back to article Apple, Samsung whip out mobe sales in patent trial showdown

Apple and Samsung's courtroom patent melee had outed sales figures for the two companies' mobile devices. Both firms have been trying to hold back as much of their performance data as possible from the public during the legal scuffle, in which Samsung is accused of copying the Apple iPhone design for its own products. But …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
g e
Silver badge
Holmes

Awww bless

So not only did Fapple sell nearly 3x the units, they also made substantially more profit per unit too.

Samsung must obviously be doing so much damage to their sales. Poor little lambkins.

30
14
Facepalm

Re: Awww bless

"Fapple"...

At what age do you grow out the debating technique of giving things you diagree with purile names (e.g. Microsh!t, Sony PooStation, Xbarf 360 etc).

11, maybe 12?

21
21
Silver badge
Trollface

Re: Awww bless

Shut up, Steve, everyone knows you throw like a girl! Nur, nur, nur.

19
3
Silver badge

Re: Awww bless

Farting hippo? More like Farting Gypo Ammirite?

Seriously though, apple are making way more profit per handset. I thought they'd be making a little more profit per handset, but never thought it'd be THAT much. (poor math put samsung at around 400 per handset and apple at 580)

That's like 45% more profit.

3
1
Happy

Re: Awww bless

Shhhh Steve! It makes it really easy to identify the retards,don't discourage them!

7
2
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: Awww bless

So you'd be fine with someone taking 25% of your income then?

5
13
FAIL

25% of income

I'm pretty much ok with it after all it goes to making the country a better place, building roads, paying teachers etc. I'd like to see less going to the military though.

8
6

Re: 25% of income

That would be great if it was the case, but I have the sneaky suspicion all it really does is go to the lawyers...

3
1

Re: Awww bless

Even if the Jury decides Apple has proven it's case, with those unit sales, it seems bizarre that Apple claim their sales were affected by Samsung's phone and tablets. It would be interesting to compare Samsung's sales with Motorola's, HTCs, etc. to see if the alleged 'We Duped You' effect really had a positive impact for Samsung or whether their unit sales are no different from Motorola, HTC, etc.

1
0

Re: 25% of your income

Here is the thing how is it 25% of their income?

Can they prove for 100% certainty that people bought the galaxy by accident instead of the iphone cause of its looks?

I know MANY people who bought the galaxy cause they honestly hated the iphone. They owned one and dumped it cause call quality was complete shit. So there was no mistake cause of rounded corners.

Both my sister, and father(he was forced to get one by work) have an iPhone 4, they both hate it for calls. Call them 70% of the time the call is dropped, and 10% of the time its not dropped you can hardly understand them. My sister on the other hand don't care about call quality seeing she uses it 99.99% of the time for texting which she says works great on it...

Hate to tell apple not every cellphone buyer is a complete idiot that can't tell the difference in brand names on the box, and only shop on rounded corners.

9
3
Anonymous Coward

Re: Awww bless

This whole trial is taking on the odor of being nothing but a colossal joke. But sadly, it is not funny.

2
1
Silver badge
Thumb Up

Re: 25% of income (@ Thomas 18)

I see what you did there... hur hur hur!

0
0
Bronze badge

Re: 25% of income

These migt interest some:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-leadership/post/crazy-data-point-of-the-day-how-much-ceo-vs-worker-pay-has-grown/2012/05/11/gIQArUISIU_blog.html

http://money.cnn.com/2012/04/19/news/economy/ceo-pay/index.htm

0
1
Bronze badge
Boffin

Re: 25% of your income

This is not just a question of rounded corners ... when will you Apple-h8rs learn????

Eat this or

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVrcQu_Q1R8

Shows the main smartphones around when the iphone came out ... forget about the purpose of the video, which was to say Apple forgot about the computer keyboard... more puerile bs from Apple haters.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

This is good for Samsung then

Yes, Apple phones are a zillion times more profitable than Samsung's, well done them. But it surely means Apple will win a zillion times less compensation/damages if they win....

4
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: This is good for Samsung then

Remedial math required, as the result is the opposite.

If it deemed Samsung infringed and cost Apple sales, to the tune of n-million units, then the loss to Apple will be equal to n-million * net earnings per unit.

It doesn't matter if Samsung lost a bajillion dollars on their enterprise, it is the damage to Apple that counts.

Dweeb

2
6

So Samsung phones did not affect Apple's iphone sales at all?

2
1
Anonymous Coward

Every

Samsung sale is really someone who wanted a i-sale but was duped by the similarity, so Apple wants compensation for every samsung sale in the US, US citizens are too stupid to know how to see a box saying SAMSUNG is so similar to a box saying APPLE.

sounds like Apple think it's US demograph are illiterate

11
2
Anonymous Coward

Re: Every

As Samsung Galaxy Phones are extremely popular worldwide - alot of people wouldn't want an iPhone, they specifically want a GalaxySii/Siii and as Apple claimed they are *identical* to the iPhone - shouldn't Samsung be getting adequate compensation for all the iPhone buyers who actually wanted a Galxy Sii but accidetnally bought the wrong phone.

Or does it only work the other way around - is it just iPhone buyers who aren't clever enough to pick the roght phone off the shelf?

10
4
Silver badge
Stop

Wrong argument

EVERY one of the Samsung models in the suit are claimed to be made using Apple's designs. It doesn't matter if not a single person would have bought an iPhone instead, they are still alleged to be using Apple's designs and Apple want to be (1) paid for their use and (2) Samsung stop infringing their design patents.

1
2
Headmaster

Re: Every

sounds like Apple think it's US demograph are illiterate

... I think you mean 'its US demograph...'

0
0
Anonymous Coward

"......kicking Samsung's sales to the kerb, at least in the US"

The last part of the sentence seems to be ignored!

3
7
Anonymous Coward

"Samsung sold 21.15 million phones in the US alone"

Obviously! You forgot to actually read the article before posting you usual anti-apple rubbish.

It's referencing the US sales the case is in the US, it's a US story.

Do you need a map? You definitely need some objectivity.

6
1
Anonymous Coward

Give It A Rest

Ignored in what sense? So what, Apple are thrashing Samsung in their biggest market, how is that being ignored?

Just wished there was a /ignore for meaningless drivel like yours.

4
3
Anonymous Coward

Re: Give It A Rest

"Just wished there was a /ignore for meaningless drivel like yours."

Same old story cowards?

I think you iPod must be broken.

2
4

Re: Give It A Rest

"Just wished there was a /ignore for meaningless drivel like yours."

There is - just don't click to read the comments.

1
1
Anonymous Coward

The fact is both of them did similar designs, rounded corners and a single button and a flat front..

it was obvious capacitive screens would take over from resistive, it was obvious screens would fill as much of a device as possible, and it was obvious that they would end up being as smooth as possible (ever watched old sci-fi, that was always the dream, flat border-less interfaces.

I just hope the jury has a few brain-cells in there somewhere...

I don't really care who is selling the most, I buy what I prefer, and I can't use an iPhone because its too small, hence I buy a Samsung as it has the biggest screen.

Oh and I prefer Samsungs interface over the iPhones, but again its preference...

11
3
Silver badge

I've come around to the opinion that Apple's game plan here isn't to obtain a few extra millions from patent infringement rulings but rather to try to build a narrative that Samsung aren't at the leading edge. The use of a legal route to push that message is neither here nor there.

I'm optimistic that most of the real world has spotted that mobile phones are essentially stagnant and are picking based on the sort of preferences you state, and therefore that this whole story is just an annoying sideshow.

0
1
Pirate

Don't forget the capacitive buttons on the front of the Samsungs. Jobs would rather die than soil his generic handslab.

2
1
Anonymous Coward

Stagnant, but not because of innovation

Phones are stagnant because battery improvements are slow - mature technology - and processor improvements are also slow as they are power-constrained. Hence all the fighting over rather little.

I'm beginning to think it will actually be quite interesting to see if RIM's use of QNX will get more functions per joule out of their BB 10 phones. But the display is still the big problem.

1
0
Silver badge

Only the Galaxy S

If you look at the other phones, the Prevail and Epic 4G don't have the single button and given the Epic has rounded ends and a slider keyboard it would be difficult for Apple to say that was a copy. Basically that leaves the 4.1 million Galaxy S models and of those you can quickly rule out any Verizon sales prior to February 2011 and Sprint sales before nearly the end of 2011 and T-mob isn't selling it yet and probably won't until it works better than 2G on their network.

Let's be honest, nearly all of the early advertising for the iPhone stressed that it was only available on AT&T so it seems improbable that Verizon, Sprint and T-Mobile customers would be confused unless the salesperson actually lied and said "yes, this is an iPhone". I can pert near guarantee that anybody who bought their phones online have no reason to be confused because their shopping cart would say quite clearly "Samsung" and not "iPhone" just like their confirmation email would.

It's equally clear that once Apple gave up its one carrier strategy sales of the iPhone exploded. At best Apple can hope for only a minimal cash win because for the majority of the time Samsung wasn't even directly competing with Apple because Apple itself had opted out of a substantial fraction of the market. Frankly, I hope Apple lose the case because of the decision to strong arm the carriers into meeting their demands as that is what I believe this case is all about. The carriers, evil sods in their own right, aren't quite so afraid of Apple walking out on them because they now know that Apple would have to give up a huge pile-o-cash. It stands to reason that if Apple can take out some phone maker competition, they might get more pull with the carriers.

1
0
Silver badge

Re: Only the Galaxy S

Apple sales never "exploded", rather they've grown over the years. You may be thinking of Android, which went through a period of 100% growth per quarter(!)

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Oi!

I seem to recall use of the term 'mobe' was officially banned!

3
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Oi!

I seem to recall use of the term 'mobe' was officially banned!

Can we call them "fondlerods" then? Being narrower than fondleslabs and easier to operate with one hand and all that.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Could still be bad for Apple

It's being reported on BGR that AT&T is guiding customers away from Apple because their (AT&T's) margins on iPhone are poor. I imagine they will now be going back to Apple demanding substantial discounts. As could be a lot of carriers.

1
0

Re: Could still be bad for Apple

I doubt it. The carriers are far more defendant on apple than vice-versa. The carrier that sticks its neck out can expect a pummeling from their investors.

0
0
FAIL

or this version?

So there are three options here…

Samsung lied about the first numbers and these are legit: They'll be crucified by their shareholders, an inquiry will be raised, and there'll be a ton of trouble.

Samsung told the truth about the first numbers and these are a lie: They'll be crucified by their shareholders, an inquiry will be raised, and there'll be a ton of trouble.

Samsung lied about the first numbers and is also lying about these: They'll be crucified 2x by their shareholders, an even larger inquiry will be raised, and there will be unimaginable trouble.

2
0
Coat

But...

I would be delighted if somehow I was mis-sold an iPhone and given a Galaxy instead. Lets face it, its a far better piece of equipment.

3
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: But...

Not according to the only objective measure of value to the user, phone resale value. iPhone loses a lot less value after purchase than do Samsung phones. Check out this article on the Priceonomics blog - it's difficult to argue against.

http://blog.priceonomics.com/post/17270218344/iphone-dominates-phone-depreciation-rankings

0
1
Silver badge

Re: But...

Ah look, yet another case of hand-picking and publicising whichever statistic makes Apple look better.

Maybe they keep value because there's little new with each new model. Or maybe because there are so few of them, compared to more popular makes like Samsung and Nokia. But who cares - it's not like the kind of people worried about saving money by second hand value are going to be buying overpriced Apple feature phones anyway. But hundreds of millions of us are able to afford a new Galaxy each time, without caring about price - when I upgrade, I either give the old phone away, or stick it in a drawer for backup.

0
1

The high end phones from Samsung are pretty expensive too. I wonder if the "profit" of each handset includes the cost of operating system development. Apple does their own, Samsung leaches off Google.

1
0
Silver badge
FAIL

This trial is a farce ...

a biased judge limiting evidence that can be used against Apple.

I guess the lawyers will be making an appealable case so more mature judges can have a go at it.

3
0
Anonymous Coward

>Samsung sold 21.15 million phones in the US alone, bagging $7.5bn

1.4 million Galaxy Tabs and Tab 10.1s for $644m

the fruity firm sold 85 million iPhones for $50bn and 34 million iPads for $19bn.

but Apple and Samsung were still hoping not to have to reveal it all publicly.<

I bet not, greedy fuckers, both of them! The judge should find 'em both guilty of being overly greedy and force 'em to pay 50% of all profits for the last five years to various charities.

0
0
This topic is closed for new posts.

Forums