Sharps pains have been related to rolling out a new facility. Sharp has been making flat panel displays longer than Samsung and can make a great display. In fact, Sharp sued Samsung over much of the same IP type claims Apple is now suing Samsung. So Apple and Sharp should be good partners. Moreover, quality is consistent with Sharp. It is the only TV manufacture who makes all of its own displays. The Internet Boards are full of unhappy Samsung buyers who brought home a TV with a lower quality display than the one found at the store. On Amazon, Sharp consistently gets the best remarks for quality.
Panasonic recently said it wanted to stop selling TVs and focus on supplying companies like Apple displays. That is another potential partner.
Agree on both counts. Sharp and Panasonic would be great partners for Apple, from this consumer's point of view at least.
Well, they couldn't compete with Samsung when they were much financially off back in the 90's. Why are they going to all of sudden make *better* products now?
Everyone in the display business is losing money - except for Samsung. Everyone in the semi business (memory) is losing money - except Samsung and Toshiba.
And in both of those key businesses they are about to lose their single biggest customer. Can Samsung mobile make up for those orders? Maybe. It was only a couple years ago that Samsung's mobile business was so bad that they stopped reporting on their sales and rolled them into the display numbers (because that made a ton of sense). Getting the Nexus twice has put them far and away at the top of the Android world, but for how long? Can other companies make up for Apple leaving? Maybe. Given their financial state, relying on the other Android vendors probably isn't a great goal either.
'kaioslider' is correct. Apple invested $100MM into Samsung to lead in the LCD space in 1999. (Is that a picture of Steve Jobs happy with Samsung? Those were the days - See here...)
Apple, Foxconn and others have been pouring Billions into Sharp (and others?) for the next generation of need in LCD and their bets are well placed. Samsung can keep the flexible and LED market.
What people/investors miss is the fact that the value of the commodity components (i.e. LCD, etc.) is not in the hardware specs but in the software, apps and media. When Apple does go after the Chinese and 'last mile' markets with cheaper commodity hardware, the value and healthy margin will still be there. Samsung will be there too with their cheaper hardware and BADA, not Android as Android is becoming too encumbered by litigation. Still, it is easy to see in the culture of Samsung that they too will become a secondary player and not dominant like Sony was/is.
The Samsung announcement should have read, "Samsung will no longer be a supplier of any components to Apple by the end of 2014." Flash has been pulled away, LCD is being phased out and SoC chip manufacturing will most likely end in 2014.
So it ends a 15 year relationship, 1999-2014. It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom (Apple), it was the age of foolishness (Samsung).
Actually neither of you have any idea what you are talking about. Samsung was not a small mom-and-pop shop near Busan, South Korea in 1999. Samsung was already a huge conglomerate, though not as big as Sony back then, many times bigger than Apple in terms of sales, profit, employees, etc, etc. To claim that Apple's puny $100M investment somehow changed Samsung is not even laughable.
Of course, there was (and is) no such firewall. There are well over 100 Samsung subsidiaries under Samsung Electronics - and I'm not sure why, but many here in AI seem to believe that they are all compartmentalized, firewall'ed, etc. No, these are nothing more than legal / accounting niceties.
but many here in AI seem to believe that they are all compartmentalized, firewall'ed, etc. No, these are nothing more than legal / accounting niceties.
Strange, I'd never thought so myself and assumed the latter. Samsung mobile's design direction in the past few years would show this to be true.
Screw Samsung. I'd rather my stock took a short term hit because of supply issues rather than apple pay these scumbags another dime!
Originally Posted by cameronj
What about a long term hit?
There is none for Apple; there are several good suppliers waiting and happy. Apple wouldn't have pushed this if they would suffer when Samsung: "says we quit you Apple"
Samsung loses out here, both from parts manufacturing and their early spying activity on Apple.
many here in AI seem to believe that they are all compartmentalized, firewall'ed, etc. No, these are nothing more than legal / accounting niceties.
Actually I do think that the Samsung businesses in question are compartmentalized between components sales and their other mobile devices department, I read it over the Korean times earlier this year. They were affirming that sales of components weren't done according to what could be the best interests of the other department (e.g. keeping the latest tech for them, etc), but to sale the most. Which is rather logical as it grows their business wherever their other products are a success or not.
So you have no reason to be posting at all and your posts in this thread thus far are spam, got it.
Either agree, rebut, or leave.
Nope, as you could see I replied to another comment with my facts, only you are trying to both ignite and keep up an useless flame war, which isn't exactly nice from a moderator.
It will happen eventually but it is more likely to be Apple's choice than Samsung's. Samsung knows it would be dumb to completely forgo lucrative guaranteed sales from Apple in favour of the supplying their own mobile division. They probably remember that it was only a couple years ago that their mobile sales were so poor they had to hide their numbers in with their display sales. While they rule the Android space for now, that can change in a heart beat. Putting all their eggs in one basket, and a basket that isn't that well made, probably isn't an idea they want to pursue.
It will happen eventually but it is more likely to be Apple's choice than Samsung's. Samsung knows it would be dumb to completely forgo lucrative guaranteed sales from Apple in favour of the supplying their own mobile division. They probably remember that it was only a couple years ago that their mobile sales were so poor they had to hide their numbers in with their display sales. While they rule the Android space for now, that can change in a heart beat. Putting all their eggs in one basket, and a basket that isn't that well made, probably isn't an idea they want to pursue.
You talk like Apple can reign supreme for many years. Remember how Nokia was #1 not too many years ago? The same thing could happen to your love child.
Samsung has diverse businesses that can supplant each other with funds and core competencies. Therefore, they can weather the various storms thrown at them in both booms and bust times. Apple, on the other hand, do not have that luxury.
Take a look at this:
Quote:
Mark Newman, who follows Samsung for Bernstein Research in Hong Kong said Tuesday that he thinks Apple is moving away from Samsung over the long term. “But the concern over this is overdone,” he said.
Samsung, Mr. Newman said, may be better off with customers that don’t apply the pricing and margin pressure that Apple can because of its huge purchase volumes. “Since Apple is the worst possible customer to imagine in terms of requirements and willingness to pay, I believe long term they are better off without Apple,” he said of Samsung. “Furthermore, longer term an Apple without Samsung’s components will be less able to compete in the marketplace, which further benefits Samsung.”
He added that Samsung’s profit margins would see little impact if it lost Apple as a buyer of memory chips and displays, noting that broad industry demand and price swings have bigger effect than a single customer’s business.
All those statements are from someone who actually follows the industry and have know-how.
I was told the opposite when I asked the manager at my Apple Store. There is apparently another way to be guaranteed a Samsung LCD and that is to buy the top of the line model which is what I did.
This is absolutely incorrect. At the store where I got my mid-level rMBP, there were approximately 15 high-end rMBPs in stock. Only 1 of those had a Samsung display.
Like I said, most managers will not admit to the existence of said system either because they don't know it exists or they don't want a flood of customers choosing a product based on the component manufacturer.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by monstrosity
It's a fickle market unless you have an insanely loyal user base such that apple enjoys.
Funnily enough last night a couple of my friends were saying some fairly insane things in their derision of all things Apple/iPhone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell
Sharps pains have been related to rolling out a new facility. Sharp has been making flat panel displays longer than Samsung and can make a great display. In fact, Sharp sued Samsung over much of the same IP type claims Apple is now suing Samsung. So Apple and Sharp should be good partners. Moreover, quality is consistent with Sharp. It is the only TV manufacture who makes all of its own displays. The Internet Boards are full of unhappy Samsung buyers who brought home a TV with a lower quality display than the one found at the store. On Amazon, Sharp consistently gets the best remarks for quality.
Panasonic recently said it wanted to stop selling TVs and focus on supplying companies like Apple displays. That is another potential partner.
Agree on both counts. Sharp and Panasonic would be great partners for Apple, from this consumer's point of view at least.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tooltalk
Well, they couldn't compete with Samsung when they were much financially off back in the 90's. Why are they going to all of sudden make *better* products now?
Everyone in the display business is losing money - except for Samsung. Everyone in the semi business (memory) is losing money - except Samsung and Toshiba.
And in both of those key businesses they are about to lose their single biggest customer. Can Samsung mobile make up for those orders? Maybe. It was only a couple years ago that Samsung's mobile business was so bad that they stopped reporting on their sales and rolled them into the display numbers (because that made a ton of sense). Getting the Nexus twice has put them far and away at the top of the Android world, but for how long? Can other companies make up for Apple leaving? Maybe. Given their financial state, relying on the other Android vendors probably isn't a great goal either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas
Can Samsung mobile make up for those orders?
Oh, I'm sure Samsung's smooth sales can do make up the difference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GhostOfApple
'kaioslider' is correct. Apple invested $100MM into Samsung to lead in the LCD space in 1999. (Is that a picture of Steve Jobs happy with Samsung? Those were the days - See here...)
http://www.samsung.com/global/business/lcdpanel/newsView.do?news_id=364
Apple, Foxconn and others have been pouring Billions into Sharp (and others?) for the next generation of need in LCD and their bets are well placed. Samsung can keep the flexible and LED market.
What people/investors miss is the fact that the value of the commodity components (i.e. LCD, etc.) is not in the hardware specs but in the software, apps and media. When Apple does go after the Chinese and 'last mile' markets with cheaper commodity hardware, the value and healthy margin will still be there. Samsung will be there too with their cheaper hardware and BADA, not Android as Android is becoming too encumbered by litigation. Still, it is easy to see in the culture of Samsung that they too will become a secondary player and not dominant like Sony was/is.
The Samsung announcement should have read, "Samsung will no longer be a supplier of any components to Apple by the end of 2014." Flash has been pulled away, LCD is being phased out and SoC chip manufacturing will most likely end in 2014.
So it ends a 15 year relationship, 1999-2014. It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom (Apple), it was the age of foolishness (Samsung).
Actually neither of you have any idea what you are talking about. Samsung was not a small mom-and-pop shop near Busan, South Korea in 1999. Samsung was already a huge conglomerate, though not as big as Sony back then, many times bigger than Apple in terms of sales, profit, employees, etc, etc. To claim that Apple's puny $100M investment somehow changed Samsung is not even laughable.
Of course, there was (and is) no such firewall. There are well over 100 Samsung subsidiaries under Samsung Electronics - and I'm not sure why, but many here in AI seem to believe that they are all compartmentalized, firewall'ed, etc. No, these are nothing more than legal / accounting niceties.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tooltalk
but many here in AI seem to believe that they are all compartmentalized, firewall'ed, etc. No, these are nothing more than legal / accounting niceties.
Strange, I'd never thought so myself and assumed the latter. Samsung mobile's design direction in the past few years would show this to be true.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FreeRange
Screw Samsung. I'd rather my stock took a short term hit because of supply issues rather than apple pay these scumbags another dime!
Originally Posted by cameronj
What about a long term hit?
There is none for Apple; there are several good suppliers waiting and happy. Apple wouldn't have pushed this if they would suffer when Samsung: "says we quit you Apple"
Samsung loses out here, both from parts manufacturing and their early spying activity on Apple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ Web
Then simply Google "broken samsung tv" and get countless hits!
That statement just attracts people like me to fire back the bullet you've just shot.
Here are FACTUAL queries from Google.
"broken samsung tv" About 12,000,000 results
"broken iphone" About 235,000,000 results
That is close to 20 times more results.
Oh snap.
Just to be fair
"broken galaxy s" About 19,100,000 results
See how that works?
deleted
Originally Posted by Sensi
Balanced article (good), ignorant comments (bad).
So reply to them with the truth.
Awwww
Seem that the story was just ... false LOL.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57537773-37/samsung-says-its-still-supplying-lcd-panels-to-apple/
Dang.
Originally Posted by Sensi
I won't lose more time spoiling rampant fanboism with facts or moderation, that's endless.
So you have no reason to be posting at all and your posts in this thread thus far are spam, got it.
Either agree, rebut, or leave.
Lol. Let it keep civil, I don't like unwarranted threats.
You were already called out at how tenuous those kinds of search queries can be in supporting your opinion, seriously.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathillien
Awwww
Seem that the story was just ... false LOL.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57537773-37/samsung-says-its-still-supplying-lcd-panels-to-apple/
Dang.
It will happen eventually but it is more likely to be Apple's choice than Samsung's. Samsung knows it would be dumb to completely forgo lucrative guaranteed sales from Apple in favour of the supplying their own mobile division. They probably remember that it was only a couple years ago that their mobile sales were so poor they had to hide their numbers in with their display sales. While they rule the Android space for now, that can change in a heart beat. Putting all their eggs in one basket, and a basket that isn't that well made, probably isn't an idea they want to pursue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas
It will happen eventually but it is more likely to be Apple's choice than Samsung's. Samsung knows it would be dumb to completely forgo lucrative guaranteed sales from Apple in favour of the supplying their own mobile division. They probably remember that it was only a couple years ago that their mobile sales were so poor they had to hide their numbers in with their display sales. While they rule the Android space for now, that can change in a heart beat. Putting all their eggs in one basket, and a basket that isn't that well made, probably isn't an idea they want to pursue.
You talk like Apple can reign supreme for many years. Remember how Nokia was #1 not too many years ago? The same thing could happen to your love child.
Samsung has diverse businesses that can supplant each other with funds and core competencies. Therefore, they can weather the various storms thrown at them in both booms and bust times. Apple, on the other hand, do not have that luxury.
Take a look at this:
Quote:
Mark Newman, who follows Samsung for Bernstein Research in Hong Kong said Tuesday that he thinks Apple is moving away from Samsung over the long term. “But the concern over this is overdone,” he said.
Samsung, Mr. Newman said, may be better off with customers that don’t apply the pricing and margin pressure that Apple can because of its huge purchase volumes. “Since Apple is the worst possible customer to imagine in terms of requirements and willingness to pay, I believe long term they are better off without Apple,” he said of Samsung. “Furthermore, longer term an Apple without Samsung’s components will be less able to compete in the marketplace, which further benefits Samsung.”
He added that Samsung’s profit margins would see little impact if it lost Apple as a buyer of memory chips and displays, noting that broad industry demand and price swings have bigger effect than a single customer’s business.
All those statements are from someone who actually follows the industry and have know-how.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
I was told the opposite when I asked the manager at my Apple Store. There is apparently another way to be guaranteed a Samsung LCD and that is to buy the top of the line model which is what I did.
This is absolutely incorrect. At the store where I got my mid-level rMBP, there were approximately 15 high-end rMBPs in stock. Only 1 of those had a Samsung display.
Like I said, most managers will not admit to the existence of said system either because they don't know it exists or they don't want a flood of customers choosing a product based on the component manufacturer.