That's not what you said. You said Samsung will "keep doing just fine" while Apple will have difficulty/time finding another supplier.
Why is it that a supplier in a business where companies are going bankrupt will keep doing fine but the largest single buyer in the world will have trouble? That sounds very much like "indoctrinated wishful thinking" that you have accused another poster of.
You mean iPhones will get suddenly less dependable if they used Hynix or Elpida RAM or NAND instead of Samsung? But they are already doing it and I haven't heard iPhone being less dependable because they aren't using Samsung parts.
Absolutely agreed with your first point but didn't you also claim yourself that Samsung will magically be fine without Apple even though the article said a Samsung VP was let go because he lost some of the Apple business?
Saying Samsung will be fine (I also used "probably" because obviously it's an opinion not stated with certainty but kudos for creative quoting) doesn't make the assumption that they won't have to change and adapt to fill that void. It doesn't make the assumption that there won't be initial loss. There would be an adjustment period, but they're probably not going to go bankrupt considering how many products they produce.
I just think that Samsung, having their own products, can make up for some of the demand, where as Apple must find a separate supplier since they don't supply themselves. It's probably going to hurt both companies either way...just as the lawsuits have.
Someone asked a question, so I gave an answer. It was clearly an opinion (not and end all claim as you would suggest), but I am entitled to it.
----------
You're right. If Apple walked away today Samsung would be completely unaffected. Sorry for being so blind.
Of course they wouldn't be unaffected. But you're foolish to suggest Apple wouldn't hurt.
Last edited: