, and a withdraw would not be wise for the security of the entire region.

 

No, no; of course not. I brought it up to highlight that they're equally idiotic statements.

post #69 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Hint: Apple LICENSED what they got from Xerox. They didn't steal it.

 

Not according to Xerox.

 

In their lawsuit against Apple, Xerox stated that they had only licensed Apple for a joint Smalltalk project.

 

Quote:

"In November of 1979, Steven Jobs, then-president of Apple, visited PARC with other Apple employees for a demonstration of Smalltalk.

 

On June 9, 1981, Xerox granted Apple a license pursuant to which Apple agreed to "participate in a project with the Learning Research Group at PARC/Xerox for the purpose of implementing the Smalltalk-80 language and system on a hardware system to be developed by [Apple]."

 

Shortly thereafter, Apple began developing its "Lisa" computer for use with Smalltalk."

 

...

 

Another Xerox research project, Star, was developed at PARC in the late 1970s. Star included a mouse-driven computer that was allegedly the first to introduce fanciful visual displays and graphical images to aid user interaction with the computer.

 

Star was first published by Xerox on April 27, 1981 and since then has contained a notice of copyright. Xerox applied for copyright registration of the Star 8010 Professional Workstation program on April 28, 1986, and was granted Registration No. TX 2-428-306.

 

This program was never licensed to Apple.

 

...

 

On May 1, 1987, Apple applied for copyright registration for the Lisa and received Registration No. PA 336-104. Lisa was first published in 1983, two years after publication of Star.

 

- Xerox

 

Xerox' lawsuit claimed that "Apple unlawfully copied portions of Xerox' Star work" and "purposefully failed to identify" Lisa and Finder as "derivative works of Star and Smalltalk."


Edited by KDarling - 8/13/13 at 1:06pm
post #70 of 92
Attack and attack is all Samsung can do instead of proofing they are better which actually not. Their resell value down while iPhone's up, this should tell you what to choose. Attacking is also a strategy to regain loosing point in the football game by the loosing team and Apple the winning team will even score more by digging into the affordable segment of the market by selling an entry level iPhones coming next. And this may scares competitor even more, just wait and see.
post #71 of 92

Samsung definitely gained a lot of momentum and especially share when it comes to phones. They move a ton of them, no question.

 

However, instead of even considering using the phrase "valuable brand", I'd rather associate their recent success with the incredible shitload of money they spend on advertising. Both classic advertising, as well as smear campaigns against competitors, false reviews and carrier provisions. All of this aggressive marketing is naturally paying off.

 

However, I would not even think for a minute that Samsung is highly considered as a brand, especially not even close when compared to Apple. People buy Samsung either because of price or because of their marketing push, not because they think Samsung is such a great brand.

 

Next time we see a list of most valuable brands as per consumer perception, I'm sure Samsung won't be amongst them. Samsung is a quantity leader, not an industry leader, not inspiring and not innovative in any way and I don't think people actually perceive Samsung to be any of those.

post #72 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chandra69 View Post

That says all about the Samscum's corporate ethics.

 

One bozo is up at the Samsung executive desk. Wow!

 

It wasn't really all that long ago that Apple's entire ad campaign was about paying tribute to "the crazy ones" who messed with the order of things. And now it's a slam on a company's ethics? Or more recently the Mac vs PC ads which poked fun at PCs like Samsung is poking fun at iDevices now. And you are crticizing their use of the same technique in their ads?

What you should be doing is slamming Samsung for copying yet another aspect of Apple...the advertising from last decade. At least that would be relevent to the article you are replying to.

(BTW: way to get sucked into AI's scheme to get all Samsung and Google haters to click on as many pages as possible to increase their ad revenue. LOL)
Edited by Wiggin - 8/13/13 at 2:56pm
post #73 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by 11thIndian View Post

 

Sorry.  I don't get how ads that insult the user make me want to use their product.  And I think ads like these fly right over the heads of people who aren't "techie enough" to be aligned with any particular platform.

 

Well believe it or not (many here will be in denial), there are people out their who have iPhones and don't like them for whatever reason. And don't forget there are people out there, again, believe it or not, who don't yet own a smartphone. Both of those groups of people are targets for ads saying that it's a mistake to buy an iPhone (or which support their belief they made a wrong purchasing decision). Someone who loves the iPhone they already have obviously is not the target for those ads.
post #74 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by IThinkIjustSaid View Post

Advertising is intended to compliment well-designed products that literally sell themselves.

 

This has got to be one of the silliest things I've read on AI. And there have been some doozies. LOL
post #75 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by tzeshan View Post

Samsung with the help from Google steals iPhone design thoroughly thus became successful.  For most consumers they don't care they are buying counterfeit products from Samsung.  I don't think Apple should try hard to switch these types of consumers back to iPhone. 

 

Totally agree with you there. The people who buy Samsung crap aren't discerning enough to deserve anything better.
post #76 of 92
Quote:

Not according to Xerox.

 

In their lawsuit against Apple, Xerox stated that they had only licensed Apple for a joint Smalltalk project.

 

 

Xerox' lawsuit claimed that "Apple unlawfully copied portions of Xerox' Star work" and "purposefully failed to identify" Lisa and Finder as "derivative works of Star and Smalltalk."

Ya, companies never claim different things afterwards once they realize they missed the boat or made bad/wrong decisions.

 

Whether there are ideas that Apple used or not I can't say either way but this idea that Apple just ripped off Xerox grows more legendary as time goes on.

 

For starters, the Lisa project actually started significantly before Apple visited Xerox.

 

I wonder how many people that just regurgitate that Apple just stole the GUI from Xerox have actually seen Xerox Star in video or pictures and know of it's limitations in comparison to even Mac OS 1.0.

 

If Mac OS is just a copied Xerox Star, then these same people should be screaming that Android is a blatant copy of iOS, because it's a slam dunk if using such vague ideas. (for example, it has icons, not command line, it's a copy)

post #77 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

Not according to Xerox.

In their lawsuit against Apple, Xerox stated that they had only licensed Apple for a joint Smalltalk project.



Xerox' lawsuit claimed that "Apple unlawfully copied portions of Xerox' Star work" and "purposefully failed to identify" Lisa and Finder as "derivative works of Star and Smalltalk."

And what was the result of that lawsuit?
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #78 of 92
I hate to say it, but a good ad campaign is one that yields the desired results. I was insulted when I saw those ads, but the numbers don't lie. Clearly the ad campaign is working, so yeah, this exec should be proud of himself.
post #79 of 92

Originally Posted by politicalslug View Post
I hate to say it, but a good ad campaign is one that yields the desired results. I was insulted when I saw those ads, but the numbers don't lie. Clearly the ad campaign is working, so yeah, this exec should be proud of himself.

 

You'd have to prove the campaign had anything to do with it first.

post #80 of 92
Apple used to be the "underdog", now they are top dog. I hope Apple don't forget that. I very much dislike Samsung, not because of their blatant rip offs but because of the rubbish service they gave me after I purchased one of their TVs. As for mobile phone technologies, keep Samsung and others at the heel of Apple, it might actually keep Apple moving forward.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Samsung points to anti-Apple ads as 'tipping point' for company