We now have someone else who has become successful to hate.
Time for beer - have a good weekend y'all!
Booming mobile sales have powered record profits at Samsung in Q3. Samsung published a preliminary statement of their financials yesterday [PDF] which shows a 91 per cent increase in net profit compared to the same three months last year. The South Korean firm drew in 6.56 trillion won profit ($5.9bn or £3.7bn) in the three …
That, of course, is irrelevant because what are you going to do if you get fed up with Google? Honestly, I'm sick to death with non-developers masquerading as computer geeks. You give yourselves away everytime by over emphasizing the hardware (which is largely irrelevant) and undervaluing the software (which is everything).
Frankly, I couldn't give a monkeys about the hardware - and not too much of a monkeys about the OS - as long as I can easily port my software from one platform (that means OS, newbies) to another.
"Frankly, I couldn't give a monkeys about the hardware - and not too much of a monkeys about the OS - as long as I can easily port my software from one platform (that means OS, newbies) to another."
So the fart apps are easy to port are they ?
Really balanced view of technology there - I am a developer, therefore software is EVERYTHING !
Grow up ! It is a symbiotic relationship software/hardware - either is useless without the other.
Of course it's symbiotic, but the hardware is the shiny shiny thing that all the newbs can cream themselves over. The software is just the intangible thing that the world and his wife seeks to rip off or pirate. Truth is though that it is software that turns a computer from being a paperweight into the ultimate Swiss Army knife. And it is the software that is the most expensive part of the set up (and therefore the part who's portability should be valued)
Taking my setup, the software cost is more many thousands of pounds more than the hardware - even ignoring the stuff that I wrote. So I'm more likely to be pissed off if I have to change software platform than hardware platform.
As to the ease of porting a fart app, yes - very easy. But I grew past the hello world phase about thirty years ago, so that's not really my bag anymore. Don't worry - if you work very hard, you might grow out of that too.
Still, I'm getting a clear sense of how many newbies are posting replies to this infantile article. I guess you fancy yourselves bofh, yes?
Wow Mr. Blowhard way to get off topic. You better accept jackwagon that your customers can switch phones and or OSs anytime they want. Don't like having to worry about hardware differences than write for IOS. You sounds like a real jack ass. Please post what your app is so I and everyone I know can avoid ever giving you damn dime.
No apps for iOS. I've never developed for iOS. And why would I want you to give me bad publicity? Not everyone is as stupid as you are. If you're really interested though, I've been working on network analysis software for Linux and Windows. No, I won't tell you what it's called.
My point was, and I'll try to keep the words short, that they should be able to switch easily - but that its the software that creates the lock in - not the hardware. Whether a user uses Samsung or HTC matters not a jot because, ultimately, they're on the same platform (Android). It's when they switch to iOS, Blackberry or Windows that they'll have the problem.
The intelligence delta between you and the rest of the world, including the other people who post on here, isn't as big as you think it is - it really isn't the case that you are as clever as you think you are.
You also seem quite stressed and that's bad for your health. You might want to think about coping strategies that will help you relax.
"My point was, and I'll try to keep the words short, that they should be able to switch easily - but that its the software that creates the lock in - not the hardware. Whether a user uses Samsung or HTC matters not a jot because, ultimately, they're on the same platform (Android). It's when they switch to iOS, Blackberry or Windows that they'll have the problem." - 45RPM
I read all of that just for you to state the obvious... what a let down. Maybe you are so hyper intelligent i am missing the point, doubtful though.
>what are you going to do if you get fed up with Google?
Umm fork the source code (its open after all for at least the galaxy nexus) and remove the annoying parts and make it do what you want. Isn't that what developers do? (of course I know its not trivial but this guy was such an ass had to point out the obvious).
Somewhat ot, but, on the angle of being fed up with google
When Koreans and sympathetic devs get pissed at googlen or renaming Dokdo with liancourt rocks on non-Korean web searches and non-Korean installs of google earth and google maps, Samsung and Hancom might fork android.
I think thenday could come that Samsung and Korea do to google what apple did to Samsung... It is as if google felt a need to retaliate against Korea for Korea hosting a privacy rights forum in which google was blasted for worsening privacy rights globally.
Down mod me all you want, but, it may be where things are headed for all involved.
I up-voted you.
I would be surprised if Samsung haven't already got their own version of Android in-house. They have Bada which is Linux, right? and they sell millions of phones with Bada. It's not a stretch to believe they will outgrow the usefulness of or need for Google in the mobile space.
As for Google's "worsening privacy rights globally", you are dead right. Their strategy is to eliminate privacy rights by breaching privacy laws on a scale so grand as to render privacy laws ineffective - and act accordingly. This, I posit, is EVIL in essence.
... forking being all well and good, there is however one aspect of Google lock-in that I am not happy with -- the Play Store. Too many apps are using DRM meaning Google Play Store is required to install them on another device. I think this is a serious issue when needs highlighted more often in the Android community.
The reason you got downvotes is not because what you said wasn't true, but because the typical register readers are aging sys admins and other such 'non-developers masquerading as computer geeks'.
A tool is a tool is a tool, but it is nice not having to spend a fortune in money or time getting all your apps on your next device. That goes for computers as well as phones.
Hasn't Samsung always been more successful than Apple? Per the Internet Samsung usurped HP to become the number one technology company when measuring by sales back in 2009.
I think the story is more interesting in terms of trends — Apple's numbers appear more or less stagnant (albeit quite healthy) while Samsung's are growing quickly.
I'm sorry, Apple's numbers are stagnant? Profits and revenue up by 25% from the same period last year is 'stagnant' now? Did the definition of the word change some time recently?
(Note: Samsung's numbers ARE better and well done to them for it but the idea Apple's profits are stagnant is noodle-doodle. Apple is still growing but Samsung is apparently growing faster, which speaks of just how big an achievement their results actually are).
Let's say in the next quarter, RIM leaps from 4 million to 25 million smartphones. That is still lower than Apple's 27 million smartphones. So who is winning? Obviously RIM, because what counts is the trend. RIM is now the guy to watch out for, even if it sold less than Apple in absolute numbers (25 million versus 27 million).
What about the REAL world? In the past 1.5 years, Apple went from 15 million to 27 million, and Samsung went from 8 million to 57 million. Do you see what is happening? Capiche?
Of the 57 million Samsung phones, perhaps 40% are quality smartphones, or about 23 million. That would still be short of Apple's 27 million, but again it's the trend that counts.
Of course he is. No British person complains about copying ideas because the UK sold off all its businesses and now only does banking or reality TV.
That's why the gov fights any sort of regulation or fees for banking. Everything including cadbury's has been sold off so we must let the bankers continue to act like crooks to keep the economy afloat. It's easier than making things and innovating.
But, but the still made the Raspberry Pi! That's innovation, right?
Or maybe just out of ease of setting up non-profit charities over here, which is much harder to do in the US.
Another UK business feature that gives us so much choice (over 185,000 in 2010) like proposing to saving some donkeys in India - but still allowing their staff to be paid millions in expenses. Tax free.
Technology and Innovation? Where?
Operating system: Made by Google, not Samsung
Form factor and UX: Depends on who you ask, but definitely not developed by Samsung
"Innovative" features like S Voice or the home button: Stolen from Apple
Larger screens are not innovations, we've had them for ages.
Where Samsung tries their own technology (Bada) it fails miserably, so the takeaway message is you can make a ton more money by not doing any R&D of your own and just take others's work.
Actually that reminds me of some people I knew at Uni....
"Tried Googling for it but couldn't find any, but it sounds like you have a very solid idea... so let's have them."
Funny, I tried googling it (took about 10 secs) and on Samsung's US page it details that each year Samsung Electronics invests ~9% of revenue back into R&D
Samsung have also invested 822 million USD in a new R&D centre in Seoul (that's the site development cost, not even including the actual "research").
And apple's R&D investment as percentage of sales is hitting new lows. (Just over 2% in 2011).
This appears to coincide with Apple's penchant for litigation against pretty much everyone.
So although we don't have figures, we can see who's more comitted to R&D - it's ironic that the company that puts the least percentage of sales back into R&D is the one trying to get away with suing everyone else.
Also, considering Samsung Electronics have (up until recently) made a large portion of the electronics that go into Apple's gadgets, I'd say trying to rubbish Sammy's R&D is a fairly good example of cutting off your nose to spite your face.
So Apple make their own OS, whilst Samsung make their own hardware like CPUs and displays.
Samsung use someone else for the OS, but then, Apple use someone else (Samsung) for their hardware like CPUs and display.
Sorry, it's ridiculous to say that Samsung don't innovate or make technology. And even for the OS, Apple bought OS X from NEXT, and IOS is built on Darwin. Meanwhile, Samsung do build their own highly successful TouchWiz OS on Android.
So both Apple and Samsung build an OS on top of other people's work, whilst Samsung make the hardware for both themselves and Apple.
Apple copied form factor and UX from others just as much as Samsung. Google and Nokia were doing voice recognition on phones years before Apple (and wasn't S Voice itself a 3rd party thing they bought out?)
You're right that larger screens aren't an innovation, which is why an ipad is nothing new. Bada still sold more than the iphone in the same timeframe since release, so I guess the iphone failed miserable too. Also don't forget Samsung's "feature" smartphones, which they sell tens of millions of, on *top* of the Android smartphones which outself Apple two to one.
I first heard of Samsung sometime around 1992, as maker of licensed copies of HP's RISC workstations (the 9000/715 IIRC). To date I can't think of a Samsung product that was particularly original. So what? They are a ,manufacturer of mainstream electronic products, and do a pretty good job of making reasonably durable electronics at attactive price points.
The endless arguments about copying are really pretty silly when it comes to mainstream products, which almost by definition incorporate the features that most consumers expect to have. A truly innovative company will keep on coming out with products based on new ideas (the definition of innovation) and stay ahead of the pack - so has nothing to fear from mainstream.
And if you compare Samsung's devices to the real iThing clones it's easy to see there is no intentional copying by Samsung, it's just that ideas that have made it into the mainstream customer's set of expectations are incorporated into their designs (just like any other mainstream manufacturer). If cloning the iThing was their goal they would have gone the whole hog and made their products indistinguishable.
Ultimately the relative market shares of Apple and Samsung reflect their chosen roles, luxury brand and mainstream. Long may Apple innovate (though the iPad mini is very 'meh') and long may Samsung (and others) popularise.
Disclaimer: I own neither Apple not Samsung kit (or shares). Appreciate Apple's design & attention to detail, detest the so-superior attitude, see no point gadgets that don't make the lights dip when you turn them on.
Indeed. Have you noticed how just about all modern cars look very similar except for a few barges at one end and a few quirk micro-cars at the other?
Aerodynamics, safety, road conditions and the need for a driver to move safely from one model to another force a great deal of similarity. All the innovation is in hidden things like the Toyota hybrid transmission, the Fiat hydraulic valve actuators, or dual clutch automated gearboxes.
The fact that Apple is litigating about things that car manufacturers ignore suggests a deficit of real R&D on their part. I don't remember Apple inventing capacitative touch screens, OLEDS, fractal antennae, lithium batteries, CNC mills, reinforced glasses or POSIX. The unique Apple contribution to the iPhone is probably no more than a couple of percent of what makes a mobile phone work.
That is why the court battles are so bitter, just as the American and English Civil Wars were fought between people who were very similar.
"look very similar" is not the same as (a) essentially indistinguishable or (b) identical.
The Chinese (the head of the "copyist" franchise) auto industry is busily making cars that are both (a) and (b) and there is a not so quiet storm brewing about.
Each can have his/her own view, but there are an enormous number of elements in the original Samsung Galaxy range compared to the Apple products - for obvious reasons fewer now. The court cases serve to define exactly where the line is drawn between "similar" and a copy. For the generally clueless IT crowd it looks like the end of the world, however this sort of thing is litigated constantly. The Apple-Samsung cases are just interesting for us in IT because we live in that world. The cases are by no means unique.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019