Tim Cook Opposed Suing Samsung Over Mobile Device Patents

[MacRumors]

In a report outlining the well-examined "frenemies" relationship between Apple and Samsung, Reuters notes that Apple CEO Tim Cook was opposed to suing Samsung for allegedly copying iOS, iPhone and iPad patents in the creation of its own line of tablets and smartphones. Cook's thoughts illustrate the differences between him and predecessor Steve Jobs, who said he was willing to wage "thermonuclear war" on companies that "stole" from Apple.

Tim Cook, Jobs' successor as Apple chief executive, was opposed to suing Samsung in the first place, according to people with knowledge of the matter, largely because of that company's critical role as a supplier of components for the iPhone and the iPad. Apple bought some $8 billion worth of parts from Samsung last year, analysts estimate. [...]

Cook, worried about the critical supplier relationship, was opposed to suing Samsung. But Jobs had run out of patience, suspecting that Samsung was counting on the supplier relationship to shield it from retribution.

Cook's operational expertise no doubt influenced his perspective in worrying about impacts on the supply chain side of the equation, but he was overruled by Jobs. Since the dispute with Samsung broke out into the legal arena, Apple has been working to reduce its reliance on Samsung, but the two remain closely linked.

During Apple's Q2 2012 conference call, Cook said he has always "hated litigation", noting that he would prefer to settle rather than battle it out in the courts, although he emphasized that Apple does not want to become the "developer for the world".*Apple has settled with other companies that it has had patent issues with, including HTC, but last November Samsung publicly said that it was not interested in settling with Apple.

Article Link: Tim Cook Opposed Suing Samsung Over Mobile Device Patents

[turtlez]

Cook fails to see this:

You can choose another manufacturer. You can't get back stolen designs. EVER

[Gnomepatrol]

Originally Posted by turtlez

Cook fails to see this:

You can choose another manufacturer. You can't get back stolen designs. EVER

I am much more apt to listen to a CEO than a forum surfer. As I have said in the past, Samsung is the best supplier of flash, nand, chips, and screens on the planet. From productions standpoint they would be shooting themselves in the foot to sever the ties with samsung. The higher failure rate of the alternatives was and still are unacceptable. They need samsung until they can find a manufactuerer that can meet the needs they have. We have already seen the issues with the new screen manufacturer (tracking diagonal swiping correctly) and I am sure they would like to avoid that.

In essence cutting ties with samsung, for now, would result in lower quality products. That is not to say that in the future it will be the same issue. Until the day comes though apple needs to play nice.

Tim Cook is a supply chain guy, he knows his stuff and wouldn't have raised these concerns if there was no reason.

[iMikeT]

Definitely the difference between a leader and a manager.

Jobs was obviously a leader. Cook on the other hand, is a good manager but definitely no leader. He's willing to play nice to make sure the ship stays on course but is not willing to make the tough decisions that Jobs would have. Either way, Jobs is gone and we have Cook as the CEO and Jobs chose him for a reason or simply because he was the most qualified at the time.....

[Renzatic]

Originally Posted by iMikeT

Definitely the difference between a leader and a manager.

Jobs was obviously a leader. Cook on the other hand, is a good manager but definitely no leader. He's willing to play nice to make sure the ship stays on course but is not willing to make the tough decisions that Jobs would have. Either way, Jobs is gone and we have Cook as the CEO and Jobs chose him for a reason or simply because he was the most qualified at the time.....

"All that most maddens and torments; all that stirs up the lees of things; all truth with malice in it; all that cracks the sinews and cakes the brain; all the subtle demonisms of life and thought; all evil, to crazy Steve, were visibly personified, and made practically assailable in Samsung. He piled upon the corporation's similar design the sum of all the general rage and hate felt by his whole race from Adam down; and then, as if his chest had been a mortar, he burst his hot heart’s shell upon it."

- Walter Isaacson, Steve Jobs

[Giuly]

Well, but not suing Samsung is not entertaining either. Also, I guess SJ saw a little bit of Big Blue in, well,

[iMikeT]

Originally Posted by Renzatic

"All that most maddens and torments; all that stirs up the lees of things; all truth with malice in it; all that cracks the sinews and cakes the brain; all the subtle demonisms of life and thought; all evil, to crazy Steve, were visibly personified, and made practically assailable in Samsung. He piled upon the corporation's similar design the sum of all the general rage and hate felt by his whole race from Adam down; and then, as if his chest had been a mortar, he burst his hot heart’s shell upon it."

- Walter Isaacson, Steve Jobs

Did you really have to quote from a book that I haven't read/listened to yet? Next time, please put "SPOILER ALERT" before I start reading!

Luckily, I'll start this book soon as the girl I'm dating just gave it to me as an audio book.

[BornAgainMac]

Originally Posted by Renzatic

"All that most maddens and torments; all that stirs up the lees of things; all truth with malice in it; all that cracks the sinews and cakes the brain; all the subtle demonisms of life and thought; all evil, to crazy Steve, were visibly personified, and made practically assailable in Samsung. He piled upon the corporation's similar design the sum of all the general rage and hate felt by his whole race from Adam down; and then, as if his chest had been a mortar, he burst his hot heart’s shell upon it."

- Walter Isaacson, Steve Jobs

That book is the starting to sound like a Bible. That looks like a form of scripture. The Book of Jobs.

[SockRolid]

Originally Posted by Gnomepatrol

[...] As I have said in the past, Samsung is the best supplier of flash, nand, chips, and screens on the planet. From productions standpoint they would be shooting themselves in the foot to sever the ties with samsung. [...]

Unless, of course, Apple has plans to design their own flash memory components.

You might remember that Apple bought Anobit, an Israeli flash memory controller design firm. Their intellectual property includes advanced techniques for increasing flash memory performance and longevity while reducing costs.

And guess what. Samsung had a large contract with Anobit for their NAND flash memory designs. But now that Apple owns Anobit, that deal has been cancelled. Samsung must now get their flash memory from someone else, and they won't have Anobit's advanced technology any more.

Also, Samsung will be losing Apple's flash memory business. And as we all know, that business is huge. Apple is the world's leading consumer of flash memory. They control the market.

Maybe this MacRumors post will refresh your memory (pun intended):

http://www.macrumors.com/2012/01/10/...y-firm-anobit/

And here's a little more on Anobit at Wikipedia (65 patents owned or pending):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anobit

[samcraig]

Originally Posted by SockRolid

Apple is the world's leading consumer of flash memory. They control the market.

Sure about that in 2012? Source?

[winston1236]

Originally Posted by samcraig

Sure about that in 2012? Source?

Its a macrumors expert, theyre all "on the inside" and dont need to bother with things like sources!

[SockRolid]

Originally Posted by samcraig

Sure about that in 2012? Source?

You asked for it. I just DuckDuckGo-ed "apple 2012 nand flash market" and got quite a few results.
DuckDuckGo.com has a pretty good search engine. You should try it.

"Apple's iPad to dominate NAND use in tablets through 2015"

http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-n...s-through-2015


"How Apple’s NAND advantage helps its bottom line"

http://gigaom.com/2012/01/06/how-app...s-bottom-line/


"Apple to account for a quarter of 2012′s entire NAND flash production"

http://www.macworld.com.au/news/appl...duction-51600/


And Apple is kicking Samsung under the bus:

"Apple cuts memory chip order to Samsung for new iPhone: source"

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...88601A20120907

Some of the stories are a little old (early 2012.) But if someone, anyone, surpasses Apple's consumption
of NAND flash, I'm sure we'll be hearing about it non-stop from the more ignorant Android Apologists.
I think we all know how they over-emphasize components and specs.
So they can avoid talking about fragmentation and forking and all that.

[deconstruct60]

Originally Posted by SockRolid

Unless, of course, Apple has plans to design their own flash memory components.

they don't.

You might remember that Apple bought Anobit, an Israeli flash memory controller design firm. ....

And guess what. Samsung had a large contract with Anobit for their NAND flash memory designs.

having a microprcocessor design (ARM core based one ) doesn't mean you have a DRAM design. Similarly, a flash controller is not NAND flash chips. They are two different kinds of chips.

But now that Apple owns Anobit, that deal has been cancelled. Samsung must now get their flash memory from someone else, and they won't have Anobit's advanced technology any more.

Anobit can't make squat. Samsung has factories that make physical thinks people can buy. Samsung is not lacking at all in flash memory abilities at all.

Marvell , LSI/Sandforce , Intel, etc all make flash controllers with ECC and work arounds for flash wear problems. Samsung is not particularly pressed about this shift in controllers for a smaller subset of their business. Even back when the initially hooked up with Anobit it wasn't betting all of its money on just one solution

"... Samsung has a partnership with Seagate to develop and cross-license flash controller technologies, so there may conceivably be a role for Anobit in this relationship. It could also get a look-in with server flash storage supplier Fusion-io where Samsung has made an investment. ... "
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/08/18/samsung_anobit/

Samsung is a basic flash block supplier. It was and still is in their basic interest as a basic component supplier to work with all the Flash controller developers out there. If Apple wants to be boneheaded and exclude Samsung, a major flash provide, that their choice. Long term it is a bozo move. Especially, since Apple doesn't make anything.

There are also different levels of flash controller. Some are aimed at USB flash drive contexts. ( like this one that got some Anobit tech SK6630 and others ) and others are aimed at SSD drives... which Samsung has their own for MLC...

" ... Their Samsung 830 Series SSD is not based on the very common SandForce or Marvell controllers. The company uses their own design called S4LJ204X01. This controller is based on a triple core ARM processor, similar to what you have in your smartphone. The flash chips and controller DRAM are also produced by Samsung which means the company has full control over every component in their drive, certainly a unique situation. ..."
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/S...es_SSD_512_GB/


Apple shouldn't be as dependent upon Samsung as they are now (more bids and investments in other suppliers ) but to cross them off completely is silly.

Apple is the world's leading consumer of flash memory. They control the market.

Apple is a player, but in so far they make nothing they hardly control it.

Apple purchased Anobit likely to merge the flash controller into future Apple SoC ( Apple A(6+?) ) and not have to pay for the IP license per 100 million sold. If $10 a pop the deal would easily pay for itself.

Kneecapping Samsung? Hardly.

[rmwebs]

Steve's childish (and yes, the way he handled it was childish) 'Thermonuclear war on Android jusy highlighted his personality before he was fired from Apple.

He may have been a great marketer, and had great ideas, but despite what is portrayed he hated competition. If he'd had it his way, the iPhone would still be competing with Windows CE.

At some point you just have to step back and say "you know what, screw it - if they want to copy our icon style and have a black border, go ahead" as thats what it amounts to. Fundamentally iOS and Android have never been the same, to claim Android was copying iOS is laughable if you've actually sat and used the two operating systems.

I like Cook, he seems a lot more focused on making Apple do what Apple does best - work with their own products. I still dont think we've really seen any of his work as its still in the pipeline, everything up to the iPhone 5 and iPad Mini would have been in development under Jobs, even the iOS UI and Maps would have been.


One thing that I would like to know:

Would Cook have chosen to develop Apple Maps? It was a Jobs decision when he had a strop and got pissed off with Google. Maybe Cook, with a slightly more calm approach would have come to a better arrangement.

(Note: Dont get me wrong, I love what Jobs achieved, but I'm capable of recognising that like all of us, he was a flawed human being who did make a lot of mistakes - we all do it.)

[macs4nw]

Originally Posted by Tankmaze

.....Steve took it very personally..

As a person who (with Woz) started the company from scratch, and who personally and jointly, had many patents to his name, that fact could be expected, understood, and even forgiven.

Cook on the other hand, not having as much direct and creative input on the designs, can look at things more from a practical and business perspective, which is probably better for APPLE in the long run. Too much time, energy and $$$ wasted, which could all be better spent on product development.

It's better to win the war, than winning a few battles.

[SockRolid]

Originally Posted by deconstruct60

Apple is a player, but in so far they make nothing they hardly control it.

Apple purchased Anobit likely to merge the flash controller into future Apple SoC ( Apple A(6+?) ) and not have to pay for the IP license per 100 million sold. If $10 a pop the deal would easily pay for itself.

Kneecapping Samsung? Hardly.

They control pricing. Biggest buyer -> best deals. Everyone else -> bidding war.

As I said, Samsung had a deal with Anobit that is now off the table.
Anobit's (now Apple's) controller technology provides for more efficient usage of NAND flash memory,
handling the degradation of the memory cells better than other controllers can, which allows the use
of less-expensive NAND memory.

Advantage Apple. Good luck Samsung.

[Terrin]

Originally Posted by Gnomepatrol

I am much more apt to listen to a CEO than a forum surfer. As I have said in the past, Samsung is the best supplier of flash, nand, chips, and screens on the planet. From productions standpoint they would be shooting themselves in the foot to sever the ties with samsung. The higher failure rate of the alternatives was and still are unacceptable. They need samsung until they can find a manufactuerer that can meet the needs they have. We have already seen the issues with the new screen manufacturer (tracking diagonal swiping correctly) and I am sure they would like to avoid that.

In essence cutting ties with samsung, for now, would result in lower quality products. That is not to say that in the future it will be the same issue. Until the day comes though apple needs to play nice.

Tim Cook is a supply chain guy, he knows his stuff and wouldn't have raised these concerns if there was no reason.

Yes, but people forget Samsung became the power house it is in large part because of large investments by US companies like Apple and even Dell. Apple gave well over a hundred million dollars to Samsung when it was struggling to 1) beef up its manufacturing capabilities, and 2) ensure a supply of components. Apple can do the same thing with Samsung's competitors.

Moreover, US companies are learning a hard lesson by outsourcing manufacturing. Take ASUS. ASUS convinced Dell to allow it to build its computers. After ASUS had a steady income from making Dell's computers, it decided to build its own computers where it could under cut Dell on pricing since it was a manufacturer.


By virtue of giving Samsung a large part of Apple's parts orders, Samsung became privy to information that allowed it to compete effectively with Apple.

Finally, when Samsung first started competing with Apple's iPhone it made its phones look almost identical. The designs today have changed probably because of Apple's lawsuits. I remember sitting in Best Buy waiting for my girlfriend. I was by a Samsung phone display. In the five minutes I was there two people came up and called it an iPhone.

Jobs already experienced having a friend (Microsoft) use inside information (Microsoft had access to the original Mac OS through a deal with Apple to create Office apps) to copy Apple's product. My only potential disagreement with Jobs is that Microsoft seemed smarter. It has licensing deals from just about everybody including Samsung. So it is making anywhere from 5 to 10 dollars per Android phone sold. Apple could have easily took that approach, and still protected its design patents. Then again APple is a design company. It stands out through design, and protecting the look and feel of its products are important.

[charlituna]

Originally Posted by turtlez

Cook fails to see this:

You can choose another manufacturer. You can't get back stolen designs. EVER

I suspect that Cook knew this and the insiders statements are bogus.

It's more likely that what he said was that he was opposed to suing Samsung until they got more manufacturers in place. that way if Samsung tried to throw a tantrum they would have their backup already going and it wouldn't screw with their supplies and seriously hurt things.

But it's more fun and gets more hits to make Apple look bad, thus the incorrect phrasing. Or these so called insiders are just stupid

----------

Originally Posted by SockRolid

But I imagine he hates flagrant systematic copying even more than litigation.

"It's important that Apple not become the developer to the world."
- Tim Cook, 4/12/2012, during Apple's FYQ2 earnings call

True then. True now. True forever.

Which is why he didn't call off all the lawsuits as soon as he was fully in charge. And even perhaps started a few.

The settlement comment was more likely in regards to how some companies don't call the alleged offender first to try to work things out but go straight to the lawsuits. Cook probably doesn't like that tactic because it is a headache of legal wranglings, its costly etc. So under his watch, Apple sends a letter or makes a phone call and if the other side isn't willing to talk it out over tea, then a suit is filed. And Cook probably wishes other companies would give Apple that chance as well.

NOT that he would never sue if there was cause.

[pacalis]

Originally Posted by turtlez

Cook fails to see this:

You can choose another manufacturer. You can't get back stolen designs. EVER

Your post isn't even internally consistent.

If you can't get back stolen designs. Ever. Than why sue?

Apple's supply arrangements with Samsung are far more valuable than the likely outcome of the suit. So the good business decision is to not sue. Also, suing your suppliers doesn't exactly help you get the best suppliers.

It is also a good business decision to find alternative suppliers, which they have been doing. But Apple can walk and chew gum at the same time.

[turtlez]

Originally Posted by pacalis

Your post isn't even internally consistent.

If you can't get back stolen designs. Ever. Than why sue?

Apple's supply arrangements with Samsung are far more valuable than the likely outcome of the suit. So the good business decision is to not sue. Also, suing your suppliers doesn't exactly help you get the best suppliers.

It is also a good business decision to find alternative suppliers, which they have been doing. But Apple can walk and chew gum at the same time.

you can't get back a stolen design unless you can go back in time. They sue for damages done by stolen designs. The product has been made from stolen designs you can't change that, you can only be paid damages from the thief.

----------

Originally Posted by MattMJB0188

I like Tim Cook. Jobs' tantrums were ridiculous. All he did was cry like a baby over stupid stuff.

so you wouldn't be PO'ed if someone ripped off your hard work and not just hard work, your very passion.

----------

Originally Posted by KdParker

What about he business impact or losing revenue to another company using your designs?

I would assume that is the angle most CEO's would take.

exactly my thoughts, but you got guts bringing it up here since a lot of people on this forum don't realise that a lot of hard work goes into design.

I remember back in 2005 before I was aware of all this and before I was even a designer myself. A friend of mine had a chinese rip off iPod and for about 4 months I thought it was an official iPod. When I discovered it wasn't the Apple version I was shocked because it looked almost identical. So there you go, I was admiring a stolen design and at Apple's cost. Hence why they sue for damages. Again people would never understand that unless trained in art or have a logical mind.

[John.B]

Samsung advertises their flagship phone in a commercial where a woman copies her co-worker's report and passes it off as her own. Is that considered ethical in a chaebol?

[flameproof]

Originally Posted by turtlez

You can choose another manufacturer.

No, you can't.

Originally Posted by turtlez

You can't get back stolen designs. EVER

1. There was no design stolen. If it were stolen then how could Apple use it?

2. Who want's the same design, EVER?

[Skoopman]

Originally Posted by turtlez

Cook fails to see this:

You can choose another manufacturer. You can't get back stolen designs. EVER

But you know what you can do? Make an even better design and beat them again. Suing was the easiest option in this case.

[turtlez]

Originally Posted by Skoopman

But you know what you can do? Make an even better design and beat them again. Suing was the easiest option in this case.

make a better design and have that one stolen too because Samsung realise they can get away with it? no

----------

Originally Posted by flameproof

No, you can't.



1. There was no design stolen. If it were stolen then how could Apple use it?

2. Who want's the same design, EVER?

I have nothing more to say

[MattMJB0188]

I like Tim Cook. Jobs' tantrums were ridiculous. All he did was cry like a baby over stupid stuff.