Samsung

  • Posted: 07 June 2009 08:34 AM

    One of my larger concerns about threats to Apple is Samsung. They are in a head-on collision course with Apple (or, less probably, they will become the first iPhone licensee!).

    SJ has always taken the position that you can’t be both Apple supplier and competitor. Yet Samsung are one week from launching what appears to be a direct iPhone competitor with video chat. And Apple buy flash memory, screens and CPUs from Samsung. Surely one day SJ will be through with Samsung?

         
  • Posted: 07 June 2009 11:13 AM #1

    artman1033 - 07 June 2009 01:26 PM

    SG, what about GOOGLE?

    Where’s the conflict, exactly? Neither Apple nor Google is so foolish as to want to own the world, I hope (look where that’s finally putting Microsoft). They are not major suppliers to each other. Google is in the business of advertising-funded cloud services that work everywhere. Apple is in the business of selling hardware with unique advantages over competing products, and paid-for premium cloud services. Both are guarding the possibility of a mafia like Microsoft’s taking over the IT business again. They are doing this by driving relentlessly towards open standards implementation of services.

    Palm Pre, with its WebOS, is an example of what they both implicitly encourage. Palm may have stepped over the mark a little, but to a first approximation, the Pre is the kind of competition that Apple actually wants, in order to stabilise competition from the big boys like MS, Samsung, Sony.

    ?

         
  • Posted: 07 June 2009 11:21 AM #2

    And of course Android is Google’s contribution to keeping Nokia, SE, Moto, Samsung, Microsoft unable to leverage their proprietary IP. (Apple wasn’t to know they’d collapse anyway). Apple now provides the same invaluable service to Google that it has traditionally given hardware manufacturers by kick starting the 3.5 inch floppy, SCSI, USB, WiFi etc. In this case, Apple can kick start key Google services when they might otherwise languish while MS or mobile carriers got up to speed with an initially subsidized proprietary alternative.

         
  • Posted: 07 June 2009 11:34 AM #3

    Nice reasoning Sleepytoo.
    This is the kind of intelligent, enlightened writing I come here to read.

         
  • Posted: 07 June 2009 12:37 PM #4

    sleepytoo - 07 June 2009 02:13 PM
    artman1033 - 07 June 2009 01:26 PM

    SG, what about GOOGLE?

    Where’s the conflict, exactly? Neither Apple nor Google is so foolish as to want to own the world, I hope (look where that’s finally putting Microsoft). They are not major suppliers to each other. Google is in the business of advertising-funded cloud services that work everywhere. Apple is in the business of selling hardware with unique advantages over competing products, and paid-for premium cloud services. Both are guarding the possibility of a mafia like Microsoft’s taking over the IT business again. They are doing this by driving relentlessly towards open standards implementation of services.

    Palm Pre, with its WebOS, is an example of what they both implicitly encourage. Palm may have stepped over the mark a little, but to a first approximation, the Pre is the kind of competition that Apple actually wants, in order to stabilise competition from the big boys like MS, Samsung, Sony.

    ?

    The Android OS will be finding its way to devices other than phones. It’s inevitable as hardware makers migrate away from the PC-centric model and move to capitalizes on user demand for highly mobile, constantly connected devices.

    The loser(s) here (for now) are Microsoft and Nokia.

    I’m not impressed with the Samsung promotion and will withhold judgement until more is known about the phones. The big loser on the hardware side from the continuing migration to highly mobile devices is Acer, which has benefitted from the surge in netbook sales but will find it to be a quickly fading fad.

    Google manufacturers nothing that requires inventory or direct relationships with retailer distributors other than ad services.

    Samsung has to reach for higher margin hardware sales opportunities. IMHO a conflict with Apple is an issue if Samsung fails to deliver on components to Apple due to the need to provide components for its own phones or other hardware products.

    Apple is smart enough in its continuing product development efforts to create products that are not beholden to the need of any one supplier for components. What the iPhone product line is today is not what the product line will be a year from now.

    I have no worries about Samsung as a handset maker. My concerns rest with Apple’s ability to continue to distinguish its products in the marketplace, the eventual opening of the domestic market for the iPhone to more than one carrier and the continued monetization of the market beyond the sale of handsets.

         
  • Posted: 07 June 2009 02:49 PM #5

    Samsung’s introduction cannot be too surprising to Apple.  Samsung has followed a strategy of vertical integration for many years.  And do I not recall an interview with the Samsung executive Choi Gee Sung wherein he stated Samsung’s goal was to be number one in worldwide cell phone sales?

    As an aside, this June 15th intro does make it less likely they will buy PALM.