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.
Apple's Patent War Against Android May Lead to Settlements Under Tim Cook's Influence
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Madness? What madness? Do you yell a scream "stop the madness" duing basketball and football games? Business is a competative sport like most everything. Different people, different rules, different goals, but all in it to make money.
Steve jobs was very special, something that cannot be replicated. I glad Tim Cook isn't trying to do that, and instead is being his own man.
Only the lawyers have been winning the patent wars. It should be the inventors who benefit from progress, and the patent system was set up to try and do that, but it is quite a minefield. It seems the realistic way for an inventor to benefit is licensing. This way everyone benefits. The originator gets the licence fees. All companies get to progress, and the customers get better gadgets. And as Apple are great at applying technology in really useable ways, they will still lead the pack.
Only the lawyers have been winning the patent wars. It should be the inventors who benefit from progress, and the patent system was set up to try and do that, but it is quite a minefield. It seems the realistic way for an inventor to benefit is licensing. This way everyone benefits. The originator gets the licence fees. All companies get to progress, and the customers get better gadgets. And as Apple are great at applying technology in really useable ways, they will still lead the pack.
Just like the notification center. It came out just 10 mins after Android introduced it.
While I agree with the first part, regarding what you said about fighting up to a point, apple can actually afford to do this... most android smartphone makers are not really making that much money per handset they sell... Remember apple has something like 80% of the profits from the smartphone market, which means they can sustain these lawsuits until they drain droidmakers' pockets dry...
----------
I'm pretty sure if you try to have "taking on the RIAA one download at a time" engraved on your iPod/iPad, Apple will tell you to change it
I would say the prof is uninformed. Banning a competitors product in some of the largest western markets as Germany and Australia, right when the market itself of tablets is being carved out has immense benefits for apple, and not only immediate ones but long term ones too...How can he fail to see this....ahhhh...academia...lofty empty criticism...
Millions of dollars in R&D for Apple! Wow, look at Samsung's R&D budget for this year. Samsung is definitely spending billions in R&D just to copy what Apple spend for their R&D in millions.
http://www.latestpatents.com/category/samsung/
This is a joy to read. There were way too many lawsuits Apple was dealing with at once and it was getting to an absolute point of absurdity.
While getting rid of all them is a pipe dream; cutting down many will definitely help them overall in the long run.
While getting rid of all them is a pipe dream; cutting down many will definitely help them overall in the long run.
"Good artists copy, great artists steal" -Picasso as repeated by Steve Jobs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW0DUg63lqU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW0DUg63lqU
Bloomberg is factually wrong
This is a fabricated piece by Bloomberg to get Apple to settle instead of beating down several of its competitors who have been abusing Apple IP.
Knowing Steve Jobs as my two time boss he will always work deals behind the scenes before pushing for legal action. He has always been amicable when it comes to business.
When nothing reasonable proves fruitful and the abuse is exacerbated then he'll go thermalnuclear.
The deal he brokered with Microsoft to settle the 10 year long patent dispute with Microsoft was mutually beneficial.
Attempting to paint Tim as a passive leader compared to Steve is a mistake and one Bloomberg will soon discover.
Apple legal fees is pittance to their bottom line.
----------
Understand the concept of seizing on an idea and seeing it beyond the original designer's intent by pushing it to a level not foreseen by it's creator and then you'll understand Steve's statement and intent.
This is a fabricated piece by Bloomberg to get Apple to settle instead of beating down several of its competitors who have been abusing Apple IP.
Knowing Steve Jobs as my two time boss he will always work deals behind the scenes before pushing for legal action. He has always been amicable when it comes to business.
When nothing reasonable proves fruitful and the abuse is exacerbated then he'll go thermalnuclear.
The deal he brokered with Microsoft to settle the 10 year long patent dispute with Microsoft was mutually beneficial.
Attempting to paint Tim as a passive leader compared to Steve is a mistake and one Bloomberg will soon discover.
Apple legal fees is pittance to their bottom line.
----------
Understand the concept of seizing on an idea and seeing it beyond the original designer's intent by pushing it to a level not foreseen by it's creator and then you'll understand Steve's statement and intent.
Apple's strength has been it's ability to stay focused on making the best products. Apple needs to get rid of distractions and continue to execute like they have with laser sharp focus.
Well said, what a wimp...Steve led it this way for so long and look where it got Apple, now he's gone already they are caving in..some cheap copy cat firm will swamp Apple again, we've all heard this story before.
And that is why you are not a business person
Being nice rarely generates revenue, and allowing people to freely steal ideas hurts competition which hurts the end user.
And endless lawsuits not a great business model either. Having worked a software company where one of our competitors stole our software and flat out copied parts of it for a competing product, I am painfully familiar with what it takes to go after someone in court. We "won" our case, but the legal cost was tremendous, and worse, the effort and focus of management having to spend time on it detracts a lot of effort towards other things they should be focusing on.
Not at all. I'm merely giving you the most recent event as an example. But lets take a look at the last 4 years, shall we? Nothing but growth, record sales, and rising stocks for Apple. And how many legal cases has Apple been in the last 4 years? Quite a bit. And none of it is slowing Apple down.
Just out of curiosity, why are you giving Samsung credit for the retina display? I was under the impression that the design was all Apple and Samsung just did the manufacturing.
I'm pretty sure if you try to have "taking on the RIAA one download at a time" engraved on your iPod/iPad, Apple will tell you to change it
Lmao that is so going on the next iPod I buy =P
Look, Jobs is dead (and this is to everyone bitching that Cook isn't doing it how Jobs would). You're not going to get another Jobs. And it's been shown it is a very bad business tactic in cases where the founder dies and had a large influence on the company to try to run it under the idea of, "What would Jobs (or whoever it was) do?" Because since no one is Jobs, they will not get it right. It is better for the person to go with his strengths and personality and run it to his strengths, not to how he thinks some other person would (when he won't have the same strengths nor can he totally predict what the other guy would have done).
"You either die a hero, or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain."
- Harvey Dent.
When I pick up an Android device I don't see it being any more of a rip off of the IOS device than I do of the IOS device being "similar" in function to my Compaq iPaq from years ago. If anyone ripped anything off I believe IOS ripped of RIM's Blackberrys Messenger service concept.
It's all Samsung (and someday Sharp and LG)
Apple knows diddly-squat about how to design and mass-produce LCD displays.
It's a market that's overwhelmingly concentrated in a very small number of very capital-intensive companies (just like only a few companies are making cutting edge integrated circuits). Some of these "companies" are joint efforts among companies that can't swing the capital needed on their own.
Apple shopped around, asking these few companies if they could make millions a month of 2048x1536 9.7" displays, at a reasonable price. (Since IOS and OSX don't have resolution independence - it had to be twice the linear count of the old Ipad2.)
Apple knows diddly-squat about how to design and mass-produce LCD displays.
It's a market that's overwhelmingly concentrated in a very small number of very capital-intensive companies (just like only a few companies are making cutting edge integrated circuits). Some of these "companies" are joint efforts among companies that can't swing the capital needed on their own.
Apple shopped around, asking these few companies if they could make millions a month of 2048x1536 9.7" displays, at a reasonable price. (Since IOS and OSX don't have resolution independence - it had to be twice the linear count of the old Ipad2.)