Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 18th Mar 2013 15:51 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless Thorsten Heins, BlackBerry's CEO: "Apple did a fantastic job in bringing touch devices to market ... They did a fantastic job with the user interface, they are a design icon. There is a reason why they were so successful, and we actually have to admit this and respect that. History repeats itself again I guess ... the rate of innovation is so high in our industry that if you don't innovate at that speed you can be replaced pretty quickly. The user interface on the iPhone, with all due respect for what this invention was all about is now five years old." Ironic, perhaps, that this comes from a BlackBerry CEO, but that doesn't make him wrong - although I'm sure the usual suspects will claim that it does.
Thread beginning with comment 555821
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Mon 18th Mar 2013 21:55 UTC
shmerl
Member since:
2010-06-08

Apple clearly stopped innovating in their iPhone, for whatever reason. It reminds the situation with MS and their total slowdown with IE. It took strong rivals to appear to make them move again. Apple's case is a bit weird though, since rivals are all around and still instead of innovating Apple just snarls and shows patents teeth.

Edited 2013-03-18 21:56 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by shmerl
by Nelson on Mon 18th Mar 2013 22:19 in reply to "Comment by shmerl"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Apple has defined two market segments and completely dominated both. It has $100 billion dollars in the bank. It is the most (or a very close second depending on market fluctuations) valuable company on the planet. Period.

I don't think they're suing Samsung out of desperation, in fact, its been shown that Samsung was given an opportunity to license the relevant patents -- a decidedly competitive move.

They're suing Samsung because they genuinely feel their IP has been violated.

I think the whole "Apple is only using patents because they can't innovate" is such a childish argument that it makes it hard to take people who make such claims seriously.

Apple does some nefarious things, but other companies do much worse, including Google trying to get exclusion orders on patents that are standard essential. That's anti competitive.

I don't mean anti competitive in shmerl's opinion, I mean in the opinion of the DOJ and various other governmental agencies around the world.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by shmerl
by cdude on Mon 18th Mar 2013 23:29 in reply to "RE: Comment by shmerl"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

> Period

That was Apple with Jobs. Past. That's the central point. Can they keep on to invent, to build new products opposed to products they invented and build before with Jobs?

Having lots of money on bank may keep you running for a while but it doesn't automatically give you a place among the top players in sold products in the future. Just see what happened with IBM or what happens now with Microsoft and both of them where strong monopolists unlike Apple. Things can change and they can change fast.

> "Apple is only using patents because they can't innovate"

But that's the central question. Can they successful innovate without Jobs? We only see patent-wars innovations, no new product innovations for a longer time now while competition is accelerating and improving there products.

Customers don't buy your law-suites, they buy your products. Apple seems to beet on the wrong thing.

Edited 2013-03-18 23:32 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Tue 19th Mar 2013 05:30 in reply to "RE: Comment by shmerl"
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

They're suing Samsung because they genuinely feel their IP has been violated.


I have strong doubts about any "genuine feelings" when it comes to Apple.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment by shmerl
by unclefester on Tue 19th Mar 2013 08:37 in reply to "RE: Comment by shmerl"
unclefester Member since:
2007-01-13

Apple has defined two market segments and completely dominated both. It has $100 billion dollars in the bank. It is the most (or a very close second depending on market fluctuations) valuable company on the planet. Period.


Apple is not even in the Top 20 companies in the world. Virtually every state owned oil company is larger. Saudi Aramco is worth an estimated $7 trillion. Saudi Aramco's annual profits are almost as much as the net worth of Apple.

Reply Parent Score: 3