I have often watched as Apple sat on technology to wait patiently for the proper moment to implement it or led the led the pack with it such as USB and SSD's. This story has a new element to the strategic nature of adding such technology. Apple has always done what it thought was best for it's platform first. If this article is correct Apple has chosen to sandbag the application of new tech to its platform to keep the best new tech for itself and defend against Samsung. I have not heard of that idea before and it does make sense for Apple's strategy of skating to where the puck will be rather than just copying what is hot with the market. The 3 year lead time from planning and purchasing to sales would explain the lag in Apple's response to Samsung. It also would be one of the results of becoming so big that literally the whole tech business has to change it's supply chain for Apple to produce a new iPhone. Apple has probably been working on a wider choice of phones for that long as well. The CPU must be the first thing that is set in stone for the product to make it to market if it takes this long to get produced. I would have to say this article seem better rather than worse than the usual produced here. If it is not wishful thinking then Apple does have a large plan for improving its market share.
I wouldn't call him stupid by any measure. He's wrong, but he seems to do so in a deliberate, trollish way.
He can clearly write and research well — the Teckstuds and DaHarders of this forum.., not so much — he just chooses to take an anti-Apple stance on everything without any desire to be fair and balanced. He's to tech what FOX is to news.
Is it the same guy that's on MacRumors?
edit: Yep it is I checked. I see he has 20 years working on touch screens and then iPhone / iPad come along ... could explain his animosity!
The end goal is for Apple to get into the fab business. Remember that Apple wants to build the whole widget. They have the money and could buy their way in.
The end goal is for Apple to get into the fab business. Remember that Apple wants to build the whole widget. They have the money and could buy their way in.
I don't even begin to understand that subject but it sounds like a good idea to me.
I don't know about that, the article was a bunch of crap and frankly I'm not sure why AI let's this blogger post anymore. More so has anybody entertained the idea that Apple may be going to TSMC because they are ahead of just about everybody else process wise? Apple may have revenge in its heart or it may not, it really is hard to tell,but the word on the street is that TSMC company may very well beat everybody to the 14nm node.
While I don't see KDarlings response as perfect, he, along with others, rightly points that this article is most non sense and frankly is two pages too long. AI would really serve the reader base by posting the contributors name on the from page with the reticle link so that those with half a mind or more can just skip it.
Funny, being "paid by the word" is the thing that comes to mind every single time I read one of your posts. It's the only reason I can think of that you would spend to much time and thousands of posts on a website dedicated a company and products that you so vehemently despise.
The only thing that I (and the other real adults here) "despise", are people who hide behind personal attacks whenever they're insecure about their "facts". If you have a good counterargument, just give it.
Quote:
Oh, and thanks for the enlightenment about Apple's motives. Because, clearly, Apple, one of the largest and most successful companies on the planet, would decisions like this, that have tens of billions of dollars at stake, on such a childish notion as "revenge".
Yes, clearly Apple never had a CEO who would say something as childish as threatening to throw away everything his company ever made, just to get even with his competitors...
"I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple's $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong."
I do agree with those who also brought up the idea of greater secrecy by using a different company, although of course the moment something hits the market, it can be reverse engineered. So the secrecy is only good for a few months at most. Compared to the need for mass production of quality parts, it's not a great trade-off.
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips
Is it the same guy that's on MacRumors?
Yes, I'm the same guy who's been posting online for over thirty years under my own name, and have a rep for freely sharing rare facts, excellent research, and discussions without attacking others.
(You can tell who the cowards and internet bullies are around here. They take advantage of my usually turning the other cheek, by constantly throwing insults at me. Just makes them look bad.)
Quote:
edit: Yep it is I checked. I see he has 20 years working on touch screens and then iPhone / iPad come along ... could explain his animosity!
On the contrary, I've stated many times that I was very glad that the iPhone came out, as it made my experience extra valuable. I'd started with capacitive screens in 1992 and had been doing standalone HTML apps since 1995 or so. After Apple, suddenly I was in big demand, and was very involved in early 2007 development and information efforts.
I did the first realistic iPhone entry rewrites in Wikipedia (prior to that, people had written silly things like the idea that it was zoom top UI with windows into a huge world of pages).
I was an initial member of the first Google group dedicated to iPhone web app development. (I was the one who proposed that when the iPhone came out six months later, we'd probably be able to do a Javascript scrollTo call and make the browser addressbar disappear, and I was right. It ended up being quite a popular concept.)
For that group, I wrote and posted the first graphical analysis of the iPhone touch UI, explaining exactly why certain things were where they were, and what size. I helped multiple developers to have their web apps ready when the iPhone went on sale. This was long before Apple posted their own such guide.
Because of my posts in that group, I was invited to speak at major Apple gatherings around the world, by their sponsors (I had to turn them down due to health reasons). There are other things I did do for iOS, but cannot talk about yet.
So no, I'm not anti-Apple, I'm pro more information and debate, which riles some people.
I don't know about that, the article was a bunch of crap and frankly I'm not sure why AI let's this blogger post anymore. More so has anybody entertained the idea that Apple may be going to TSMC because they are ahead of just about everybody else process wise? Apple may have revenge in its heart or it may not, it really is hard to tell,but the word on the street is that TSMC company may very well beat everybody to the 14nm node.
While I don't see KDarlings response as perfect, he, along with others, rightly points that this article is most non sense and frankly is two pages too long. AI would really serve the reader base by posting the contributors name on the from page with the reticle link so that those with half a mind or more can just skip it.
Consider just the expression he used, "cutting off one's nose to spite one's face." He's not saying that Apple is moving away from Samsung for business reasons that don't align with Apple (to put it mildly) he's saying that Apple, as a company, is not acting in its or its shareholder best interests.
He's saying Apple has no concern for its own well being so long as it can negatively affect Samsung's bottom line. He's saying Apple, a company, is so overwhelmed with anger and hate that it will damage itself greatly in order to damage Samsung even a little bit. How can you see that as a reasonable and rational response?
Oh please! You honestly believe that rigid corporate firewall crap samsung is spewing about the information firewall between its mobile division and its semiconductor division?!! Hint: it does not exist, there one big happy company and they look at apples A series chip plans every time apple gives them a new one so they can copy it into there exynos designs.
I take it you've never worked for a company the size of Samsung? Companies of that size barely know how to get different departments talking to each other at the best of times. I've worked for a couple of Japanese corporations where the rivalry between different offices was far worse than any external competitor.
Yes, clearly Apple never had a CEO who would say something as childish as threatening to throw away everything his company ever made, just to get even with <span style="line-height:1.231;">his competitors...</span>
<span style="line-height:1.231;">"I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple's $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong."</span>
...
So no, I'm not anti-Apple, I'm anti-false info, which riles people who specialize in such.
Using sarcasm and using hyperbole are quite similar in a way.
In both cases, the speaker is trying to make a point while expecting the words not to be taken literally.
You used one to introduce an example of the other. Bravo!
The cherry on top was your announcement of your anti-false info crusade.
Truly a masterwork of bullshit.
I don't really think it's appropriate to have your main competitor making your chips for you. You don't want them having the power to cut off supply, and you also don't want them seeing the next gen designs. Apple is doing the right thing. And following the linked articles it's quite impressive how quickly TSMC have built new facilities.
Using sarcasm and using hyperbole are quite similar in a way.
In both cases, the speaker is trying to make a point while expecting the words not to be taken literally.
You used one to introduce an example of the other. Bravo!
The cherry on top was your announcement of your anti-false info crusade.
Truly a masterwork of bullshit.
I don't recall Tim Cook saying that nor do I recall Apple "cutting its nose to spite its face" by stopping all interaction with Samsung as soon as they knew Samsung had infringed on their IP. Seems to me that certain posters have been saying over and over since the lawsuits started that Apple uses Samsung components and/or foundries, which pretty much invalidates any claim that this is what Apple will do.
He's saying Apple has no concern for its own well being so long as it can negatively affect Samsung's bottom line. He's saying Apple, a company, is so overwhelmed with anger and hate that it will damage itself greatly in order to damage Samsung even a little bit. How can you see that as a reasonable and rational response?
Instead of putting words in my mouth, why not present your own take on the topic.
Do you think it's smart that Apple is dropping a reliable mass supplier for one that hasn't proven itself yet?
Do you agree with the original article that Apple moved away from Samsung because they thought the courts would find in Samsung's favor over some minor patents?
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
"While lawyers from Apple and Samsung argued their positions in court over many months, Apple's executive team wasn't willing to bet that the courts would resolve matters satisfactorily."
Yes, I'm the same guy who's been posting online for over thirty years under my own name, and have a rep for freely sharing rare facts, excellent research, and discussions without attacking others.
Seriously dude you need to update that picture then
I recall telling you on MacRumors you had posted the most inane post I had ever read but for the life of me I can't recall what it was now. I'm 32+ years in the Apple business so memory fading lol. Some seriously bad insult of SJ I recall.
Sorry, but that's not all you claimed I said. For instance, I didn't say that I thought Apple had no concern for its own well being. I'm quite sure that they think they do.
Still waiting for you to present your own take on why Apple is willing to leave a known good supplier.
Sorry, but that's not all you claimed I said. For instance, I didn't say that I thought Apple had no concern for its own well being. I'm quite sure that they think they do.
<span style="line-height:1.231;">Still waiting for you to present your own take on why Apple is willing to leave a known good supplier.</span>
There is absolutely zero ambiguity with the meaning of that expression. To cut off one's own nose means to damage one's self. Do you think cutting off your own nose to spite your face is in the best interests of your own well being? Seriously?!
There is absolutely zero ambiguity with the meaning of that expression. To cut off one's own nose means to damage one's self. Do you think cutting off your own nose to spite your face is in the best interests of your own well being? Seriously?!
Um, that's the whole point of the expression: the person doing it doesn't realize it's not in their best interests.
However, I'm willing to change the expression if it helps us get back to discussing the title article.
Samsung Mobile and Samsung Semiconductor are effectively separate companies. How a long time Samsung Mobile didn't even use Samsung chips in the majority of its phones and it's been reported that Samsung Mobile don't get a discount on the chips.
Maybe Apple was smart enough to realize that it wasn't Samsung Semiconductor copying Apple's designs or ridiculing the company.
At the trial where Samsung got hit with a billion dollar charge, it came out that the Samsung Semiconductor division was sending some pretty detailed information to the Samsung Mobile diviion. The purported firewall between these divisions was non-existent.
Comments
Is it the same guy that's on MacRumors?
edit: Yep it is I checked. I see he has 20 years working on touch screens and then iPhone / iPad come along ... could explain his animosity!
The end goal is for Apple to get into the fab business. Remember that Apple wants to build the whole widget. They have the money and could buy their way in.
I don't even begin to understand that subject but it sounds like a good idea to me.
I don't know about that, the article was a bunch of crap and frankly I'm not sure why AI let's this blogger post anymore. More so has anybody entertained the idea that Apple may be going to TSMC because they are ahead of just about everybody else process wise? Apple may have revenge in its heart or it may not, it really is hard to tell,but the word on the street is that TSMC company may very well beat everybody to the 14nm node.
While I don't see KDarlings response as perfect, he, along with others, rightly points that this article is most non sense and frankly is two pages too long. AI would really serve the reader base by posting the contributors name on the from page with the reticle link so that those with half a mind or more can just skip it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy
Funny, being "paid by the word" is the thing that comes to mind every single time I read one of your posts. It's the only reason I can think of that you would spend to much time and thousands of posts on a website dedicated a company and products that you so vehemently despise.
The only thing that I (and the other real adults here) "despise", are people who hide behind personal attacks whenever they're insecure about their "facts". If you have a good counterargument, just give it.
Quote:
Oh, and thanks for the enlightenment about Apple's motives. Because, clearly, Apple, one of the largest and most successful companies on the planet, would decisions like this, that have tens of billions of dollars at stake, on such a childish notion as "revenge".
Yes, clearly Apple never had a CEO who would say something as childish as threatening to throw away everything his company ever made, just to get even with his competitors...
"I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple's $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong."
I do agree with those who also brought up the idea of greater secrecy by using a different company, although of course the moment something hits the market, it can be reverse engineered. So the secrecy is only good for a few months at most. Compared to the need for mass production of quality parts, it's not a great trade-off.
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips
Is it the same guy that's on MacRumors?
Yes, I'm the same guy who's been posting online for over thirty years under my own name, and have a rep for freely sharing rare facts, excellent research, and discussions without attacking others.
(You can tell who the cowards and internet bullies are around here. They take advantage of my usually turning the other cheek, by constantly throwing insults at me. Just makes them look bad.)
Quote:
edit: Yep it is I checked. I see he has 20 years working on touch screens and then iPhone / iPad come along ... could explain his animosity!
On the contrary, I've stated many times that I was very glad that the iPhone came out, as it made my experience extra valuable. I'd started with capacitive screens in 1992 and had been doing standalone HTML apps since 1995 or so. After Apple, suddenly I was in big demand, and was very involved in early 2007 development and information efforts.
I did the first realistic iPhone entry rewrites in Wikipedia (prior to that, people had written silly things like the idea that it was zoom top UI with windows into a huge world of pages).
I was an initial member of the first Google group dedicated to iPhone web app development. (I was the one who proposed that when the iPhone came out six months later, we'd probably be able to do a Javascript scrollTo call and make the browser addressbar disappear, and I was right. It ended up being quite a popular concept.)
For that group, I wrote and posted the first graphical analysis of the iPhone touch UI, explaining exactly why certain things were where they were, and what size. I helped multiple developers to have their web apps ready when the iPhone went on sale. This was long before Apple posted their own such guide.
Because of my posts in that group, I was invited to speak at major Apple gatherings around the world, by their sponsors (I had to turn them down due to health reasons). There are other things I did do for iOS, but cannot talk about yet.
So no, I'm not anti-Apple, I'm pro more information and debate, which riles some people.
Consider just the expression he used, "cutting off one's nose to spite one's face." He's not saying that Apple is moving away from Samsung for business reasons that don't align with Apple (to put it mildly) he's saying that Apple, as a company, is not acting in its or its shareholder best interests.
He's saying Apple has no concern for its own well being so long as it can negatively affect Samsung's bottom line. He's saying Apple, a company, is so overwhelmed with anger and hate that it will damage itself greatly in order to damage Samsung even a little bit. How can you see that as a reasonable and rational response?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mechanic
Oh please! You honestly believe that rigid corporate firewall crap samsung is spewing about the information firewall between its mobile division and its semiconductor division?!! Hint: it does not exist, there one big happy company and they look at apples A series chip plans every time apple gives them a new one so they can copy it into there exynos designs.
I take it you've never worked for a company the size of Samsung? Companies of that size barely know how to get different departments talking to each other at the best of times. I've worked for a couple of Japanese corporations where the rivalry between different offices was far worse than any external competitor.
Using sarcasm and using hyperbole are quite similar in a way.
In both cases, the speaker is trying to make a point while expecting the words not to be taken literally.
You used one to introduce an example of the other. Bravo!
The cherry on top was your announcement of your anti-false info crusade.
Truly a masterwork of bullshit.
I don't really think it's appropriate to have your main competitor making your chips for you. You don't want them having the power to cut off supply, and you also don't want them seeing the next gen designs. Apple is doing the right thing. And following the linked articles it's quite impressive how quickly TSMC have built new facilities.
I don't recall Tim Cook saying that nor do I recall Apple "cutting its nose to spite its face" by stopping all interaction with Samsung as soon as they knew Samsung had infringed on their IP. Seems to me that certain posters have been saying over and over since the lawsuits started that Apple uses Samsung components and/or foundries, which pretty much invalidates any claim that this is what Apple will do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
He's saying Apple has no concern for its own well being so long as it can negatively affect Samsung's bottom line. He's saying Apple, a company, is so overwhelmed with anger and hate that it will damage itself greatly in order to damage Samsung even a little bit. How can you see that as a reasonable and rational response?
Instead of putting words in my mouth, why not present your own take on the topic.
Do you think it's smart that Apple is dropping a reliable mass supplier for one that hasn't proven itself yet?
Do you agree with the original article that Apple moved away from Samsung because they thought the courts would find in Samsung's favor over some minor patents?
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
"While lawyers from Apple and Samsung argued their positions in court over many months, Apple's executive team wasn't willing to bet that the courts would resolve matters satisfactorily."
Seriously dude you need to update that picture then
I recall telling you on MacRumors you had posted the most inane post I had ever read but for the life of me I can't recall what it was now. I'm 32+ years in the Apple business so memory fading lol. Some seriously bad insult of SJ I recall.
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips
Seriously dude you need to update that picture then
The photo's actually not that old, but my wife hates taking pictures so I'm stuck with it
At least I put a real picture up. It'd be interesting (and no doubt revealing) if everyone did so.
Quote:
I recall telling you on MacRumors you had posted the most inane post I had ever read but for the life of me I can't recall what it was now.
Are you same digitalclips who got banned on MacRumors, then the mods called you out for making up a false story why it happened?
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=16416483&postcount=229
"cutting its nose to spite its face"
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Sorry, but that's not all you claimed I said. For instance, I didn't say that I thought Apple had no concern for its own well being. I'm quite sure that they think they do.
Still waiting for you to present your own take on why Apple is willing to leave a known good supplier.
There is absolutely zero ambiguity with the meaning of that expression. To cut off one's own nose means to damage one's self. Do you think cutting off your own nose to spite your face is in the best interests of your own well being? Seriously?!
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
There is absolutely zero ambiguity with the meaning of that expression. To cut off one's own nose means to damage one's self. Do you think cutting off your own nose to spite your face is in the best interests of your own well being? Seriously?!
Um, that's the whole point of the expression: the person doing it doesn't realize it's not in their best interests.
However, I'm willing to change the expression if it helps us get back to discussing the title article.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL
Samsung Mobile and Samsung Semiconductor are effectively separate companies. How a long time Samsung Mobile didn't even use Samsung chips in the majority of its phones and it's been reported that Samsung Mobile don't get a discount on the chips.
Maybe Apple was smart enough to realize that it wasn't Samsung Semiconductor copying Apple's designs or ridiculing the company.
At the trial where Samsung got hit with a billion dollar charge, it came out that the Samsung Semiconductor division was sending some pretty detailed information to the Samsung Mobile diviion. The purported firewall between these divisions was non-existent.