Apple Takes Jab at Samsung in Full Page Earth Day Newspaper Ad

[osofast240sx]

I suggest you do.



You're wrong. Just becuase Samsung made something that looked a tiny bit like iPhone, doesn't mean they copy. Infact they innovated - unlike apple.

The bottom line if Apple never innovated like you say, you wouldn't even be here on this forum! You need to ask yourself why am I here on an Apple forum and not a Samsung forum especially since Apple has not innovated since the iPad one. It's also clear that you do not have the ability to answer my questions

 

[samcraig]

Nice PR. However - most customers simply don't care and this won't have any effect on sales. Not that it's meant to. It's Apple patting themselves nicely on the back.

 

[Lerxt]

You're wrong. Just becuase Samsung made something that looked a tiny bit like iPhone, doesn't mean they copy. Infact they innovated - unlike apple.

"sprays coffee all over monitor in laughter". Ever seen Samesung innovate? Look no closer that the Galaxy Gear. Never seen such a design and functionally devoid product.


P.S. What do they pay people to write this stuff?

 

[mattbaar26]

Tomorrow morning: Samsung Announces 'Galaxy Campus 3'.

Dude this is getting so old and we know it's not all true...

 

[peterdevries]

Not so easy you still haven't explained what is innovative about those products. Let me give you a help on the definition of innovation!!

The term innovation can be defined as something original and, as a consequence, new, that "breaks into" the market or society. A definition consistent with these aspects would be the following: "An innovation is something original, new, and important in whatever field that breaks in to a market or society".

I think you need to differentiate between disruptive innovation (which you describe above) and incremental innovation. The latter is what everyone is accusing Apple to do too much of; improving their products in small increments with small scale new technology (e.g. Touch ID, lightning port). What everyone wants is the disruptive innovations (e.g. iPad, iPhone, retina displays, Macbook Air).

The problem is that many people don't know what is involved in innovation in terms of business and how a business can create innovation. It is not a problem that you can throw money at or flick a switch. But good luck in trying to convince people here of that.

 

[rish]

Now this is more like the Apple I know. What a great ad. Subtle and to the point. Fantastic. #

----------

"sprays coffee all over monitor in laughter". Ever seen Samesung innovate? Look no closer that the Galaxy Gear. Never seen such a design and functionally devoid product.


P.S. What do they pay people to write this stuff?

I liked this. Made me really giggle. Great return.

 

[the8thark]

Nice PR. However - most customers simply don't care and this won't have any effect on sales. Not that it's meant to. It's Apple patting themselves nicely on the back.

You would be surprised. Many customers (corporate and individual) do care about buying greener and more local. it's big business. I personally (at similar prices and product quality) would buy greener and local. And I am not alone in this thought process.

 

[rahhb.riley]

Does "Better" also include not disabling core services for older releases without notice?

Oh stop it. You're an alarmist. When those services are restored I'll be tracking you down to make sure you back track on your verbal diaareeha.

 

[orange.x]

Don't know if I'm the only one but I just can't help it to pronounce the Apple text in the "Tim Cook" mode... So irritating how he talks. In the keynotes he's always talking about prawducts instead of products.

I just realised this while reading the quote in the article... It's not what I want t hear!

 

[osofast240sx]

I think you need to differentiate between disruptive innovation (which you describe above) and incremental innovation. The latter is what everyone is accusing Apple to do too much of; improving their products in small increments with small scale new technology (e.g. Touch ID, lightning port). What everyone wants is the disruptive innovations (e.g. iPad, iPhone, retina displays, Macbook Air).

The problem is that many people don't know what is involved in innovation in terms of business and how a business can create innovation. It is not a problem that you can throw money at or flick a switch. But good luck in trying to convince people here of that.

Usually but not always when these companies go for disruptive innovation it usually adds up to a bunch of gimmicks. Samsung is constantly throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks and while that might not be a good or bad thing. I prefer Apple approach how they let the technology be refined before they added to device. I like my stuff actually to work and work well

 

[rish]

I find it absurd that Apple calls itself a green company. They are a company based solely on the insanity of consumerism, which is horrible to the environment, whether or not you use solar farms. Has anyone been to Africa or China to see the effect that consumerism has on our earth? Apple is an enormous part of that.

As for electronic recycling and battery recycling, it's generally a health hazard and has no real impact on the "green" initiative of a company. We use the developing world to deal with problems the western world has created by the need to buy stuff we don't need.

Anyone that buys into this nonsense really needs to give their head a shake.

I'm afraid you really have a point here. If we were a truly recycling, then we would be able to replace key parts of what were in a timelessly designed apparatus and then use the removed parts into something else limiting waste. We would then have a truly earth caring approach to our limited waste and somehow reuse that too.

With consumerism as it is it's difficult to see how this is going to be achievable. #

 

[FloatingBones]

This page notes some of Samsung's US initiatives with solar/wind power. It's unclear what sort of a commitment Samsung has to this as a global effort.

To some extent, Apple's advertising could be construed as poisoning the water on this topic: any enhancement of their green initiative could point back to Apple. The chemistry is a bit tricky here.

 

[Klyster]

Apple isn't beating its green chest about the production process. This is about data centers, not production.



You need to look at the whole chain in order to be able to make a judgment on whether it is better for the environment or not. And you lack (and so do I, but I regularly work in manufacturing of diagnostics equipment) information on Apple’s production process.

They might shave off 90% (although this seems too much. Where did you get this information?), and I agree that re-using shavings is energy intensive. However production of plastics and molding plastics are also very electricity and water intensive. In addition, plastic casings are produced in more parts than unibody chassis, which increases energy consumption. Moreover plastics are more polluting and more difficult to recycle. Another factor that needs to be taken into account is the reclaim value and lifespan that the product has. Aluminium is easier to recycle and Apple does have a recycling program in place (where are Samsung’s, Lenovo’s etc?) to increase the reclaim of those products.

Other factors that come into play are supply chain effects such as transport of parts etc. We don’t know a lot about the production process. There is no way that you are able to make a statement that Apple is more or less polluting than the rest without more information.

Last but not least it would also help to differentiate your argument better. Apple is here advertising its efforts in clean energy generation for data centers. They nowhere speak of their production process.
You need to compare

I never said Apple was greener or less green than "insert company".

I never said aluminium is worse than plastic (which Apple still use right?).

I'm not an expert and I'm certainly not trying to win an argument about aluminium and the process of.

But, Apple are boasting how energy efficient they are, they also allude to finding better ways of protecting the planet, so now maybe they can stop the unnecessary uni body design an maybe start casting which uses less energy.

But they won't, because their product will be less desirable and at the end of the day Apple cares for the environment while it helps them but they don't really care. If they did, they'd have already used less wasteful processes, bring production back to the United States where they'd have total control over their manufacturing process, they could build solar farms for their own factories (who if anyone could afford to do this), they'd also spend some of that ridiculous amount of cash on fixing some of the energy issues by innovation rather than using pre-existing solutions. If they were doing that, we'd hear about it weekly (how many articles have there been about eco data centres, shesh) so it's safe to say that's not happening

But Apple take out a self serving advertisement, ironically creating more waste, telling the "world" how much effort they have put into making their data centres efficient. Woopty frikkin Doo.

 

[peterdevries]

Please.... get your facts straight.

Let me help you a bit with a definition of innovation and some examples.

Disruptive innovation: creates a new or redefines a pre-existing market with something completely new.
Incremental innovation: updates of existing technology or new technology that is used to create new functionality. Does not have total market impact.

• Apple introduced the iPhone in 2007. This was a disruptive innovation, which redefined the smartphone market.
• Apple introduced the retina screen in 2010 (I think, not bothering to look up the date). This was an incremental innovation of display technology.
• Apple introduced the iPad in 2010 (I think, not bothering to look up the date). This was a disruptive innovation which basically created the tablet market. Or redefined the tiny market that existed before it, if you feel nitpicky.
• Samsung introduces the s-pen. An incremental innovation of input technology.
• Apple introduced the Lightning connector in 2012. This was an incremental innovation of the old interface.
• Apple introduced Touch ID in 2013. This is an incremental innovation also.
• Samsung introduced the Galaxy Gear watch in 2013. Now this was intended as a disruptive innovation to create or redefine the wearables market, but it didn’t work. Still it is an innovation, not incremental though, and not really disruptive either.

This is not an exhaustive list, there might be more on either "side". I do wonder what truly disruptive innovation Samsung has produced?

----------

so now maybe they can stop the unnecessary uni body design an maybe start casting which uses less energy.

Again, again and again. Take it from a manufacturing process consultant: YOU NEED TO LOOK AT THE COMPLETE PRODUCTION PROCESS TO BE ABLE TO SAY THIS.

 

[dermeister]

What is the purpose of this ad? To make us like Apple products because Apple uses solar energy? This is ridiculous. What a waste of money.

 

[639051]

So funny to watch people defend corporations who have no interest in them as a person beyond their wallets.

I hope they both go under .. then the next guy with the great idea will come along with a great new product.

 

[peterdevries]

Usually but not always when these companies go for disruptive innovation it usually adds up to a bunch of gimmicks. Samsung is constantly throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks and while that might not be a good or bad thing. I prefer Apple approach how they let the technology be refined before they added to device. I like my stuff actually to work and work well

Couldn't agree with you more.

 

[Karma*Police]

So wasting aluminium (it has to be re-smelted at a guess) by milling blocks is green? Wouldn't that take more energy to produce than casting individual pieces en masse? Are they building solar farms for the factories in China?

Or is this just for the media, to make Apple look good in the U.S press, and to gain pats on the back from Greenpeace. Sure seems like it..

But good on Apple for announcing their green intentions, I doubt for one second that it is self serving..... Guffaw...

If ilthe factory is powered by renewable energy then it doesn't matter, which seems to be something Apple is pushing for now.

And why would Apple want to impress the US media by taking out an ad in the UK? Did you even read the article?

 

[JHankwitz]

"leave the world better than we found it".
Really?
Then stop selling all-in-one Macs (a waste of displays!!!).

No, then you should stop buying all-in-one Macs! Apple, as all companies, are market driven. They make what the consumer wants to buy. It's your call, not theirs. They'll stop selling only when consumers stop buying.

 

[samcraig]

You would be surprised. Many customers (corporate and individual) do care about buying greener and more local. it's big business. I personally (at similar prices and product quality) would buy greener and local. And I am not alone in this thought process.

I don't discount that. But I think the majority of people don't.

 

[gatearray]

What is the purpose of this ad? To make us like Apple products because Apple uses solar energy? This is ridiculous. What a waste of money.

I'm not sure I would call positive advertising a waste of a company's money, but this on the other hand...

http://www.theverge.com/2014/4/21/5634980/samsungs-innovation-museum-opens-its-doors

 

[Digital Skunk]

The bottom line if Apple never innovated like you say, you wouldn't even be here on this forum!

The sad part is that the definition of innovation changes from person to person. Why I don't think the gear was innovative, I don't think the nMP was innovative either.

I also think the innovative part of the iPhone was mostly in iOS. We had brick phones with large screens and full touch interfaces before Apple. Let alone phone that could copy/paste, send MMS, and install apps via broadband form an "app store."

Dude this is getting so old and we know it's not all true...

Anything that lets forum users get their jollies off about Apple. This is MacRumors after all. I had to skip the first two pages of written excrement.

Usually but not always when these companies go for disruptive innovation it usually adds up to a bunch of gimmicks. Samsung is constantly throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks and while that might not be a good or bad thing. I prefer Apple approach how they let the technology be refined before they added to device. I like my stuff actually to work and work well

This is debatable. Apple Maps is the most recent one that I can remember of how Apple not always taking that approach.

You would be surprised. Many customers (corporate and individual) do care about buying greener and more local. it's big business. I personally (at similar prices and product quality) would buy greener and local. And I am not alone in this thought process.

I agree, and it's why I am eager to see what Google is trying with their modular phone design. Going back to the days of replacing parts instead of entire machines.

 

[peterdevries]

The sad part is that the definition of innovation changes from person to person. Why I don't think the gear was innovative, I don't think the nMP was innovative either.

That's not really correct. There are two definitions of innovation (incremental and disruptive), which are agreed in business and accepted in literature and business schools. The problem is that most people don't know these definitions and use them in an incorrect way, leading to the discussions we have everyday on this forum.

 

[MacHiavelli]

And we eagerly await the day when every product is made without the harmful toxins we have removed from ours.

That's badly worded...sounds as though Apple donates its toxins to other companies to use in their products.

 

[attila]

Yes, why show your products and services in your ad, when you can show the lawn outside your factory!