Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 4th Jul 2012 23:08 UTC
Google Apparently, this is a major victory of the patent system. This, this right here, this is what the patent system has come to. This is the destructive effect it's having on this once beautiful industry. Thanks to trolls like Apple and Microsoft, basic, elemental functionality is being removed from devices people already own.
Thread beginning with comment 525364
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Savior
Member since:
2006-09-02

Your arguments are honestly terrible. Number one is an incoherent mess and I'll skip that.


No it is not. If you want that similar decisions follow in the future as a protectionalist measure, you have to keep in mind that Europe and Asia may also follow suit, and judging by the population (313M vs 739M and 1,339M from China alone), you might not like the result of that. Not that I expect something like this would actually happen anytime soon.

Number two states that Google also spends tons on RnD. ... I said foreign companies (HTC, Samsung, etc.)


Why wouldn't it be relevant? First, the Galaxy Nexus is produced by Samsung AND Google. Especially in this case, the "fault" (which it is not, of course) lies with Google. Second, all the stuff that makes up an Apple device (be it a laptop, cell phone or iPod) is produced in Asia, mostly by foreign companies from foreign R&D. So if you want to be consistent, you should frown upon Apple products, too. Or if you are only worried about the label, well, it's *Google* Nexus, not Samsung Nexus.

Number 3: You have no clue what the hell you read really says. Samsung is a huge CONGLOMERATE of INDEPENDENT businesses under the same brand name. They make everything from refrigerators to semiconductors, laptops, even clothing.


I guess you are right in that. However, do you think that most of that R&D stuff goes into refrigerators and clothing? I do not doubt for a second that most of it goes into electronics -- for example, into AMOLED (which is not Samsung Electronics, but definitely something we have on our phones). Also, you might want to muse for a few minutes on why Samsung became the initial supplier for retina displays instead of LG or Sharp, if not for their investments in the area?

BusinessWeek ranked companies based on how they've actually innovated.


Except the first list is about 2010; but aside from that, there is not a single column in either table labelled "money spent on innovation". They try to get that information out of stock market statistics and expectations, in other words, out of their ass.

Nice language, BTW.

Edited 2012-07-05 11:53 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 6

lilsim89 Member since:
2009-11-30

Apologies, it was late. I shouldn't have flamed out on you.

Regardless, it's true that Samsung and Google are both partially responsible. I find that on the software side, at least Google makes enough unique strides in their technology that it's almost neck and neck with Apple. (Apple may not agree, at least publicly.)

I don't dislike Samsung or HTC. They are great companies, but I don't feel that it's fair to anyone who takes huge gambles on new innovation to be simply replicated and not fairly compensated.

Take the creator of Siri. Not Apple, but Dag Kittlaus of Norway. He literally worked every day on the project (with his team) for four years, before Steve Jobs called him himself and asked what his thoughts were about Apple buying his company and moving him to Cupertino.

The huge amount of investments put into those early projects only happen because the reward is worth it in the end... If you were right.

When these other companies take zero risk, and want to reap the rewards, it almost a bad joke to me.

Enter Samsung's S Voice.

http://9to5mac.com/2011/11/10/meet-dag-kittlaus-the-guy-who-made-si...

Reply Parent Score: 2

_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17

Enter Samsung's S Voice.


Yet the concept behind Siri isn't particularly new, or revolutionary. It also inherits from the boatloads of previous research that has been done in this area.

What IS good about Siri is the execution of the concept. If it took so long to work on Siri then in all likelihood it is the better implementation. It should therefore compete and win against S-voice on the merits of the product.

Edited 2012-07-05 21:28 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2