Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 9th Aug 2011 17:32 UTC
Legal Okay, I didn't see this one coming. German press agency dpa is reporting that Apple has been granted a preliminary injunction barring Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1 from being distributed in the entire European Union except for The Netherlands, over a design patent. Competition at its finest, people, and this is clearly in the interest of consumers. I'm ashamed to be European. Updates in the article now. This iterative update process isn't really working when you've got a gazillion of them.
Thread beginning with comment 484458
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: zzzz
by jtfolden on Wed 10th Aug 2011 19:40 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: zzzz"
jtfolden
Member since:
2005-08-12

Sorry, Chuckles, but that reasoning also applies to all of the accusations that iFanboys have directed at Microsoft over the years. Clearly something was lacking in MacOS (and Apple computers in general), given that they're an abject failure in the market compared to Windows-based PCs.


No, that's fairly idiotic logic. Apple is one of the top selling PC brands in the market. In fact, they seem to OWN the $1000+ segment. That would hardly make them a failure. Try again.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: zzzz
by rr7.num7 on Wed 10th Aug 2011 22:12 in reply to "RE[4]: zzzz"
rr7.num7 Member since:
2010-04-30


No, that's fairly idiotic logic. Apple is one of the top selling PC brands in the market. In fact, they seem to OWN the $1000+ segment. That would hardly make them a failure. Try again.


No. Your arguement would only make sense if Apple didn't have the monopoly over Mac OS X, and there were dozens of brands offering (legal) Mac OS X compatible computers. The Windows-based PC market is very segregated because people can choose. So it is your logic the one that is idiotic.

Anyway, by Sabon's logic, it's pretty obvious that there must have been something lacking on Mac OS-based computers since they were nowhere nearly as successful as Windows (the "Mac OS rip-off" Apple Fanboys have been complaining about for ages) based ones.

Oh, and if you like so much to filter data to suit your beliefs, how about this: Apple also OWNS the named-after-a-fruit PC segment.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[6]: zzzz
by jtfolden on Thu 11th Aug 2011 02:03 in reply to "RE[5]: zzzz"
jtfolden Member since:
2005-08-12


No. Your arguement would only make sense if Apple didn't have the monopoly over Mac OS X, and there were dozens of brands offering (legal) Mac OS X compatible computers. The Windows-based PC market is very segregated because people can choose. So it is your logic the one that is idiotic.


This is illogical yet again. The iPhone is the #1 selling smartphone. Should it be discounted because Apple has a "monopoly" over iOS? Yes, the iPhone is SUCH a failure. lol

Since you talk of people that "filter data to suit" you certainly display a run-away knack for it. There is nothing wrong with comparing hardware brand against hardware brand.

Anyway, by Sabon's logic, it's pretty obvious that there must have been something lacking on Mac OS-based computers since they were nowhere nearly as successful as Windows (the "Mac OS rip-off" Apple Fanboys have been complaining about for ages) based ones.


...and yet Apple is just as successful as other hardware makers.

Oh, and if you like so much to filter data to suit your beliefs, how about this: Apple also OWNS the named-after-a-fruit PC segment.


The fact that I mentioned Apple owning the high-end PC market is not selective filtering, it's merely pointing to the fact of how successful they have been and with a healthy markup to boot.

Edited 2011-08-11 02:03 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: zzzz
by BallmerKnowsBest on Wed 10th Aug 2011 22:57 in reply to "RE[4]: zzzz"
BallmerKnowsBest Member since:
2008-06-02

"Sorry, Chuckles, but that reasoning also applies to all of the accusations that iFanboys have directed at Microsoft over the years. Clearly something was lacking in MacOS (and Apple computers in general), given that they're an abject failure in the market compared to Windows-based PCs.


No, that's fairly idiotic logic.
"

Which was exactly my point, bravo on completely missing it.

Apple is one of the top selling PC brands in the market. In fact, they seem to OWN the $1000+ segment. That would hardly make them a failure. Try again.


The only way to not see Apple's computing products as a failure is to use dishonest comparisons that are rigged to make Apple look better, like comparing an entire platform (Macs + OS X) to a single vendor like Dell or Acer.

The reality is that Macs, as a platform, don't compete against individual PC OEMs, Apple's desktop computing platform "competes" (and I use that term in the loosest possible sense) with Microsoft's desktop computing platform... and by every objective measure out there is, Apple's platform is a laughable failure compared to Microsoft's. Sorry, you don't get to gloss over that minor detail, just because Apple's platform is at disadvantage due to its single-vendor limitations (especially since that disadvantage is solely due to deliberate decisions on Apple's part).

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: zzzz
by apoclypse on Wed 10th Aug 2011 23:56 in reply to "RE[5]: zzzz"
apoclypse Member since:
2007-02-17

Apple's profits even before the whole iphone/ipad thing begs to differ. I don't know about you but if I'm making money hand over fist with less effort and less product than my competitor who has to basically go broke to earn the same amount as me, I think that's a win for me.

The only way you can look at Apple as failure is if you ignore how much money they make on their product selling less on their part. So yeah, Apple sells much less that Acer, HP, and Dell, yet they are the biggest tech company in the world at this moment, that with only barely 10% market penetration. Who's the real winner?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: zzzz
by _txf_ on Thu 11th Aug 2011 08:10 in reply to "RE[4]: zzzz"
_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17

No, that's fairly idiotic logic. Apple is one of the top selling PC brands in the market. In fact, they seem to OWN the $1000+ segment. That would hardly make them a failure. Try again.


Maybe not in terms of revenue but failure in terms of user base...

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: zzzz
by jtfolden on Thu 11th Aug 2011 18:57 in reply to "RE[5]: zzzz"
jtfolden Member since:
2005-08-12



Maybe not in terms of revenue but failure in terms of user base... [/q]

Considering it is a self-imposed limit, it's kind of disingenuous to call it a "failure". It's been extremely successful for them as a company. They're worth more than Exxon.

Reply Parent Score: 1