seriously, all Samsung needs is a killer operating system that rivals Android OS with functionality, and has the ease of use of iOS, and they can be serious competitors to the trending walled gardens we are seeing. Bada OS doesn't cut it.
Samsung is the largest technology company in the world
Samsung has one of the most far reaching supply chains in the world
Samsung has the most patents out of any other mobile company
And lets remember that Apple is the company that came into Samsung's territory by going into the mobile space, not vice versa. Not saying that is bad or anything.
i'm seeing a lot of comments brushing off Samsung like they're some small amateur company, which I find amusing to be honest. Samsung is a huge conglomerate, with full support from the Korean government. In fact, its almost fair to say that the Korean gov't is part Samsung itself.
problem, as i see it, is: they dont come from software. To complicate, gaining the knowledge relevant for doing software isn't as easy as one might think. Further, once you do, you're still not home-free. Then you actually have to make your platform break - itself (somewhat of) a chicken-and-egg problem to solve.
That said, while software obviously is the key to the industry, i wouldnt advise Samsung to go for their own OS. I would advise them to start building software capabilities if they are interested in going that (integrated) route (something that would make them quite unique, as they are also component makers -- Nokia buy comparison has their own production facilities, but dont really produce components as such), and i would advise them to do some software knowledge investments regardless. Building (enough knowledge and capability for building) something as refined as an OS though, is something that will take time - lots of it. Until you actually can, dont, and even then, think again. :- )
----------
Uh really? I like my iMac, but I would never use it as my primary PC over my Windows 7 box. Accuse me of being brainwashed into the Windows UI, but I prefer it.
Window-management on 7 is a dream in comparison. Some say Lion improves the Mac experience, though. With my MBA now in order (my IT-department pushes Macs, not pcs on me!) so i guess i will soon be able to tell...
----------
Samsung did. The Win8 tablets MS gave away in the recent dev conference was from samsung. One with beastly spec.
They sell hw with android, Bada, Win8. And provide critical parts for iOS stuff.
wp7 too... even though they do a quite lousy job at that.
Is it?
If the market was really "thirsting" for an iPad alternative, it would have snapped up the TouchPad and the Playbook.
But it didn't. They lingered on store shelves, dusty and unwanted, until the prices got slashed.
A lot of people who, for whatever reason, don't like Apple, seem to be putting their hopes in Windows 8 somehow succeding where Android and WebOS and QNS failed. I think they are going to be mistaken.
Because nobody really likes Microsoft. And nobody really likes Samsung either. But more importantly, nobody (sane) is going to go out and waste $500 or $600 just to "stick it" to Steve Jobs and the folks at Apple. They are going to say: "Do I spend $500 on an iPad - for which there is all this wonderful software. That works with my iPhone and my Itunes library. That I KNOW just works. Or do I go and spend the same $500 and buy myself the same heaches I've tolerated from Windows all these years. Do I buy myself a Samsung, with an incomprehensible manual like the one that came with the LCD TV set and DVD player I bought."
Sensible people don't buy computer products out of spite.
people dont need to like Microsoft to like their products, just like i can like Apples products while hating selected parts of its corporate entity as such. Heck, they dont even need to like their products to buy them, they just have to not hate them enough to counter the cost of switching (and, few people, "real people", have something against MSFT).
So yes, if you ask me, lots of people will gladly spend the same 500 and buy themselves a windows tablet. They do so when it comes to the sub-par beast that is Android in which they have 0 investments, so they will definitely do so when it comes to the MSFT where (everyone really) has larger investments, and which platform is the core of the largest and strongest ecosystem out there (at least in this market).
I fully agree with Apple action to take legal action against those who copy their design.
This got nothing to do with Apple like Microsoft but a lesson Apple learn in the past.
Look at the past, Microsoft invited by Apple to help design the first GUI OS and then Microsoft steal the idea and come out windows and take over the world.
Same go to Samsung, joint partner but they go stealing apple design. This is not healthy and right kind of partnership.
And how will you feel if you are the one who invent thing and you never gain anything from your invention because others just copy your idea and eat into your share.
This will only make the inventor loss heart and give up and close shop.
1) An idea, not originating at Apple at all.
(and, something a court decided was perfectly fine -- something i give 0 weight, but others here seem obsessed by court-rulings, so yeah).
2) Windows 95 were an iphone, to speak LTD. Beyond that, one could even argue. It was w95 that was the deciding factor, the definitive win for the "GUI" (as Gates once stated - even though i think he wouldve been better off calling it the desktop paradigm). Apple were, of course, making the same bet - but it was MSFT, not Apple, that made sure they both won.
3) MSFT has, since day 1, been the single most important partner for Apple. Even Jobs acknowledges this.
FWIW it means nobody had a realistic use case for a tablet until Apple's marketing team told you that it's 'revolutionary' and 'magical' to kill time with Angry Birds on the loo.
Yes, as you can see, I still don't see a realistic Average Joe use case for a tablet. Either smartphone or Netbook, but tablet - not worth the 500 bucks for a contemplary device.
On the "contrary" (i think we agree), I believe plenty had realistic use cases for a tablet - some better than others - just not seeing the product itself viable (just yet).
I too, have a hard time seeing A.J. picking up a 500 (here its even more) buck far-to-dumb device. While i dont think Weiser will be right for quite some time to come (in his - oft-times extremely accurate vision - tablets are scrap-computers), the value-proposition simply is not good enough as it is (especially not if people start realizing that they cant consume stuff with money that is not theirs without being ****ed in the end).
Technological progression, however, on the path to Weisers scrap-computer will surely though make a stop at both the 199 tablet and the 99 tablet. And those, will - as evidenced by the hp firesale - certainly fly off the shelves...
(Strange as it is, while i can see myself buying 0 ipads at 500, i could easily see myself picking up a whole bunch at 99 a pop, actually costing me way more.)
