Yes! Ewan McGregor - he could be Tim Cook's son! I see some Matt Damon there too.
Ah yes I see that. I was thinking of people closer to his age. A failure of creativity on my part. I guess Tallest Skil gets the gold star on this one, damn him *shakes fist at the sky in futility*.
Whew! Thanks for clarifying that. Now that the fly shit has been properly sorted from the pepper I'm sure we'll all sleep better.
I think the point folks were making here wasn't so much about the semantics of "complaint" vs "charges" but whether pursuing criminal prosecution was a good idea at all.
Even Florian Mueller wrote that "going down the criminal law avenue is totally unreasonable" and "I think Apple should use better judgment in the future. This story from Spain makes Apple look very bad."
Like I mentioned before, he was quite clear in his original post and subsequent follow up posts. Words can matter a great deal. The difference between a company or person being able to file criminal charges or prosecutor making that call is huge. A prosecutor that is independent of both parties, looked at the evidence and determined a crime was likely committed. I suspect some people want to ignore that point. Like I said, he was pretty clear early and often so I don't think you needed to fly shit on his point.
Now to be fair, your question is a valid one. But it is tangential to ChrisCa's post.
I think a lot of people are overestimating the amount of Samsung tech in Apple products. At this point I believe the only Samsung components in the iPhone are memory chips and the processor.
As has been discussed, Apple's ARM design could be contracted to a different fab, although that might be costly and long term. And while Samsung is the largest manufacturer of memory they are not the only one, by any means, and with Apple willing to make investments in their supply chain I suspect that they could move some or all of their FLASH and DRAM needs away from Samsung, if they aren't doing so already.
Samsung's contributions to the iOS products are not insignificant, by any means, but I get the impression that some folks believe that Samsung practically builds them to spec, which is not remotely true.
If Apple owns the equipment on the floor of Samsung's factories (which now seems probable), they are f*cked. And they are likely stuck for years.
Nonsense. First of all, we don't really know if Apple has invested heavily in any Samsung capacity. We know they're willing to spend money to secure scale from their supply partners, but that could just as easily be investing in Samsung's competitors to give them some bargaining strength.
Secondly, even if they have spent some money to put manufacturing capacity into Samsung's plants, you don't think Apple is capable of walking away from such an investment, if they felt they had strong strategic interests in doing so? Apple's iOS market is worth vastly more than whatever drop in the bucket they may have spent on hardware.
Indeed, so huge as to be self-evident. I'm surprised we're still writing about Chris_CA's parsing of what the definition of "is" is. Obviously there was a simple semantic mistake at play; I don't think anyone here believes Apple runs the Spanish prosecutor's office.
People have all sorts of opinions, yet as Mueller notes the court found that no crime was committed.
The initiating action was a complaint filed by Apple. Not even Mueller dares to backpedal on that, and he goes on to express an opinion similar to that of many of the posters in this thread, that the criminal complaint was a heavy-handed, as confirmed by the court's decision.
Self evident. Yet over 100 posts in and you're just getting it. Maybe.
Comments
Cook doesn't look a thing like Liam Neeson.
And if anyone is Qui-Gon, it's Steve. Cook is Obi-Wan.
Stev-Paul Jobbs: "These music industry types are cowards. The negotiations will be short."
Yes! Ewan McGregor - he could be Tim Cook's son! I see some Matt Damon there too.
Cook doesn't look a thing like Liam Neeson.
And if anyone is Qui-Gon, it's Steve. Cook is Obi-Wan.
Stev-Paul Jobbs: "These music industry types are cowards. The negotiations will be short."
Thank god you stopped by. I've been racking my brain over here trying to figure it out.
Whew
Yes! Ewan McGregor - he could be Tim Cook's son! I see some Matt Damon there too.
Ah yes I see that. I was thinking of people closer to his age. A failure of creativity on my part. I guess Tallest Skil gets the gold star on this one, damn him *shakes fist at the sky in futility*.
Whew! Thanks for clarifying that. Now that the fly shit has been properly sorted from the pepper I'm sure we'll all sleep better.
I think the point folks were making here wasn't so much about the semantics of "complaint" vs "charges" but whether pursuing criminal prosecution was a good idea at all.
Even Florian Mueller wrote that "going down the criminal law avenue is totally unreasonable" and "I think Apple should use better judgment in the future. This story from Spain makes Apple look very bad."
http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011...t-against.html
Like I mentioned before, he was quite clear in his original post and subsequent follow up posts. Words can matter a great deal. The difference between a company or person being able to file criminal charges or prosecutor making that call is huge. A prosecutor that is independent of both parties, looked at the evidence and determined a crime was likely committed. I suspect some people want to ignore that point. Like I said, he was pretty clear early and often so I don't think you needed to fly shit on his point.
Now to be fair, your question is a valid one. But it is tangential to ChrisCa's post.
As has been discussed, Apple's ARM design could be contracted to a different fab, although that might be costly and long term. And while Samsung is the largest manufacturer of memory they are not the only one, by any means, and with Apple willing to make investments in their supply chain I suspect that they could move some or all of their FLASH and DRAM needs away from Samsung, if they aren't doing so already.
Samsung's contributions to the iOS products are not insignificant, by any means, but I get the impression that some folks believe that Samsung practically builds them to spec, which is not remotely true.
If Apple owns the equipment on the floor of Samsung's factories (which now seems probable), they are f*cked. And they are likely stuck for years.
Nonsense. First of all, we don't really know if Apple has invested heavily in any Samsung capacity. We know they're willing to spend money to secure scale from their supply partners, but that could just as easily be investing in Samsung's competitors to give them some bargaining strength.
Secondly, even if they have spent some money to put manufacturing capacity into Samsung's plants, you don't think Apple is capable of walking away from such an investment, if they felt they had strong strategic interests in doing so? Apple's iOS market is worth vastly more than whatever drop in the bucket they may have spent on hardware.
Indeed, so huge as to be self-evident. I'm surprised we're still writing about Chris_CA's parsing of what the definition of "is" is. Obviously there was a simple semantic mistake at play; I don't think anyone here believes Apple runs the Spanish prosecutor's office.
People have all sorts of opinions, yet as Mueller notes the court found that no crime was committed.
The initiating action was a complaint filed by Apple. Not even Mueller dares to backpedal on that, and he goes on to express an opinion similar to that of many of the posters in this thread, that the criminal complaint was a heavy-handed, as confirmed by the court's decision.
Self evident. Yet over 100 posts in and you're just getting it. Maybe.
I doubt there are many Apple products that don't contain Samsung products.
There isn't much in this world that doesn't have Samsung's fingerprints on it, good luck to him!