Ad hominem attacks weaken your argument. But that's okay, because your argument doesn't have any strength to begin with.
Yes, Samsung was making smartphones. Bad ones that nobody wanted to buy. So were a lot of people. Then the iPhone came along in 2007, and everyone's phones radically changed in design from having hardware keyboards taking up 40% of the device's face to having a capacitive touchscreen with software keyboard overnight.
To say otherwise is to ignore the stark reality that everyone (but you) recognizes.
Attacks aside, my argument needs no strength. It's a simple fact that Samsung was making smartphones before the iPhone came out.
I am not defending Samsung's actions, that's for the court system, but you must admit that Apple went into their relationship with Samsung eyes wide open. Samsung was already competing, and some would argue already copying, before Apple chose to source components from Samsung.
Your bias is showing when you state that Samsung phones were "Bad ones that nobody wanted". Facts please. IIRC, the BlackJack sold so poorly that it was immediately canned. Oh wait, no it wasn't - it sold so well that they came out with the BlackJack II.
When does it cost more to make a processor? It usually costs them less over time.
When raw materials go up, or demand increases.
For example, the Japan tsunami knocked out lots of silicon wafer production, along with chip fabs. About 25% of the world's chip production went off line, leading to parts shortages and price increases.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank
Samsung uses unfair business practices since they make a lot of the components commonly found in all smartphones and the go around and copy the component customer's products. Samsung has the following information and leverage to compete unfairly.
They know what components each mfg is planning on using, what price they pay, delivery schedules and they have the ability to charge whatever they want, deliver whatever they want, hold product back if they want, etc.
None of that is information about case or UI design, which is what they've been sued by Apple over... not about similar internals or displays (which they do not have).
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by MachineShedFred
Ad hominem attacks weaken your argument. But that's okay, because your argument doesn't have any strength to begin with.
Yes, Samsung was making smartphones. Bad ones that nobody wanted to buy. So were a lot of people. Then the iPhone came along in 2007, and everyone's phones radically changed in design from having hardware keyboards taking up 40% of the device's face to having a capacitive touchscreen with software keyboard overnight.
To say otherwise is to ignore the stark reality that everyone (but you) recognizes.
Attacks aside, my argument needs no strength. It's a simple fact that Samsung was making smartphones before the iPhone came out.
I am not defending Samsung's actions, that's for the court system, but you must admit that Apple went into their relationship with Samsung eyes wide open. Samsung was already competing, and some would argue already copying, before Apple chose to source components from Samsung.
Your bias is showing when you state that Samsung phones were "Bad ones that nobody wanted". Facts please. IIRC, the BlackJack sold so poorly that it was immediately canned. Oh wait, no it wasn't - it sold so well that they came out with the BlackJack II.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank
When does it cost more to make a processor? It usually costs them less over time.
When raw materials go up, or demand increases.
For example, the Japan tsunami knocked out lots of silicon wafer production, along with chip fabs. About 25% of the world's chip production went off line, leading to parts shortages and price increases.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank
Samsung uses unfair business practices since they make a lot of the components commonly found in all smartphones and the go around and copy the component customer's products. Samsung has the following information and leverage to compete unfairly.
They know what components each mfg is planning on using, what price they pay, delivery schedules and they have the ability to charge whatever they want, deliver whatever they want, hold product back if they want, etc.
None of that is information about case or UI design, which is what they've been sued by Apple over... not about similar internals or displays (which they do not have).