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 528722
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
kyousefi
Member since:
2012-07-28

If you think what apple does -fighting for it's patents- is immoral, check -using your browser- which countries Samsung products are sold using its official channels. Many of them are enemies of human rights and brutal regimes that uses it's technologies to suppress their own people. What Samsung does is not only immoral, but illegal and contrary to international laws and UN sanctions.

So, if we follow your logic, Samsung goes a lot farther when it comes to protecting it's perceived profit than Apple. If it could sue apple for it's refrigerator and microwave oven patents, it wouldn't hesitate.

What follows is not specific to this post, but it's my take on OSNEWS recent tone on Apple, but some of it is related to this post:

You are throwing everything you've got at Apple, connecting unrelated matters like market capitalization and legal issues to prove your point, maybe because you like open source - or hate apple "fanboys".Maybe, many like open source and understand its benefits, but creating an evil from a company to prove your point is unfair. Also hating some brand simply because "commons" discovered and liked it in recent years, the trend I witnessed in OSnews in recent years after Apples revival (Before that you were less critical to apple). It's snobbish and elitist. Its not journalism, it's "fanboy" wars.

So, if you can't report neutrally on complexities of business world and politics, please focus on what you are good at: Technology

Reply Score: 2

Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Many of them are enemies of human rights and brutal regimes that uses it's technologies to suppress their own people.


Right, because Apple has no official presence in, say, China.
I don't think this is an argument you want to make.

What Samsung does is not only immoral, but illegal and contrary to international laws and UN sanctions.


Out of curiosity, exactly how is Samsung getting away with breaking international law?

but creating an evil from a company to prove your point is unfair


Yet you did exactly this just now.

Edited 2012-07-28 21:50 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

kyousefi Member since:
2012-07-28

1-Apple presence in china is within international law. But Samsung is working with a government under harshest UN security council sanctions in history.

See for yourself :
http://m.samsung.com/iran/

2-if you don't understand the difference between Iran and China, it's your problem. Skip your next galaxy 5 and buy a ticket to Tehran. I'll show you around. Btw, Don't forget to write your last will. I've been in China too and it's heaven in comparison.Not to mention many Iranians dying to have some place like Foxconn to work.

3-I didn't meant to use the same method that the original author used. I wanted to mock his reasoning by my own example. I wanted to show mixing politics and sensational whinings about patents and their immorality is too big to handle by the author who apparantly has limited political and business knowledge.

Reply Parent Score: 1