What's new

Apple Gets $1 Billion From Samsung

Chauism is right. Chinese phones have market for lower income customers who want smart phones. Only thing in favor of Chinese phones is their cost. But people are skeptical about it.

That being said, there was a Chinese smartphone I almost got last year, but I pass it for Galaxy SII since I am just too addicted to Super AMOLED screens. Its Mi-Two is coming out soon, that will be very interesting to see how it will do in the market though.

Also right now the problem with Chinese or any smartphone (right now just android and apple as Nokia's symbia is dead, and blackberry will soon follow. I see not much future in Win8 platform either) is that their processors are dominated by Nvidia(Tegra), Samsung(exynos), TI(OMAP) and Qualicomm(Snapdragon), their top end screens are monopolized by manufacturers like Samsung(AMOLED), Sharp(IPS) and LG(forgot the name). Despite someone brand the phone as their own, in reality those phones are just different combination of hardwares of all the names I mentioned above with different casing.
Xiaomi MI-One - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It depends on context. Where I work a lot of peoples use them due to the mobility. They are also used a lot in the medical field.

Maybe, but for me I still find them to be too chubby to carry around as I normally don't like to carry bag as I go.
 
Samsung should somehow get out of the US, and concentrate on the rest of the world
let dumb rednecks do what they do best, be sheep (and apple is the best shepherd)

I see samsung growing all around me, but for some reason samsung is crazy about US
 
Koreans were so cruel during the Vietnam War.

Samsung rips off Americans and Taiwans. Apple abuses consumers just like Microsoft in the 1990's.

China makes the best smartphone with dual core, 4.3 inch screen and Android 4.0

ascend-p1-press-3-380-75.jpg


Huawei Ascend P1 review | from TechRadar's expert reviews of Mobile phones
A bit outdated, 1.5 quad core :)
 
Huh? Galaxy S3 is also 1.5 gigahertz, except Huawei Ascend P1 is dual core while Samsung is quad core. It really makes no difference.
Oh, it makes big difference performance wise. My Samsung Galaxy SII HD LTE also use the same processor as Ascend P1. In many criterias it is no where near the performance of my SIII I939. Ascend P1 is also no match even for my 1 year old SII HD LTE as the later has a 1280x720 HD screen. So saying Ascend P1 is the best is a vastly overstatement, not to mention saying it is Chinese made since its Snapdragon process is from Qualicomm, and its Super AMOLED screen is from Samsung.
 
Oh, it makes big difference performance wise. My Samsung Galaxy SII HD LTE also use the same processor as Ascend P1. In many criterias it is no where near the performance of my SIII I939. Ascend P1 is also no match even for my 1 year old SII HD LTE as the later has a 1280x720 HD screen. So saying Ascend P1 is the best is a vastly overstatement, not to mention saying it is Chinese made since its Snapdragon process is from Qualicomm, and its Super AMOLED screen is from Samsung.
Well Samsung Galaxy is twice the price. The Huawei Ascend P1 is only about $350 USD. The screen on the Galaxy is a little bigger but 4.3 inch on the Huawei is big enough for most people. Unless you are running some very demanding apps on your phone, being a little faster is not going to be noticeable.
 
Well Samsung Galaxy is twice the price. The Huawei Ascend P1 is only about $350 USD.
That's what we are saying, its good for people who can't afford SIII. But the price of SIII is right because of advantage it have over other phones.
 
That's what we are saying, its good for people who can't afford SIII. But the price of SIII is right because of advantage it have over other phones.
One thing you have to give is that for its price, it is nicely equipped with Super AMOLED screen, 1.5 Ghz dual core processor and 1GB RAM. Although the Qualicomm processor tends to overheat comparing to other dual core processors.
 
Korean copied Other??? you guys must be kidding...only us the evil Chinese have exclusivity of copies and paste from aircraft to toys...there must be a rational explaination

..eh Korean are you there to comment? ...oops he's temporary banned.
 
478583745.jpg


----------------

August 24, 2012

Apple, Samsung violated each other’s patents

Seoul court rules Samsung didn’t violate Apple's design in battle of smartphone giants

Samsung Electronics Co’s flagship Galaxy smartphone looks very similar to Apple’s iPhone, but the South Korean firm has not violated the iPhone design, a Seoul court ruled on Friday.

The South Korean ruling comes as the two technology titans are locked in a high-stakes global patent battle that mirrors a fierce rivalry for industry supremacy between two companies that control more than half the world’s smartphone sales.

The Seoul court ruling on Friday comes ahead of more crucial US verdicts. Nine jurors began deliberation on Wednesday in California in one of many disputes between the two firms around the world that analysts see as partly aimed at curbing the spread of Google Inc’s Android, the world’s most used mobile software.

“There are lots of external design similarities between the iPhone and Galaxy S, such as rounded corners and large screens ... but these similarities had been documented in previous products,” a judge at the Seoul Central District Court said on Friday.

“Given that it’s very limited to make big design changes in touch-screen based mobile products in general ... and the defendant (Samsung) differentiated its products with three buttons in the front and adopted different designs in camera and (on the) side, the two products have a different look,” the judge said.

The judge said it was difficult to say that consumers would confuse the iPhone with the Galaxy given they clearly have the respective company logos on the back of each model, and consumers also factor in operating systems, brand, applications, price, and services when buying a phone.

The judge ordered Samsung to immediately stop selling 10 products, including the Galaxy S II, and also banned sales of four Apple products, including the iPhone 4 and iPad 2.

The court ruled that Apple infringed on two of Samsung’s wireless technology patents and was ordered to pay Samsung 40 million won ($35,400). Samsung was fined 25 million won for violating one patent relating to so-called bouncing-back function used when scrolling electronic documents.

The compensation sought by both Apple and Samsung in South Korea is small due to the relatively small size of the market.

The wrangle was triggered by Apple’s lawsuit in April last year claiming Samsung slavishly copied Apple’s smartphones and tablets. Samsung has countered that it simply developed its own “unique” products in a bid to “best the competition,” and that Apple actually owes money for using its patented technology.

In the United States, Apple is demanding more than $2.5 billion in damages and an order to permanently ban Samsung from selling patent-infringing products. Samsung argues Apple owes $422 million for violating a clutch of its patents.

Neither Apple nor Samsung had an immediate comment on the Seoul ruling.

In Seoul, Samsung shares last traded down 1.3 percent, in line with the broader market.

Apple, Samsung violated each other
 
August 25, 2012

Apple patent victory seen spurring wider range of smartphones

Expect to see some new phone designs emerge, quickly

Apple Inc scored a clear victory in its patent dispute with Samsung Electronics Co. on Friday, increasing pressure on smartphone makers around the world to create handsets that stand apart from the iPhone and deliver more choices for consumers in a $219.1 billion market.

A jury awarded $1.05 billion in damages yesterday after finding that Samsung infringed six patents for mobile devices, a defeat for Apple’s biggest opponent in smartphones.

The verdict strengthens Apple’s hand as it seeks to discourage Samsung and competitors such as HTC Corp and LG Electronics Co. from making devices that mimic the iPhone. While it’s a blow to efforts by Samsung and its software partner Google Inc to challenge Apple in smartphones, the outcome will probably mean a broader range of devices and more options for consumers as rivals seek to avoid costly legal tussles, said Carl Howe, an analyst at Yankee Group.

“This is a big win for Apple,” said Howe, whose firm is based in Boston. “It’s good for innovation. It says that if you create something new, others can’t just piggyback on it. From a competition point of view, it says create your own stuff. It says copying is not OK.”

Cupertino, California-based Apple would add to its victory over Samsung should US District Judge Lucy Koh, who presided over the trail, decide to ban Samsung mobile devices from the US based on the jury’s findings of infringement. Koh, who could also triple the damages awarded, will consider the injunction request at a later date.

“The more significant issue is whether or not Apple is entitled to an injunction,” said Colleen Chien, an assistant law professor at Santa Clara University. “If it is, expect to see some new phone designs emerge, quickly - not only by Samsung but all other handset makers selling designs similar to Apple’s.”

Apple shares rose to as high as $675.94 in late trading yesterday as the verdicts were announced, surpassing the intraday record of $674.88 reached on August 21. The stock had gained less than 1 per cent to $663.22 at yesterday’s close.

Apple sought $2.5 billion to $2.75 billion for its claims that Suwon, South Korea-based Samsung infringed four design patents and three software patents in copying the iPhone and iPad. Jurors found infringement by all 21 Samsung devices that Apple claimed had copied its so-called rubberbanding technology, the way an iPad or iPhone screen seems to bounce when a user scrolls to the end of a file.

The nine-member jury in San Jose, California, rejected Samsung’s patent counterclaims against Apple and its request for damages. The jury also determined that all of Apple’s patents at stake in the trial were valid.

In light of the verdict, Samsung and other manufacturers will probably need to work harder to ensure that their devices aren’t seen as copying Apple’s, said Kevin Rivette, founder of 3LP Advisors LLC and former vice president of intellectual property strategy for International Business Machines Corp

“It’s a good day for competition,” Rivette said. “You’re going to force competitors to come into the marketplace with new designs.”

Still, tweaks aimed at avoiding copying the iPhone won’t necessarily result in better products as companies put concerns over intellectual property ahead of innovation, Chien said.

“Rather than innovate first, sort out the IP later, which has been the custom in tech, companies will need to be much more mindful of the patent landmines that are out there, and try to avoid or secure rights to them,” she said. “That could literally choke innovation.”

Samsung will ask the judge to overturn the verdict and, if she doesn’t, will appeal the case, Mira Jang, a spokeswoman for Samsung, wrote in an e-mail.

“Today’s verdict should not be viewed as a win for Apple, but as a loss for the American consumer,” Samsung said. “It will lead to fewer choices, less innovation, and potentially higher prices.”

The four-week trial underscores rising stakes in the smartphone market, where sales surged 62 per cent last year, according to data compiled by Bloomberg Industries. While Samsung is the leading smartphone manufacturer, Apple’s iPhone is the best-selling single device. Google’s Android operating system is the most used mobile software, with 61 per cent share.

The verdict also hands a defeat to Google, which may need to scale back or change features of Android, said Rivette.

“Google is in a position that it didn’t want to be in,” he said.


The setback comes at a bad time for some other users of Android, including HTC, which in June cut its sales and profitability forecast for the fiscal second quarter. Google’s Motorola Mobility on August 13 announced a 20-per cent staff reduction. Sony Corp said on August 23 that it’s cutting 15 per cent of the workforce in its mobile-phone unit.

Google competitors, including Microsoft Corp, stand to benefit if manufacturers seek alternatives to Android to avoid being sued by Apple, Rivette said.

“Microsoft is a big winner,” Rivette said. “The licensees will start moving away from Android. They’re business people.”

The patent disputes between Apple and Samsung are far from over. A hearing for Apple’s request for an injunction is scheduled for September 20, and the two companies have sued each other in the UK, Australia and South Korea.

“We’ve seen the first big win in a long battle,” Rivette said.

High stakes war

$1.05b : damages awarded to Apple by jury in patent trial.

62% : surge in global sales of smartphones 
last year.
Apple patent victory seen spurring wider range of smartphones | GulfNews.com

----------------

The first operating system that used Icon clicking mechanism on a computer can sue all other operating systems for copying the system. Which operating system was the first to use it? :D
 
Fighting for rights for rectangular shape with rounded corners is so cheap.The manufacturers who initiated phones with clamshell or flip or candybar designes or features like touchscreen or putting volume rocker buttons on side never sued others for doing the same.It is shameful for a $60 billion corporation to pursue such shameful tactics.
 
Fighting for rights for rectangular shape with rounded corners is so cheap.The manufacturers who initiated phones with clamshell or flip or candybar designes or features like touchscreen or putting volume rocker buttons on side never sued others for doing the same.It is shameful for a $60 billion corporation to pursue such shameful tactics.

Don't you know, American is the law and above the law...they're exceptionasm...so Korean, India, Japanese...no matter how you suck up with them , American interest come first.
 
disgusting decision by lucy koh ..the patents of apple were in very first step wrong .. they should have not been issued by authority ..
these are obvious evolution of technology ..
 

Back
Top Bottom