Comments on: Google vs. Samsung

By: davylow

davylow — Thu, 15 Nov 2012 11:06:21 +0000

MDN, Your link to the full article links back to this same page instead.

By: Derek Currie

Derek Currie — Thu, 15 Nov 2012 07:10:59 +0000

Reading through the full report, I got a second impression. It’s summed up in one word:

ENRON

I can EASILY see Samsung having spent sooo much money on:
- Marketing
- Defense Lawyers
- Lawsuit Verdicts
- Bribes
- Business Espionage

And sooo much time:
- Cooking The Books
- Faking the statistics
- Hiding The Deficits and Red Ink
- Banking On A Fantasy Future

That they go BUST one day in an implosion that rivals ENRON.

I’m only imagining here. No need to go dump their stock over it or anything. Only considering the sparse data, having déja vu and remembering the last time I saw fraud on this massive scale. Hmm. Tick Tick Tick…

This could end up being BEYOND interesting.

By: Derek Currie

Derek Currie — Thu, 15 Nov 2012 06:47:08 +0000

Large Korean businesses often have about 3 or 4 different records books each used to show to different entities.

OH MY FSCK.

‘Samsung’: Korean for massively sized accounting fraud.
- – -:

Does this have something to do with western penis size envy? Is that what’s REALLY going on here? Hmm.

By: Derek Currie

Derek Currie — Thu, 15 Nov 2012 06:40:30 +0000

I use Spell Catcher. It never fails me.

By: Derek Currie

Derek Currie — Thu, 15 Nov 2012 06:34:21 +0000

I already boycott Google cookies. Mighty sour, them cookies. Not even milk can save them.

By: Derek Currie

Derek Currie — Thu, 15 Nov 2012 06:33:13 +0000

HAHAHA! I hope folks catch the reference.

By: Derek Currie

Derek Currie — Thu, 15 Nov 2012 06:20:59 +0000

“It went from having almost no smartphone sales to selling over 50 million units per quarter in a matter of two years.”

All while riding on the back of ripped off Apple technology! YEAH! That’s doing business!

‘Samsung’: Korean for tape worm.

By: AC in WA

AC in WA — Thu, 15 Nov 2012 06:16:56 +0000

Samsung would not buy Google, they would innovate an identical OS called Sandroid.

By: farkas

farkas — Thu, 15 Nov 2012 06:03:47 +0000

Android is Dead…
http://seekingalpha.com/article/1007921-android-is-dead-part-1-why

By: 3l3c7ro

3l3c7ro — Thu, 15 Nov 2012 05:46:25 +0000

Maybe we should include Google with our boycott of Samsung consumer products.

By: ban6dit

ban6dit — Thu, 15 Nov 2012 05:15:58 +0000

You are right. Thats how corporate Korea works. In order for Korean businesses to get loans and grants from the bank or government they have to report growth and profits from year to year. If they don’t report growth then they can and will lose a lot of money and support. Large Korean businesses often have about 3 or 4 different records books each used to show to different entities. Samsung is just the epitome of the standard large Korean Corporation.

By: RP

RP — Thu, 15 Nov 2012 05:10:27 +0000

Google pours tons of time and money and has to work it’s ass off with Android for little profit. Apple pours tons of time and money and has to work it’s ass off for iOS AND design and engineer breakthrough phones and gadgets.

Now tell me again why would Samsung want to buy Google when it could just sit back and use Android and copy Apple? I mean why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?

Apple was even giving them their designs and paying them to make their phone parts. Who wouldn’t love this deal?

By: arnbar

arnbar — Thu, 15 Nov 2012 04:28:06 +0000

Scary article – does MDN want to go here????

http://semiaccurate.com/2012/10/23/apple-vs-samsung-samsung-put-the-boot-in-hard/

By: Me

Me — Thu, 15 Nov 2012 02:58:06 +0000

Hefe, would you say I have a “plethora”?

By: MacHeadB

MacHeadB — Thu, 15 Nov 2012 01:42:45 +0000

Google gave/away a great golden egg to a foreign nation to spite another Great American company APPLE!

Google should burn for it! Do no Evil my ass!

By: Pridon

Pridon — Thu, 15 Nov 2012 01:01:28 +0000

The minute Googe starts to charge for Android is the point at which Apple sues Google directly..SS cannot buy Google without Google divesting MMI aqcuqistion. BTW, I believe ORCL may ultimately prevail versus GOOG. There was never a jury decision because the judge ruked the Java APIs non copyrightable. This was without precendent. HTC’s setlement with Apple gives some credibility to validity of Apple patents that SS is fighting. Unforutnately, slow judical system is huring Apple. SS has likely sold more than 20 million infringing devcies since the verdict. Injunction hearing in 3 yeaks and then the inevitable appeal delay. Injunction should have been immediate as the threat of an injunction cuased a spike in SS sales for those SS lovers who wanted to get the phone befroe any ban.

Most Android users don’t use the web becuase they simpky got the phone because it was free and looked better than thier slider feature phone. They maight download a few free games and then just use the phone to play some time wasting game, to text and to jabber.

By: heyhey

heyhey — Thu, 15 Nov 2012 00:41:20 +0000

there is know way that google is going take on samsung…google created android for the specif purpose of giving it out for free…that would be a bad publicity move especially considering their “do no evil” mission statement

By: breeze

breeze — Thu, 15 Nov 2012 00:07:19 +0000

They well deserve each other and this is not entirely a fantasy

By: hannahjs

hannahjs — Wed, 14 Nov 2012 23:46:10 +0000

It’s turtles all the way down

By: peterblood71

peterblood71 — Wed, 14 Nov 2012 23:44:38 +0000

I would love it if Google woke up to the fact Samsung was capitalizing on Android much more than they were to their detriment and Samsung & Google became enemies. (Not likely I know.)

By: Memetech

Memetech — Wed, 14 Nov 2012 23:41:50 +0000

By: Alf

Alf — Wed, 14 Nov 2012 23:32:47 +0000

That would be great! I’d laugh my behind off. Frankenstein’s monster.

Aw, hell–now I’m rooting for Samesung to acquire Google!

By: Jeff

Jeff — Wed, 14 Nov 2012 23:26:03 +0000

Samsung’s success is dependent on having ridden on the back of Android.
Android’s success is dependent on having ridden on the back of iPhone.

By: SamLowry

SamLowry — Wed, 14 Nov 2012 23:23:52 +0000

exactly what I thought.

By: m159

m159 — Wed, 14 Nov 2012 23:18:34 +0000

Does Google make enough money from extra clicks on phones to justify the cost of producing and maintaining android? If the real money on android is made by samsung, then why not start charging to license the OS? Is their agreement with device makers that android always be free? Why aren’t google shareholders clambering to monetize their android product? Why aren’t the execs? Inquiring minds want to know.

By: chrish1961

chrish1961 — Wed, 14 Nov 2012 23:11:50 +0000

Here it is: http://www.asymco.com/2012/11/14/google-vs-samsung/

By: chrish1961

chrish1961 — Wed, 14 Nov 2012 23:11:09 +0000

Can we get a link to the full article? The current links points back here.

By: danilko1

danilko1 — Wed, 14 Nov 2012 22:59:39 +0000

It’s all lies. They do not sell 50mill phones per quarter.

30% web usage for mobiles devices points to flat out fakery on the part of Samsung and ALL of Android. Most manufactures are honest and report real sales, successes and failure. Samsung is reporting lies, fakery and foolishness, so people think they are awesome. Awesome = Buy Me…

Investigate this Media Vision of phones, maker.

By: Tobias Tate

Tobias Tate — Wed, 14 Nov 2012 22:32:57 +0000

also, Samsung got their production process ramped up supplying parts for Apple, so when it came time to manufacture their own sh**, they were way ahead of any other Android peddler.

By: Jdub

Jdub — Wed, 14 Nov 2012 22:29:19 +0000

Samsung copied Apple to a much greater degree than any of the other Android vendors. That’s why they are more successful than the other iPhony peddlers….

By: hannahjs

hannahjs — Wed, 14 Nov 2012 22:16:21 +0000

Samsung acquiring Google. Only Horace Dediu would postulate such a colossal house of horrors.