But you know what you can do? Make an even better design and beat them again. Suing was the easiest option in this case.
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.
Tim Cook Opposed Suing Samsung Over Mobile Device Patents
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
But you know what you can do? Make an even better design and beat them again. Suing was the easiest option in this case.
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.
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-news/4238015/Apple-s-iPad-to-dominate-NAND-use-in-tablets-through-2015
"How Apple’s NAND advantage helps its bottom line"
http://gigaom.com/2012/01/06/how-apples-nand-advantage-helps-its-bottom-line/
"Apple to account for a quarter of 2012′s entire NAND flash production"
http://www.macworld.com.au/news/apple-to-account-for-a-quarter-of-2012s-entire-nand-flash-production-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/2012/09/07/us-apple-samsung-idUSBRE88601A20120907
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.
Only none of those fantastic articles actually states that "Apple is the world's leading consumer of flash memory. They control the market."
The articles you linked to (did you read them?) talk about NAND in tablets. Is there any evidence that Apple is the world's leading consumer of flash memory" in 2012?
You seem to think I'm trying to negate your statement. So your sarcasm, while amusing, fails to deliver.
Now - since I've already tried to locate a statement that backs up your assertion and could find none - perhaps you can find a source that states that "Apple is the world's leading consumer of flash memory" in 2012.
Thanks
The articles you linked to (did you read them?) talk about NAND in tablets. Is there any evidence that Apple is the world's leading consumer of flash memory" in 2012?
You seem to think I'm trying to negate your statement. So your sarcasm, while amusing, fails to deliver.
Now - since I've already tried to locate a statement that backs up your assertion and could find none - perhaps you can find a source that states that "Apple is the world's leading consumer of flash memory" in 2012.
Thanks
Right, as opposed to hearing about it from you right now. DO NOT DO THIS THING I AM DOING, CUZ YOU WILL BE STUPID IF YOU DO THE THINGS THAT I DO!
And over emphasizing components and specs? Everyone does that. You get into an argument about the iPhone 5 vs. Galaxy S3, and you have people on both sides throwing up benchmark and spec graphs like they're going out of style. "The A6 is, like, a billion times faster than than stupid Exynos 4 crap Sameshame is using OLOL".
And lastly, do you know what forking actually is?
Get best deals doesn't mean control market. It only means that Apple doesn't pay any more for Flash memory than anyone else. Compared to most competitors they pay slightly less. None of that means controlling the supply of Flash chips.
More efficient compared to what? 3 year old flash controllers?
" ... The companys product goes beyond the standard for flash controllers, not only using advanced techniques for the error correction whose importance is growing with each new generation of NAND flash, but also tapping into proprietary knowledge about how the flash chips work internally, which is information only available through a very intimate relatioship with the NAND flash chipmakers themselves. ... "
http://thessdguy.com/apple-to-acquire-anobit/
Guess what? as NAND flash chipmakers change the internal dynamics of their chips over time so that "secret sauce" they had back in 2010-2011 will start to evaporate. The dynamics will change with process technology shrinks; it isn't a "just to be mean spirited" move. Apple could go raging hostile to NAND flash producers (including Samsung) but that would be a bozo move. As I said, all NAND producers not trying to shoot themselves in the foot work with several flash controller makers. Samsung isn't solely dependent upon Anobit.
Frankly, a simple way of staying out of the 3 bit error rate zone is to just not use 3 bit storage. The write speeds on 3-bit is slower. It is also more likely to crap out as the lower process levels.
Anobit has a approach to handling the issues. It isn't the only one.
There is little to no evidence that it is the unequivocally best one for the long term.
Apple has enough money and other resources that they don't "have to" use Samsung without any other choices. Short term product quality will likely suffer but long term they aren't dependent upon Apple.
However, the same is true in the other direction. Long term Samsung isn't dependent upon Apple. As flash prices generally come down (which they are and Apple can't control ) more system integrators will use flash. In that context Apple will stop being the "biggest". One reason Apple is major consumer is because their devices cost more. It isn't owning Anobit or iPhone ... just the price.
make a better design and have that one stolen too because Samsung realise they can get away with it? no
----------
You haven't got a clue about the British Motor industry have you. The fact that you made up a word - beautifulest? What the hell is that?
Bad management had nothing to do with the demise of the British motor industry. It was the morons in the unions. Striking because the coffee machines were out of coffee, comes to mind. I know because my grandfather worked in the industry for decades.
Back on topic, if Cook was that against litigation he could have stopped them. Instead Apple has gone through with those and started even more. Not the sign of a CEO who would rather make a deal.
OK, let's keep this fascinating thread going. Because, after all, every single post on MacRumors.com is concrete evidence of MacRumors' enormously high web traffic. Which, in turn, helps to drive up the site's ad revenue. Which, ultimately, benefits MacRumors, one of the leading pro-Apple sites.
Where to start? Ummmm.... I know! Let's just DuckDuckGo the phrase "apple leading flash memory consumer" shall we? If you'd like to follow along, here's the link:
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=apple+leading+flash+memory+consumer
Quite a few results, including:
"Apple now world's largest consumer of flash memory"
http://news.techworld.com/sme/3285185/apple-now-worlds-largest-consumer-of-flash-memory/
"Apple now No. 1 in flash memory consumption"
http://www.winbeta.org/news/apple-now-no-1-flash-memory-consumption
First, the thing about "leading" is that you are ahead until someone else passes you. Correct? Next, Apple news dominates the tech news media, even that faction that looks for any and all weaknesses. Any and all weaknesses, whether real or merely perceived, in Apple's products and operations. I think we've all seen this umpteen times over the past few decades.
Given all of the above, don't you think it would be big news if anyone else, say HiSense (the brand that replaced Microsoft at CES' biggest booth, in case you haven't heard of them) surpassed Apple's consumption of NAND flash? I think it would be big news. I think it would spread throughout the tech media even if it were a false rumor. But nope. Can't find a single news story, blog post, or tweet about Apple losing its #1 spot as world's largest consumer of NAND flash memory.
Question: So where are the headlines like "Brand X surpasses Apple in NAND flash orders," or "Apple slips to number two in key flash memory component purchases", or "Apple is doomed because they bought less NAND flash than Brand X this quarter"?
Answer: There are none.
Hence, we can safely assume that Apple still leads in worldwide consumption of NAND flash memory, as they have since 2011.
Let's try this: I DuckDuckGo'd "Apple #2 nand memory" and still got articles like this, from way back in 2009. Again, if you'd like to play along at home:
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=apple+%232+nand+memory+
NAND memory shortage blamed on Apple
http://www.techspot.com/news/36202-nand-memory-shortage-blamed-on-apple.html
Apple leading is old news. Apple falling behind would be big news.
If it ever happened.
----------
Oops. Did I hit a hot button? Was it the "specs" thing?
Or was it the "ignorant Android Apologists" turn of phrase?
I hope you'll understand that MacRumors is a predominantly pro-Apple news and blog site.
Not everything they publish is pro-Apple, but their audience is mostly pro-Apple.
Huge difference between praising Apple here and spam-trolling Android and whatever else here.
Assume away. Clearly you enjoy doing so. I prefer actual facts. Of which you've provided none for 2012. The absence of evidence is not evidence. Have a lovely day.
The absence of proof of guilt means innocence.
Show me one single traditional news story, one blog post that proves that Apple has lost its dominant position as the world's largest consumer of NAND flash memory.
(... crickets ...)
The absence of of proof of innocence does not mean guilty. That's my point. You're clearly missing.
By the way - I have now found a source (recent) which confirms the fact. No thanks to you, however since all you could provide was old data.
You seem to think this was about proving you wrong. It wasn't. It was about confirming the facts. With proof. Not conjecture. Maybe you should spend less time trying to be snarky or clever and more time understanding the question being asked and providing the (factual) answer. FYI - here it is.
http://www.zdnet.com/nand-flash-mar...n-2013-despite-ultrabooks-stumble-7000010859/
Again - have a lovely day.
Perhaps he was looking for the source article that those quote?
“Because of its high-memory density, combined with high-volume shipments, Apple’s iPhone line in 2012 was the largest single consumer of NAND, helping to increase demand for the memory from the smartphone market,” said Michael Yang, senior principal analyst for memory & storage at IHS. “However, Ultrabook sales fell short of industry expectations, dragging down the overall NAND market for the year.”
http://www.isuppli.com/Memory-and-S...ntracts-in-2012-as-Ultrabooks-Disappoint.aspx
"iPhones consumed 10.5 percent of the total NAND flash supply in 2012. In comparison, all other smartphones combined used 10.4 percent."
"The fate of the NAND industry in the near and intermediate term rests on the support of three pillars of demand: smartphones, tablets and SSDs."
Given that in two out of three categories, Apple ships the most devices with the most NAND, and that SSDs is diluted across many companies, it's pretty certain that Apple bought the most raw NAND.
As for who controls the NAND market? Dunno. It doesn't really matter.
I'd say it's probably JEDEC.
Ah yes, ZDNet. Very important source of tech industry news. In the '90s.
My original point still stands. You *do* remember it. Don't you?
Do you remember my point. It was about locating an actual source. I provided one. You didn't. Enough said.
Great. Now do you think that qualifies you for a career in journalism?
This is a blog, in case you hadn't noticed. Big difference between "journalism" and "blogging."
Can you get a little more off topic. Where did I claim I was trying to qualify for a career in journalism.
You stated something. I simply asked if you had a source. Clearly something you are completely bent out of shape about since you keep trying to make this into some personal attack.
You couldn't provide one. I provided one. You can try and discredit the source as much as you'd like - but the link I posted referred to another source - one that another forum poster linked to directly.
Since when is this "discussion" between you and I about journalism/blogging. Hint: It's not. Never was. It was about providing a source. Any source.
Wow. Done with this and you. The matter has been resolved.
Traditional journalists need to provide sources. Bloggers may not need to.
Commenters, such as myself, absolutely do not need to.
So why, again, do you believe I absolutely positively must without fail provide a source?
And yes, thanks for the link. I'll use that again in the future.