Slashdot Mirror
Why Apple Is Suing Every Android Manufacturer In Sight
First time accepted submitter amiller2571 writes "The eyes of the technology world are focused on the epic patent struggle between Apple and Samsung — the latest iteration of Apple's frantic legal battle against everything Android. The iPhone maker has also brought suits against Android device manufacturers HTC and Motorola. Apple has faced criticism for its endless lawsuits designed to stunt competition from Google's Android, but a quick look at Android device shipments in the second quarter of 2012 reveals a key number that suggest Apple is right to worry." Spoiler alert: the number the article focuses on is 68 — as in, the 68 percent of the smart phone market in this year's second quarter that consisted of Android phones.
We need a repeat of SEA vs. PKZip, with Apple as SEA.
68% of the market is occupied by almost all the other smart phone companies put together. In other words, they're all tiny minorities. The iPhone rules.
Remember, Windows PC makers 'dominated' the market and Apple had only a 'small' share. Except, Apple had the largest single company share and the most growth and the greatest profits by far. How many units are sold by all X makers in aggregate isn't really all that important here.
Apple also has the iTunes store that makes money off the back end. The other makers don't have that. They're jealous but failed. Apple's making it.
(No, I don't have an iPhone, just observing.)
I'm a user of MS, Apple and Android based products. I'm getting tired of Apple's sue happy policy and I will take that into serious consideration during any future purchases.
Apple is making MS look less douchebaggish by comparison.
The important % is: "What % of the available profit in the smart phone ecosystem is Apple extracting?"
I would wager that Apple's percentage there is considerably higher.
Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)
http://www.lawrenceperson.com/
Didn't we go through this already?....oh yeah:
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120807133033596
The eyes of the technology world are focused on the epic patent struggle between Apple and Samsung
No, but nice try.
Because they're assholes. They've always been assholes since the '90s. They've just never had the financial clout to follow through until several years ago.
The numbers are from IDC, so they might not be very accurate. According to IDC, Samsung sold 2,391,000 tablets worldwide in Q2 2012, but according to Samsung's court documents in the Apple case, it sold 37,000 tablets relevant to the court case. It could be that almost all of their sales were international and/or not-relevant (such as Windows tablets), but it is hard to reconcile those numbers nonetheless. The most likely explanation is that IDC really sucks at estimating tablet sales. Maybe they are dramatically better at phones?
Source: http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2012/08/10/apple-sold-5-7-million-tablets-in-the-u-s-last-quarter-court-documents-show-samsung-sold-37000/
I.e. Samsung alone shipped almost twice as many smartphones as Apple.
I am just obnoxious or trying to defend Apple here, but to say in comparison it is what is going to kill innovation. Apple is saying, right or wrong, design something different, follow the FRAND rules, and be innovative. Not everything has to be an iPad or iPhone. The Kindle Fire, for example, is not remotely an iPad, but is an extremely functional machine.
OTOH, MS is saying they own everything, and anyone who does anything owes them money. This is what they did with the naked PC fight. By focusing on Apple, and their effort to innovate, instead of MS and their effort to take a cut of anything that looks like technology, we are losing the war.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
I'm concerned that if Apple 'wins' too many of these patent lawsuits, we will all end up with expensive phones and few (if any) even reasonably cheap phones will be available. The costs of patents is pushing up the costs to the consumer too much in this case.
We need to make sure cell phones remain inexpensive for all consumers to afford.
A phone is an essential communications device. Land lines have begun to fade away. You can still buy land-line phones for under $20. An average smart phone is several hundred dollars to purchase outright (or will be factored into the monthly payment on contract). When a smartphone breaks, or gets stolen, the cost of replacement is now the average person's disposable income for a month or many months!
Cell phones aren't made to last. We need to keep the prices down or a lot of people will be left out. I'm hoping one dominant player doesn't take over the market for this very reason.
I.e. Samsung alone shipped almost twice as many smartphones as Apple.
Apple makes over 70% of industry profit. And Samsung is the only other phone maker making any significant profit at all in the smartphone. (HTC apparently makes a small operating profit) Pretty much every other phone maker including Research In Motion, Nokia, Motorola and Sony all posted losses. Because Samsung ships a lot more units (feature phones + smart phones) but still only has half the profit of Apple over the same period, that means that Samsung is competing with Apple primarily on price. Yes they are selling a lot of units but people (mostly) aren't buying them for the features - they are buying Samsung because of the price. It's unclear if Samsung will be able to continue its price leadership since there isn't all that much much to differentiate Samsung's Android phone from anyone else's.
I love it! Apple has turned into the New Microsoft. I wonder what all the Apple Fans are saying now after years and years of complaining about Microsoft suing everyone and anti-competetive behavior!! LOL at Apple.
Apples numerous lawsuits aren't " 'blah blah emotional decision' posts", they are real.
Reactions to those lawsuits ARE emotional reactions. That's a judgement, just a fact. We have every right to have an emotional reaction to things and in fact a huge portion of our purchasing decisions are driven by factors other than pure reason.
I roll my eyes every time I see one of these posts positing that Apple is somehow more evil than the rest of them. Every one of these companies Apple is suing would do the exact same thing if they were in Apple's shoes and many of them have. There are no good guys here. Every one of them is as guilty as the next.
Apple's stock would be crushed by a price war - which is inevitable unless they can choke off competition with patent suits.
Ultimately this is all about keeping margins high and emptying the pockets of consumers.
The problem is that they could have 99% of the profit in the market, it doesn't matter if they keep on losing market share. Eventually, their profits will drop.
Or those loss making companies will go bankrupt or leave the market. With $100 billion in the bank and their current margins Apple can bankroll a pretty long fight. Apple only owns a relatively modest percentage of the PC market but they are easily the most profitable PC maker out there. They don't need much of the market share as long as they can continue to own the bits making all the profit. So far Apple has made all the right moves and their strategy looks good. Even Microsoft and Google cannot forever bankroll money losing ventures though Microsoft certainly has been willing to try.
That's not to say there is no risk to Apple. Apple depends heavily on just a few products. If they drop the ball on the next iPhone or the next iPad, their stock price will drop like a stone. The real risk to Apple is if someone comes out with software that they cannot compete with. Apple's products are differentiated primarily by their software. (yeah the design stuff matters too but much less) Google is a risk to them because Google has enough programming talent to potentially outperform Apple in some way. The devices themselves are important but actually somewhat secondary.
Apple's sue happy policy and I will take that into serious consideration during any future purchases.
If you are not buying based on lawsuits, you are out of luck regarding buying any smartphones or tablets.
Apple is not alone in suing lots of companies. Google (through Motorola) was trying to sue Apple over patents that were SUPPOSED to be able to be used by anyone implementing the 3G standard, at a standard cost - but Motorola was shaking down Apple for more. How is that fair or right?
Meanwhile Samsung is suing Apple.
The thing to attack is not the companies suing each other but the patent system that enables such behavior.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
You can't complain about those suits without noting that Google is also suing both companies, through Motorola and other Android vendors.
Why turn a blind eye to one company if you are REALLY so indignant about lawsuits?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
A software platform vendor enableing a rich ecosystem of hardware vendors eating the lunch of Apple's combined OS+Hardware approach. Apple knows how it ended last time, and any possible chance it has to delay that process, no matter how desperate seeming, is worth it.
Samsung didn't copy Apple. Anyone with half a brain can tell the difference between Apple's products and Samsung's products. Apple isn't defending themselves against some mythical infringement of their rights, they are the aggressor here. They deserve to go the way of SCO for what they are trying to do to the landscape.
"16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
It makes me wonder, what if we lived in a world where Apple won and had its own way...
The only smartphone in existence would be the iPhone, and they would hold so many patents that nobody but Apple could make smart devices that are usable. With a 100% market monopoly, the vast majority of cellphone owners would have dumb phones because they couldnt afford an iPhone. The iPhone would be one of the most visible separators of the rich vs the poor.
Any person caught without an iPhone would be ostracised and teased as "that person who is so poor they cant even afford an iPhone, what a loser...etc etc".
Innovation would drop to essentially zero in the mobile market, as any attempt at competition vs Apple would result in Apple Legal utterly destroying the offending company.
In all, it would be the equivalent of the Smartphone Apocalypse, a veritable wasteland where only the well-to-do are allowed to enjoy the fruits of mobile technology, and the rest of us shamble along, dejected, left out and downtrodden.
What an awful world that would be.
Fuck you Apple, you narcissistic greedy bastards.
Seriously -
Cheung Kung University of Taiwan are suing Apple [Patent infringement]
The US Department of Justice are suing Apple [iBooks Price Fixing]
Antione Pontbriand are suing Apple [iBooks Price Fixing]
Noise Free Wireless are suing Apple [Patent]
Trans Video Electronics are suing Apple [Patent]
Scott, Koffman, SIlversmith and Monroe are suing Apple [In-app purchase baiting]
Apple is suing Motorola [Patent]
Motorola were suing Apple [Patent]
Apple is suing Samsung [Patent]
Samsung are suing Apple [Patent]
Samsung are suing Apple again [Patent]
Samsung were suing Apple yet again [Advertising]
Apple is suing Kodak [Patent]
Kodak is suing Apple [Patent, constructive litigation]
Kodak is suing Samsung [Patent]
Varia Holdings are suing Samsung [Patent]
Varia Holdings are suing RIM [Patent]
Samsung is suing the Australian Patent Commission [Patent]
Apple is suing HTC [Patent]
HTC are suing Apple [Patents bought from Google]
Symantec/STEC IP are suing Apple [Patent]
Nokia was suing Apple [Patent]
Nokia is suing Google [patent]
Nokia is suing HTC [Patent]
Nokia is suing RIM [Patent]
Nokia is suing Viewsonic [Patent]
IPCom is suing HTC [Patent]
Interdigital is suing Nokia [Patent]
British Telecom is suing Google [Patent]
ProView were suing Apple [Trademark]
EMG Technology is suing Google [Patent]
Microsoft are suing Motorola [Patent]
Motorola are suing Microsoft [Paten]
Oracle were suing Google [API Copyright]
PayPal is suing Google [Patent]
Mount Hamilton Partners is suing Google [Patent]
The Authors Guild are suing Google [Google Books transcriptions]
The state of Texas is suing Google [Antitrust]
CamUp is suing Google [Patent]
Intellectual Ventures is suing Motorola [Patent]
Tivo are suing Motorola [Patent]
Fujifilm are suing Motorola [Patent]
Viacom is STILL suing Google [YouTube Copyright]
MTEL is suing RIM [Patent]
Openwave is suing Apple [Patent]
Openwave is suing RIM [Patent]
WiLAN is suing RIM [Patent]
NXP Semiconductors are suing RIM [Patent]
Dolby Laboratories were suing RIM [Patent]
Evelyn Paswall is suing Apple [walking into a door]
At that point, complaining about any one company refusing to innovate is unreasonable and it simply shows a major problem with the entire system of patents, especially in their interaction with international companies.
Apple can engage in shenanigans around Android and patents for a while, but they really have nothing: right now, manufacturers may perhaps infringe on a few patents because Apple's patents are so vague and ill defined, but as part of the lawsuits, they have to put their cards on the table about which gimmicks they want to own. Once they do, it's easy enough to design around. And the damage that this b.s. is doing to Apple's reputation is immense: presumably, Apple is suing over their best innovations, and everybody now sees what they are: springy windows and black bezels.
The adage is those "who could, innovate. Others litigate". May be Apple thinks differently and asks "why not both?" and it litigates innovatively ;-)
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Samsung didn't copy Apple. Anyone with half a brain can tell the difference between Apple's products and Samsung's products.
Which, if true, is totally irrelevant. The question is whether everybody can distinguish between an iPad and a Galaxy Tab. Including people who don't know who makes which tablet. Including people who believe that "iPad" is a generic name, and that various companies could make iPads under various different names.
There is also the question whether people go just by looks and decide "this tablet looks almost like an iPad, so surely it must work almost as well as an iPad". Or whether people go just by looks and say "this looks almost like an iPad, so it is good enough for me".
Throwing lots of android handsets at lawyers with apple logos.
oh... make it html5, so it runs on iOS bypassing their safegarden, ($99 for a dev kit, forget about it)
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
Reason why is cause they were rls'ing new version of mac os x next day and within a few months the iphone 5 would be out, most mac nuts won't buy the old phone when new one is close.
Here's the thing. Appearance designs are not copyrightable or patentable in ANY other industry.
Oh yeah? Form a soft drink company and sell your product in a bottle shaped like this, and see how long it takes a cease and desist letter to arrive.
Trade dress is applicable in more than just the computer industry.
Apple does not want to see a repeat of the 1980's with Microsoft. They are suing because they believe that Google, Samsung, etc truly stole their ideas to make phones. The court will decide whether that's true or not. Apple makes tons more money than anyone else in mobile phones, so that's probably not the motivator.
It's a copy of the SGS2. They started the "na na nana na copycat copycat" war as a diversion.
Apple's following seems to have a disproportionate number of irrational, fanatical disciples who truly "believe".
Ah, yes. 26 million fanbois bought iPhones last quarter.
To use a Windows analogy, not many people buy Windows. They buy Dells. They buy HPs. They buy Asuses. They buy Toshibas. They don't buy Windows. Windows is just something that comes along with what they wanted--namely a personal computer from a reputable brand.
Not many people buy Android. They buy Samsung or Motorola or HTC. I don't think there are many people out there saying, "Oh, Man! I gotta get me Jelly Bean!" But they are saying, "Oh, man, I gotta get me a Samsung Galaxy S3!"
There's a certain degree of ignorance out there, also. If I have an iPhone and I'm in a 2 year plan, why do I care what an Android phone can do? I have a phone and I'm stuck with it for the next two years. Why look around? The iPhone does what I want.
One of the things that Apple's competitors have to do is start showing things that the iPhone can't do and show me why I want to do those things. Don't waste my time with specs that I don't understand. Don't waste my time with cool futuristic-looking ads and a bunch of gobbledygook. Show me stuff that I want to do and show how your product will let me do it.
Samsung has been doing this well, lately. I can't find it, but I saw an ad recently that showed the whole "bump to transfer images" thing, which is great.
I always thought the reason was as simple as this: "I'm willing to go thermonuclear war on this... Our lawsuit is saying, 'Google you f***ing ripped off the iPhone, wholesale ripped us off. I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple's $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong. I'm going to destroy Android, because it's a stolen product." -- Steve Jobs
Qu'on me donne six lignes écrites de la main du plus honnête homme, j'y trouverai de quoi le faire pendre.
And of course restarting the baseband. Airplane mode will also deregister the terminal from the base station and then make a location update, but will not restart the base band.
I don't know what you're talking about. My {InsertPhoneModelHere} works perfectly. I never have signal problems like {InsertCrappyPhoneModelHere} do. It has the automatic ass wiping feature unlike Symbian or BlackBerry. My signal strength is the Chuck Norris of cell phone signal. In fact when I'm in a low signal area, my {InsertPhoneModelHere} will kick closest {InsertCrappyPhoneModelHere} in the ass and steal all it's signal bars for me. It can generate chocolate pudding at will.
Now then..... I own a smartphone. I've owned many, and someday someone will come out with one that might make me want to get naked and cover myself with oil. I don't know for sure, cause I haven't seen it yet. that being said quit trying to justify your overpriced piece of technology, and accept the fact that we all spent too much for the coolest thing out there. No matter which brand it is.