To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Apple did much better than anyone else in the picture last time they were "dominated" internationally ('81-'84, Microsoft rose to dominance under DOS, not Windows) and weathered the storm for 15 years to lead the next wave.
Would you really wager that there is any other player in the game (particularly any that are not Google) more likely to outlast a 15-20 year storm of dominance by another platform than Apple?
Are you like trying to convince yourself or someone else here?
1) Apple earns almost 60% of it's IPhone revenue from international sales.
2) International iPhone sales are the growth driver, while NA sales are slowing as the market saturates.
3) Apple's primary lawsuits are all in US. Software patents and trade dress patents are much weaker outside the US and so - other that the circus in Germany - really have no tangible impact on international sales.
But feel free to believe whatever helps you sleep at night.
]{
I love how the rhetoric shifts "submission" of evidence to "suppression." When Samsung was denied, it was often because Samsung was pursuing a new theory/narrative several months late, without notice. When they avoided "suppression" of evidence, the fanboys thought it shifted the case to a slam dunk -- when in reality it was weak sauce.





Member since:
2006-01-01
Wow, dude, read and then think about what you read before you speak. Otherwise you wind up sounding pretty dumb ...
No, it didn't. SCOTUS said that abstract ideas that are not otherwise patentable don't become patentable just because their expressed in software. None of the Apple patents in question represent abstract ideas; their all very utilitarian in nature.
Moreover none of the trade dress patents are in any way 'abstract ideas'.
No it didn't. The only thing the 'suppression of evidence' that you are talking about would have impacted would be the trade dress part of the suit of which Apple only won for the 3GS.
Even if that whole trade dress piece gets tossed it would have only limited impact on either company (what's a few hundred million to these guys).
Did you even bother to read which patents Apple is asserting here? Because if you did you would understand how totally stupid that statement is.
Apple is 'killing itself' with a 48% y-o-y growth. I am sure Tim Cook cries every time he looks at that number.
]{