or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Apple vs. Samsung docs reveal Galaxy Tab was a flop and Samsung knew it
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple vs. Samsung docs reveal Galaxy Tab was a flop and Samsung knew it - Page 3

post #81 of 165
So again more proof that Samsung lies, cheats, steals to get business even when there is no business. It's poor attempts at putting down Apple's products in its advertising appear to be a big failure not to anyones surprise. The corruption of this companies leaders seems to have no bounds and it seems that the legal system is totally blind to there actions as they keep getting away with lie after lie after lie. The the anal-ists seem to be blindingly following them like there some sort of god praising Samsung and Android when in reality the facts show totally the opposite going on and yet none of them saw it, not one.
post #82 of 165
Originally Posted by singularity View Post
So if the tab range was a complete disaster and selling an embarrassing amount in the US then by showing it isn't Apple undermining their own argument on how it has lost billions in profit and irreparable harm?
Originally Posted by d4NjvRzf View Post
How could Apple claim billions in lost sales if Samsung's Tab sold so poorly? Money doesn't just disappear into thin air. It has to end up in someone's hands. If not Samsung's, then whose?

 

How on Earth do you not understand this?

 

Originally Posted by mark6051 View Post
This doesnt really seem to happening so the truth and veracity of all this of it may never be known.

 

They’re in court right now. Everything being uncovered here is the truth. The fact that Wall Street couldn’t care less that Samsung has lied to them for six years is MEANINGLESS to the veracity of these documents.

 

This is Wall Street. The same place that shorts Apple for having THE FOURTH BEST QUARTER OF ANY COMPANY IN HUMAN HISTORY. Nothing they do is anything even remotely close to justice.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #83 of 165

The reality distortion field play well by samsung. :\

post #84 of 165
So does Googlesung pay more than the 20¢ per post that the Koch Brothers pay to troll liberal blogs? If not, 9633 posts in 37 months only comes to ~$52/month. Not much of a career.
post #85 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac-sochist View Post

So does Googlesung pay more than the 20¢ per post that the Koch Brothers pay to troll liberal blogs? If not, 9633 posts in 37 months only comes to ~$52/month. Not much of a career.

Is this your pet peeve? What have the Koch brothers to do with anything?

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #86 of 165

Cue the Samsung/Android fanbois saying that Sumsung purposely gave Apple doctored low figures to try and reduce the amount they have to pay Apple.

post #87 of 165
To Samsung, IDC, Gartner and Strategy Analytics:
You were liars in 2011. Why should we not believe you are liars now?
post #88 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac-sochist View Post

So does Googlesung pay more than the 20¢ per post that the Koch Brothers pay to troll liberal blogs? If not, 9633 posts in 37 months only comes to ~$52/month. Not much of a career.

Is this your pet peeve? What have the Koch brothers to do with anything?

That's the best-known example of paid trolling. I'm just wondering if Gatorguy is making more than that.
post #89 of 165

By using the tablet sales numbers Apple's lawyers are going to contrast Samsung's quite successful phone* business to their abysmal tablet** sales.

 

That shows a direct correlation between Samsung's copying/stealing and their market success.

 

* The Galaxy S I and S II were almost identical to iPhone 3G/3GS. The look of the S III changed a lot but they kept the GUI and interactions as close to iOS as possible.

** With the Galaxy Tab series Samsung never reached the same level of blatant copying as there was already serious tension between the two companies.

post #90 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by HAMETA View Post

IDIOT

Uncalled for.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac-sochist View Post

So does Googlesung pay more than the 20¢ per post that the Koch Brothers pay to troll liberal blogs? If not, 9633 posts in 37 months only comes to ~$52/month. Not much of a career.

Probably the same rate George Soros pays.
post #91 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post
A long time and generally respected member such as yourself ....

Thank you.

post #92 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by capasicum View Post
 

By using the tablet sales numbers Apple's lawyers are going to contrast Samsung's quite successful phone* business to their abysmal tablet** sales.

 

That shows a direct correlation between Samsung's copying/stealing and their market success.

 

* The Galaxy S I and S II were almost identical to iPhone 3G/3GS. The look of the S III changed a lot but they kept the GUI and interactions as close to iOS as possible.

** With the Galaxy Tab series Samsung never reached the same level of blatant copying as there was already serious tension between the two companies.

Samsung marketed the S3 was by emphasizing how different it was from the iPhone, not by saying "look! we can do this too!" That was the first device where they genuinely tried to distinguish themselves from Apple, to the point that some observers remarked that it looked as though it were designed by lawyers. Remember this advert?

post #93 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

There's no need for name calling.

I find his post funny because he took the time to use all caps, italicize, increase the font size, and change the color, yet with all that effort he could only think of calling @TeaEarleGreyHot an idiot.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #94 of 165

Ah, more still of DED tilting at windmills and relying on old/irrelevant news. Such as the vast difference between Android in 2011/2012 and today.

And the bouncing that goes back and forth between:

1. Android is a stolen product that has cost Apple billions

2. Android is a failure that accounts for no sales other than cheap toys and "I have never seen Android tablets in the wild; they are always gathering dust and acting as doorstops in Costco/Best Buy or sold as cheap kids toys at Toys-R-US"

 

Here is some reality: actual Android tablet sales data based on app installations (which Android users do not buy).

 

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/01/kindle-fire-nabs-33-of-android-tablet-market-nexus-7-just-8/

Kindle has 1/3 of the Android market in the U.S. With Fire TV, that will increase. Amazon is probably now the main Android player.

Nook is #2 at 10% of the market.

Samsung is indeed a flop at 9%, meaning that their money from Android is basically coming from their (soon to be emulated by Apple) phablets.

Nexus is 8%, a bit below Samsung despite Google not putting anywhere near the marketing push behind their phones and tablets (yet, they will start in 2015) as they do other products like the Chromecast and Chromebooks (which incidentally are selling heavily).

But note that this study has a sample size of 500 million unique Android devices.

post #95 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac-sochist View Post

So does Googlesung pay more than the 20¢ per post that the Koch Brothers pay to troll liberal blogs? If not, 9633 posts in 37 months only comes to ~$52/month. Not much of a career.

Ah, so when you can't dispute the facts or find a flaw in the logic it's time for the trump card: Impune the character of the poster. So are congratulations in order for your timely investment in a time-honored playground tradition?
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #96 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

Apple wants Samsung to stop using its technologies and designs. The lawsuit is an attempt to stop Samsung, or at least attach a price to stealing so it will slow down or stop. Apple has to argue that it has lost profits and/or that Samsung should be dinged for profiting illegally from Apple’s work. That’s how the patent system and courts work.  
Ah, so Apple doesn't really believe they're owed billions due to lost sales but they have to argue it that way because that's how patent trials work?

 

The suit is only partially about the Tab devices. There are more phones and the phones are doing more damage. I'm just glad we get to see Attorneys eyes only documents that show what a sham the tab numbers are in the analyst marketshare data. Now that this is out, I wouldn't be surprised if there was a class action lawsuit against Samsung for misleading investors.

post #97 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

I find his post funny because he took the time to use all caps, italicize, increase the font size, and change the color, yet with all that effort he could only think of calling @TeaEarleGreyHot an idiot.

Especially since @TeaEarleGreyHot was very respectful, and diplomatic is his/her post.
"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 #98 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark6051 View Post

If this the truth, and Samsung fudged the figures to its shareholders, then there is greater at stake. Firstly the stockmarket would collapse the shares, indictments may commence against those who lied and manipulated the figures and shareholders generallly wont be too pleased so a general cleaning of house of upper management would occur. the company would be turned upside down and the stockmarket would take a while to trust the company again. This doesnt really seem to happening so the truth and veracity of all this of it may never be known.

 

We should expect to see a class action suit now that this is public since they mislead investors knowingly. They didn't lie which would be a bigger problem for them. They filled the channel and said by how much. That isn't illegal. Continuing to cite that number after you see your sells are a fraction of what you filled the channel with is a gray area, but it is misleading. 

post #99 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by singularity View Post

So if the tab range was a complete disaster and selling an embarrassing amount in the US then by showing it isn't Apple undermining their own argument on how it has lost billions in profit and irreparable harm?

The article doesn't say who is presenting the evidence, Apple or Samsung. Apple, however, can use the information to show Samsung was copying Apple because it was desperate for sales.

 

The article doesn't, but the images clearly show it was plaintiff's (Apple) exhibit. 

post #100 of 165

More good stuff. Again, this does not rely on manufacturer sales figures but reputable information based on "what American businesses and institutions are buying through the commercial channel, which includes large distributors and resellers." 

 

http://www.zdnet.com/new-u-s-sales-figures-show-the-changing-face-of-pcs-and-tablets-in-2013-7000024657/

https://www.npd.com/wps/portal/npd/us/news/press-releases/u-s-commercial-channel-computing-device-sales-set-to-end-2013-with-double-digit-growth-according-to-npd/

 

1. Apple iPad sales accounted for 59 percent of the volume in the tablet market. So why is not that news of Apple's great dominance being reported by DED or Apple Insider? Because: 

2. Android tablet sales grew more than 160 percent.

3. More evidence that Chromebooks are taking off: they outsold Android tablets and had over half the sales of I-Pads.

 

Bottom line: regardless of what happens with Samsung, Android is a success, a maturing product with a growing market share, ever since the better OS versions and apps (basically Jelly Bean and onwards) came out. And ChromeOS cannot be understated either. (Gee, since Samsung's tablet sales stink anyway, they might as well put ChromeOS on tablets. Nothing is stopping them.) 

 

I wonder how quickly Apple Insider pivots from going after Samsung to going after Amazon and Kindle. And from going after Android to going after ChromeOS (maybe when/if someone comes out with a ChromeOS smartphone, which the FireFox OS phones will make inevitable at some point)?

post #101 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by mensmovement View Post

Ah, more still of DED tilting at windmills and relying on old/irrelevant news. Such as the vast difference between Android in 2011/2012 and today.
And the bouncing that goes back and forth between:
1. Android is a stolen product that has cost Apple billions
2. Android is a failure that accounts for no sales other than cheap toys and "I have never seen Android tablets in the wild; they are always gathering dust and acting as doorstops in Costco/Best Buy or sold as cheap kids toys at Toys-R-US"

Here is some reality: actual Android tablet sales data based on app installations (which Android users do not buy).

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/01/kindle-fire-nabs-33-of-android-tablet-market-nexus-7-just-8/
Kindle has 1/3 of the Android market in the U.S. With Fire TV, that will increase. Amazon is probably now the main Android player.
Nook is #2 at 10% of the market.
Samsung is indeed a flop at 9%, meaning that their money from Android is basically coming from their (soon to be emulated by Apple) phablets.
Nexus is 8%, a bit below Samsung despite Google not putting anywhere near the marketing push behind their phones and tablets (yet, they will start in 2015) as they do other products like the Chromecast and Chromebooks (which incidentally are selling heavily).
But note that this study has a sample size of 500 million unique Android devices.

500 mm Androids. 59% US. Kindle Fire has 33%. So you expect us to believe Amazon sold 98 MM units?

Oh btw, the report indicated 500 unique devices, not Android devices.
post #102 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phone-UI-Guy View Post

The suit is only partially about the Tab devices. There are more phones and the phones are doing more damage. I'm just glad we get to see Attorneys eyes only documents that show what a sham the tab numbers are in the analyst marketshare data. Now that this is out, I wouldn't be surprised if there was a class action lawsuit against Samsung for misleading investors.

It was "out" in the last trial almost two years ago. Nothing in this story is actually new apparently. It's all old recycled stuff that was written about 18 months ago or more.
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/151854/quite-smooth-samsung-actually-sold-1-10-of-the-2-million-galaxy-tabs-it-claimed-in-2010
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #103 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by d4NjvRzf View Post
 

Samsung marketed the S3 was by emphasizing how different it was from the iPhone, not by saying "look! we can do this too!" That was the first device where they genuinely tried to distinguish themselves from Apple, to the point that some observers remarked that it looked as though it were designed by lawyers. Remember this advert?

 

I didn't state that Galaxy S III had no other features (ignoring discussions on whether those worked at all). But GUI and interactions such as bounce-back, data detectors, etc were there. And that's what makes Apple's case.

post #104 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by mensmovement View Post

More good stuff. Again, this does not rely on manufacturer sales figures but reputable information based on "what American businesses and institutions are buying through the commercial channel, which includes large distributors and resellers." 

http://www.zdnet.com/new-u-s-sales-figures-show-the-changing-face-of-pcs-and-tablets-in-2013-7000024657/
https://www.npd.com/wps/portal/npd/us/news/press-releases/u-s-commercial-channel-computing-device-sales-set-to-end-2013-with-double-digit-growth-according-to-npd/

1. Apple iPad sales accounted for 59 percent of the volume in the tablet market. So why is not that news of Apple's great dominance being reported by DED or Apple Insider? Because: 
2. Android tablet sales grew more than 160 percent.
3. More evidence that Chromebooks are taking off: they outsold Android tablets and had over half the sales of I-Pads.

Bottom line: regardless of what happens with Samsung, Android is a success, a maturing product with a growing market share, ever since the better OS versions and apps (basically Jelly Bean and onwards) came out. And ChromeOS cannot be understated either. (Gee, since Samsung's tablet sales stink anyway, they might as well put ChromeOS on tablets. Nothing is stopping them.) 

I wonder how quickly Apple Insider pivots from going after Samsung to going after Amazon and Kindle. And from going after Android to going after ChromeOS (maybe when/if someone comes out with a ChromeOS smartphone, which the FireFox OS phones will make inevitable at some point)?

More channel stuffing. Come back with some usage information.
post #105 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark6051 View Post

If this the truth, and Samsung fudged the figures to its shareholders, then there is greater at stake. Firstly the stockmarket would collapse the shares, indictments may commence against those who lied and manipulated the figures and shareholders generallly wont be too pleased so a general cleaning of house of upper management would occur. the company would be turned upside down and the stockmarket would take a while to trust the company again. This doesnt really seem to happening so the truth and veracity of all this of it may never be known.

I read a lot of posts regarding Samsung shareholders, and the stock market and investors, etc. For the record, Samsung is traded on the Korean stock exchange. They have no ADR in the US. US investors can only buy Samsung stock on the grey market which is probably a bad idea since there is no transparency, a lot of risk and the shares would be rather difficult to sell. Almost no one in the US holds any Samsung shares. And as far as being investigated, Samsung pretty much owns the Korean government so even if they were to be investigated nothing would ever become of it. Samsung stock is up around 25% over the past year so the Korean shareholders aren't really all that upset about anything.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #106 of 165
Originally Posted by HAMETA View Post
HA, HA,  Idiot is Idiot !  NOTHING MORE, NOTHING LESS Why You NEED FRILL ON IT ? ほ、ほ、

 

I’m bothered by how much sense this makes.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #107 of 165
1) This information begs the question: Why believe anything written by IDC, Gartner, Strategy Analytics, VentureBeat, Computerworld or Huffington Post about Apple? That's a shame because one would hope for legitimate, objective analysis from financial and technical sources. People make investment decisions based on these writers. And the world talks about Job's "Reality Distortion Field"!

2) What about the Samsung investors who were misled (outright lied to) about the success of the Samsung tablets? Sounds to me as if there may be grounds for an SEC investigation into market manipulation.
post #108 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post


500 mm Androids. 59% US. Kindle Fire has 33%. So you expect us to believe Amazon sold 98 MM units?

Oh btw, the report indicated 500 unique devices, not Android devices.

 

Fair enough. My main point was that even if Samsung's tablets are flops, other quality Android tablets - Amazon's - are indeed selling. As a matter of fact, I will even say that Nexus almost selling as much as Samsung (despite not really trying) is good for the platform.
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post


More channel stuffing. Come back with some usage information.

The usage information was in my first link: Amazon tablet app installation. To put it another way: Amazon freely admits that they break even on hardware. So wow, where does all the revenue from their Kindle platform come from I wonder? In totally unrelated news, shortly after releasing Fire TV, Amazon announced that they are now the #3 streaming site behind only YouTube and Netflix.

 

But hey, better for Amazon to be #1 than the company that Apple is suing, right? Oh yeah, as I have stated before, Amazon is coming out with a line of Fire smartphones later this year. With Kindle tablets, Fire TV and Amazon Cloud, that will give them the best Android ecosystem (better than Google's, and Samsung doesn't have an ecosystem) and the second best ecosystem to Apple (far better than Microsoft's disjointed stuff that doesn't even interoperate ... such as XBox running on Windows NT!!!). 

post #109 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc View Post

Thanks again DED for a well researched post.

This question stands out for TL;DR crowd:
I wonder if the bloggers and analytic teams also realize, that by their coercive misrepresentation of the markets, they may very well wake up some day and find their hero companies bankrupt. Thus depriving themselves of the very devices that they so desire and dote upon endlessly. You can't subsidize a product endlessly, losing millions in the process.

Denying the truth of the markets is dangerous, even if you're in the business of manipulating them. Allowing them to be manipulated is criminal.

Again, I don't understand Samsung's competitors in the PC/Android market why they are so docile in pointing out the unfair advantage that a convicted cheater is allowed to continue to harm their businesses. They have the most to lose in this fight, not Apple.

Well, this disclosure of lying to their investors about the success of their product line is guaranteed to get them a bevy of investor lawsuits. Whether the information presented here argues against their estimate of damages, really depends on how those damages have been measured. But, I don't see that happening. Apple is arguing that but for Samsung's patent infringement, Samsung's sales today would have been far lower, and that difference constitutes part of Apple's request for damages. I will presume Apple's lawyers made their arguments internally consistent. 

 

But, by disclosure of what might be construed as investor fraud, Apple is meaning to damage Samsung financially other than by collecting legal damages for lost sales and patent infringement. 

post #110 of 165

More info:


Samsung Galaxy S5 has about the same number of preorders as the HTC One M8. Whether that is good news for HTC or bad news for Samsung I will leave for others to ruminate over.

http://www.cnet.com/news/galaxy-s5-launch-no-lines-but-pre-orders-look-strong/

post #111 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by mensmovement View Post
 

Ah, more still of DED tilting at windmills and relying on old/irrelevant news. Such as the vast difference between Android in 2011/2012 and today.

And the bouncing that goes back and forth between:

1. Android is a stolen product that has cost Apple billions

2. Android is a failure that accounts for no sales other than cheap toys and "I have never seen Android tablets in the wild; they are always gathering dust and acting as doorstops in Costco/Best Buy or sold as cheap kids toys at Toys-R-US"

 

Here is some reality: actual Android tablet sales data based on app installations (which Android users do not buy).

 

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/01/kindle-fire-nabs-33-of-android-tablet-market-nexus-7-just-8/

Kindle has 1/3 of the Android market in the U.S. With Fire TV, that will increase. Amazon is probably now the main Android player.

Nook is #2 at 10% of the market.

Samsung is indeed a flop at 9%, meaning that their money from Android is basically coming from their (soon to be emulated by Apple) phablets.

Nexus is 8%, a bit below Samsung despite Google not putting anywhere near the marketing push behind their phones and tablets (yet, they will start in 2015) as they do other products like the Chromecast and Chromebooks (which incidentally are selling heavily).

But note that this study has a sample size of 500 million unique Android devices.

 


You seem to have picked an article whose author has no idea how to present numbers, nor their meaning.

 

500 million unique Android devices do not represent only tablets. It might just happen that 99.99% of them are actually Android phones.

So, that is not the sample size of the study. The sample size is completely missing from the article.

 

Kindle's 33% of Android tablet market means nothing unless you know how large the whole Android tablet market is, NOT the Android market as a whole. Or, if you know exactly how many devices did Amazon ship, you can calculate the whole market size (based on those 33%). Strangely, no enough data is available to do the calculations. Sales numbers are given for a single quarter, while Localytics gives market share as a whole.

 

All that mixing of data is obviously intentional. The goal is to present some significant numbers (such as those 500 million units) without actually telling anything of significance. 

 

Also, Kindle Fire is not exactly an Android device. Amazon did branch the Android project long long time ago, at version 1.6 I think.

 

Should you decide to answer with some idiotic comments, first try to answer the following simple question:
How many Kindle Fire devices represent those 33% of the Android tablet market?

 

post #112 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by mensmovement View Post
 

In totally unrelated news, shortly after releasing Fire TV, Amazon announced that they are now the #3 streaming site behind only YouTube and Netflix.

 

1. Amazon instant video and streaming services are available for quite some time (more than an year).

 

2. As I wrote earlier, Amazon does not use vanilla Android. They forked the project at v1.6. And if you have the slightest idea how much Android changed since that version, and how much Amazon's version changed, you would understand why Amazon do not refer to their OS as Android. Because it is not.

 

Sailfish and Firefox OS are able to run Android applications as well. That doesn't mean they are Android.

post #113 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by HAMETA View Post

Listen, Your ( Plural ) Knowledge & Wisdom is Very Very LIMITED !

So DON'T TRY TO PREACH ME ANYTHING As If You Were Superior to Me !

INSTEAD, Argue SOMETHING SUBSTANTIAL.

The typeface is getting bigger and brighter. Does that mean the comments are more important and deserve more consideration now? 1rolleyes.gif
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #114 of 165
Why doesn't someone sue Samsung for misleading its investors?
post #115 of 165
Daniel, you should update your article. The first slide from Samsung are NOT global numbers (both sldies are US only). There are a few places in your article where your mistaken assumption leads you to the wrong conclusion.
post #116 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by singularity View Post

So if the tab range was a complete disaster and selling an embarrassing amount in the US then by showing it isn't Apple undermining their own argument on how it has lost billions in profit and irreparable harm?

 

I suppose that could be a compelling argument. However... this data is from the early stages of a nascent market, which has continued beyond the 2011/12 data points (as a growth market) for another two years. Samsung has surely sold enough across that time period to warrant a large-loss claim.

 

Second, I had a background suspicion before that the 2012 "smoking gun" doc (and now this one) showing how "absolutely awful" Samsung's "actual sales" were, could very well be fabrications created by Samsung, designed to elicit exactly the same response and perspective that you gave... "See, your honor? We didn't actually sell enough to warrant a large claim!" ...

 

Sure, it's mildly 'conspiracy theory' sounding, but with Samsung's overall behavior, I wouldn't put it past them at all.

 

Who's checking their books? The US courts? Really?  Believing the validity of those documents is in part based on the good faith of lawyers and company executives. Who from the court or the Apple side is inside Samsung HQ in Korea making sure those are actual, accountable figures? That's right. No one. We have to "trust Samsung" (and their well-paid lawyers). Bwaa ha ha ha...

 

Either way (lying to their investors/market, or lying to the courts), it shows Samsung to be a seriously dishonest company, with that dishonesty being a clear foundation of their corporate culture. I will avoid their products regardless of whether they compete with Apple or not.

post #117 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by capasicum View Post
 

 


You seem to have picked an article whose author has no idea how to present numbers, nor their meaning.

 

500 million unique Android devices do not represent only tablets. It might just happen that 99.99% of them are actually Android phones.

So, that is not the sample size of the study. The sample size is completely missing from the article.

 

Kindle's 33% of Android tablet market means nothing unless you know how large the whole Android tablet market is, NOT the Android market as a whole. Or, if you know exactly how many devices did Amazon ship, you can calculate the whole market size (based on those 33%). Strangely, no enough data is available to do the calculations. Sales numbers are given for a single quarter, while Localytics gives market share as a whole.

 

All that mixing of data is obviously intentional. The goal is to present some significant numbers (such as those 500 million units) without actually telling anything of significance. 

 

Also, Kindle Fire is not exactly an Android device. Amazon did branch the Android project long long time ago, at version 1.6 I think.

 

Should you decide to answer with some idiotic comments, first try to answer the following simple question:
How many Kindle Fire devices represent those 33% of the Android tablet market?

 

Since you are incapable of having a discussion without making accusations and insults, I have determined that you are unworthy of dialogue of any sort. Goodbye and have a nice life. 

post #118 of 165

Many people here claim Apple will lose the suit because they won't be able to prove a loss.  Samsung lied, these lies affected Apple stock prices. In fact  Samsung should be investigated for purposely misrepresenting their numbers which directly affected Apple stock. There may be enough to Charge Samsung with stock manipulation. 

post #119 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by RadarTheKat View Post

Yes, you would be after Samsung/Google implemented a whole host of Apple innovations into the software that runs it. Even if it turns out that some of Apple's innovations are not patentable (i.e, if Samsung successfully contests the validity of some Apple patents) and therefore Samsung and Google are legally allowed to adopt Apple's innovations, the evidence seems to be mounting that it's Apple that is the innovation leader where it counts in this space and not Samsung.

It is actually one of the reasons the trolls support any of the following positions:
1. "No one company should be allowed to control ____ feature"
2. "Apple should be forced to license their patents"
3. "The government should declare Apple's patents as SEP and seize them"
4. "Patent laws should change to make it easier to do (any of the above)"

Basically, they want the iPhone or iPad without having to buy one from Apple.

EDIT: added a fourth bullet item

"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 #120 of 165

Good OP!

 

This only further proves what many have been saying for years now.

 

Samsung is a fraud, and nothing at all can be trusted when it comes to Android sales figures.

 

Everything is a lie. And you have stupid morons that keep using these bogus figures in their so-called "research" reports and fake marketshare stats. These people are truly bad people, not to mention extremely dishonest and very possibly criminally negligent.

 

Hopefully they will all get what they deserve soon, one way or another.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
  • Apple vs. Samsung docs reveal Galaxy Tab was a flop and Samsung knew it
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Apple vs. Samsung docs reveal Galaxy Tab was a flop and Samsung knew it