Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Samsung Not Interested in Settlement with Apple over Patent Issues
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well then, why respond to a chain of comments about who first invented it only saying that the iPhone was more popular? How was that a relevant post?
----------
I know, right? Apple's shameless ripoff of this thing was so blatantly obvious.
He's not talking about the design, but the invention of digital MP3-players.
Yes. Have you looked at Apple's?
My point was - both Apple and Samsung (and a lot of tech) aren't inventors but implementers. Or build products on the backs of other tech.
But what this and 90 percent of the back and forth in this thread have ANYTHING to do with the actual topic is beyond me. Samsung doesn't want to settle. There's really nothing to say about that other than. Ok. They don't want to settle.
Because the innovation involved entails more than the electronic component, the screen. Simply slapping on a new type of touch screen does not make a successful implementation of a touch screen device. It's a response to the "innovation" argument, which supposedly is disproven by the fact that there where earlier phones with touch screens. These phones failed, which is an indication that they did not get the interface right, Apple on the other hand did, which is the innovatation we are talking about here.
You do know Apple is a software company first so by default that is where their patent concentration would be...it's not like this is news. This has been the case for over 30 years.
So again, the fact that Apple did not invent capacitive touch-based phones is negated by Apples implementation being more "innovative"?
Not to mention most of the electronics in Apple devices are riding on Samsung patents, design, and innovation.
Obviously Apple did copy it. It has buttons. Or has Apple patented buttons already?
Someone call Microsoft its got Windows!!!!
Yes, Apple patents products, not ways to make products - or 50 iterations of the same technology with one minor difference, which is what Samsung patents.
Apple is certainly an implementer. Samsung is a manufacturer who also implements the tech they manufacture because they can undercut the rest of the industry that way. In the past, that has resulted in shoddy products - but they've learned a lot after taking on Sony and Apple directly.
However, Apple tends to look forward and stretches themselves more with the tech they choose whereas Samsung rarely does anything that hasn't been done before. This is simply because Apple is a more agile company and more follows the modern Silicon Valley business culture and Samsung is an absolutely gigantic company that has to push in too many directions at once.
Yeah, I know we're not following the article but it seems that the same arguments are starting up again - people needs to ask themselves if Samsung copied and stop focusing on the only way Apple can fight back against that as some sort of patent trolling.
Not to mention Apple paid Creative 100mil for the Zen patent.
Apple is a hardware company first, that much is very clear.
----------
No, not really at all. Samsung did not invent RAM, ARM processors (certainly not the designs that Apple uses), touch screens, or even AMOLED screens.
AAPL total assets are $177 billion. At 3% of $177 billion = $5.31 billion which is less than $10 billion spent by Samsung. So AAPL spends about half of what Samsung spends on R&D and in the next few years will be dwarfed by Samsung.
Apple needs to drop its charges against Samsung, it will only cost money and they will lose in the end.
What? Ok - that answers the question. You haven't looked at Apple's patents. At least not enough of them. Nor Samsung's. Thanks for clarifying.
Again, no. On the component side arguably coming up with the screen itself is the big achievement. Adding that component innovated by someone else into a phone isn't really that innovative in it self.
Way to miss the point. They produce far fewer products, so spread that R&D across the product lines and see who spends more on R&D for each.
By the way, you're doing it again. Total assets are not revenue.
So true. Samsung waits and watches, while others innovate, do R&D, and once another company establishes a market Samsung boldly jumps in, copies, steals and violates patents with zero regard. Then when the other company responds Samsung cries to the public they're being prevented from offering consumers choice and that its so unfair. That's a lie and a play to get the ignorant public on their side. Samsung will not pay their fair when it comes to lisencing products, that's their game - lie, cheat, steal.
Yes, it's not just smart phones, washers, dryers, TV, video, microwaves its all made with stolen tech, NOT smarts ... The smarts came from Japan for decades and by now Samsung has knocked it all off and labelled themselves as the innovator.
Samsung has their patents too, not saying they don't. They don't however have a clue to create a finished product or develop a market as the companies they've copied already did. That's my problem with the company, they steal and mislead and won't pay a fair licensing fee. I won't buy a Samsung branded product, I'm proud not to.
For those who think its smart to see Samsung weaseling into markets what's going to happen if they reach success in bankrupting the companies they've copied, Sharp, Panasonic, Apple etc etc that would mean the worlds electronics would be of South Korean design, and with the will to do what they want, what will happen to prices and quality? A race to the bottom and back to the days of junk electronics. It's not the first time this has happened in business, do your research.
No. Apple is an electronics company and that is how they are listed on the financial exchanges. It is a company similar to Samsung Electronics.
I'll fix your analogy since it was terrible. If you came to me with evidence that I was infringing your patent, said that you would like to reach a license agreement and I refused, then yes I would say it is ok for you to sue me because that's how the law works...
So? The posts you originally commented on were about wether Apple did or did not invent the kind of phone the iPhone is, a capacitive touch-based phone with minimal buttons, which they definitely didn't, and "innovativeness" does in no way change that.
I don't have to. I already have. I've done a lot of research on several tech companies. But you can bury your head in the sand if you like. Fact is - you're wrong. Especially if you think that Apple only patents products.
They patent a lot of things other than actual products. You either know this and can't admit it - or you haven't looked at Apple patents. Take your pick.