Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 28th Jul 2012 10:10 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless In case you were still doubting whether or not Apple's lawsuits against Samsung were a case of 'if you can't compete, litigate', Samsung's financial results should seal the deal. The company shipped round and about 50 million smartphones, twice as many smartphones as Apple shipped. So, not only is Android doing better on smartphones than iOS, there's now also a single manufacturer outselling Apple. Oh, the next avenue for de-emphasizing this achievement has already reared its head: Samsung has a wider portfolio, and as such, the comparison isn't fair. Nonsense, of course - Volkswagen sells lots more models than, say, Mazda, but that doesn't mean you can't compare them. Maybe, just maybe, having a wide portfolio of devices to meet the various different needs of the market is simply a very good strategy. It'll be interesting to see just how much Apple can take back with the next iPhone, especially since the full potential of the Galaxy SIII hasn't been realised yet and will be accounted for in Samsung's next quarter as well. Fun, such a fight between titans. Just too bad one of the two titans plays dirty by opting for the courtroom.
Thread beginning with comment 528680
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

But Microsoft had a monopoly in the Windows era. They could be open because they defined the terms of the competition in that way -- compatibility with the widest array of applications. Remember: developers, developers, developers.

Windows Mobile was an open system, as well. You could do anything you wanted with it -- you could install apps simply by downloading a .CAB, edit the registry, etc.

By being slow with Windows Phone, Microsoft allowed Android to become the second entrant. Thus, Microsoft went from first entrant to third entrant. As third entrant, it now faced a radically different competitive situation. Either it could compete against free, or it could compete against Apple. Guess which one they decided would be more profitable.

Reply Parent Score: 3

Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:

Yeah its kind of funny. They thought that being open didn't work because of the hardware manufacturers not developing good devices, I think google has proved the problem with the approach was the poor software.

Reply Parent Score: 3

moondevil Member since:

Microsoft was already open in the MS-DOS days.

Even though on those days I actually preferred the development tools from Borland.

Reply Parent Score: 5