Apple Adds Galaxy S III to Samsung Lawsuit
Top message: Pride Comes Before the Fall. by Slammer
Replying to: Occam's Razor by bluecoyote
Here is another idea... Apple isn't out to eliminate Google or Samsung... they are, however, out to make the market less competitive against their products and the products of friendlies (Sony, Microsoft)... this is an easy task, since it is nearly impossible for anyone to sell a mobile device that does not, in some way, mimic or otherwise copy Apple's iOS (note the use of the word "copy" here, as opposed to the word "counterfiet"... there is a legal distinction here). The touch screen was not invented by Apple, but Apple did majorly popularize it via the OG iPhone. Icons on a home screen, and the early commercialized GUI, showed up in Mac first (technically on the Apple Lisa first), and was "copied" by Windows and later OS's. So, what would Apple do in order to reward their partners while stabilizing the entire market and industry to make themselves more comfortable?
Well, why not sue the living snot out of anyone who isn't a "pass recipient" (a.k.a. Microsoft/Nokia and Sony), and then, when Android devices from offending OEM's become too expensive to compete with WP devices from anyone, or Android devices from Sony, or with the iPhone itself, then go in for the kill... sue the living snot out of Google itself over Android. Now, would suing Google over Android kill Google? No, no it would not! Google is a business like any other, and although they make alot of money in a largely unorthodox internet-based revenue model, they will still divest ideas that are too expensive to keep around. Google makes very little money directly from Android (yes, Android is... mostly... open-source, but they still extract support fees from carriers and OEM's for official Android builds and support), less than $300 million in all four years of its commercial existence thus far, and so if Apple could crowd out most of their OEM's and THEN swing the knock-out punch of a multi-billion dollar suit, Google would see it in their own best interest to divest Android... and would continue to reap the benefits of their ad-sense and search and mapping revenues that already account for more than 95% of their income anyway!
Who would then buy Android from Google? Why, Sony, of course! They would wall it off into a proprietary OS, license it out to "nice" players, and then compete "nicely" with Microsoft and Apple in a much more stable tri-polar world hegemony of OS-software distributors. Hegemony, because if Ubuntu is rolled into Android as is currently planned for the next version of Android, then the new Android will represent 97% of all open-source Linux-based OS users. Open-source, as a popular notion to the average mobile user, will be dead. Some may rebel and join the 3% who stick to various forms of Debian or Red Hat, but the numbers of the free will stay small after that.
Yes, Apple contracts with FoxConn, but so does Samsung... so I really don't care about who does what. But, people who use Occam's Razor as a perfect bludgeoun to discredit all people who think about complex systems of this magnitude are keeping their own heads under the sand, and are ignoring evidence that does NOT fit the simplistic system they have imagined in their own perfect imaginary world.
No replies to this message