Maybe to you, but think about how much money it takes to create some kind of wireless technologies? Better yet, why doesn't Apple pay royalties to LG for the fact that they copied LG's Prada phone? Before Prada phone, there weren't any candy bar type phones. It never existed.
OK you've had an irrelevant moment in the sun, now you can crawl back under your rock.
I think Apple should drop all law suits against Samsung to focus on innovation. Without Samsung's support, Apple will eventually loose iPhone's market to Moto X.
South Korea's statement was actually pretty vanilla. I'm sure it was carefully worded to pacify a large and powerful constituent while not angering the U.S. Gov't. Let's face it -- S. Korea needs the U.S., economically, militarily, and diplomatically, way more than the U.S. needs S. Korea.
On a somewhat related note, I don't subscribe to the view that Apple should start manufacturing it's own products, but I wonder if they have ever given serious consideration to purchasing a controlling stake in LG Electronics? LG's market cap is slightly less than $12 billion so they could definitely swing it by spending some of that off shore cash pile.
That would give Apple control over a major display and electronics manufacturer and also take the battle with Samsung to their own shores. This way Apple could compete with Samsung indirectly in many different areas and hopefully improve LG's consumer electronics offerings by giving them the Apple touch. BTW, I'm not suggesting that LG become a part of Apple. That would tank Apple's profit margins. Just be a majority shareholder and partner.
Same here, no more Samscum products. Does anybody know, is Vizio a subsidiary of Samsung? Is LG owned in any portion by them? Looking for other subsidiaries to avoid. Voting with my wallet.
Well, no more Apple products then? Without Samsung, Apple would not have been this successful and never likely be. Umm, how about Moto X?
Ridiculous.
If Samsung didn't exist, the iPhone would still exist. The standards bodies would have chosen different technologies. And Apple would have sourced its screens and CPUs from someone else. Sure, the specs might be somewhat different, but the basic design could still have been made.
If you thought the $1000 re-badged LG display (~$400) known as the Apple Thunderbolt Display was overpriced, just wait till you see an Apple TV.
Knowing Apple they would just take a Sharp LCD/LED panel, integrate a $100 Apple TV box and add $1000 to the price.
Let Apple do what they do best, software and computer packaged hardware.
There is no reason to introduce a middle-man for something as simple as a display.
I agree with you that I don't beleive Apple is going to build a TV set. That said; if they did, then obviously they would take Sharp (or whoever's) LCD panel.
Have you ever heard anyone suggest that Apple was going to start "manufacturing" its own LCD panels?
I own a Samsung TV, unfortunately. I went to buy a Sony to replace a older Sony but Salesman convinced me that Samsung was just as good, but cost less. I later found out that Samsung pays Salespeople more to push their products. I also found out that Samsung had done same thing to Sony that they did to Apple -- copy their product then underpriced Sony. The Samsung TV gave out after less than a year but I was able to get it fixed under warranty. My Sony TV lasted over 10 years without a problem. Samsung sucks in so many ways. I will never again buy another Samsung product.
When is Apple going to start paying for all the FRAND patents it uses?
Obama's veto is a huge blow to innovation as who in their right minds will want to risk all the R&D and money it takes to give their hard work to FRAND only have leaches like Apple refuse to pay for the technology?
Be careful of what you wish for because you might not like the out come.
If Samsung didn't exist, the iPhone would still exist. The standards bodies would have chosen different technologies. And Apple would have sourced its screens and CPUs from someone else. Sure, the specs might be somewhat different, but the basic design could still have been made.
So in effect Apple would be stealing someone else's patents?
I agree with you that I don't beleive Apple is going to build a TV set. That said; if they did, then obviously they would take Sharp (or whoever's) LCD panel.
Have you ever heard anyone suggest that Apple was going to start "manufacturing" its own LCD panels?
If they did, Sharp or LG would likely provide them with a panel.
They would never manufacture their own LCD panel. Apple is only good at packaging hardware, not creating it.
I own a Samsung TV, unfortunately. I went to buy a Sony to replace a older Sony but Salesman convinced me that Samsung was just as good, but cost less. I later found out that Samsung pays Salespeople more to push their products. I also found out that Samsung had done same thing to Sony that they did to Apple -- copy their product then underpriced Sony. The Samsung TV gave out after less than a year but I was able to get it fixed under warranty. My Sony TV lasted over 10 years without a problem. Samsung sucks in so many ways. I will never again buy another Samsung product.
In 2004, S-LCD was a 50:50 joint venture by Sony and Samsung to manufacture LCD displays. At the start of 2012, Sony sold their share to Samsung.
Your '10 year' old Sony display was pre-2004, and was likely CRT or rear projection.
It's funny how people are so stupid to cheer for a company they know little about. Like what I have said to my other comments, cheer for Android, boast about how great your Galaxy S4 is, but to be proud of a company you know little about, and worse defend them, a company as shrewd/cunning as Samsung, is it worth your honour pride and integrity?
Android needs competition to grow more and not a monopoly.
Learn more about the roots culture and practices of a company before defending them, or else just shut your mouth you'll just end up a moron.
Well, no more Apple products then? Without Samsung, Apple would not have been this successful and never likely be. Umm, how about Moto X?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Ridiculous.
If Samsung didn't exist, the iPhone would still exist. The standards bodies would have chosen different technologies. And Apple would have sourced its screens and CPUs from someone else. Sure, the specs might be somewhat different, but the basic design could still have been made.
Well, no more Apple products then? Without Samsung, Apple would not have been this successful and never likely be. Umm, how about Moto X?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Ridiculous.
If Samsung didn't exist, the iPhone would still exist. The standards bodies would have chosen different technologies. And Apple would have sourced its screens and CPUs from someone else. Sure, the specs might be somewhat different, but the basic design could still have been made.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb
?
Did you know that Apple invested in Samsung LCD production? And do you know how much Samsung gained from its business relationship with Apple?
Exactly why I pointed out how people would comment on something they know little about.
When is Apple going to start paying for all the FRAND patents it uses?
Obama's veto is a huge blow to innovation as who in their right minds will want to risk all the R&D and money it takes to give their hard work to FRAND only have leaches like Apple refuse to pay for the technology?
Be careful of what you wish for because you might not like the out come.
Did you know that Apple invested in Samsung LCD production? And do you know how much Samsung gained from its business relationship with Apple?
Exactly why I pointed out how people would comment on something they know little about.
edit: quotes
No I did not know that. (Thanks Gatorguy) I don't know that either. Would you please let us know how much Samsung gained from its business relationship with Apple? (with of course supporting links) Otherwise, please do not reply me.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by cottonluv8
Maybe to you, but think about how much money it takes to create some kind of wireless technologies? Better yet, why doesn't Apple pay royalties to LG for the fact that they copied LG's Prada phone? Before Prada phone, there weren't any candy bar type phones. It never existed.
OK you've had an irrelevant moment in the sun, now you can crawl back under your rock.
I think Apple should drop all law suits against Samsung to focus on innovation. Without Samsung's support, Apple will eventually loose iPhone's market to Moto X.
On a somewhat related note, I don't subscribe to the view that Apple should start manufacturing it's own products, but I wonder if they have ever given serious consideration to purchasing a controlling stake in LG Electronics? LG's market cap is slightly less than $12 billion so they could definitely swing it by spending some of that off shore cash pile.
That would give Apple control over a major display and electronics manufacturer and also take the battle with Samsung to their own shores. This way Apple could compete with Samsung indirectly in many different areas and hopefully improve LG's consumer electronics offerings by giving them the Apple touch. BTW, I'm not suggesting that LG become a part of Apple. That would tank Apple's profit margins. Just be a majority shareholder and partner.
Looking for other subsidiaries to avoid. Voting with my wallet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by palomine
Same here, no more Samscum products. Does anybody know, is Vizio a subsidiary of Samsung? Is LG owned in any portion by them?
Looking for other subsidiaries to avoid. Voting with my wallet.
Well, no more Apple products then? Without Samsung, Apple would not have been this successful and never likely be. Umm, how about Moto X?
Ridiculous.
If Samsung didn't exist, the iPhone would still exist. The standards bodies would have chosen different technologies. And Apple would have sourced its screens and CPUs from someone else. Sure, the specs might be somewhat different, but the basic design could still have been made.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAKings33
If you thought the $1000 re-badged LG display (~$400) known as the Apple Thunderbolt Display was overpriced, just wait till you see an Apple TV.
Knowing Apple they would just take a Sharp LCD/LED panel, integrate a $100 Apple TV box and add $1000 to the price.
Let Apple do what they do best, software and computer packaged hardware.
There is no reason to introduce a middle-man for something as simple as a display.
I agree with you that I don't beleive Apple is going to build a TV set. That said; if they did, then obviously they would take Sharp (or whoever's) LCD panel.
Have you ever heard anyone suggest that Apple was going to start "manufacturing" its own LCD panels?
Samsung owns the South Korean Govt & media.
I own a Samsung TV, unfortunately. I went to buy a Sony to replace a older Sony but Salesman convinced me that Samsung was just as good, but cost less. I later found out that Samsung pays Salespeople more to push their products. I also found out that Samsung had done same thing to Sony that they did to Apple -- copy their product then underpriced Sony. The Samsung TV gave out after less than a year but I was able to get it fixed under warranty. My Sony TV lasted over 10 years without a problem. Samsung sucks in so many ways. I will never again buy another Samsung product.
When is Apple going to start paying for all the FRAND patents it uses?
Obama's veto is a huge blow to innovation as who in their right minds will want to risk all the R&D and money it takes to give their hard work to FRAND only have leaches like Apple refuse to pay for the technology?
Be careful of what you wish for because you might not like the out come.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Ridiculous.
If Samsung didn't exist, the iPhone would still exist. The standards bodies would have chosen different technologies. And Apple would have sourced its screens and CPUs from someone else. Sure, the specs might be somewhat different, but the basic design could still have been made.
So in effect Apple would be stealing someone else's patents?
Quote:
Originally Posted by backstab
I agree with you that I don't beleive Apple is going to build a TV set. That said; if they did, then obviously they would take Sharp (or whoever's) LCD panel.
Have you ever heard anyone suggest that Apple was going to start "manufacturing" its own LCD panels?
If they did, Sharp or LG would likely provide them with a panel.
They would never manufacture their own LCD panel. Apple is only good at packaging hardware, not creating it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ybfmiami
I own a Samsung TV, unfortunately. I went to buy a Sony to replace a older Sony but Salesman convinced me that Samsung was just as good, but cost less. I later found out that Samsung pays Salespeople more to push their products. I also found out that Samsung had done same thing to Sony that they did to Apple -- copy their product then underpriced Sony. The Samsung TV gave out after less than a year but I was able to get it fixed under warranty. My Sony TV lasted over 10 years without a problem. Samsung sucks in so many ways. I will never again buy another Samsung product.
In 2004, S-LCD was a 50:50 joint venture by Sony and Samsung to manufacture LCD displays. At the start of 2012, Sony sold their share to Samsung.
Your '10 year' old Sony display was pre-2004, and was likely CRT or rear projection.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR
South Korean government expresses concern?
Well, of course.
Samsung IS the South Korean government.
Here too.
I will not buy another Samsung product again, on principle alone.
In fact, give me a chance to buy Samsung or another, more expensive brand, I'm willing to pay MORE to ensure it isn't a Samsung.
I highly recommend others follow this example to send a message.
Many South Koreans feel the same:
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2013/04/21/apple-samsung-agent-provocateurs/?iid=obinsite
It's funny how people are so stupid to cheer for a company they know little about. Like what I have said to my other comments, cheer for Android, boast about how great your Galaxy S4 is, but to be proud of a company you know little about, and worse defend them, a company as shrewd/cunning as Samsung, is it worth your honour pride and integrity?
Android needs competition to grow more and not a monopoly.
Learn more about the roots culture and practices of a company before defending them, or else just shut your mouth you'll just end up a moron.
http://www.theverge.com/2012/11/30/3709688/samsung-25-years-lee-kun-hee
http://stopsamsung.wordpress.com
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/151854/quite-smooth-samsung-actually-sold-1-10-of-the-2-million-galaxy-tabs-it-claimed-in-2010
edit: Almost 2 years free from Samsung branded products. Started when I learned about their roots and practices.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb
Well, no more Apple products then? Without Samsung, Apple would not have been this successful and never likely be. Umm, how about Moto X?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Ridiculous.
If Samsung didn't exist, the iPhone would still exist. The standards bodies would have chosen different technologies. And Apple would have sourced its screens and CPUs from someone else. Sure, the specs might be somewhat different, but the basic design could still have been made.
?
Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb
Well, no more Apple products then? Without Samsung, Apple would not have been this successful and never likely be. Umm, how about Moto X?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Ridiculous.
If Samsung didn't exist, the iPhone would still exist. The standards bodies would have chosen different technologies. And Apple would have sourced its screens and CPUs from someone else. Sure, the specs might be somewhat different, but the basic design could still have been made.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb
?
Did you know that Apple invested in Samsung LCD production? And do you know how much Samsung gained from its business relationship with Apple?
Exactly why I pointed out how people would comment on something they know little about.
edit: quotes
Yes they did, almost 15 years ago. I don't recall anyone bringing that up tho they may have.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
Yes they did, almost 15 years ago. I don't recall anyone bringing that up tho they may have.
It's more like somewhere between 1999-2001, to help Samsung increase their LCD production capacity also helping to bring cheaper prices to market.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Victory2013
When is Apple going to start paying for all the FRAND patents it uses?
Obama's veto is a huge blow to innovation as who in their right minds will want to risk all the R&D and money it takes to give their hard work to FRAND only have leaches like Apple refuse to pay for the technology?
Be careful of what you wish for because you might not like the out come.
Can we ban idiots like this? Waste of bandwidth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daredevil
Did you know that Apple invested in Samsung LCD production? And do you know how much Samsung gained from its business relationship with Apple?
Exactly why I pointed out how people would comment on something they know little about.
edit: quotes
No I did not know that. (Thanks Gatorguy) I don't know that either. Would you please let us know how much Samsung gained from its business relationship with Apple? (with of course supporting links) Otherwise, please do not reply me.