Why cant Apple just buy samsung and releve us all of this headache and listening to Samsung's misery.
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.
Samsung Declines to Seek iPhone 4S Ban in Korea, Wins Source Code Access
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Totally agree. How do you go about deciding if it's violating a patent in 2 hrs? Maybe keep a flash drive at hand?
That's been suggested before...
That would be destroying evidence in a court case. When evidence is destroyed, not only are there severe consequences for the people who do it and the lawyers involved, but any court will assume that the evidence was destroyed because of what it showed. If Samsung looks for comments that say "Hahaha we copied Samsung's patents and they don't know it!" and comments have been removed, then the court will assume that whatever Samsung claimed was in these comments would be true.
So it's not happening. On the contrary, there will likely be a knowledgable Apple engineer who will assist the Samsung engineer. And some more people making sure that no copies are being made
Like the other suggestion, it's not going to happen. The engineer and lawyers would be so deep in **** if that happened.
I think Apple has higher priorities. For the sake of humanity, giving some money to schools to improve reading and writing skills would be much better use of Apple's money, but that isn't going to happen either.
Awesomeness
Samsung: "Show us the contracts"
Apple: *waving its hand* "These are not the contracts you're looking for."
Samsung: *derp*
Apple: *waving its hand* "We can go about our business."
Samsung: *derp* "You can go about your business."
Apple: "Move along."
Samsung: "Move along. Move along."
Damn, that's priceless.
Samsung: "Show us the contracts"
Apple: *waving its hand* "These are not the contracts you're looking for."
Samsung: *derp*
Apple: *waving its hand* "We can go about our business."
Samsung: *derp* "You can go about your business."
Apple: "Move along."
Samsung: "Move along. Move along."
Damn, that's priceless.
If Apple wasn't going downhill in the early 90's, we would have seen this happen with the Microsoft lawsuit probably, things getting ugly I mean. But they did away with the lawsuit for the future and it did work out for both Apple and Microsoft probably.
But now Apple doesn't have to play to someone else's hand, so lawsuits from now on are going to stick.
But now Apple doesn't have to play to someone else's hand, so lawsuits from now on are going to stick.
3G thing in the firmware, not the entire thing
----------
And how can Apple buy Samsung?
Might be different this time.
https://www.macrumors.com/2011/11/11/iphone-4s-launches-to-long-lines-in-hong-kong-and-south-korea/
I've noticed that every article headline that talks about the iPhone 4S source code just says "source code" as if it was the entire package of code they handed over. 9to5Mac did this too.
It's just the baseband code. Geez.
Unless I'm utterly, utterly wrong
But I'm pretty sure it's just the 3G stuff. Obvious trying to make story sound larger than it is.
It's just the baseband code. Geez.
Unless I'm utterly, utterly wrong
But I'm pretty sure it's just the 3G stuff. Obvious trying to make story sound larger than it is.
Apple is letting them see the relevant source code (ie. not all of iOS) for a very good reason: Apple doesn't believe they are infringing Samsung's 3G patents.
Apple is claiming "exhaustion" - in other words, because the 3G functionality is mostly provided by the Qualcomm chips they buy (and Qualcomm is a Samsung licensee) - then they aren't guilty of infringement.
What the source code will show is how Apple implements 3G: If the source code says something like "pass this task off to the processor located at address XYZ, and return the result to address ABC" - then Apple hasn't copied Samsung's IP.
On the other hand, if the iOS source code itself contains instructions as to how to handle the data, using methods that Samsung has patented - then Apple would be guilty of infringement.
That is what Samsung's engineers are going to be looking for. And while two hours isn't a lot of time to analyze source code, it should be enough for Samsung's engineers to decide if Apple's version is basically true, or not.
Apple is claiming "exhaustion" - in other words, because the 3G functionality is mostly provided by the Qualcomm chips they buy (and Qualcomm is a Samsung licensee) - then they aren't guilty of infringement.
What the source code will show is how Apple implements 3G: If the source code says something like "pass this task off to the processor located at address XYZ, and return the result to address ABC" - then Apple hasn't copied Samsung's IP.
On the other hand, if the iOS source code itself contains instructions as to how to handle the data, using methods that Samsung has patented - then Apple would be guilty of infringement.
That is what Samsung's engineers are going to be looking for. And while two hours isn't a lot of time to analyze source code, it should be enough for Samsung's engineers to decide if Apple's version is basically true, or not.
Their legal departments and their R&D has nothing to do with each other probably. So they are both doing both.
Apple is not letting them anything, Apple must show the baseband source code because the judge has ordered them to show it to Samsung
Exactly! Even if Apple just wants to get a block minority of 25% + 1 share (meaning that Samsung cannot do any "important business" without approval), they would have to buy share for $86bn and Apple has only a cash reserve of about half of that.
Apple is big, but not big enough to "swallow" someone like Samsung just like that. They could though start it like Vodaphone did with D2 Mannesmann and just buy shares with shares meaning they increase own capital and use this to buy shares of someone else. This has a high risk for Apple though because investors might loose confidence. Nevertheless, Apple is strategically far from doing something like that. They outsourced production and they will stay this way.
Do you realize how large Samsung is? More like Samsung can buy Apple to relieve themselves of the headache.
Oh, it's that picture again.
Maybe you need to go through predicate logic again.
A tautology is a tautology no matter how the relation is understood. The picture is a fact. No matter how many times it gets posted, it will still remain true and magnify what Samsung really is up to.
But never mind, this forum is crowded with anti-apple, pro-android trolls. So here we go with down ranking. Woot! Woot!
And like what?
Never mind? But you still commented? Never mind...
----------
Samsung can buy Apple?
Right.
I believe Apple uses Qualcom's APIs (which in-turn are Samsung IP
) that abstract the register level operations.
Samsungs is worth about 3 times that of Apple in total assets.
I don't believe that is true. Apple is trading places with Exxon Mobile for the highest market capitalization. RIM recently traded below "book value", meaning their market capitalization was actually less than their total assets. For Samsung to be worth three times Apple in assets would mean that Samsung is trading far far below book value.
Right now, Apple's market cap is about $350B. Hard to gauge Samsung since doing the math on their stock and converting from the South Korean Won does not add up -- I know in Sep 2009 they were approaching Intel's market cap without about $91B in valuation.
Please provide some citation for your "3 times the value claim".
UPDATE: The market cap for Samsung on the South Korea exchange shows 146.7T in Korean Won. Doing the conversion at 1125 Won per US Dollar, Samsung is worth about $130.4B today. Apple is worth almost three times as much.
The best Apple could hope to do is merge with Samsung, meaning cash + stock exchange based on the above valuations.
They could not since they don't have enough cash, nor would it be worth it. Only a stock merger would be possible.
It is a bit amusing, but even more amusing is the belief by some that:
While Apple buying Samsung is a bit ridiculous, this is completely absurd since the numbers don't quite show that.
Last edited:
LOL.
Why don't you compare % of total exchange OR correct your values to reflect US GDP vs. K GDP (or PPP or whatever metric you want).
Kind of a shortsighted analysis on your part, eh?
nah Apple buying Samsung is more ridiculous, Samsung in 2010 had about double the equity and almost three times the assets (not to mention the strain it would give Apple to employ 5 times more employees)
