Never said they invented them. Open up an Apple computer from the last 10 years most of it is Samsung "innovations". You can innovate with out inventing these days.
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
Never said they invented them. Open up an Apple computer from the last 10 years most of it is Samsung "innovations". You can innovate with out inventing these days.
Even if the patent was obviously too generic (You know, things like using a touchscreen or making a square device with rounded corners) and you'd have to pay millions in defence anyway, money that you might not even have?
I said that Apple was first to get it right, does that take innovation? Who cares if your first to market if your implementation is failure and your product does not sell as a result.
Apple spends money on "Buying companies with innovative products" and "litigating competition".
Really? Was Apple spending R&"D" when they took the look/feel of Delicious library? How about pulldown notifications? How about their recent settlement regarding their clock app? Need I continue?
Both companies spend money on R&D. Both companies use ideas from other tech. None of this is relevant to the thread which is simply about Samsung not willing to settle with Apple.
So let me ask the community this.
If you were Samsung - would you settle?
Hmm, how do I choose here... Wait, you're wrong...and you're making a **** ton of assumptions if you think I haven't "researched several tech companies" lol.
----------
No, I wouldn't settle, because I've gotten away with it before too many times...and in Korea, it's business as usual. Especially now that Samsung has the entire weight of the Apple hating community as fanboys.
So which product are you referring to that was a failure or didn't sell? The Prada? Define failure/doesn't sell well?
The original iPhone wasn't an overnight success you know.
Samsung manufacturing is not Samsung innovating. Not to mention, Samsung makes less than 20% of what you find in an iPhone let alone a Mac. And considering a Mac is merely a PC like any other, are you now crediting Samsung with the invention of PCs?
You can slice and dice this anyway you want. Look at total assets or total revenue and the numbers are still less than Samsung. R&D spending per product line is dubious at best. If Samsung spends R&D to develop technologies to cost effectively fabricate SoCs at 10 nm. It benefits all of their mobile computing products (not mention Apple as well).
It's a little more like leapfrog, but I know that's hard to see when Samsung releases 10 smartphones to each iPhone.
----------
You're the only one slicing and dicing here. There's nothing dubious about it, if I made one product why would I put 20% of revenue into research and development of that one product? It's pointless. Assets are not revenue, that's also a little of your slicing and dicing going on.
If Samsung spends 10 billion on R&D but has 1000 different projects to spread that across, including freighter manufacturing and washing machine manufacturing, how does that benefit the 10 nm SoC?
It may seem dubious because it opposes your argument but these are simple facts that you don't want to see injected - much easier to just use big numbers and make the claim that everything Apple does is wrong.
Ok, you win. Apple did obviously invent the touch-based minimalist phone despite of not being the first to make one, but by being the first to make it popular. Your original post was definitely relevant to what you quoted and continue to argue about. (I mean, that was what you quoted and answered to first, right? Or maybe you just posted something completely irrelevant to make Apple seem better, more "innovative"?)
The manufacturing process is an important part of the entire process and innovations in manufacturing are just as important.
That's great that Samsung is involved in so many different industries.
I think the point has been missed. In medicine, we call FP (family medicine docs) the jack of all trades and master of none.
Samsung has so many different branches involved in different industries, but there is not one thing they are know for doing extremely well. The fact that most people don't know that they build skyscrapers in the UAE or involved in shipping only reinforces the point that they don't really excel at a given industry.
Names like Boeing, BMW, Rolex, Jones Lang LaSalle not only have strong brand awareness in the market, but also generate strong brand identity. You know what they make, and what they do. And they are the leaders of their respective industries in which they are involved.
Samsung is involved in many industries - but they are not a leader nor a benchmark for others to aspire to in the market place. This is proven by the fact that they produce so many different products for other market leaders. At best, they are a larger glorified manufacturer.
"f LG Prada was a true pre cursor and a great implementation of a touch screen phone then it would have been a success, again sales figures tells the story."
really? So you're saying only great implementations of products become successes. And that if something fails - it's because it wasn't a good implementation.
I guess you're discounting marketing, advertising, brand reputation, delivery channels and so on.
Sales figures don't always tell the story. Not the whole story. Not everything that sells well is the best. Not everything that sells poorly is bad.
You can't be serious. You're saying that Samsung isn't known for any one thing they do well?
P.S. I didn't originally write what you're quoting. I was quoting someone else.
P.S. I didn't originally write what you're quoting. I was quoting someone else.
This is very true, but I don't think the LG Prada was a very good product. It may have tried a few new things but sucked at the execution.
----------
They manufacture like freaking porn stars.
No, that is not what I'm saying. But what is wrong with LGs distribution, brand reputation and ability to market their products. It's a strong indicator, it also applies to earlier tablets and touch devices btw.
So you have to compare 3 Samsung products to 1 of apples for the numbers to come out in your favor?? The iPhone 5 surpassed the Galaxy SIII after 3 weeks. Try actually researching something before making nonsensical comments.... There will ALWAYS be fans of one or the other. Every person has their specific taste... So stop comparing apples to oranges... (No pun intended)
No, they did not. They were just the contractor and this is what a contractor does
It was neither designed nor built by Samsung. Regarding the first, much like their phones.
If that building would have been built by Samsung, it would have been plastic.
They have a patent on it, so....yeah. Samsung has the choice to either license, or fight it out HOPING the patent is invalid. This is how law works. It's not just patents. If someone sues Best Buy because they slipped and fell in the store, Best Buy can either settle, or fight it out. If they choose to fight it out, they may spend a lot of money.
I am quite sure Apple isn't interested either in a settlement - 20% increase in prices for Apple from Samsung, Apple is findings other suppliers for its hardware.
This thing is going thermonuclear, as predicted.
My money is still on Apple - I don't trust a washing machine manufacturer as a phone maker.
You do know Samsung is way bigger then Apple and make things like Ships, Cars, Trains and other stuff.