One and a half months ago, the "Apple in the United States v. Samsung infringement case" finally took a year-and-a-half year. - The jury of the United States District Court ruled that Samsung infringed several Apple patents and required Apple to pay more than 1.05 billion. The US dollar reimbursement amounted to approximately RMB 6.62 billion. This is a seemingly embarrassing number, but is this the result Apple wants? A photo circulated on the Internet seems to show some clues -- after the trial ended, Apple’s defense lawyer Jason B artlett was outside the courtroom. Interviewed by the media. In the photo, B artlett's face is not filled with happy and casual success. On the contrary, in the corners of the smile and strabismus that had been squeezed out, there was a trace of misgivings.
The lawsuit was a victory, but according to Apple’s original plan, the claim amount was US$2.5 billion. The incidental request included a complete ban on Samsung’s infringing products in the United States. However, as of the time of the press release of the Southern Metropolis, the amount of patent compensation has not reached expectations, and the ban has not yet been passed. In fact, even if it does not make sense to pass, it has been 16 months since Apple sued Samsung. Many of the lawsuit-related products have already been withdrawn from Samsung's machine tactics. In addition, after experiencing this long-standing patent battle, "Apple Samsung" and "Samsung Apple" can only be called "comparable skill" in the eyes of ordinary consumers. As a result, if you don't want to buy an iPhone, there is still a fairly good Samsung Galaxy S to choose from. In this case, the losing Samsung seems to be talking about the cheap.
In the case of a patent dispute, although the winner loser looks distinct, there is still some distance away from the end of the song.
Losers? Winners?
The busy shopping malls in Guangzhou before the National Day and Huang Caifeng, who works in a large bank for market, want to buy a new mobile phone for him to use for the National Day holiday. Her first choice was iPhone 5, but at this time the Hong Kong version was just listed. The parallel price in Guangzhou was about RMB 7,200. She thought it was too expensive and unnecessary. When visiting the Samsung store on the 4th floor of China Plaza, her eyes stopped on the white version of the Galaxy SIII. "You know that Samsung was sued by Apple for appearance infringement and eventually lost the case in the United States?" In the face of the Southern Reporter's question, her answer was "know, but what about me? This machine is very nice."
As Huang Caifeng’s “joinedâ€, the sales figures of this Samsung flagship mobile phone were refreshed again and again. Just before Apple released iPhone 5, Samsung officially announced that Galaxy SIII's cumulative sales reached 20 million.
"Regardless of Samsung's official defense in this patent case, Samsung seems to have been imitating it in the industry, but it proved to be successful." Yang Quan, an analyst at Wargames, a mobile phone consulting company, said that Samsung has entered every business. It was later than its main competitor - the appliance business was 51 years later than Panasonic, the semiconductor business was 10 years behind Intel, and the mobile phone business was 122 years later than Nokia. In the past, many home appliance companies in China started to imitate their homes. In the early years, South Korea’s Samsung technology lags behind Europe, the United States, and Japan.
"You don't think that companies like Samsung are in need of courage to imitate." The founder of a large Internet company that does not wish to be named is so vocal about the Southern Reporter. In the mouth of many interviewees, Samsung's ability to imitate was even seen as an important factor in its rapid rise in just a few decades.
Regarding the Apple and Samsung patent cases, when interviewed by reporters from Nandu, the Chinese companies of both companies indicated that they had no comment. "After all, it was a lawsuit in the United States. There is really nothing to say." A Samsung mobile phone dealer told Southern Reporter that people inside Samsung also responded.
"A company as big as Samsung, if it does one thing, will certainly predict the consequences that may occur. This is also true of the 'plagiarism' of Apple's resolution," said the founder of the Internet company. IC Component E-Commerce Co., Ltd. Executive Vice President Zhu Jizhi agreed with this statement, but also admitted that unless Samsung is frank, otherwise the outside world simply can not prove. However, in his view, Samsung has the motivation and reason to do so, "assuming that Samsung applied for authorization from Apple and agreed to pay licensing fees. The whole process lasts for months and many years for two years. Now, it loses. Claims for reparations are at best the payment of royalties.â€
Following this line of thinking, the total sales volume of Samsung's mobile phones in 2011 was 327 million units, and a total of 1.05 billion U.S. dollars was distributed among about 75 million smart phones, each at US$14, which was approximately 88 yuan.
Xiao Jun, the chairman of Xiaomi Technology (Weibo), said in an interview with a reporter from Nandu. “Now there are 450,000 patents in one cell phone, and then we can see when it will reach 4.5 million.†He believes that the current patent The application is like a "digging campaign". The implication is that the purpose of applying for a patent is more like waiting for a competitor to fall.
If Apple has always been keen to "dig mines" (according to a report released by UBM TechInsights, a market research company, released in February this year, Apple has a total of approximately 15,500 patents, of which approximately 8,500 are U.S. patents). From the results of this lawsuit, Samsung seems to have found a way to escape.
Driving force, sense of crisis
Samsung's chairman Lee Kun Hee has a "high degree of sense of crisis" for business operations. For this Korean family-owned company, a strong sense of crisis can make timely and correct responses to all unknown challenges or opportunities, thereby surpassing the opponents, and imitation is the quickest and most effective way to catch up with opponents.
For example, Sony's initial R&D investment accounted for about 60% of the total R&D, while Samsung’s initial R&D amount accounted for only about 30% of overall R&D, thus using more resources to purchase technology and transform and learn the technology purchased. . Relying on such a practice, Samsung has successively surpassed Japanese companies such as Sony in semiconductors, liquid crystal displays, and other fields.
In order to gain an advantage in the field of mobile phones, Samsung aimed at copying objects at Apple. Whether it is product design or the launch node for new products, it also moves toward Apple.
Vice Chairman of Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Cui Zhicheng, visited the Samsung U.S. Department and local managers worried about the lack of projects that could impress him. “The overall plan is good, but we lack the creativity that can make Cui Zhicheng exclaim. Overall, he lacks confidence in whether we can beat Apple.â€
"The highest decision makers are addicted to Apple's design and are not satisfied with the Samsung designer's creativity." Samsung designers revealed that the sense of crisis and urgency prompted Samsung designers and engineers to adopt the concept that best fits the look and feel of the iPhone. Russell Winer, director of marketing at New York University's Stern School of Business, bluntly stated that Samsung products such as Galaxy Tab 10.1 confuse users and it is difficult for users to tell the difference between the appearance of Apple and Samsung products.
On the operating system of mobile phones, Samsung has abandoned the development of Symbian operating system smartphones since 2010, and instead focused entirely on Android systems. The problem lies in this, Android system originated from Google, and Google at the beginning of the design of Android, it will be positioned as a system based on large-screen, touch operation, and always can not walk out of Apple's system design rules and regulations.
However, in Samsung’s chief product officer’s opinion, it is irrational that Apple’s entanglement with “rectangular†issues. "This would have become a dispute involving the entire industry and it may have strangled competition. This has puzzled us. Consumers are eager for rectangular products. We can provide rectangular products and become the focus of the struggle."
In the face of a sense of urgency in competition, the concept of infringement is blurred or even diminished. What Samsung needs is to quickly follow up and improve on hardware to win the market. For Apple, the development of a mobile phone takes a lot of time and effort, and the product update cycle is also forced to be extended, and Samsung is also very successful. In addition to the similar operating system and appearance, Samsung also carefully selected the release time.
Apple released the flagship autumn season, Samsung is staggering the time, chose the spring, and follow more and more compact. The iPhone4 was released in June 2010. Samsung launched the Galaxy S2 in April of the following year, nearly a year away. After the release of 4S in November 2011, Samsung accelerated its pace and launched the Galaxy SIII in May 2012, greatly shortening the time between the launch of Apple's new machine and the time it took to go public before the release of the iPhone 5, and to seize the market's empty period. What is more advantageous than Apple is that Samsung attracts consumers with high hardware configuration, a more brilliant LCD screen, and a relatively low price.
After imitation, slaughter opponents
"An excellent artist borrows and a great artist steals." This is Picasso's famous quote.
On the second day after the US judgement came out, according to the data released by the US market research company IDC, in the global smartphone shipments in the second quarter of 2012, Samsung and Apple together accounted for a global share of 49.5%, of which Samsung accounted for 32.6%. 16.9% of Super Apples. The figures for the same period last year were 17% and 18.8%, respectively, and Samsung was also slightly lower than Apple.
Samsung at this time, the lawsuit lost, but the mall is worthy of pride.
Matt Evans, an analyst at CLSA, said: "Obviously, the Galaxy SIII is becoming a true competitor to the iPhone and is equal to the iPhone, not a substitute for it."
Fei Xiang network CEO Xiang Ligang (microblogging) said that there are few revolutionary innovations like Apple, that imitate, the vast majority of manufacturers are groping in the imitation. Samsung is the best of many imitators.
Moreover, Samsung is not limited to imitation, it also has the advantage Apple does not have - the vertical integration of hardware from the components to the terminal. Samsung has many key components of smart phones, from LCD panels, to CPU chips, to memory chips, Samsung has a strong production capacity. Smartphones make money, and the sale of spare parts also helps Samsung earn pours. “Samsung products have always been at the forefront in terms of technology research and development and innovation, and Samsung is relatively perfect in the entire industry chain.†Lu Jiebo, deputy secretary-general of the China Electronic Chamber of Commerce, commented on Samsung. Although Apple has created a brand new industrial chain for smartphones, in the field of hardware, Samsung has penetrated the entire industry chain far more than Apple.
Samsung and Apple are both enemies and friends. The main accessories for Apple’s iPhone and iPad products (including CPUs, storage chips, and monitors, etc.) are all sourced from Samsung, and the total purchase amount in 2010 alone is close to US$5.7 billion. In addition, Samsung is the only manufacturer of Apple's iPhone and iPad processors, and their relationship is subtle.
The free Android system is also an excellent weapon for Samsung. While saving millions of dollars in research and development costs and licensing fees, Samsung’s smartphones can also be better with Google’s constant updates to Android. User experience. At the same time, Samsung will focus all its efforts on upgrading the hardware. Nearly every flagship product launch will lead the hardware in the iPhone.
The software has a free Android system. The hardware has its own advantages over Apple. Samsung is also different from Apple in selling product lines. In addition to high-end flagship products such as the Galaxy SIII, Samsung also sells low-cost mobile phones that cater to low-end consumers, targeting customers at all levels.
Asustek chairman Shi Chongyi famously said, "Samsung is good at imitating others and killing each other."
New Product Launch and Litigation Run
According to public information, Apple’s profit for the quarter was as high as US$8.8 billion, and Samsung expects the profit for the third quarter of this year to reach US$6.8 billion. It is worth noting that both figures are much higher than the US$1.05 billion in compensation in this lawsuit. Therefore, the current results of the lawsuit for the two giants, almost can not afford to lift the slightest ripples. Thus, the next visible, and even the next, round will inevitably follow.
Just after the court announced that Apple won the suit, the company filed a new lawsuit. This time, it listed the Samsung Hotsales Galaxy SIII and Galaxy Note as infringement models, claiming approximately US$700 million. However, Samsung is not idle. It is pushing forward with the fastest speed. The most typical example is the fact that the GalaxyNote, which has been on the market for less than a year, is about to start selling second-generation products. The period is shorter than that of the Galaxy S series. According to Yang Qun’s estimation, even if Apple's additional lawsuit still wins, Samsung may have launched other flagship new products. Indemnity is secondary, Apple's more important purpose is to let Samsung stop selling the relevant models, which is a fatal blow to Samsung. However, it is impossible for the court to increase the speed in order to match Apple's ideas. Samsung has just grasped this point.
In addition to continuing lawsuits, industry rumors that Apple is reducing cooperation with Samsung on parts and components, vowed to draw a line with them. For example, in the third quarter of this year, Samsung has dropped from 40% of its peak in the supply of Apple's core components to less than 20%, and in flash memory and other areas, Apple has begun to transfer more new product orders to Samsung, such as Toshiba and Elpida. opponent. In the purchase of LCD panels, Samsung has basically withdrawn from Apple's procurement system.
However, in the view of Zhu Jizhi, who is familiar with the IC components industry, Samsung has also responded to moves. “In the field of components and components, Japanese companies have absolute technological advantages. However, many technologies that are too advanced cannot be used in the civilian sector. Samsung is only a consumer market. The price is cheaper than the Japanese system and the reaction speed is fast. After years of precipitation, The brand and quality are also very good.†Zhu Jizhi said that because of this, Samsung’s position in the field of consumer electronic components is not shaken by Apple's unilateral reduction of cooperation. In recent years, Japan’s component companies have become smaller, and Samsung’s development speed and customer range have been greatly improved.
"Moreover, part of the cooperation is not finished until the end." Zhu Jizhi added that although Apple officials did not disclose, the A6 processor used in the iPhone 5 should still be Samsung's hand. "The processor chip is not like other components and it takes time to accumulate. Especially for companies that are demanding and tightly tracked, such as Apple, it is impossible to simply trade for an alternative supplier." So there is still an inability to eradicate between Samsung and Apple. Deeply embarrassed.
Yang Qun believes that Japanese companies in the field of consumer electronics sunset Xishan, Nokia, Motorola and other veteran mobile phone operators and "difficult to protect themselves", leaving only the real threat to Samsung's only Apple. On the other hand, before Samsung's vertical integration model has yet to show obvious loopholes, its advantages are still unique, not that Apple can easily pull it down.
Patent involved in the lawsuit
In addition to the three products, all of Samsung's devices have confirmed Apple's '915' zoom-out patent. The patent refers to the pinching of two fingers to zoom in and enlarge the picture. This is Apple's use of multi-touch technology in the iPhone after the creation of a generation, with the capacitive screen instead of resistive screen, basically everyone is using such gesture logic, but this is indeed Apple's patent.
A variety of devices from Samsung confirmed that it infringed on Apple's '381 "rapid return" patent, the home physical key at the bottom of the screen. No matter what interface you press the home button to return to the main screen, Samsung has to avoid patent disputes. Late products designed the home button to be rectangular or elliptical, but this did not bypass the "quick return" feature.
A variety of devices from Samsung confirmed that it infringed on Apple's '163' double-click zooming patent. This means that double-clicking on image browsing, e-book reading, and web page thumbnails can be used to switch between zoom-in and zoom-out. This is also a redundant logic design made by Apple in order to compensate for pinch gestures. , as a supplement to the first item and perfection.
A variety of devices from Samsung confirmed that it infringed the '677 commercial design patent on the front of the iPhone and the D'087 commercial design patent on the rear, showing the '305 appearance patent of the main screen. Mainly for a variety of Samsung products and iPhone3G S similar appearance disputes, including four weeks around the metal edging, smooth back, glass front panel design.
Apple Samsung Patent Litigation Replay
April 15, 2011:
Apple filed a lawsuit against Samsung in the United States, claiming that Samsung infringed Apple’s patent rights.
April 21, 2011:
Samsung sued Apple in South Korea, Japan, and Germany, claiming that Apple infringed Samsung’s patent rights.
June 2011:
Apple sued Samsung in South Korea, and Samsung also sued Apple to the US International Trade Commission (ITC).
August 4, 2011:
Apple filed a preliminary injunction with the District Court of Düsseldorf, Germany, hoping to ban the sale of certain Samsung products.
September 26, 2011:
Apple filed several patent rights lawsuits against Samsung in Australia.
May 2012:
Apple CEO Cook and Samsung CEO Cui Zhicheng met in San Francisco to seek reconciliation. But ultimately failed.
July 30, 2012:
Apple's Samsung patent lawsuit was opened at the District Court of San Jose, California, USA.
August 24, 2012:
The San Jose Court ruled that Samsung lost the case and required Apple’s compensation of US$1.05 billion, followed by Samsung’s appeal.
The lawsuit was a victory, but according to Apple’s original plan, the claim amount was US$2.5 billion. The incidental request included a complete ban on Samsung’s infringing products in the United States. However, as of the time of the press release of the Southern Metropolis, the amount of patent compensation has not reached expectations, and the ban has not yet been passed. In fact, even if it does not make sense to pass, it has been 16 months since Apple sued Samsung. Many of the lawsuit-related products have already been withdrawn from Samsung's machine tactics. In addition, after experiencing this long-standing patent battle, "Apple Samsung" and "Samsung Apple" can only be called "comparable skill" in the eyes of ordinary consumers. As a result, if you don't want to buy an iPhone, there is still a fairly good Samsung Galaxy S to choose from. In this case, the losing Samsung seems to be talking about the cheap.
In the case of a patent dispute, although the winner loser looks distinct, there is still some distance away from the end of the song.
Losers? Winners?
The busy shopping malls in Guangzhou before the National Day and Huang Caifeng, who works in a large bank for market, want to buy a new mobile phone for him to use for the National Day holiday. Her first choice was iPhone 5, but at this time the Hong Kong version was just listed. The parallel price in Guangzhou was about RMB 7,200. She thought it was too expensive and unnecessary. When visiting the Samsung store on the 4th floor of China Plaza, her eyes stopped on the white version of the Galaxy SIII. "You know that Samsung was sued by Apple for appearance infringement and eventually lost the case in the United States?" In the face of the Southern Reporter's question, her answer was "know, but what about me? This machine is very nice."
As Huang Caifeng’s “joinedâ€, the sales figures of this Samsung flagship mobile phone were refreshed again and again. Just before Apple released iPhone 5, Samsung officially announced that Galaxy SIII's cumulative sales reached 20 million.
"Regardless of Samsung's official defense in this patent case, Samsung seems to have been imitating it in the industry, but it proved to be successful." Yang Quan, an analyst at Wargames, a mobile phone consulting company, said that Samsung has entered every business. It was later than its main competitor - the appliance business was 51 years later than Panasonic, the semiconductor business was 10 years behind Intel, and the mobile phone business was 122 years later than Nokia. In the past, many home appliance companies in China started to imitate their homes. In the early years, South Korea’s Samsung technology lags behind Europe, the United States, and Japan.
"You don't think that companies like Samsung are in need of courage to imitate." The founder of a large Internet company that does not wish to be named is so vocal about the Southern Reporter. In the mouth of many interviewees, Samsung's ability to imitate was even seen as an important factor in its rapid rise in just a few decades.
Regarding the Apple and Samsung patent cases, when interviewed by reporters from Nandu, the Chinese companies of both companies indicated that they had no comment. "After all, it was a lawsuit in the United States. There is really nothing to say." A Samsung mobile phone dealer told Southern Reporter that people inside Samsung also responded.
"A company as big as Samsung, if it does one thing, will certainly predict the consequences that may occur. This is also true of the 'plagiarism' of Apple's resolution," said the founder of the Internet company. IC Component E-Commerce Co., Ltd. Executive Vice President Zhu Jizhi agreed with this statement, but also admitted that unless Samsung is frank, otherwise the outside world simply can not prove. However, in his view, Samsung has the motivation and reason to do so, "assuming that Samsung applied for authorization from Apple and agreed to pay licensing fees. The whole process lasts for months and many years for two years. Now, it loses. Claims for reparations are at best the payment of royalties.â€
Following this line of thinking, the total sales volume of Samsung's mobile phones in 2011 was 327 million units, and a total of 1.05 billion U.S. dollars was distributed among about 75 million smart phones, each at US$14, which was approximately 88 yuan.
Xiao Jun, the chairman of Xiaomi Technology (Weibo), said in an interview with a reporter from Nandu. “Now there are 450,000 patents in one cell phone, and then we can see when it will reach 4.5 million.†He believes that the current patent The application is like a "digging campaign". The implication is that the purpose of applying for a patent is more like waiting for a competitor to fall.
If Apple has always been keen to "dig mines" (according to a report released by UBM TechInsights, a market research company, released in February this year, Apple has a total of approximately 15,500 patents, of which approximately 8,500 are U.S. patents). From the results of this lawsuit, Samsung seems to have found a way to escape.
Driving force, sense of crisis
Samsung's chairman Lee Kun Hee has a "high degree of sense of crisis" for business operations. For this Korean family-owned company, a strong sense of crisis can make timely and correct responses to all unknown challenges or opportunities, thereby surpassing the opponents, and imitation is the quickest and most effective way to catch up with opponents.
For example, Sony's initial R&D investment accounted for about 60% of the total R&D, while Samsung’s initial R&D amount accounted for only about 30% of overall R&D, thus using more resources to purchase technology and transform and learn the technology purchased. . Relying on such a practice, Samsung has successively surpassed Japanese companies such as Sony in semiconductors, liquid crystal displays, and other fields.
In order to gain an advantage in the field of mobile phones, Samsung aimed at copying objects at Apple. Whether it is product design or the launch node for new products, it also moves toward Apple.
Vice Chairman of Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Cui Zhicheng, visited the Samsung U.S. Department and local managers worried about the lack of projects that could impress him. “The overall plan is good, but we lack the creativity that can make Cui Zhicheng exclaim. Overall, he lacks confidence in whether we can beat Apple.â€
"The highest decision makers are addicted to Apple's design and are not satisfied with the Samsung designer's creativity." Samsung designers revealed that the sense of crisis and urgency prompted Samsung designers and engineers to adopt the concept that best fits the look and feel of the iPhone. Russell Winer, director of marketing at New York University's Stern School of Business, bluntly stated that Samsung products such as Galaxy Tab 10.1 confuse users and it is difficult for users to tell the difference between the appearance of Apple and Samsung products.
On the operating system of mobile phones, Samsung has abandoned the development of Symbian operating system smartphones since 2010, and instead focused entirely on Android systems. The problem lies in this, Android system originated from Google, and Google at the beginning of the design of Android, it will be positioned as a system based on large-screen, touch operation, and always can not walk out of Apple's system design rules and regulations.
However, in Samsung’s chief product officer’s opinion, it is irrational that Apple’s entanglement with “rectangular†issues. "This would have become a dispute involving the entire industry and it may have strangled competition. This has puzzled us. Consumers are eager for rectangular products. We can provide rectangular products and become the focus of the struggle."
In the face of a sense of urgency in competition, the concept of infringement is blurred or even diminished. What Samsung needs is to quickly follow up and improve on hardware to win the market. For Apple, the development of a mobile phone takes a lot of time and effort, and the product update cycle is also forced to be extended, and Samsung is also very successful. In addition to the similar operating system and appearance, Samsung also carefully selected the release time.
Apple released the flagship autumn season, Samsung is staggering the time, chose the spring, and follow more and more compact. The iPhone4 was released in June 2010. Samsung launched the Galaxy S2 in April of the following year, nearly a year away. After the release of 4S in November 2011, Samsung accelerated its pace and launched the Galaxy SIII in May 2012, greatly shortening the time between the launch of Apple's new machine and the time it took to go public before the release of the iPhone 5, and to seize the market's empty period. What is more advantageous than Apple is that Samsung attracts consumers with high hardware configuration, a more brilliant LCD screen, and a relatively low price.
After imitation, slaughter opponents
"An excellent artist borrows and a great artist steals." This is Picasso's famous quote.
On the second day after the US judgement came out, according to the data released by the US market research company IDC, in the global smartphone shipments in the second quarter of 2012, Samsung and Apple together accounted for a global share of 49.5%, of which Samsung accounted for 32.6%. 16.9% of Super Apples. The figures for the same period last year were 17% and 18.8%, respectively, and Samsung was also slightly lower than Apple.
Samsung at this time, the lawsuit lost, but the mall is worthy of pride.
Matt Evans, an analyst at CLSA, said: "Obviously, the Galaxy SIII is becoming a true competitor to the iPhone and is equal to the iPhone, not a substitute for it."
Fei Xiang network CEO Xiang Ligang (microblogging) said that there are few revolutionary innovations like Apple, that imitate, the vast majority of manufacturers are groping in the imitation. Samsung is the best of many imitators.
Moreover, Samsung is not limited to imitation, it also has the advantage Apple does not have - the vertical integration of hardware from the components to the terminal. Samsung has many key components of smart phones, from LCD panels, to CPU chips, to memory chips, Samsung has a strong production capacity. Smartphones make money, and the sale of spare parts also helps Samsung earn pours. “Samsung products have always been at the forefront in terms of technology research and development and innovation, and Samsung is relatively perfect in the entire industry chain.†Lu Jiebo, deputy secretary-general of the China Electronic Chamber of Commerce, commented on Samsung. Although Apple has created a brand new industrial chain for smartphones, in the field of hardware, Samsung has penetrated the entire industry chain far more than Apple.
Samsung and Apple are both enemies and friends. The main accessories for Apple’s iPhone and iPad products (including CPUs, storage chips, and monitors, etc.) are all sourced from Samsung, and the total purchase amount in 2010 alone is close to US$5.7 billion. In addition, Samsung is the only manufacturer of Apple's iPhone and iPad processors, and their relationship is subtle.
The free Android system is also an excellent weapon for Samsung. While saving millions of dollars in research and development costs and licensing fees, Samsung’s smartphones can also be better with Google’s constant updates to Android. User experience. At the same time, Samsung will focus all its efforts on upgrading the hardware. Nearly every flagship product launch will lead the hardware in the iPhone.
The software has a free Android system. The hardware has its own advantages over Apple. Samsung is also different from Apple in selling product lines. In addition to high-end flagship products such as the Galaxy SIII, Samsung also sells low-cost mobile phones that cater to low-end consumers, targeting customers at all levels.
Asustek chairman Shi Chongyi famously said, "Samsung is good at imitating others and killing each other."
New Product Launch and Litigation Run
According to public information, Apple’s profit for the quarter was as high as US$8.8 billion, and Samsung expects the profit for the third quarter of this year to reach US$6.8 billion. It is worth noting that both figures are much higher than the US$1.05 billion in compensation in this lawsuit. Therefore, the current results of the lawsuit for the two giants, almost can not afford to lift the slightest ripples. Thus, the next visible, and even the next, round will inevitably follow.
Just after the court announced that Apple won the suit, the company filed a new lawsuit. This time, it listed the Samsung Hotsales Galaxy SIII and Galaxy Note as infringement models, claiming approximately US$700 million. However, Samsung is not idle. It is pushing forward with the fastest speed. The most typical example is the fact that the GalaxyNote, which has been on the market for less than a year, is about to start selling second-generation products. The period is shorter than that of the Galaxy S series. According to Yang Qun’s estimation, even if Apple's additional lawsuit still wins, Samsung may have launched other flagship new products. Indemnity is secondary, Apple's more important purpose is to let Samsung stop selling the relevant models, which is a fatal blow to Samsung. However, it is impossible for the court to increase the speed in order to match Apple's ideas. Samsung has just grasped this point.
In addition to continuing lawsuits, industry rumors that Apple is reducing cooperation with Samsung on parts and components, vowed to draw a line with them. For example, in the third quarter of this year, Samsung has dropped from 40% of its peak in the supply of Apple's core components to less than 20%, and in flash memory and other areas, Apple has begun to transfer more new product orders to Samsung, such as Toshiba and Elpida. opponent. In the purchase of LCD panels, Samsung has basically withdrawn from Apple's procurement system.
However, in the view of Zhu Jizhi, who is familiar with the IC components industry, Samsung has also responded to moves. “In the field of components and components, Japanese companies have absolute technological advantages. However, many technologies that are too advanced cannot be used in the civilian sector. Samsung is only a consumer market. The price is cheaper than the Japanese system and the reaction speed is fast. After years of precipitation, The brand and quality are also very good.†Zhu Jizhi said that because of this, Samsung’s position in the field of consumer electronic components is not shaken by Apple's unilateral reduction of cooperation. In recent years, Japan’s component companies have become smaller, and Samsung’s development speed and customer range have been greatly improved.
"Moreover, part of the cooperation is not finished until the end." Zhu Jizhi added that although Apple officials did not disclose, the A6 processor used in the iPhone 5 should still be Samsung's hand. "The processor chip is not like other components and it takes time to accumulate. Especially for companies that are demanding and tightly tracked, such as Apple, it is impossible to simply trade for an alternative supplier." So there is still an inability to eradicate between Samsung and Apple. Deeply embarrassed.
Yang Qun believes that Japanese companies in the field of consumer electronics sunset Xishan, Nokia, Motorola and other veteran mobile phone operators and "difficult to protect themselves", leaving only the real threat to Samsung's only Apple. On the other hand, before Samsung's vertical integration model has yet to show obvious loopholes, its advantages are still unique, not that Apple can easily pull it down.
Patent involved in the lawsuit
In addition to the three products, all of Samsung's devices have confirmed Apple's '915' zoom-out patent. The patent refers to the pinching of two fingers to zoom in and enlarge the picture. This is Apple's use of multi-touch technology in the iPhone after the creation of a generation, with the capacitive screen instead of resistive screen, basically everyone is using such gesture logic, but this is indeed Apple's patent.
A variety of devices from Samsung confirmed that it infringed on Apple's '381 "rapid return" patent, the home physical key at the bottom of the screen. No matter what interface you press the home button to return to the main screen, Samsung has to avoid patent disputes. Late products designed the home button to be rectangular or elliptical, but this did not bypass the "quick return" feature.
A variety of devices from Samsung confirmed that it infringed on Apple's '163' double-click zooming patent. This means that double-clicking on image browsing, e-book reading, and web page thumbnails can be used to switch between zoom-in and zoom-out. This is also a redundant logic design made by Apple in order to compensate for pinch gestures. , as a supplement to the first item and perfection.
A variety of devices from Samsung confirmed that it infringed the '677 commercial design patent on the front of the iPhone and the D'087 commercial design patent on the rear, showing the '305 appearance patent of the main screen. Mainly for a variety of Samsung products and iPhone3G S similar appearance disputes, including four weeks around the metal edging, smooth back, glass front panel design.
Apple Samsung Patent Litigation Replay
April 15, 2011:
Apple filed a lawsuit against Samsung in the United States, claiming that Samsung infringed Apple’s patent rights.
April 21, 2011:
Samsung sued Apple in South Korea, Japan, and Germany, claiming that Apple infringed Samsung’s patent rights.
June 2011:
Apple sued Samsung in South Korea, and Samsung also sued Apple to the US International Trade Commission (ITC).
August 4, 2011:
Apple filed a preliminary injunction with the District Court of Düsseldorf, Germany, hoping to ban the sale of certain Samsung products.
September 26, 2011:
Apple filed several patent rights lawsuits against Samsung in Australia.
May 2012:
Apple CEO Cook and Samsung CEO Cui Zhicheng met in San Francisco to seek reconciliation. But ultimately failed.
July 30, 2012:
Apple's Samsung patent lawsuit was opened at the District Court of San Jose, California, USA.
August 24, 2012:
The San Jose Court ruled that Samsung lost the case and required Apple’s compensation of US$1.05 billion, followed by Samsung’s appeal.
LC Fiber Connector provides a pull-proof design and small size perfect for high-density applications. A series of Fiber Connector LC is Single Mode LC Connector and multimode LC Connector ,simplex and duplex Fiber Optic LC Connector with different diameters (0.9mm,2.0mm,3.0mm). The LC fiber connector, which is provided with a 1.25mm zirconia ferrule, are widely used for Fiber to home(FTTH),Local Areal Networks(LAN),Passive Optical Networks(PON),CATV,Fiber communication system. Foclink,a reliable supplier of SC Fiber Connector is always beside u 7*24.
LC Fiber Connector
LC Fiber Connector,LC Connector,Fiber Optic LC Connector,Single Mode LC Connector
Foclink Co., Ltd , http://www.scfiberpigtail.com