Computers, Jet Fighter Plans, TVS (THE BIGGEST TV MANUFACTRER IN THE WORLD BTW), Cellphones, Ships/Shipyards, Washer/Dryers, Refridgerators, Monitors, Cameras, Textiles, etc. They MUCH bigger than Apple.
Any other quesitons?
They much bigger than Apple?
Not really. In terms of number of employees? Yes, much bigger. In terms of revenues? About twice as much, I believe, which does not qualify as *much* bigger.
It's funny how quickly you get an infraction point for an ad hominem attack (and I'm okay with that)... but you can skirt around the TOS by just using obvious taunts, trolling and antagonism time and time again without a warning... unless one or more members bitch loudly.
Anyway... off topic.... carry on.
Samsung stinks etc.
You guys like to label people as trolls or put us on ignore list whenever someone takes a different viewpoint. This clique mentality is so teenage girlish.
If you disagree with someone, then debate with facts, rather than reciting slogans and throwing tantrums.
If you really don't like the discussion, then just engage with different people. Has the sophomoric tactic of troll-labeling gained you anything at all? Anything?
I'm not so sure. Not that it matters much but tied at the hip does imply an untying in order to separate, as in a knot. If he had said joined at the hip I would agree. Again not that it matters much, I'm just trying not to respond to the troll fest going on around here lately.
Edit: I see you're raking umbrage with the word troll here and I thought I'd be clear I wasn't talking about you in my troll fest part of my comment.
I'm keeping my orginal statement. The two don't need each other. If they decide to destory themselves, it's capitalism and are free to do so.
Implicitly you are admitting that the alternative to keeping each other around until they find replacements is self-destructive. Truly it is. In a world where Wall Street punishes you for missing growth targets, a company gets absolutely devastated if they show negative growth. Samsung may have a lot of other customers, but if Apple suddenly ceased being one of them then their earnings would definitely suffer a hit. Likewise, if Apple's manufacturing capability decreases now, at a time when they already struggle to meet great demand, their earnings will take a hit.
Neither company will let that happen. Period. Apple will get their replacements lined up FIRST, and that won't be as easy as others on this thread make it out to be. It will take time, and build schedules look many months ahead. Tim Cook is the guru of supply chain management, and he is nobody's fool. Meanwhile, Samsung is not going to stop supplying parts to Apple just due to a fight on the other side of their business.
Big corporations don't act purely out of spite like individuals do. When they get a chance to satisfy their spite as a bonus, they do. But they won't cut off their nose for it. So these companies will continue doing business with one another until they can ramp away to a replacement. For the time being though, they absolutely need each other. It is much the same in many competitive industries: corporations are teammates and rivals at the same time. They manage to compartmentalize stuff much better than individuals. But many people on this thread are thinking of Samsung and Apple as individuals at war. That is a naive way to look at it.
Implicitly you are admitting that the alternative to keeping each other around until they find replacements is self-destructive. Truly it is. In a world where Wall Street punishes you for missing growth targets, a company gets absolutely devastated if they show negative growth. Samsung may have a lot of other customers, but if Apple suddenly ceased being one of them then their earnings would definitely suffer a hit. Likewise, if Apple's manufacturing capability decreases now, at a time when they already struggle to meet great demand, their earnings will take a hit.
Neither company will let that happen. Period. Apple will get their replacements lined up FIRST, and that won't be as easy as others on this thread make it out to be. It will take time, and build schedules look many months ahead. Tim Cook is the guru of supply chain management, and he is nobody's fool. Meanwhile, Samsung is not going to stop supplying parts to Apple just due to a fight on the other side of their business.
Big corporations don't act purely out of spite like individuals do. When they get a chance to satisfy their spite as a bonus, they do. But they won't cut off their nose for it. So these companies will continue doing business with one another until they can ramp away to a replacement. For the time being though, they absolutely need each other. It is much the same in many competitive industries: corporations are teammates and rivals at the same time. They manage to compartmentalize stuff much better than individuals. But many people on this thread are thinking of Samsung and Apple as individuals at war. That is a naive way to look at it.
Thompson
Well, it's a good thing Steve Jobs didn't have full power over Apple....
I'm not so sure. Not that it matters much but tied at the hip does imply an untying in order to separate, as in a knot. If he had said joined at the hip I would agree. Again not that it matters much, I'm just trying not to respond to the troll fest going on around here lately.
Edit: I see you're raking umbrage with the word troll here and I thought I'd be clear I wasn't talking about you in my troll fest part of my comment.
In my best medical opinion, it is not possible to tie two hips in a knot. So I would consider "tied at the hip" and "unraveling a knot" to be mixed metaphors, particularly since the common saying is "joined" rather than "tied" at the hip (arguably, that alone is a mixed metaphor).
No worries about the troll remark. I wasn't so much taking or raking umbrage as I was giving hopefully well received (fat chance) advice.
Is your slogan to Think Different Topic when caught unable to back up with facts?
It's been proven. Can you back up your facts? Don't come running in here wanting facts and you yourself have yet to bring in a single piece of evidence. Seems like there is a huge problem. Apple doesn't have focus groups like several other companies. In fact, some companies like Kellogs have launched products that failed because of that.
Lemme just leve this here:
Quote:
It?s not about pop culture, and it?s not about fooling people, and it?s not about convincing people that they want something they don?t. We figure out what we want. And I think we?re pretty good at having the right discipline to think through whether a lot of other people are going to want it, too. That?s what we get paid to do. So you can?t go out and ask people, you know, what?s the next big [thing.] There?s a great quote by Henry Ford, right? He said, ?If I?d have asked my customers what they wanted, they would have told me ?A faster horse------Steve Jobs
Well, it's a good thing Steve Jobs didn't have full power over Apple....
Jobs long ago put Cook in charge of the supply chain and logistics, with stunning effect. Jobs also let Cook be the guy that presided over the quarterly conference calls. Jobs knew that Cook was hell-on-wheels at that type of thing, and ultimately decided he would be best to run the show after.
There were certain things that Steve just left to Tim, and in spite of the former's micromanagement persona, he liked it when people brought competent arguments against him. My hunch is that Tim Cook won his share of disagreements with Steve when it came to such things. I could imagine the scene now...
Steve: I am going to nuclear war with Android right now, and I think we should just instantly stop all business with Samsung in order to hit them where it hurts. And we'll take down all others the same way if we have to, regardless of what it does to us.
Tim: I don't think that's a good idea, and here's why...
[Followed by a dazzling display of operational intellect that suggests another way that Apple can hit Samsung where it hurts and doesn't hurt Apple's operations in the slightest. The only con would be delayed gratification of Mr Steve's desire.]
In my best medical opinion, it is not possible to tie two hips in a knot. So I would consider "tied at the hip" and "unraveling a knot" to be mixed metaphors, particularly since the common saying is "joined" rather than "tied" at the hip (arguably, that alone is a mixed metaphor).
Yes, indeedy, I am known for my mixed metaphors. I love mixing 'em up. Why use only one metaphor when two can amuse? Love to kill the two birds, ya know? After all, a hand in the bush is better than two birds!
It's funny how quickly you get an infraction point for an ad hominem attack (and I'm okay with that)... but you can skirt around the TOS by just using obvious taunts, trolling and antagonism time and time again without a warning... unless one or more members bitch loudly.
Anyway... off topic.... carry on.
Samsung stinks etc.
There is nothing wrong with suggesting that someone could leave and I see nothing wrong with trading taunt for taunt. Given that we are awash is trolls here, who never change their tune no matter what rational arguments are given, a polite suggestion to someone that the door is the rectangle with the handle does not seem out of place to me.
Comments
That is a very naive statement. These companies are tied at the hip for the moment, and it will take quite some time and effort to unravel that knot.
Thompson
Tied at the hip ... knot unraveling ...
That's serious metaphor mixing, dude.
Who doesn't test their products or have sit downs for suggestions? Apple? Not true. Samsung? Not true either.
Are you talking about another company?
Apple tends to not put in things that are become standard in the industry. Is their slogan Think Different?
Computers, Jet Fighter Plans, TVS (THE BIGGEST TV MANUFACTRER IN THE WORLD BTW), Cellphones, Ships/Shipyards, Washer/Dryers, Refridgerators, Monitors, Cameras, Textiles, etc. They MUCH bigger than Apple.
Any other quesitons?
They much bigger than Apple?
Not really. In terms of number of employees? Yes, much bigger. In terms of revenues? About twice as much, I believe, which does not qualify as *much* bigger.
Apple tends to not put in things that are become standard in the industry. Is their slogan Think Different?
That does not equate not testing and not meeting.
Is your slogan to Think Different Topic when caught unable to back up with facts?
Tied at the hip ... knot unraveling ...
That's serious metaphor mixing, dude.
Mixing metaphors is my specialty. A blessing and a curse. :-)
Thompson
It's funny how quickly you get an infraction point for an ad hominem attack (and I'm okay with that)... but you can skirt around the TOS by just using obvious taunts, trolling and antagonism time and time again without a warning... unless one or more members bitch loudly.
Anyway... off topic.... carry on.
Samsung stinks etc.
You guys like to label people as trolls or put us on ignore list whenever someone takes a different viewpoint. This clique mentality is so teenage girlish.
If you disagree with someone, then debate with facts, rather than reciting slogans and throwing tantrums.
If you really don't like the discussion, then just engage with different people. Has the sophomoric tactic of troll-labeling gained you anything at all? Anything?
Tied at the hip ... knot unraveling ...
That's serious metaphor mixing, dude.
I'm not so sure. Not that it matters much but tied at the hip does imply an untying in order to separate, as in a knot. If he had said joined at the hip I would agree. Again not that it matters much, I'm just trying not to respond to the troll fest going on around here lately.
Edit: I see you're raking umbrage with the word troll here and I thought I'd be clear I wasn't talking about you in my troll fest part of my comment.
I'm keeping my orginal statement. The two don't need each other. If they decide to destory themselves, it's capitalism and are free to do so.
Implicitly you are admitting that the alternative to keeping each other around until they find replacements is self-destructive. Truly it is. In a world where Wall Street punishes you for missing growth targets, a company gets absolutely devastated if they show negative growth. Samsung may have a lot of other customers, but if Apple suddenly ceased being one of them then their earnings would definitely suffer a hit. Likewise, if Apple's manufacturing capability decreases now, at a time when they already struggle to meet great demand, their earnings will take a hit.
Neither company will let that happen. Period. Apple will get their replacements lined up FIRST, and that won't be as easy as others on this thread make it out to be. It will take time, and build schedules look many months ahead. Tim Cook is the guru of supply chain management, and he is nobody's fool. Meanwhile, Samsung is not going to stop supplying parts to Apple just due to a fight on the other side of their business.
Big corporations don't act purely out of spite like individuals do. When they get a chance to satisfy their spite as a bonus, they do. But they won't cut off their nose for it. So these companies will continue doing business with one another until they can ramp away to a replacement. For the time being though, they absolutely need each other. It is much the same in many competitive industries: corporations are teammates and rivals at the same time. They manage to compartmentalize stuff much better than individuals. But many people on this thread are thinking of Samsung and Apple as individuals at war. That is a naive way to look at it.
Thompson
Implicitly you are admitting that the alternative to keeping each other around until they find replacements is self-destructive. Truly it is. In a world where Wall Street punishes you for missing growth targets, a company gets absolutely devastated if they show negative growth. Samsung may have a lot of other customers, but if Apple suddenly ceased being one of them then their earnings would definitely suffer a hit. Likewise, if Apple's manufacturing capability decreases now, at a time when they already struggle to meet great demand, their earnings will take a hit.
Neither company will let that happen. Period. Apple will get their replacements lined up FIRST, and that won't be as easy as others on this thread make it out to be. It will take time, and build schedules look many months ahead. Tim Cook is the guru of supply chain management, and he is nobody's fool. Meanwhile, Samsung is not going to stop supplying parts to Apple just due to a fight on the other side of their business.
Big corporations don't act purely out of spite like individuals do. When they get a chance to satisfy their spite as a bonus, they do. But they won't cut off their nose for it. So these companies will continue doing business with one another until they can ramp away to a replacement. For the time being though, they absolutely need each other. It is much the same in many competitive industries: corporations are teammates and rivals at the same time. They manage to compartmentalize stuff much better than individuals. But many people on this thread are thinking of Samsung and Apple as individuals at war. That is a naive way to look at it.
Thompson
Well, it's a good thing Steve Jobs didn't have full power over Apple....
I'm not so sure. Not that it matters much but tied at the hip does imply an untying in order to separate, as in a knot. If he had said joined at the hip I would agree. Again not that it matters much, I'm just trying not to respond to the troll fest going on around here lately.
Edit: I see you're raking umbrage with the word troll here and I thought I'd be clear I wasn't talking about you in my troll fest part of my comment.
In my best medical opinion, it is not possible to tie two hips in a knot. So I would consider "tied at the hip" and "unraveling a knot" to be mixed metaphors, particularly since the common saying is "joined" rather than "tied" at the hip (arguably, that alone is a mixed metaphor).
No worries about the troll remark. I wasn't so much taking or raking umbrage as I was giving hopefully well received (fat chance) advice.
That does not equate not testing and not meeting.
Is your slogan to Think Different Topic when caught unable to back up with facts?
It's been proven. Can you back up your facts? Don't come running in here wanting facts and you yourself have yet to bring in a single piece of evidence. Seems like there is a huge problem. Apple doesn't have focus groups like several other companies. In fact, some companies like Kellogs have launched products that failed because of that.
Lemme just leve this here:
It?s not about pop culture, and it?s not about fooling people, and it?s not about convincing people that they want something they don?t. We figure out what we want. And I think we?re pretty good at having the right discipline to think through whether a lot of other people are going to want it, too. That?s what we get paid to do. So you can?t go out and ask people, you know, what?s the next big [thing.] There?s a great quote by Henry Ford, right? He said, ?If I?d have asked my customers what they wanted, they would have told me ?A faster horse------Steve Jobs
Now, where's your evidence?
Why would they dispose of their top *design team*?
[insult removed] I was only joking. Lighten up.
And I thought we were done with Samsung news in 2011
We have two months left, man; what're you thinking?
That's time at least for fifteen more major articles, and not just here, I'll tell you.
Exactly. First to market does not a long term winner always make.
Your right Yoda, as usuall!
Well, it's a good thing Steve Jobs didn't have full power over Apple....
Jobs long ago put Cook in charge of the supply chain and logistics, with stunning effect. Jobs also let Cook be the guy that presided over the quarterly conference calls. Jobs knew that Cook was hell-on-wheels at that type of thing, and ultimately decided he would be best to run the show after.
There were certain things that Steve just left to Tim, and in spite of the former's micromanagement persona, he liked it when people brought competent arguments against him. My hunch is that Tim Cook won his share of disagreements with Steve when it came to such things. I could imagine the scene now...
Steve: I am going to nuclear war with Android right now, and I think we should just instantly stop all business with Samsung in order to hit them where it hurts. And we'll take down all others the same way if we have to, regardless of what it does to us.
Tim: I don't think that's a good idea, and here's why...
[Followed by a dazzling display of operational intellect that suggests another way that Apple can hit Samsung where it hurts and doesn't hurt Apple's operations in the slightest. The only con would be delayed gratification of Mr Steve's desire.]
Steve: Good, then. Carry on.
Thompson
In my best medical opinion, it is not possible to tie two hips in a knot. So I would consider "tied at the hip" and "unraveling a knot" to be mixed metaphors, particularly since the common saying is "joined" rather than "tied" at the hip (arguably, that alone is a mixed metaphor).
Yes, indeedy, I am known for my mixed metaphors. I love mixing 'em up. Why use only one metaphor when two can amuse? Love to kill the two birds, ya know? After all, a hand in the bush is better than two birds!
;-)
Thompson
[insult removed] I was only joking. Lighten up.
Lighten up? You're the one *raking* umbrage.
There's a saying, it goes something like this: If you can't take, don't give.
Lighten up? You're the one *raking* umbrage.
There's a saying, it goes something like this: If you can't take, don't give.
That absolutely makes no sense. That didn't answer my question.
It's funny how quickly you get an infraction point for an ad hominem attack (and I'm okay with that)... but you can skirt around the TOS by just using obvious taunts, trolling and antagonism time and time again without a warning... unless one or more members bitch loudly.
Anyway... off topic.... carry on.
Samsung stinks etc.
There is nothing wrong with suggesting that someone could leave and I see nothing wrong with trading taunt for taunt. Given that we are awash is trolls here, who never change their tune no matter what rational arguments are given, a polite suggestion to someone that the door is the rectangle with the handle does not seem out of place to me.