HA! If I buy FB shares mate lock me up okay:) In the meantime, let me know when and how much you bought, I'd love to know how much you're destined to lose after FB's next insider seller release date or next quarterly figure release date.
Though i will admit, the way they are in desperation mode over at FB, I'd say there may be gains this quarter but only because they have filled the site up so heavily on ads people mistakenly click on them because there is hardly any room left for anything else.
the question is where they go from here. they have a solid userbase, and astronomical opportunities in mobile if they can get their collective head out of the collective dark area. at some point there will be an inflection point. i'd buy now probably.
Okay, quit it with the cool aid talk for just one second. The mobile industry is just the tech industry but even less understood by business people / investors in general. FB has to compete against who exactly? Apple, Samsung, Google, Microsoft, Motorola, etc etc
Frankly HP has more potential than FB in the mobile market because at the very least they are TRYING to make a product worth anything (failing but they are trying), What's FB doing? They are creating AppStores to work on platforms and compete against the very vendors it runs on. Those vendors without finding a better word of it couldn't care less, would never give a potential competitor a helping hand, nor give a flying flaming f*()k so on an so fourth. So FB's AppStore idea is simply yet another failed concept of concepts they could try.
Facebook needed to OEM its platform, create a set of protocols for Carriers and/or Phone vendors to work on and then engage in a cross licencing agreement allowing for advertisers to pay for the service and allow Samsung, Apple, A&AT, Verizon to pocket a percentage. I believe the chance for this to take place is well and truly over, What's going to happen is FB's share prices are going to sink to a point where a mobile phone vendor will simply pick up them for pennies, the discussion should be about who will it be?
I'd say a race between Apple and Microsoft, you can see MS playing the dirty games with their share holdings already by releasing them in bursts pushing FB's price down and as for Apple, Apple is cosying up to Zukkerberg for a reason because other than iTunes what social platform has Apple really got?
Who wants that userbase and how much is it really worth? 4bn-5bn? As it stands not 40bn which is FB's current market cap is.
Shaolin Temples? Monks? Martial Arts? I.E Lifestyle? Philosophy? Yes, so out of touch are we. Some reading may help you with your ailment of cluelessness.
Riiight because buying something that's "fashionable" ISN'T something an Apple customer does right?
If it wasn't for mass media campaigns and the grand entrance of Jobs at his Keynotes being shown on every prime time news station as a "feel good" piece Apple wouldn't of had sales frenzies either. It's safe to assume it cuts both ways.
Not sure of the price myself which I don't care about as my Lumia was less RRP than an iPhone, does the EXACT same thing except with lower specced but better quality hardware. So say what you will about WP, so far no disappointments.
Here is a fairly balanced comparison between the two.
Some wins both sides I'd say. Which is better? whose to say? The weak points on Apple was video streaming and lack of HTML5, WP weaknesses the use of Trident over WebKit. But really splitting hairs between the two there isn't much between them!
Why? WP7.5 wasn't too bad? The thing about mobile OSes is that it isn't matter of "how many" features it has its more about "how less" features it has.
As such see my above post, its also time to stop putting Apple in with OEM. The moment the first Apple store hit the streets distributors / resellers should of told Apple where to stick it, where Microsoft creates a tablet and its considered burning bridges with their partners, Apple has its cake, eats it and its all okay.
Apple is akin to Dell these days. They buy large chunks of components and couple them together to produce an end product. Where as intel is a vendor, nvidia is a vendor.
Apple is a distributor of resold components and also end user retailer , which shits their own resellers to death because they enforce shitty pricing and restrictive models and then compete right down the street with their own Apple stores.
Selling Apple products your told to NOT put them near other similar products, you're told to use a specific amount of signage and told only to sell at a specific price and then you're forced to compete with not only the Apple store but also the Apple website.
Its you without a clue, thinking you have a single idea on how it sales work.
The problem is, as Google previously didn't manufacture any mobile phones - and were I to hazard a guess, probably didn't hold very many patents relevant to the industry - they didn't have grounds to go on the offensive.
Please direct me to the Google manufacturing plant please? Oh wait, they are an OEM software provider to a bunch of other vendors. Apple, a hardware reseller that re-brands pretty much the same stuff that comes out of the same building as a bunch of other vendors but with different rounded edges and a jacked OS they took from Berkeley.
The fight is not with Android, the fight is with the patents surroundings Motorola or have you forgotten what the M in AIM stood for? Yes, Google played the strategist here as they are protecting their interests and that's obvious, bad or good I'm in two minds as my hope is that the patent system just gets its ass handed to it and pushed for a reform of some sort.
Moving on, lets forget fact Eric Schmidt was on Apple;s board of directors until 09 so I'm sensing there is a lot of internal bad blood here and what I feel (and this is just me thinking out loud) is that though Jobs didn't like Android wouldn't of wished this to happen. Just as Apple and Microsoft are blood enemies in the media, on paper, they are cross licencing partners. The industry is built around these kinds of shady deals just like Apple and Samsung are partners and what we have here is just before the iPhone 5 release Apple moves to Sharp? Gooood lord, is that 101 of worst things to do as a business, trust an untested supplier on a major launch and expect it to all be all OK, at least the very least it should of been done as a iPhone 4GS2 or something of the sort.
I know I contrast two contradictory points by saying most hardware comes from the same place, yet it's still risky to switch suppliers. My concern is the use of materials, what other patent issues they'll need to circumnavigate and what is the manufacturing quality of sharp. The odds are really stacking up on the future of Apple and a lot of uncertainty indeed.
Dood, seriously? GFC? what about superfunds funding future trading options? Apple has had a lot of money poured into it from different places left and right. How much of that was YOUR money! If Samsung loses and because they are not posted on the NASDAQ means that Samsung and their knitted group of shareholders bare the brunt. A company like Apple losses and loses large chunks of value then WE the people have to suffer. It's sick I tell ya!
This case SHOULD end in a Samsung win and yes I agree Samsung did steal. Samsung should win because they did what the market demands and that is be a competitor to a potential monopolistic vendor which in turn means we the users weigh in on the benefits, If it wasn't for Apple bringing out Smartphones and then Samsung making a BETTER Smartphone we wouldn't all have such cool devices sitting on all our desks.
This whole shooting match means
a) users get best of the best product as the two companies have to "out do" each other b) It's a measure of true capitalism where business reaps the benefits because they have a better product.
I say allow the time proven way of business to play out, GM makes a better car than Ford, then Ford makes a better car than GM. What Apple did with the smartphone revolt is provide us with Electric Flying Cars, Samsung has given us Underwater Electric Flying Cars that can fly to outer space. So, lets keep the momentum of this going moving forward and not allow the courts to kill it.
Okay Apple wanna nitpick, lets nitpick.... going from the bottom of TFA.
SMS Icon Apple = Comic strip SMS word cloud Samsung = Wait that's the email icon... hmmmm Similarity = Green, Different shades.
Clock Apple = well okay, its a fuckin clock Samsung = a fuckin clock again Similarity = CLOCK!
Browser Apple = Safari icon Samsung = World icon Similarity = Blue, a little bit of prior art... IE anybody?
IPod Apple = IPod outline Samsung = Wait, that's the calculator icon. Similarity = Orange.
I'd also note the px rounded edges are different on each phone, again making them different. The one thing I'll give Apple is the bottom row, that's functionality ripping but that's it as i can see.
http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/samsung-feels-awkward.png... feels awkard? so you're telling me an interface which you've patented has been redone in such a way that its "copier" has created a lesser version? or is it just Apple who likes to stick irrelevant banter in all their design notes. Further to this, one of the 3 icons shown is the same colour while the calendar icon is different. Meanwhile the camera icon has the same colour but a different icon.
It's the Job's factor, he knew how to stay in the good graces with the upper echelon of the tech world and was controlling the market pace to their satisfaction, kind of like the same reason why we don't have electric cars everywhere and why they are being trickled in to the marketplace slowly as to not piss off the fuel companies.
Cook just wants to do what all CEO's are doing now, that's make a quick buck for today and forget about tomorrow. If Apple is to last the test of time and not sink then it has to play nice with its competition / partners, keep the cosy agreements with them and just keep innovating on new products. I.E there was iPod / iPhone / iPad if they made a good iWhatever that created yet another new market space then they would continue to grow into the trillions marketcap wise. iGlasses possibly could of worked but Google has taken first place on the podium for that idea.
As for this legal escapade it's only going to hurt them in the long run. Not only is it shedding light on Apple's development practices but its going to piss off their own high end talent by dragging them in to court and putting them in front of a defence lawyer that's giving them a good once over, they'll walk out of that court room walking funny not quite sure why their bosses did that too them.
It's safe to say the iPhone though a big money puller for Apple is not a cornered marketplace any more. Regardless of the patent trial outcome Samsung will still ship products that compete as will many others, HTC, Nokia, etc. and when the new Samsung phone does hit the USA the people over there will see that it has everything the iPhone has but is lighter and smarter and yes better. Sorry, Apple people you have to accept this, take it up with Apple as to why this has happened but it has and they know it!
The iPad is however still an unchallenged market, I'd even go as far to say that Apple the only full featured tablet that handles the paces. I had an iPad until yesterday, screen died and therefore gave me the excuse to get the Nexus 7, If Nexus was a little bigger / wider and had a camera in the back then game over as my iPad needs would of been met. As for the Galaxy tab, its good but it's still clunky, maybe Jelly Bean can fix it, who knows but it's still clunky. If the Galaxy was smoother and the Nexus was bigger the market would have stiff competition, so I'd say the clock is ticking on the iPad but not quite yet.
Yeah, in that case NASDAQ cannot be held accountable for the money they lost. If suing which is the issue id see them going after the extra cost the shares incurred.
Having said that, I'm certain NASDAQ's systems has a defined set of terms of use for traders, i.e if the system screws up we (NASDAQ) are not liable sort of thing, just like a terms of service agreement with an ISP, the net goes down people cant really sue over it.
Prior art work may here because of how it was disclosed, I don't see commercial in confidence written at the bottom of the design and divulging it to Apple can be seen as publicly disclosing information.
The only defense is if NDAs were imposed and how those NDAs were used. Lastly, it was a Sony employee designing the prototype and giving it too Apple, if Apple said f-off we don't need you, it can be construed as Apple screwing a supplier.
You're missing the point, a day, a week a month you can't patent prior art, Apple's patent will have to be deemed invalid after this and so it should.
Throw whatever crafted argument at it but judges are about the law, if you think of them like compilers and the lawyers the code the result will result in this one conclusion Apple cannot sidestep it.
Time will tell though.
As for my opinion Jobs if alive today would not of done this he also would not of fucked his suppliers out of the market grabbing at market share like Cook has. Go look at the market cap graph since Jobs death, the company nearly doubled, Cook was reckless and he'll kill Apple because of it, stupid, because MS, Samsung, Google will tear them to shit, if not this time, the next, the target has been set.
I call bs here, you need to put your feet back on the planet like the rest of the cokcheaded investors, he went public he had a successful / profitable business, just because they got overvalued isn't really his doing, it's those dot com bubble morons sitting on the shadows that didn't get their asses fired back in the 90s. People just had to be sensible and realistic on the market, is that too much to expect? Obviously it is.
Slashdot Mirror
HA! If I buy FB shares mate lock me up okay :) In the meantime, let me know when and how much you bought, I'd love to know how much you're destined to lose after FB's next insider seller release date or next quarterly figure release date.
Though i will admit, the way they are in desperation mode over at FB, I'd say there may be gains this quarter but only because they have filled the site up so heavily on ads people mistakenly click on them because there is hardly any room left for anything else.
the question is where they go from here. they have a solid userbase, and astronomical opportunities in mobile if they can get their collective head out of the collective dark area. at some point there will be an inflection point. i'd buy now probably.
Okay, quit it with the cool aid talk for just one second. The mobile industry is just the tech industry but even less understood by business people / investors in general. FB has to compete against who exactly? Apple, Samsung, Google, Microsoft, Motorola, etc etc
Frankly HP has more potential than FB in the mobile market because at the very least they are TRYING to make a product worth anything (failing but they are trying), What's FB doing? They are creating AppStores to work on platforms and compete against the very vendors it runs on. Those vendors without finding a better word of it couldn't care less, would never give a potential competitor a helping hand, nor give a flying flaming f*()k so on an so fourth. So FB's AppStore idea is simply yet another failed concept of concepts they could try.
Facebook needed to OEM its platform, create a set of protocols for Carriers and/or Phone vendors to work on and then engage in a cross licencing agreement allowing for advertisers to pay for the service and allow Samsung, Apple, A&AT, Verizon to pocket a percentage. I believe the chance for this to take place is well and truly over, What's going to happen is FB's share prices are going to sink to a point where a mobile phone vendor will simply pick up them for pennies, the discussion should be about who will it be?
I'd say a race between Apple and Microsoft, you can see MS playing the dirty games with their share holdings already by releasing them in bursts pushing FB's price down and as for Apple, Apple is cosying up to Zukkerberg for a reason because other than iTunes what social platform has Apple really got?
Who wants that userbase and how much is it really worth? 4bn-5bn? As it stands not 40bn which is FB's current market cap is.
Provided it offers the same scope of features as VMWare it could in some ways be much cheaper.
mod parent up
Shaolin Temples? Monks? Martial Arts? I.E Lifestyle? Philosophy? Yes, so out of touch are we. Some reading may help you with your ailment of cluelessness.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_martial_arts
Jump to the bit about how its all structured on Chinese philosophy and also the section on mediation.
Riiight because buying something that's "fashionable" ISN'T something an Apple customer does right?
If it wasn't for mass media campaigns and the grand entrance of Jobs at his Keynotes being shown on every prime time news station as a "feel good" piece Apple wouldn't of had sales frenzies either. It's safe to assume it cuts both ways.
Not sure of the price myself which I don't care about as my Lumia was less RRP than an iPhone, does the EXACT same thing except with lower specced but better quality hardware. So say what you will about WP, so far no disappointments.
Here is a fairly balanced comparison between the two.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DP9HlGB7Sy8
Some wins both sides I'd say. Which is better? whose to say? The weak points on Apple was video streaming and lack of HTML5, WP weaknesses the use of Trident over WebKit. But really splitting hairs between the two there isn't much between them!
It doesn't do that either.
Ohhhh prior art
http://techreport.com/gallery/index.x?id=23432&image=59639
I'm sure I've seen those light switches before.
Why? WP7.5 wasn't too bad? The thing about mobile OSes is that it isn't matter of "how many" features it has its more about "how less" features it has.
As such see my above post, its also time to stop putting Apple in with OEM. The moment the first Apple store hit the streets distributors / resellers should of told Apple where to stick it, where Microsoft creates a tablet and its considered burning bridges with their partners, Apple has its cake, eats it and its all okay.
Apple is akin to Dell these days. They buy large chunks of components and couple them together to produce an end product. Where as intel is a vendor, nvidia is a vendor.
Apple is a distributor of resold components and also end user retailer , which shits their own resellers to death because they enforce shitty pricing and restrictive models and then compete right down the street with their own Apple stores.
Selling Apple products your told to NOT put them near other similar products, you're told to use a specific amount of signage and told only to sell at a specific price and then you're forced to compete with not only the Apple store but also the Apple website.
Its you without a clue, thinking you have a single idea on how it sales work.
The problem is, as Google previously didn't manufacture any mobile phones - and were I to hazard a guess, probably didn't hold very many patents relevant to the industry - they didn't have grounds to go on the offensive.
Please direct me to the Google manufacturing plant please? Oh wait, they are an OEM software provider to a bunch of other vendors. Apple, a hardware reseller that re-brands pretty much the same stuff that comes out of the same building as a bunch of other vendors but with different rounded edges and a jacked OS they took from Berkeley.
The fight is not with Android, the fight is with the patents surroundings Motorola or have you forgotten what the M in AIM stood for? Yes, Google played the strategist here as they are protecting their interests and that's obvious, bad or good I'm in two minds as my hope is that the patent system just gets its ass handed to it and pushed for a reform of some sort.
Moving on, lets forget fact Eric Schmidt was on Apple;s board of directors until 09 so I'm sensing there is a lot of internal bad blood here and what I feel (and this is just me thinking out loud) is that though Jobs didn't like Android wouldn't of wished this to happen. Just as Apple and Microsoft are blood enemies in the media, on paper, they are cross licencing partners. The industry is built around these kinds of shady deals just like Apple and Samsung are partners and what we have here is just before the iPhone 5 release Apple moves to Sharp? Gooood lord, is that 101 of worst things to do as a business, trust an untested supplier on a major launch and expect it to all be all OK, at least the very least it should of been done as a iPhone 4GS2 or something of the sort.
I know I contrast two contradictory points by saying most hardware comes from the same place, yet it's still risky to switch suppliers. My concern is the use of materials, what other patent issues they'll need to circumnavigate and what is the manufacturing quality of sharp. The odds are really stacking up on the future of Apple and a lot of uncertainty indeed.
WRONG!
Dood, seriously? GFC? what about superfunds funding future trading options? Apple has had a lot of money poured into it from different places left and right. How much of that was YOUR money! If Samsung loses and because they are not posted on the NASDAQ means that Samsung and their knitted group of shareholders bare the brunt. A company like Apple losses and loses large chunks of value then WE the people have to suffer. It's sick I tell ya!
This case SHOULD end in a Samsung win and yes I agree Samsung did steal. Samsung should win because they did what the market demands and that is be a competitor to a potential monopolistic vendor which in turn means we the users weigh in on the benefits, If it wasn't for Apple bringing out Smartphones and then Samsung making a BETTER Smartphone we wouldn't all have such cool devices sitting on all our desks.
This whole shooting match means
a) users get best of the best product as the two companies have to "out do" each other
b) It's a measure of true capitalism where business reaps the benefits because they have a better product.
I say allow the time proven way of business to play out, GM makes a better car than Ford, then Ford makes a better car than GM. What Apple did with the smartphone revolt is provide us with Electric Flying Cars, Samsung has given us Underwater Electric Flying Cars that can fly to outer space. So, lets keep the momentum of this going moving forward and not allow the courts to kill it.
START:
Apple_please_create_a_new_marketspace()
Samsung_copy_ Apple_but_make_it cheaper_and_better()
GOTO START
Samsung just doubled her bribe that's all :)
There was no keynote with Jobs citing how cool it was. iPad Mini will flop.
Okay Apple wanna nitpick, lets nitpick.... going from the bottom of TFA.
SMS Icon ... hmmmm
Apple = Comic strip SMS word cloud
Samsung = Wait that's the email icon
Similarity = Green, Different shades.
Clock
Apple = well okay, its a fuckin clock
Samsung = a fuckin clock again
Similarity = CLOCK!
Browser ... IE anybody?
Apple = Safari icon
Samsung = World icon
Similarity = Blue, a little bit of prior art
IPod
Apple = IPod outline
Samsung = Wait, that's the calculator icon.
Similarity = Orange.
I'd also note the px rounded edges are different on each phone, again making them different. The one thing I'll give Apple is the bottom row, that's functionality ripping but that's it as i can see.
http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/samsung-icon-concept.png ... Is it just me or does that contradict the hell out of itself. Apple is what was the word "luxurious" HA! while Samsung's isn't. So I guess Apple owns the patent on anything luxurious now.
http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/samsung-feels-awkward.png ... feels awkard? so you're telling me an interface which you've patented has been redone in such a way that its "copier" has created a lesser version? or is it just Apple who likes to stick irrelevant banter in all their design notes. Further to this, one of the 3 icons shown is the same colour while the calendar icon is different. Meanwhile the camera icon has the same colour but a different icon.
http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/samsung-tablets.png ... prior art prior art prior art prior art.
http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/samsung-pre-iphone-designs.png .. they all copy each other imho they are as 'bad' as each other. Samsung gets into bed with Apple, Apple gets into bed with Samsung, they make wonderful babies together, Apple files for devoice and this is simply the child custody hearing.
It's the Job's factor, he knew how to stay in the good graces with the upper echelon of the tech world and was controlling the market pace to their satisfaction, kind of like the same reason why we don't have electric cars everywhere and why they are being trickled in to the marketplace slowly as to not piss off the fuel companies.
Cook just wants to do what all CEO's are doing now, that's make a quick buck for today and forget about tomorrow. If Apple is to last the test of time and not sink then it has to play nice with its competition / partners, keep the cosy agreements with them and just keep innovating on new products. I.E there was iPod / iPhone / iPad if they made a good iWhatever that created yet another new market space then they would continue to grow into the trillions marketcap wise. iGlasses possibly could of worked but Google has taken first place on the podium for that idea.
As for this legal escapade it's only going to hurt them in the long run. Not only is it shedding light on Apple's development practices but its going to piss off their own high end talent by dragging them in to court and putting them in front of a defence lawyer that's giving them a good once over, they'll walk out of that court room walking funny not quite sure why their bosses did that too them.
It's safe to say the iPhone though a big money puller for Apple is not a cornered marketplace any more. Regardless of the patent trial outcome Samsung will still ship products that compete as will many others, HTC, Nokia, etc. and when the new Samsung phone does hit the USA the people over there will see that it has everything the iPhone has but is lighter and smarter and yes better. Sorry, Apple people you have to accept this, take it up with Apple as to why this has happened but it has and they know it!
The iPad is however still an unchallenged market, I'd even go as far to say that Apple the only full featured tablet that handles the paces. I had an iPad until yesterday, screen died and therefore gave me the excuse to get the Nexus 7, If Nexus was a little bigger / wider and had a camera in the back then game over as my iPad needs would of been met. As for the Galaxy tab, its good but it's still clunky, maybe Jelly Bean can fix it, who knows but it's still clunky. If the Galaxy was smoother and the Nexus was bigger the market would have stiff competition, so I'd say the clock is ticking on the iPad but not quite yet.
Yeah, in that case NASDAQ cannot be held accountable for the money they lost. If suing which is the issue id see them going after the extra cost the shares incurred.
Having said that, I'm certain NASDAQ's systems has a defined set of terms of use for traders, i.e if the system screws up we (NASDAQ) are not liable sort of thing, just like a terms of service agreement with an ISP, the net goes down people cant really sue over it.
ROFL...
"Im going to sue you on botching my investment into a company that is making sooo much $$ ... no wait .. losing soo much $$$"
At least fuckin sue for a purpose idiots, looks like the NASDAQ did you favor.
Yup and if you clicked the unseen ad then statistic would render you a bot.
In either case you were an unwilling ad viewer who click on an ad you didn't want because you had an adblocking plugin.
Mind boggling....
Prior art work may here because of how it was disclosed, I don't see commercial in confidence written at the bottom of the design and divulging it to Apple can be seen as publicly disclosing information.
The only defense is if NDAs were imposed and how those NDAs were used. Lastly, it was a Sony employee designing the prototype and giving it too Apple, if Apple said f-off we don't need you, it can be construed as Apple screwing a supplier.
You're missing the point, a day, a week a month you can't patent prior art, Apple's patent will have to be deemed invalid after this and so it should.
Throw whatever crafted argument at it but judges are about the law, if you think of them like compilers and the lawyers the code the result will result in this one conclusion Apple cannot sidestep it.
Time will tell though.
As for my opinion Jobs if alive today would not of done this he also would not of fucked his suppliers out of the market grabbing at market share like Cook has. Go look at the market cap graph since Jobs death, the company nearly doubled, Cook was reckless and he'll kill Apple because of it, stupid, because MS, Samsung, Google will tear them to shit, if not this time, the next, the target has been set.
http://techcrunch.com/2012/07/27/apple-buys-samsungs-android-security-partner-authentec-for-365m/
I call bs here, you need to put your feet back on the planet like the rest of the cokcheaded investors, he went public he had a successful / profitable business, just because they got overvalued isn't really his doing, it's those dot com bubble morons sitting on the shadows that didn't get their asses fired back in the 90s. People just had to be sensible and realistic on the market, is that too much to expect? Obviously it is.