I've been saying for ages that Apple needs to move production of components from Samsung to other suppliers; the problem is that Samsung truly is a relieable supplier at the volumes that Apple needs. That said, I would like to see them move more production to other vendors and, in particilar, find someone who can manufacture their SOCs which would be a major hit to Samsung. But, even here, I have mixed feelings because Samsung manufactures a good deal of the se SOCs in Texas whereas other suppliers are less likely to have fabs here in the US.
I truly believe that the fact the Samsung's LSI division wrote a report specifically on a customer's product (the iPhone) was one of the most damning pieces of evidence. They knew what they were doing was wrong but tried to keep it under the radar by not having the report written by Samsung's mobile division.
I think I found a copy of a video surveillance tape from the Samsung plant when they were discussing the various intellectual property held by the various divisions:
Can you imagine if Samsung was producing the new IPS screen on the upcoming iPhone5, instead of LG. If they were producing that part.. I'd bet money that a Galaxy S3i would magically pop on on on Sept 11th, with an IPS screen.
Nonsense, Samsung makes AMOLED panels. They've moved on from LCD some time ago for mobile displays; which is why LG has that market cornered.
To me, this shows a level of maturity that indicates that level-head prevail when rational conversations are had... Even between Apple and Samsung.
It takes an awfully big person to sue a parent company for a record breaking amount (because they refused to negotiate or discuss reasonable solutions), only to turn around and order a record breaking number of parts from one of their subsidiaries.
I, for one, applaud Tim Cooks ability to keep business and emotion in separate corners.
This. Apple is a business, and Samsung will probably continue to have a significant role to play as a component supplier. It's much more likely that, within a few months, both parties will find a way to wrap up the litigation related issues and move on from it.
This. Apple is a business, and Samsung will probably continue to have a significant role to play as a component supplier. It's much more likely that, within a few months, both parties will find a way to wrap up the litigation related issues and move on from it.
I wonder if Samsung would want to raise component prices thus offsetting lawsuit losses as well as potential future losses that will come from banning, licensing, and/or getting rid of popular features from their devices.
I wonder if Samsung would want to raise component prices thus offsetting lawsuit losses as well as potential future losses that will come from banning, licensing, and/or getting rid of popular features from their devices.
I don't think Apple will suddenly become stupid when it comes to their sourcing practices. Among the many skills they seem to have institutionalized, supply chain management is probably the top one (even higher than product design, in my view). A billion dollars is so significant to Samsung, and most likely the final figure is not going to be a cash transfer but instead covered through credits or discounts on other transactions.
I think the calls for Apple to dump Samsung as a supplier are a little premature.
Samsung the Component Supplier is not the same as Samsung the Smartphone Maker.
I agree. It's fairly normal for companies as large as Apple and Samsung to develop business relationships with other companies even when certain arms of the two companies are involved in ongoing litigation. If a company as vast and multi-faceted as Apple refused to trade with any businesses it had litigated against, business would become more difficult and expensive.
[QUOTE]Samsung hopes 'strict internal firewall' will protect Apple parts deals [/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]the company held an emergency meeting on Sunday led by vice chairman Coi Gee-sung and head of Samsung's mobile business[/QUOTE]
This announcement appears to be a tactic by Gee-sung Choi to answer a question before Apple asks it, to wit: "Going forward Mr. Kwon Oh-hyun (Samsung CEO) how can we protect ourselves from Samsung stealing our IP in the future?"
Moreover, being found guilty of stealing is a tremendous loss of face for Gee-sung and his division, I'll bet he disappears from the top of the masthead quick.
Personally, what Samsung is doing is conflict of interest.
A component supplier to various companies in a particular industry should NOT compete by bringing out a product that goes after the same market.
I think Samsung should spin off their computer and mobile divisions into COMPLETELY separate companies that don't report to Samsung top management and have to use a different name.
Just like Microsoft should not OEM their WIndows software to various computer, tablet, smartphone, server vendors and then backstab them by coming out with a competing product.
I wonder how much Samsung's yearly revenue would be without Apple.
Much lower.
First, take out the $10 B in products that Apple buys from Samsung.
Then, take out a large chunk of the mobile products that Samsung copied from Apple. Without their copying, they likely would have grown at rates comparable to the other OEMs, so their sales would probably be half of what they are now.
Then there are the second order effects. By having $10 B in business from Apple and many billions of dollars in ill-gotten mobile sales, Samsung had the leverage to optimize their manufacturing, make capital investments, and reduce their costs. That made them more competitive with everything they sell.
Again, even if Apple gets the damages tripled and the Tab added under Rule 50, Samsung has benefited greatly from their theft. That's not fair
Comments
I've been saying for ages that Apple needs to move production of components from Samsung to other suppliers; the problem is that Samsung truly is a relieable supplier at the volumes that Apple needs. That said, I would like to see them move more production to other vendors and, in particilar, find someone who can manufacture their SOCs which would be a major hit to Samsung. But, even here, I have mixed feelings because Samsung manufactures a good deal of the se SOCs in Texas whereas other suppliers are less likely to have fabs here in the US.
I truly believe that the fact the Samsung's LSI division wrote a report specifically on a customer's product (the iPhone) was one of the most damning pieces of evidence. They knew what they were doing was wrong but tried to keep it under the radar by not having the report written by Samsung's mobile division.
That's the beauty of moving the SOCs manufacturing to TSMC or Global Foundries - they don't make finished goods.
I think I found a copy of a video surveillance tape from the Samsung plant when they were discussing the various intellectual property held by the various divisions:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daekwan
Can you imagine if Samsung was producing the new IPS screen on the upcoming iPhone5, instead of LG. If they were producing that part.. I'd bet money that a Galaxy S3i would magically pop on on on Sept 11th, with an IPS screen.
Nonsense, Samsung makes AMOLED panels. They've moved on from LCD some time ago for mobile displays; which is why LG has that market cornered.
Apple should go to Advanced Micro Systems and get it to fab a custom chip.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcode
To me, this shows a level of maturity that indicates that level-head prevail when rational conversations are had... Even between Apple and Samsung.
It takes an awfully big person to sue a parent company for a record breaking amount (because they refused to negotiate or discuss reasonable solutions), only to turn around and order a record breaking number of parts from one of their subsidiaries.
I, for one, applaud Tim Cooks ability to keep business and emotion in separate corners.
This. Apple is a business, and Samsung will probably continue to have a significant role to play as a component supplier. It's much more likely that, within a few months, both parties will find a way to wrap up the litigation related issues and move on from it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell
Apple should go to Advanced Micro Systems and get it to fab a custom chip.
AMD would f it up like everything else they do... Go with Intel, a pro!
So now they are professing to have integrity as an ethical company?
Not only is Apple finding new hardware partners, in MHO they will pull back to the US some.
Quote:
Originally Posted by focher
This. Apple is a business, and Samsung will probably continue to have a significant role to play as a component supplier. It's much more likely that, within a few months, both parties will find a way to wrap up the litigation related issues and move on from it.
I wonder if Samsung would want to raise component prices thus offsetting lawsuit losses as well as potential future losses that will come from banning, licensing, and/or getting rid of popular features from their devices.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason98
I wonder if Samsung would want to raise component prices thus offsetting lawsuit losses as well as potential future losses that will come from banning, licensing, and/or getting rid of popular features from their devices.
I don't think Apple will suddenly become stupid when it comes to their sourcing practices. Among the many skills they seem to have institutionalized, supply chain management is probably the top one (even higher than product design, in my view). A billion dollars is so significant to Samsung, and most likely the final figure is not going to be a cash transfer but instead covered through credits or discounts on other transactions.
I think the calls for Apple to dump Samsung as a supplier are a little premature.
Samsung the Component Supplier is not the same as Samsung the Smartphone Maker.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd_in_sb
Samsung will lose all of Apple's business one day. The damage is done.
And other potential clients as well I expect. A "potential theft" discount is going to have to be baked into any deal with Samsung from now on?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610
I think the calls for Apple to dump Samsung as a supplier are a little premature.
Samsung the Component Supplier is not the same as Samsung the Smartphone Maker.
Well, actually, in the incidents at trial that's not quite the case: the component supplier leaked like a sieve all over the smartphone maker.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610
I think the calls for Apple to dump Samsung as a supplier are a little premature.
Samsung the Component Supplier is not the same as Samsung the Smartphone Maker.
I agree. It's fairly normal for companies as large as Apple and Samsung to develop business relationships with other companies even when certain arms of the two companies are involved in ongoing litigation. If a company as vast and multi-faceted as Apple refused to trade with any businesses it had litigated against, business would become more difficult and expensive.
I wonder how much Samsung's yearly revenue would be without Apple.
[QUOTE]the company held an emergency meeting on Sunday led by vice chairman Coi Gee-sung and head of Samsung's mobile business[/QUOTE]
This announcement appears to be a tactic by Gee-sung Choi to answer a question before Apple asks it, to wit: "Going forward Mr. Kwon Oh-hyun (Samsung CEO) how can we protect ourselves from Samsung stealing our IP in the future?"
Moreover, being found guilty of stealing is a tremendous loss of face for Gee-sung and his division, I'll bet he disappears from the top of the masthead quick.
Personally, what Samsung is doing is conflict of interest.
A component supplier to various companies in a particular industry should NOT compete by bringing out a product that goes after the same market.
I think Samsung should spin off their computer and mobile divisions into COMPLETELY separate companies that don't report to Samsung top management and have to use a different name.
Just like Microsoft should not OEM their WIndows software to various computer, tablet, smartphone, server vendors and then backstab them by coming out with a competing product.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST.
Much lower.
First, take out the $10 B in products that Apple buys from Samsung.
Then, take out a large chunk of the mobile products that Samsung copied from Apple. Without their copying, they likely would have grown at rates comparable to the other OEMs, so their sales would probably be half of what they are now.
Then there are the second order effects. By having $10 B in business from Apple and many billions of dollars in ill-gotten mobile sales, Samsung had the leverage to optimize their manufacturing, make capital investments, and reduce their costs. That made them more competitive with everything they sell.
Again, even if Apple gets the damages tripled and the Tab added under Rule 50, Samsung has benefited greatly from their theft. That's not fair