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 and Samsung Moving into 'Hate-Hate' Relationship
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
There are a lot of places that don't take paypass. Both require some kind of equipment upgrade.
At the end of 2011 there were 3.9 million NFC based readers installed globally or about 8% of credit card terminals. Annual growth is predicted ~50%. Keep in mind NFC adoption in Europe and Asia is happening much faster than in the United States so that 8% of terminals is likely considerably less in the United States.
Correct, but you seem to be misunderstanding what Passbook actually is. While Passbook has limited support for payment through gift cards, that’s not the prime use case. Passbook is about customer acquisition, customer retention and increasing the per-visit gross dollar average; it’s a marketing tool. It’s also a Trojan Horse.
That you only know of Starbucks is immaterial. Target, Major League Baseball, Fandango, LiveNation, TicketMaster, Walgreens to name just a few of the major national brands. More to the point Wallet has been around for more than a year, and was promoted & heavily incentivized by Google, Mastercard, Visa, et. al.,
Simple(ish), but not cheap. You try telling a medium sized company they need to invest hundreds of dollars per location so a minority of customers can check out slightly faster. Even in a good economy that’s a bad business proposition outside of the select few partners that get incentives for upgrading (e.g. pretty much every example you listed above). Again refer to previous statement about NFC credit card terminal adoption, it’s fast, but not fast enough.
Again you’re conflating the issue. Passbook is not a payment platform, judging it by that criteria is missing the point. Adoption is far more important that functionality at this point and adoption comes from low cost of entry. Wallet has a high cost of entry for both vendor and customer. Passbook has effectively zero.
M$ didn't LOAN Apple money. It was a "settlement" because Apple caught M$ ripping off Apple for Quicktime code after M$ hired ex-Apple Quicktime Developers, San Francisco Caynon Co.. In their little out of court settlement. M$ paid Apple a decent size amount of money, bought so many restricted shares of Apple and agreed to continue to make Office for Apple. It was promoted as helping bail Apple out. Look at the amount Apple had in cash at the time (about $1.5 Billion) and the amount of money M$ gave to Apple was in the hundreds of millions. Microsoft also bought and then later sold their non-voting stock. (BIG MISTAKE to have sold so soon.)
The media made it sound like Microsoft was bailing out Apple, because it makes Microsoft look good.
Yes, because Apple should be able to have a healthy business relationship with a partner who becomes a primary competitor by ripping off your stuff (see $1 billion judgment) and runs denigrating TV ads mocking you and your customers.
----------
Shhh, you're using facts to ruin the Microsoft fanboys' favorite talking point.
Sorry - but again - business is business. Apple didn't do anything for Samsung as charity. The idea that they were "good" to Samsung is a crock. They both benefited (and still do) from their relationship.
But it's quite clear how emotional YOU are about this
Apple has been investing in key component mfg to build mfg plants specifically FOR Apple to ensure component supplies and quality. So, Apple paid Samsung money for some of Samsung's fab plants. Now, if Apple wrote their agreements to take over those mfg plants in the event of any wrong doing of Samsung, then maybe Apple would be able to OWN those mfg plants they basically paid for. Now, Apple just goes elsewhere and makes similar investments in building mfg plants for screens, chips, etc. by OTHER mfg. I guess Apple doesn't want to to build and operate their own fab plants. IBM has been a large semiconductor mfg since the 60's because they made their own chips for their mainframes.
I think it might be time for Apple to start their own chip mfg plants for processors so they can design, mfg their own designs without anyone else knowing anything about what they are doing. They could come up with the freakish designs in the process. I don't know how many plants they would need since the Chips aren't that big, but building a couple of processor mfg plants quietly might do the trick. For Apple, that's chump change investing a couple of billion on state of the art processor fab houses they could run. I mean, even AMD sources some of their designs elsewhere.
I agree, after the recent past Apple really show little respect, not just to Samsung, but to other companies too.
But Apples problems will repeate themselves. In the PC market, the last chips Apple were designing we're dramatically slower than intel and AMD. I already question the A proc stability and performance. Apple will not be able to keep up with Samsung and other manufactures with years of experience in these areas.
Eventually they will be forced to redesign their core OS to work with industry standards once again.
It was only a matter of time before they would completely separate themselves. I was always confused how Samsung was both a Supplier and a Competitor... Anyone who didn't see this coming is either ignorant or blind.
What I'm wondering is if Apple will move to other suppliers, or will they begin to do everything in-house. I suspect Apple, being the obsessive compulsive controlling company they are, will try to own and run the entire production cycle... eventually.
What I'm wondering is if Apple will move to other suppliers, or will they begin to do everything in-house. I suspect Apple, being the obsessive compulsive controlling company they are, will try to own and run the entire production cycle... eventually.
Adopting a natural evolution in wireless technology is not a game changer. There is nothing special about adding LTE.
I think Android phones got bigger because manufacturers are obsessed with larger displays.
Most places already have it because all major credit card companies are pushing RFID cards. The credit card companies are essentially also pushing the adoption of Google wallet at the same time. Credit card readers also are typically replaced after 5-6 years as the contacts wear out.
But Apples bottom line numbers are not as great as Samsung. Rough numbers quoted were 4 million to Samsungs 8 million world wide weekend sales after release date of comparable products. (but this is all speculation and nonsense, carnt believe I let my self get dragged in to this
)Not to add how much profit Samsung revenues from the manufacturing of each Apple unit.
But Apples bottom line numbers are not as great as Samsung. Rough numbers quoted were 4 million to Samsungs 8 million world wide weekend sales after release date of comparable products. (but this is all speculation and nonsense, carnt believe I let my self get dragged in to this
Not to add how much profit Samsung revenues from the manufacturing of each Apple unit.
It is the profit margin that matters.
Juice it up
The new valpak passbook has a lot of new mom n pop stores
----------
Resale value is a huge part of it
I sold my 4s for $400
Would you buy a car not thinking about resale?
I think that is one of the problems Apple is avoiding. Very few places use paypass. I have it on my credit card and the only place it actually works is Mcdonalds. Then theres the security breaches on android and NFC that would have to be addressed before Apple would move forward with it. The technology is not ready for primetime in most places.
Steve Jobs made it sound very different from how you described it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?&v=WxOp5mBY9IY
Like Woz said in an interview recently, Apple is acting especially arrogantly these days. They think they can do it all: hardware design, OS, video editing software, music software, apps, cloud computing, maps services, etc. They are spreading themselves too thin and it will start to show in the not too distant future.
True. They remind me of the Bush administration and the whole "if you're not with us, you're against us" thing. Korean dishes like bibimbap will probably be renamed to "Freedom rice" in Apple HQ's restaurant.
Much of this juvenile, binary attitude came from Steve who apparently saw everything that way. People he worked with were either 'best evvar!' or 'worst evvar!' and nothing inbetween, and a total polarity switch could occur when you least expected it.
I'm sure the current Apple leadership is capable of a more nuanced and diplomatic way of managing business relations, but of course they feel obligated to Steve who swore to fight Google (and by extension, Samsung) until and including his "last dying breath" (yeah, don't waste it on saying goodbye to loved ones or anything). So they will probably continue to fight this crybaby war on his behalf, but hopefully it will be the last.
Oh... this text may have been contaminated by the Samsung SSD drive on my MBP, in case you want to wash your eyes with detergents as a precaution.
To me passbook is more about getting rid of the 90 rewards cards I have, being able to use to to pay for Starbucks and having movie tickets on it, etc are just a plus.
yea but they are makeing a hell lot of dough with the supllies for Apples products. They would loose a hole heap of money which they would never catch with their other sales.
So it would hurt them more then Apple.
I was at BP the other day buying coffee and was surprised I couldn't tap and go. I find only about 30% places around me have it. You can't use it at big stores like Target and Giant Eagle, etc.
No. Honestly - because when I buy a car I am not thinking about what I'll be able to sell it for. I'm buying it because I plan on using it and beyond that is gravy. But then again - I don't buy a new car every 1-2 years. Maybe some do.
As with phones - same thing though. I don't buy a phone based on whether or not I can sell it or how much I might get for it. I buy the phone I want. *IF* I'm able to sell it before I get a new one or after - it's gravy. I never base my purchase on resell ability though.
You mean Apple. Samsung's going to partner with Microsoft in the end and Apple needs to make up a very large supply, and they've been buying all the supplies they can already. Cutting out Samsung will only mean higher prices on components and lower supply. Samsung will lose money in the short term as they grow their way out of it, but Apple will need to spend more.
Anyone who thinks Apple can legitimately crush Samsung is completely without idea of how the market works. What do they replace Samsung's foundry with? And what happens when Samsung starts dumping chips onto the market to reduce prices of all products? I mean, how much money does Samsung make on the iPhone? A few billion? Isn't it Apple's life blood? Why on earth would they mess with their supply lines over bounce-back?
iOS has a decade before it becomes Mac OS X. I like OS X. But its not outrageously useful for most tasks, I use it mostly to surf the web and consume entertainment. For work, video games, and even Java/Flash games, Windows far outclasses Mac OS. You just get to a certain point with a $650 device and wonder-where's the growth? Apple can't really increase the ppi on their set. They can add more RAM, a better processor, and maybe a faster connection. iOS 6 is lame compared to iOS 5 in so many ways. This is not innovation. And this is not enough to "dominate" mobile markets too much longer. Apple is playing defense instead of offense. Instead of suing, they should be innovating and leaving their competition in the dust. Want to steal our old technology? Great: Galaxy SIII: As capable as the iPhone 4. Imagine the ads if that were the case. And it could've been the case.
Really? You have clearly never created anything of your own before. When you create partnerships with companies who are not direct competitors and then they use the intimate details of that partnership to compete against you, to do anything but find another way would be foolish. Microsoft taught them a lesson 20 years ago that they will never forget. They allowed themselves to be dependent on them and then they used that to nearly destroy the company. Google was playing the same game but was surprised when Apple responded differently. Apple doesn't care what you think about it, but they will not fall in that hole again.