7 ms·

A very biased article - the only facts emphasized are the ones that support the Samsung is an IP thief narrative.

by g8oz 13y ago

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
sillysaurus3 13y ago
Which reading would you recommend?
- hahainternet 13y ago
  I've never found a remotely balanced article about the history of smartphones. The best reading is Wikipedia.
gress 13y ago
It's only 'bias' if you don't want to see it as true.
- hahainternet 13y ago
  No it's biased because the article spends half its time talking about scandals in Samsung's history and praising Jobs/Apple as unbelievable visionaries brutally screwed by corporate Korea.
  - gress 13y ago
    The scandals characterize the behavior of the company. You can't pretend they didn't happen.
    - hahainternet 13y ago
      I didn't say they didn't happen. I said the article is biased because it focuses on one side alone.
      - gress 13y ago
        The scandals don't belong to Apple. Of course they are only on 'one side'. Just because it doesn't make both companies look as bad doesn't make it biased.
        hahainternet 13y ago
        Well, this just made me give up on HN.
        jscheng 13y ago
        Why? Are you a Samsung employee? They've been caught and fined lying about other companies in Asia. Samsung is by far the sickest, more unethical, corrupt, and disgusting greedy assholes on the planet.
        salgernon 13y ago
        Are you Posting under the Two different accounts? A sibling post by a user, jackshaocheng has s similarstyleof writing with similar use of asshole
        hahainternet 13y ago
        Apple made such publicly false claims they were called back before the court twice to correct them. They took the unprecedented step of forcing Apple to run a court ordered statement on their homepage. They also determined that as part of this trial Apple had extremely dubiously tried to play two European courts against each other to obtain an illegitimate injunction.
        gress 13y ago
        Yes, thanks for saying this, it really brings balance... Oh wait... It doesn't change the way Samsung comes out of this.
        13y ago
  - jscheng 13y ago
    How is it bias if all the allegations are true? Samsung does this shit in China, and in Taiwan. If the author was biased, it's that he completely left out all the Samsung shenanigans in China's and Taiwan's smart phone market. The author only mentioned U.S. and Europe. But Samsung, the sick assholes they are, do the same things in Asia as well.
    - personjerry 13y ago
      It's very easy to have bias even if the facts are correct. For example there's a chemical that is used in the production of most explosives, and anyone who has ever ingested it will assuredly die. I'm talking about water, but I made it sound like I was referring to a dangerous toxin. The whole point of unbiased media is to present facts on both sides--like another comment said, we need to understand the unscrupulous practices of both Apple and Samsung.
      - gress 13y ago
        No media behaves anything like what you are calling for. Yes, this would be ideal, but it is so meaningless to call for it in the context of a single article that it is effectively a straw man. What we currently live with is media either painting a realistic picture, or not. In this case it is realistic.
- shkkmo 13y ago
  No. It's both biased and true. The author goes deeply into related price fixing by Samsung, but never mentions the price and wage fixing that Apple has done. The author is clearly espousing a specific and deceptive narrative. Both companies engage in anti-competitive practices. However, you can't compare the two if you don't engage in an honest exploration of their business practices. Really? I don't understand the debate. The fact that these companies have been 'borrowing' from each other has been great for us consumers. If nobody was competing with Apple, the iphone would be worse than it is today. The size and cost of the legal battle between these two companies should really inform us about the changes we need to make to technology patent laws.
  - gress 13y ago
    "It nobody was competing with Apple, the iPhone would be worse than it is today" This is an irrelevant straw-man. Knocks offs aren't the only way to compete. Arguably if Samsung truly created something original, there would be far more pressure on Apple to improve. Indeed Samsung's real effect in piggybacking on Apple's work has been to stifle the other Android franchisees such as Motorola and HTC whose products were in many ways better.
    - fpgeek 13y ago
      Of course if Samsung hadn't stifled Motorola and HTC, Apple was already well along with lawsuits on those fronts (including an import ban that probably helped start HTC's downward spiral).
      - gress 13y ago
        Motorola had no trouble with Apple patents.
        fpgeek 13y ago
        http://www.theverge.com/2013/8/7/4598834/apples-patent-case-against-motorola-revived-by-appellate-court http://www.theverge.com/2013/8/7/4598834/apples-patent-case-... http://arstechnica.com/security/2012/09/apple-wins-german-ban-against-motorola-can-pay-e25m-to-enforce-it/ http://arstechnica.com/security/2012/09/apple-wins-german-ba...
Shivetya 13y ago
Considering what was available before the iPhone debut, what was known in the pipeline, and the comments made by some competitors about starting over, its not hard to side with Apple. Given it took how long after the iPhone came out for Samsung to copy it? Yeah, I said copy. Smart phones before it were anything but.
- jpollock 13y ago
  The iPhone wasn't the first capacitative touch smartphone. LG announced and got to market before them. I don't remember if anyone else was earlier or not. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Prada http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Prada
  - jolohaga 13y ago
    Why then didn't Samsung copy the LG phone?
  - MBCook 13y ago
    It wasn't the first, but no one remembers them because they didn't make a difference in the market. Quality of implementation is everything. Philo Farnsworth didn't invent the first TV, mechanical TV systems existed before. But his was much more practical, a better implementation. Same with Edison's lightbulb. I wouldn't say the iPhone was special for being the first touchscreen phone (which as you pointed out, it's not). I'd say it was the first modern smartphone.
    - anigbrowl 13y ago
      They sold 1m of the phones, but they concentrated on the Asian rather than the US market. Apple had a more powerful brand to leverage than LG did, not to mention experience as a platform provider.
      - MBCook 13y ago
        I don't think any amount of marketing would have made that phone sell or set off a revolution the way the iPhone did. I don't think Apple selling that phone would have set off a revolution the way the iPhone did. I'm not saying it's a bad phone, but some anti-Applers like to minimize the iPhone as "just the first touchphone"; there was more to it than that.

A very biased article - the only facts emphasized are the ones that support the Samsung is an IP thief narrative.

by g8oz 13y ago

A very biased article - the only facts emphasized are the ones that support the Samsung is an IP thief narrative.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

sillysaurus3 13y ago

Which reading would you recommend?

hahainternet 13y ago
I've never found a remotely balanced article about the history of smartphones. The best reading is Wikipedia.

gress 13y ago

It's only 'bias' if you don't want to see it as true.

hahainternet 13y ago
No it's biased because the article spends half its time talking about scandals in Samsung's history and praising Jobs/Apple as unbelievable visionaries brutally screwed by corporate Korea.
- gress 13y ago
  The scandals characterize the behavior of the company. You can't pretend they didn't happen.
  - hahainternet 13y ago
    I didn't say they didn't happen. I said the article is biased because it focuses on one side alone.
    - gress 13y ago
      The scandals don't belong to Apple. Of course they are only on 'one side'. Just because it doesn't make both companies look as bad doesn't make it biased.
      - hahainternet 13y ago
        Well, this just made me give up on HN.
        jscheng 13y ago
        Why? Are you a Samsung employee? They've been caught and fined lying about other companies in Asia. Samsung is by far the sickest, more unethical, corrupt, and disgusting greedy assholes on the planet.
        salgernon 13y ago
        Are you Posting under the Two different accounts? A sibling post by a user, jackshaocheng has s similarstyleof writing with similar use of asshole
        hahainternet 13y ago
        Apple made such publicly false claims they were called back before the court twice to correct them. They took the unprecedented step of forcing Apple to run a court ordered statement on their homepage. They also determined that as part of this trial Apple had extremely dubiously tried to play two European courts against each other to obtain an illegitimate injunction.
        gress 13y ago
        Yes, thanks for saying this, it really brings balance... Oh wait... It doesn't change the way Samsung comes out of this.
        13y ago
- jscheng 13y ago
  How is it bias if all the allegations are true? Samsung does this shit in China, and in Taiwan. If the author was biased, it's that he completely left out all the Samsung shenanigans in China's and Taiwan's smart phone market. The author only mentioned U.S. and Europe. But Samsung, the sick assholes they are, do the same things in Asia as well.
  - personjerry 13y ago
    It's very easy to have bias even if the facts are correct. For example there's a chemical that is used in the production of most explosives, and anyone who has ever ingested it will assuredly die. I'm talking about water, but I made it sound like I was referring to a dangerous toxin. The whole point of unbiased media is to present facts on both sides--like another comment said, we need to understand the unscrupulous practices of both Apple and Samsung.
    - gress 13y ago
      No media behaves anything like what you are calling for. Yes, this would be ideal, but it is so meaningless to call for it in the context of a single article that it is effectively a straw man. What we currently live with is media either painting a realistic picture, or not. In this case it is realistic.
shkkmo 13y ago
No. It's both biased and true. The author goes deeply into related price fixing by Samsung, but never mentions the price and wage fixing that Apple has done. The author is clearly espousing a specific and deceptive narrative. Both companies engage in anti-competitive practices. However, you can't compare the two if you don't engage in an honest exploration of their business practices. Really? I don't understand the debate. The fact that these companies have been 'borrowing' from each other has been great for us consumers. If nobody was competing with Apple, the iphone would be worse than it is today. The size and cost of the legal battle between these two companies should really inform us about the changes we need to make to technology patent laws.
- gress 13y ago
  "It nobody was competing with Apple, the iPhone would be worse than it is today" This is an irrelevant straw-man. Knocks offs aren't the only way to compete. Arguably if Samsung truly created something original, there would be far more pressure on Apple to improve. Indeed Samsung's real effect in piggybacking on Apple's work has been to stifle the other Android franchisees such as Motorola and HTC whose products were in many ways better.
  - fpgeek 13y ago
    Of course if Samsung hadn't stifled Motorola and HTC, Apple was already well along with lawsuits on those fronts (including an import ban that probably helped start HTC's downward spiral).
    - gress 13y ago
      Motorola had no trouble with Apple patents.
      - fpgeek 13y ago
        http://www.theverge.com/2013/8/7/4598834/apples-patent-case-against-motorola-revived-by-appellate-court http://www.theverge.com/2013/8/7/4598834/apples-patent-case-... http://arstechnica.com/security/2012/09/apple-wins-german-ban-against-motorola-can-pay-e25m-to-enforce-it/ http://arstechnica.com/security/2012/09/apple-wins-german-ba...

Shivetya 13y ago

Considering what was available before the iPhone debut, what was known in the pipeline, and the comments made by some competitors about starting over, its not hard to side with Apple. Given it took how long after the iPhone came out for Samsung to copy it? Yeah, I said copy. Smart phones before it were anything but.

jpollock 13y ago
The iPhone wasn't the first capacitative touch smartphone. LG announced and got to market before them. I don't remember if anyone else was earlier or not. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Prada http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Prada
- jolohaga 13y ago
  Why then didn't Samsung copy the LG phone?
- MBCook 13y ago
  It wasn't the first, but no one remembers them because they didn't make a difference in the market. Quality of implementation is everything. Philo Farnsworth didn't invent the first TV, mechanical TV systems existed before. But his was much more practical, a better implementation. Same with Edison's lightbulb. I wouldn't say the iPhone was special for being the first touchscreen phone (which as you pointed out, it's not). I'd say it was the first modern smartphone.
  - anigbrowl 13y ago
    They sold 1m of the phones, but they concentrated on the Asian rather than the US market. Apple had a more powerful brand to leverage than LG did, not to mention experience as a platform provider.
    - MBCook 13y ago
      I don't think any amount of marketing would have made that phone sell or set off a revolution the way the iPhone did. I don't think Apple selling that phone would have set off a revolution the way the iPhone did. I'm not saying it's a bad phone, but some anti-Applers like to minimize the iPhone as "just the first touchphone"; there was more to it than that.