And that's exactly Apple's point. There was a large variety of different devices before the iPhone came out and no one unifying theme. Then Apple introduced the iPhone and suddenly dozens of near clones appear.
Too bad none of the major phone manufacturers was able to innovate on their own.
Well said, and I think Apple should try and clean house of the copy cats.
Apple signed a contract with Samsung 2 years ago, for contract manufacturing of the A4 and successor chips. As part of this contract Samsung was expected to invest almost $3B in fab plants over 36 months.
To safeguard it's investment, the contract required a 5Y commitment from Apple, and minimum volumes. Today however, Samsung is a dangerous competitor. Apple wants to diversify, but cannot.
This lawsuit is probably an attempt by Apple to have Samsung break the agreement first. Apple anyway wants to walk away, so they don't care. They have suppliers lined up for all the things Samsung makes.
Of course, such a major shift will have issues, but better to deal with those issues today than to wait - they will only get bigger.
It is extremely unlikely if Samsung will walk away from $7.7B in revenues. They have invested way too much for the conponents. Secondly the phone business is not anywhere near as profitable. In all likelihood, they will focus only on components, and walk away from phones and tablets over next 2 years or so. Apple pays top dollar - no one else can buy anywhere near Apple's volumes, so they will lose on price and volumes.
Why stay on topic if the topic makes the folks here uncomfortable?
I'd be surprised if they really had a suit.... they're pissed off because it could threaten their crappy fake iPad and fake iPhone products..... quite literally. Loose that business, and all of apple's business and I'd guess we're talking even more than the $5.7 Billion Apple already gives them. I also think there's no information because right now it's just a threat. They aren't providing specifics so how in the hell can any of us comment on whether or not it really is a bullshit lawsuit, or if it has any legs. We're all blind until they submit something showing how they believe apple has overstepped on it's IP.
Exactly who would replace Apple's orders. Exactly who could pay over a billion in advance for parts and components the way Apple does?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez
In the worst-case scenario for Samsung, however unlikely it may be, the company emerges with 96% of its revenues untouched. With the available capacity and the growing markets, replacing that 4% won't be hard.
The market is exploding. But you down play Apple's involvement in the "exploding" market.
At this point there would not be as robust of mobile OS development without iOS, there wouldn't be as healthy a mobile software development without iOS, there would be no tablet market without the iPad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez
No one says it has to be a single company, and probably won't be, just like most of the rest of the 96% of the company's revenue. The market as a whole is exploding, so filling in that 4% gap won't be difficult.
Yes, but tablets are nothing new. Manufacturers have been making them for years without success. Simply placing a touch screen interface over a copy of Windows XP obviously didn't make for a good user experience or a successful product. It took Apple's design for a UI/OS specifically tailored for touch input to finally turn the concept of a tablet into something really successful.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
And even the original iPhone has some design elements similar to Samsung's FC700 shown months before Apple released any images of their smartphone. IMHO, this isn't as clear-cut an issue as might be imagined.
You're kidding right? About the only thing the Samsung F700 has in common with the original iPhone is that they both phones have a touch screen. Any vague similarities end there. The UI looks positively draconian and the unit itself is quite chunky. Now, when you consider that this thing was introduced in early '07 and went on sale in late '07, it just further accentuates what a groundbreaking device the original iPhone was. For two devices that came out within months of each other, the Samsung unit seems to be years behind the iPhone.
I think I would have just said "stop making those galaxy things look like our stuff or we stop buying from you." And then make good on the threat. The whole lawsuit thing is so lame and risky.
They already did they are now making the Galaxy 2:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xero910
Didn't realize Samsung has a "dock connector" on their devices too. What a blatant ripoff. No other company uses a dock connector for their devices, let alone one that looks practically identical to Apple's. Look and feel aside, Samsung copies Apple on hardware/internal components too. Hope Apple wins this. It's one thing to copy the style of the iPhone, its another to try and mirror it. Even HP's new webOS devices look more unique than Samsung's offerings.
No other company eh?
The idea of docking connectors has been around for decades.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tundraboy
If Samsung thinks they have enough clout over Apple in this fight, they are sorely mistaken. The company who brings in the final customer always has an outsized advantage because he can take those customers elsewhere. There are other component manufacturers out there who would jump at the chance to be a major supplier to Apple
What is Apples raison d'être?
Profit.
How do they make so much profit?
Huge margins.
Why do Apple buy so much stuff from Samsung?
They are the best at making the stuff with high quality and low cost.
What happens when Apple goes elsewhere for their components?
They cost more or are of lower quality.
What then happens to Apples margins and profit?
Apple really are biting off their nose to spite their face with this fight they chose to start.
You're kidding right? About the only thing the Samsung F700 has in common with the original iPhone is that they both phones have a touch screen. Any vague similarities end there. The UI looks positively draconian and the unit itself is quite chunky. Now, when you consider that this thing was introduced in early '07 and went on sale in late '07, it just further accentuates what a groundbreaking device the original iPhone was. For two devices that came out within months of each other, the Samsung unit seems to be years behind the iPhone.
--a rectangular product shape with all four corners uniformly rounded;
--the front surface of the product dominated by a screen surface with black borders;
as to the iPhone and iPod touch products, substantial black borders above and below the screen having roughly equal width and narrower black borders on either side of the screen having roughly equal width;
--as to the iPad product, substantial black borders on all sides being roughly equal in width;
--a metallic surround framing the perimeter of the top surface;
--a display of a grid of colorful square icons with uniformly rounded corners; and
--a bottom row of square icons (the ?Springboard?) set off from the other icons and that do --not change as the other pages of the user interface are viewed.
It is noticeably different from an iphone? Yes. Would anyone get them confused? No. But the point is, is that several of the "Look and feel" patents apple is using were used by Samsung in the past.
I think apple does have a case with touchwiz. But they're throwing in stock android phones, and saying that phones like the Gem and Epic4g violate the "Look and feel" of the hardware, which is absurd.
Interesting side note: Whoever prepared the lawsuit actually violated copyright law by stealing images taken by other sites (notably AndroidCommunity) without crediting them. Going so far as to crop out the watermark of the image.
Now, this was more than likely a mistake on their part. But if a lawyer who specializes in patent/copyright/trademark law can't keep track of all the convoluted laws, it speaks volumes about just how messed up the system is.
Samsung didn't even bother to deny Apple's copycat allegation! i guess they couldn't quickly think of anything to say that wasn't ridiculous on its face.
game over.
this lawsuit is not about winning in court, guys. that will take years. forget who is "right" technically. this suit is about winning in consumer/market perceptions - now. Apple is chopping at Samsung's reputation right now, branding them as a second-rate knockoff product. not the "real thing." it's an attempt to define their opponent before they can define themselves - classic political tactics.
so if this charge "sticks," it will hurt Samsung. they will probably tweak their UI later this year to make the copying less obvious, but the damage is done.
That is yet another lawsuit that Samsung could potential throw at Apple for maliciously damaging Samsung's reputation. Its called libel. If Samsung can prove that, they could gain not only claim damages from lost profits but also punitive damages.
I think I would have just said "stop making those galaxy things look like our stuff or we stop buying from you." And then make good on the threat. The whole lawsuit thing is so lame and risky.
How do you know that they did not do this first? Usually a company will try to negotiate something with another company first before going the legal route. Possibly for more than a year. You don't know that apple did not do just that before deciding to sue.
That is yet another lawsuit that Samsung could potential throw at Apple for maliciously damaging Samsung's reputation. Its called libel. If Samsung can prove that, they could gain not only claim damages from lost profits but also punitive damages.
I have to laugh at your wild enthusiasm for spinning baroque fantasies of how Apple will come to grief. This one is particularly fanciful.
How do you know that they did not do this first? Usually a company will try to negotiate something with another company first before going the legal route. Possibly for more than a year. You don't know that apple did not do just that before deciding to sue.
Because this is apple. They don't license their patents on stuff like this, ever. If there was any communication prior to this lawsuit it was Apple demanding a settlement out of court. Samsung and Apple can't have talks if Apple's answer will always be no.
Either this is some sort of "legal dance" between Apple and Samsung or a foolish quest on Apple's part... All of these devices have the same look and feel, IMO.
Actually Apple is well within their rights on this one.
The Galaxy Tablet picture clearly shows a Dock Connector. Apple certainly wouldn't have licensed this and therefore Samsung is wrong.
Comments
And that's exactly Apple's point. There was a large variety of different devices before the iPhone came out and no one unifying theme. Then Apple introduced the iPhone and suddenly dozens of near clones appear.
Too bad none of the major phone manufacturers was able to innovate on their own.
Well said, and I think Apple should try and clean house of the copy cats.
What ever happened to the eMac?......LOL
To safeguard it's investment, the contract required a 5Y commitment from Apple, and minimum volumes. Today however, Samsung is a dangerous competitor. Apple wants to diversify, but cannot.
This lawsuit is probably an attempt by Apple to have Samsung break the agreement first. Apple anyway wants to walk away, so they don't care. They have suppliers lined up for all the things Samsung makes.
Of course, such a major shift will have issues, but better to deal with those issues today than to wait - they will only get bigger.
It is extremely unlikely if Samsung will walk away from $7.7B in revenues. They have invested way too much for the conponents. Secondly the phone business is not anywhere near as profitable. In all likelihood, they will focus only on components, and walk away from phones and tablets over next 2 years or so. Apple pays top dollar - no one else can buy anywhere near Apple's volumes, so they will lose on price and volumes.
Why stay on topic if the topic makes the folks here uncomfortable?
I'd be surprised if they really had a suit.... they're pissed off because it could threaten their crappy fake iPad and fake iPhone products..... quite literally. Loose that business, and all of apple's business and I'd guess we're talking even more than the $5.7 Billion Apple already gives them. I also think there's no information because right now it's just a threat. They aren't providing specifics so how in the hell can any of us comment on whether or not it really is a bullshit lawsuit, or if it has any legs. We're all blind until they submit something showing how they believe apple has overstepped on it's IP.
In the worst-case scenario for Samsung, however unlikely it may be, the company emerges with 96% of its revenues untouched. With the available capacity and the growing markets, replacing that 4% won't be hard.
At this point there would not be as robust of mobile OS development without iOS, there wouldn't be as healthy a mobile software development without iOS, there would be no tablet market without the iPad.
No one says it has to be a single company, and probably won't be, just like most of the rest of the 96% of the company's revenue. The market as a whole is exploding, so filling in that 4% gap won't be difficult.
Do we have a Samsung tablet at CEBIT 2006? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYnlS1cEc9Q
Yes, but tablets are nothing new. Manufacturers have been making them for years without success. Simply placing a touch screen interface over a copy of Windows XP obviously didn't make for a good user experience or a successful product. It took Apple's design for a UI/OS specifically tailored for touch input to finally turn the concept of a tablet into something really successful.
And even the original iPhone has some design elements similar to Samsung's FC700 shown months before Apple released any images of their smartphone. IMHO, this isn't as clear-cut an issue as might be imagined.
You're kidding right? About the only thing the Samsung F700 has in common with the original iPhone is that they both phones have a touch screen. Any vague similarities end there. The UI looks positively draconian and the unit itself is quite chunky. Now, when you consider that this thing was introduced in early '07 and went on sale in late '07, it just further accentuates what a groundbreaking device the original iPhone was. For two devices that came out within months of each other, the Samsung unit seems to be years behind the iPhone.
I think I would have just said "stop making those galaxy things look like our stuff or we stop buying from you." And then make good on the threat. The whole lawsuit thing is so lame and risky.
They already did they are now making the Galaxy 2:
Didn't realize Samsung has a "dock connector" on their devices too. What a blatant ripoff. No other company uses a dock connector for their devices, let alone one that looks practically identical to Apple's. Look and feel aside, Samsung copies Apple on hardware/internal components too. Hope Apple wins this. It's one thing to copy the style of the iPhone, its another to try and mirror it. Even HP's new webOS devices look more unique than Samsung's offerings.
No other company eh?
The idea of docking connectors has been around for decades.
If Samsung thinks they have enough clout over Apple in this fight, they are sorely mistaken. The company who brings in the final customer always has an outsized advantage because he can take those customers elsewhere. There are other component manufacturers out there who would jump at the chance to be a major supplier to Apple
What is Apples raison d'être?
Profit.
How do they make so much profit?
Huge margins.
Why do Apple buy so much stuff from Samsung?
They are the best at making the stuff with high quality and low cost.
What happens when Apple goes elsewhere for their components?
They cost more or are of lower quality.
What then happens to Apples margins and profit?
Apple really are biting off their nose to spite their face with this fight they chose to start.
Apple really are biting off their nose to spite their face with this fight they chose to start.
You're kidding right? About the only thing the Samsung F700 has in common with the original iPhone is that they both phones have a touch screen. Any vague similarities end there. The UI looks positively draconian and the unit itself is quite chunky. Now, when you consider that this thing was introduced in early '07 and went on sale in late '07, it just further accentuates what a groundbreaking device the original iPhone was. For two devices that came out within months of each other, the Samsung unit seems to be years behind the iPhone.
Here's some of Apple's specific complaints:
(Taken from: http://thisismynext.com/2011/04/19/a...sung-analysis/) Which was written by a former patent lawyer.
--a rectangular product shape with all four corners uniformly rounded;
--the front surface of the product dominated by a screen surface with black borders;
as to the iPhone and iPod touch products, substantial black borders above and below the screen having roughly equal width and narrower black borders on either side of the screen having roughly equal width;
--as to the iPad product, substantial black borders on all sides being roughly equal in width;
--a metallic surround framing the perimeter of the top surface;
--a display of a grid of colorful square icons with uniformly rounded corners; and
--a bottom row of square icons (the ?Springboard?) set off from the other icons and that do --not change as the other pages of the user interface are viewed.
Now let's look at the F700 again:
http://tinypic.com/r/2jetsls/7
It is noticeably different from an iphone? Yes. Would anyone get them confused? No. But the point is, is that several of the "Look and feel" patents apple is using were used by Samsung in the past.
I think apple does have a case with touchwiz. But they're throwing in stock android phones, and saying that phones like the Gem and Epic4g violate the "Look and feel" of the hardware, which is absurd.
Interesting side note: Whoever prepared the lawsuit actually violated copyright law by stealing images taken by other sites (notably AndroidCommunity) without crediting them. Going so far as to crop out the watermark of the image.
Now, this was more than likely a mistake on their part. But if a lawyer who specializes in patent/copyright/trademark law can't keep track of all the convoluted laws, it speaks volumes about just how messed up the system is.
Samsung didn't even bother to deny Apple's copycat allegation! i guess they couldn't quickly think of anything to say that wasn't ridiculous on its face.
game over.
this lawsuit is not about winning in court, guys. that will take years. forget who is "right" technically. this suit is about winning in consumer/market perceptions - now. Apple is chopping at Samsung's reputation right now, branding them as a second-rate knockoff product. not the "real thing." it's an attempt to define their opponent before they can define themselves - classic political tactics.
so if this charge "sticks," it will hurt Samsung. they will probably tweak their UI later this year to make the copying less obvious, but the damage is done.
That is yet another lawsuit that Samsung could potential throw at Apple for maliciously damaging Samsung's reputation. Its called libel. If Samsung can prove that, they could gain not only claim damages from lost profits but also punitive damages.
I think I would have just said "stop making those galaxy things look like our stuff or we stop buying from you." And then make good on the threat. The whole lawsuit thing is so lame and risky.
How do you know that they did not do this first? Usually a company will try to negotiate something with another company first before going the legal route. Possibly for more than a year. You don't know that apple did not do just that before deciding to sue.
<snip>
What ever happened to the eMac?......LOL
It was replaced by iMacs that were just as cheap (price wise) in bulk by popular demand for a smaller footprint and digital flat LCD screen.
That is yet another lawsuit that Samsung could potential throw at Apple for maliciously damaging Samsung's reputation. Its called libel. If Samsung can prove that, they could gain not only claim damages from lost profits but also punitive damages.
I have to laugh at your wild enthusiasm for spinning baroque fantasies of how Apple will come to grief. This one is particularly fanciful.
How do you know that they did not do this first? Usually a company will try to negotiate something with another company first before going the legal route. Possibly for more than a year. You don't know that apple did not do just that before deciding to sue.
Because this is apple. They don't license their patents on stuff like this, ever. If there was any communication prior to this lawsuit it was Apple demanding a settlement out of court. Samsung and Apple can't have talks if Apple's answer will always be no.
Either this is some sort of "legal dance" between Apple and Samsung or a foolish quest on Apple's part... All of these devices have the same look and feel, IMO.
Actually Apple is well within their rights on this one.
The Galaxy Tablet picture clearly shows a Dock Connector. Apple certainly wouldn't have licensed this and therefore Samsung is wrong.