It's really common business practice to copy what the competition is doing. Google isn't the only company to do it. Phillips was the first company to introduce the flat panel TV to consumers and the other manufacturers quickly followed suit. Most cars look very similar. Whenever a company comes up with the new 'it' thing it is simply going to be copied in some fashion.
Exactly.
Apparently there was only one way to design a car back then.
I'm glad they started branching out and exploring new designs today!
I personally think that Samsung should NOT be allowed to be a component supplier to the computer, tablet, and smartphone industry and make finished goods that compete with their component customer's products as that is conflict of interest. I wonder if Samsung computer/mobile division pay less for the exact same components they sell to other companies. It wouldn't surprise me if they did, which would unfairly bring down the costs of their finished goods.
And who, exactly, has the authority to tell Samsung what they can/can't make? Its Apple's decision to continue to have components manufactured by Samsung, no-one's forcing them. If they don't like it, they can go and find someone else to do it. If they can't find anyone else who can manufacture to the quality/quantity required, then that's unfortunate but a pill they have to swallow.
And who, exactly, has the authority to tell Samsung what they can/can't make? Its Apple's decision to continue to have components manufactured by Samsung, no-one's forcing them. If they don't like it, they can go and find someone else to do it. If they can't find anyone else who can manufacture to the quality/quantity required, then that's unfortunate but a pill they have to swallow.
so, you don't see anything wrong with a company that makes key components and then turns around and competes with their component customers? They have an unfair advantage as they know who buys which products, how much they pay and when they get shipments. It's VERY easy (although very hard to prove) that Samsung favorites their own Mobility division in terms of pricing, and product shipments.
Have you ever heard of the term "CONFLICT OF INTEREST"?
Why do you think that Samsung is the only company that seems to have much in the way of Sales and profits amongst the Android mfg.
What Samsung is doing is practicing unfair business practices. I can't wait for Apple to get off of Samsung completely, unfortunately it may take them a little while longer until they can get other suppliers up to speed with products, but at least Apple doesn't buy NAND, RAM, or SSD memory from them anymore that I'm aware of. Apple just buys some panels and the ARM processors (until TSMC gets up to speed, which may be next year) from Samsung until they can find another supplier that can do it. But hopefully they'll get 100% away from them in about a year.
That's quite rich coming from someone who constantly refers to Samsung as Samdung/Samesung/Samscum and often attacks the poster rather than the post itself. That's something my teenage son does so hardly shows maturity. People in glass houses.......
I've never used those terms you've mentioned. However I do use Scamscum. That one fits.
Do you need a refresher course in English comprehension? Glass House? Really? Looks like I just shattered your Glass House.
so, you don't see anything wrong with a company that makes key components and then turns around and competes with their component customers? They have an unfair advantage as they know who buys which products, how much they pay and when they get shipments. It's VERY easy (although very hard to prove) that Samsung favorites their own Mobility division in terms of pricing, and product shipments.
No, I don't see anything wrong with that. Every single one of Samsung's component customers know that Samsung competes with them in the consumer sector. If they then choose to continue to use Samsung as a supplier, how is that Samsung's fault? All of their customers have a choice, if they don't like it use a different supplier. Its called a free market.
No, I don't see anything wrong with that. Every single one of Samsung's component customers know that Samsung competes with them in the consumer sector. If they then choose to continue to use Samsung as a supplier, how is that Samsung's fault? All of their customers have a choice, if they don't like it use a different supplier. Its called a free market.
You don't see anything wrong with conflict of interest? You must not have any integrity in your methods of doing business. It's similar to Microsoft selling a product that competes with their OEM Windows customers. A bunch of Microsoft OEMs were discussing the possibility of going after Microsoft when they released the Surface products since that's conflict of interest because Microsoft charges their OEMs money for Windows OS licenses as well as Office, but with Microsoft, they absorb those costs. Whether or not they actually take action, that's another discussion. Since Microsoft isn't doing that well in terms of Surface sales, so they might not bother, but that is conflict of interest.
It's not Samsung's fault for the OEM to buy components from them, but it IS Samsung's fault for competing against them with similar products with similar configurations and pricing.
If you don't see a problem with Samsung's Mobility unit, then you obviously haven't studied business law. it's not Kosher to do what Samsung is doing. The problem is deciding to take legal action, which costs a lot of money, takes a long time to get resolution. It would be more effective if there was a class action, but for the OEMs to do that may take a while.
I think it's wrong to do that. What do I know, I only got A's in Business Law. What did you get when you took that course?
That doesn't change the fact that you're helping Samsung's bottom line with every Apple device that you buy.
Well, I can't help that. But I haven't bought any computing device in now a year, so I'm hoping that Apple will eventually be 100% Samsung free when I replace anything that I currently own. The only two things that I know Apple still uses from Samsung is still panels for some products and ARM processors. But I'm going to replace my iPhone (which is 2 years old) when they release the larger screen model, which hopefully will be 100% Samsung free. I'm not planning on replacing my iPad until next year's model, which I hope will be 100% Samsung free. But I'm not going to buy something with Samsung's name on the OUTSIDE of the product.
A component is far different than an actual product. Samsung won't be selling me a TV, Washer, dryer, refrigerator, etc. and those things aren't cheap. Nothing in my home has EVER had the name Samsung on the outside of the product and I can't always look inside to see what was used by Samsung.
Comments
Exactly.
Apparently there was only one way to design a car back then.
I'm glad they started branching out and exploring new designs today!
That doesn't change the fact that you're helping Samsung's bottom line with every Apple device that you buy.
Don't you have something else to do, like pound sand?
Maybe when you grow up and mature, you might find yourself posting more mature postings that actually are worth reading.
I personally think that Samsung should NOT be allowed to be a component supplier to the computer, tablet, and smartphone industry and make finished goods that compete with their component customer's products as that is conflict of interest. I wonder if Samsung computer/mobile division pay less for the exact same components they sell to other companies. It wouldn't surprise me if they did, which would unfairly bring down the costs of their finished goods.
And who, exactly, has the authority to tell Samsung what they can/can't make? Its Apple's decision to continue to have components manufactured by Samsung, no-one's forcing them. If they don't like it, they can go and find someone else to do it. If they can't find anyone else who can manufacture to the quality/quantity required, then that's unfortunate but a pill they have to swallow.
And who, exactly, has the authority to tell Samsung what they can/can't make? Its Apple's decision to continue to have components manufactured by Samsung, no-one's forcing them. If they don't like it, they can go and find someone else to do it. If they can't find anyone else who can manufacture to the quality/quantity required, then that's unfortunate but a pill they have to swallow.
so, you don't see anything wrong with a company that makes key components and then turns around and competes with their component customers? They have an unfair advantage as they know who buys which products, how much they pay and when they get shipments. It's VERY easy (although very hard to prove) that Samsung favorites their own Mobility division in terms of pricing, and product shipments.
Have you ever heard of the term "CONFLICT OF INTEREST"?
Why do you think that Samsung is the only company that seems to have much in the way of Sales and profits amongst the Android mfg.
What Samsung is doing is practicing unfair business practices. I can't wait for Apple to get off of Samsung completely, unfortunately it may take them a little while longer until they can get other suppliers up to speed with products, but at least Apple doesn't buy NAND, RAM, or SSD memory from them anymore that I'm aware of. Apple just buys some panels and the ARM processors (until TSMC gets up to speed, which may be next year) from Samsung until they can find another supplier that can do it. But hopefully they'll get 100% away from them in about a year.
That's quite rich coming from someone who constantly refers to Samsung as Samdung/Samesung/Samscum and often attacks the poster rather than the post itself. That's something my teenage son does so hardly shows maturity. People in glass houses.......
I've never used those terms you've mentioned. However I do use Scamscum. That one fits.
Do you need a refresher course in English comprehension? Glass House? Really? Looks like I just shattered your Glass House.
so, you don't see anything wrong with a company that makes key components and then turns around and competes with their component customers? They have an unfair advantage as they know who buys which products, how much they pay and when they get shipments. It's VERY easy (although very hard to prove) that Samsung favorites their own Mobility division in terms of pricing, and product shipments.
No, I don't see anything wrong with that. Every single one of Samsung's component customers know that Samsung competes with them in the consumer sector. If they then choose to continue to use Samsung as a supplier, how is that Samsung's fault? All of their customers have a choice, if they don't like it use a different supplier. Its called a free market.
No, I don't see anything wrong with that. Every single one of Samsung's component customers know that Samsung competes with them in the consumer sector. If they then choose to continue to use Samsung as a supplier, how is that Samsung's fault? All of their customers have a choice, if they don't like it use a different supplier. Its called a free market.
You don't see anything wrong with conflict of interest? You must not have any integrity in your methods of doing business. It's similar to Microsoft selling a product that competes with their OEM Windows customers. A bunch of Microsoft OEMs were discussing the possibility of going after Microsoft when they released the Surface products since that's conflict of interest because Microsoft charges their OEMs money for Windows OS licenses as well as Office, but with Microsoft, they absorb those costs. Whether or not they actually take action, that's another discussion. Since Microsoft isn't doing that well in terms of Surface sales, so they might not bother, but that is conflict of interest.
It's not Samsung's fault for the OEM to buy components from them, but it IS Samsung's fault for competing against them with similar products with similar configurations and pricing.
If you don't see a problem with Samsung's Mobility unit, then you obviously haven't studied business law. it's not Kosher to do what Samsung is doing. The problem is deciding to take legal action, which costs a lot of money, takes a long time to get resolution. It would be more effective if there was a class action, but for the OEMs to do that may take a while.
I think it's wrong to do that. What do I know, I only got A's in Business Law. What did you get when you took that course?
That doesn't change the fact that you're helping Samsung's bottom line with every Apple device that you buy.
Well, I can't help that. But I haven't bought any computing device in now a year, so I'm hoping that Apple will eventually be 100% Samsung free when I replace anything that I currently own. The only two things that I know Apple still uses from Samsung is still panels for some products and ARM processors. But I'm going to replace my iPhone (which is 2 years old) when they release the larger screen model, which hopefully will be 100% Samsung free. I'm not planning on replacing my iPad until next year's model, which I hope will be 100% Samsung free. But I'm not going to buy something with Samsung's name on the OUTSIDE of the product.
A component is far different than an actual product. Samsung won't be selling me a TV, Washer, dryer, refrigerator, etc. and those things aren't cheap. Nothing in my home has EVER had the name Samsung on the outside of the product and I can't always look inside to see what was used by Samsung.