Apple's charts compare its U.S. market share and global sales to Samsung's from 2004-2012
The second quarter of 2008 was when Sprint was pushing the 3G Samsung Instinct as an "iPhone Killer". This was when the OG Apple iPhone was running on EDGE. It was also just prior to the launch of the Apple iPhone 3G which would also account for the dip in Apple's market share at the time. That would also explain the drop in market share in the third quarter of 2011 as consumers awaited what would be the Apple iPhone 4S.
does not include the most recent quarter that showed the Korean manufacturer nearly doubling the number of iPhones sold by Apple in the period.
In today's opening statement at the District Court showdown between Apple and Samsung, the former once again pointed out Samsung's increasing market share, most likely to show how Apple has been harmed by Samsung's alleged patent infringement.
Apple's graphs show U.S. market share (L) and worldwide unit smartphone sales of itself and Samsung from Q1 2004-Q1 2012
1. TerryCrowley (Posts: 184; Member since: 31 Jul 2011)
I knew when I read the title it would be in Apple's favor.
11. ardent1 (Posts: 1991; Member since: 16 Apr 2011)
Apple is just stating the facts. There's no normative spin on these statistic.
19. Pdubb (Posts: 239; Member since: 08 Aug 2011)
This complete spin! Apple just said after their earnings call that the drop was because anticipation of the next iPhone. They cannot have it both ways. They are either slipping because Samsung is kicking their arse or because people are holding off or the next phone. Also is it me or is this the same thing that people have been praising Apple for doing. They take something that is already there and make it better, they refine it, maybe even make it innovative.
22. ardent1 (Posts: 1991; Member since: 16 Apr 2011)
I used the word "normative" as a descriptive before "spin". I understand most people don't know what normative means or how it is used.
normative is defined as "of or pertaining to a norm, especially an assumed norm regarded as the standard of correctness in behavior, speech, writing, etc." source:http://dictionary.reference.co
Apple is in fact making a very strong case that Samsung sucked in the smartphone marketplace for a long time and then did great after the introduction of the iPhone. I am saying you don't have to agree with Apple's assertion because in statistics, we are taught correlation is not causation or casuality.
Nonetheless, you have to wonder how Samsung did so well after stealing Apple's IP. That is why this case is very interesting.
25. D.Aceveda (Posts: 359; Member since: 30 Jun 2012)
Nobody has stole Apple's IP lmao. Keep dreaming.
24. Orbitman (Posts: 110; Member since: 09 Oct 2011)
i think there's a little spin. unit sales and market share are shown because they're in Apple's favor, but what about Apple's profits over the years? let's see if there's actually evidence that they've lost money to Samsung. and $2.5 billion at that, really?! that's chump change to Apple
2. a1000smiles4u (Posts: 84; Member since: 24 Apr 2012)
Apple knows that thr next iPhone wont be a match to sgs3
so trying to make money by cheap acts
43. jroc74 (Posts: 4720; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
I think Apple wants to go bigger screen and thinner phone.
They dont wanna be seen as copy cats. Or they mad cuz they cant hype it up as the next great things in mobile phones.
3. D.Aceveda (Posts: 359; Member since: 30 Jun 2012)
Ah yes statistics from Apple. You can always smell bulls**t.
4. khmer (Posts: 93; Member since: 21 Jun 2012)
Apple filed lawsuits only on Samsung not other phone makers, Judge Koh must be too busy playing with iPhone and iPad and no time to do on research on other phone makers that copied from iPhone and iPad.
8. traccer055 (Posts: 11; Member since: 04 Sep 2009)
sorry I think you have the copying backwards
13. ardent1 (Posts: 1991; Member since: 16 Apr 2011)
If you are going to slam Apple, you really have to put some effort into it. That was W-E-A-K, even by android fanboy standards.
5. tedkord (Posts: 4508; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
What harmed Apple's market share was their refusal to even attempt to out innovate the competition. They simply did what they did in the 80s with the Mac - come out with a great product, then expect the rest of the world to just stop and leave you at the top. Mac lost to the PC, and iPhone will lose to Android, or WP...
10. darkkjedii (Posts: 10559; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)
Dude I don't know what you're smoking, but please stop smoking it.
14. ardent1 (Posts: 1991; Member since: 16 Apr 2011)
> What harmed Apple's market share was their refusal to even attempt to out innovate the competition
That is an another prototypical android fanboy witchhunt. The fact is Apple has been awarded key patents in the smartphone arena, thus providing the evidence Apple is trying to out-innovate the competition.
I would like to see Google's patent applications from 2004 to 2007 timeframe to discern what plans they had in mind for android.
27. tedkord (Posts: 4508; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
Take a good look at Apple's key patents. They are littered with prior art, stolen ideas and just plain idiotic slip by. That's not innovation.
Apple's business plan seems to be to take advantage of a serverely screwed up patent system, to submit any idea that comes to mind without actually working on it, then use that to drive all competition or of the game. Then be absurd enough to try to claim a tap is a zero length swipe, so taps infringe your patent.
Software patents need to be abolished. Period. If this system existed 30 years ago, we'd have had a patent on "a system of low level code to interface between a user and a device," and we'd all have had to use one operating system for the next twenty years.
28. chadrick0814 (Posts: 208; Member since: 23 Nov 2011)
So the "slide to unlock" patent that they love to sue over is an example of their innivation? Maybe we should wait til they can actually get a 4g radio in a phone and then we'll applaud their innovation. Patent trolling isn't innovating anything.
6. protozeloz (Posts: 5372; Member since: 16 Sep 2010)
Hohoho according to apple's own numbers here by Q1 2012 Samsung sold MORE phones than Apple, this is the final Nail on TACOS Dignity coffin as I await him to reply with baseless statements on here
and guys its obvious they would use market share as an argument for "harm received" so I'm not surprised to see this numbers in here...
7. khmer (Posts: 93; Member since: 21 Jun 2012)
Apple and Samsung trials make the Samsung consumers rushing to buy Galaxy S3 before it is ban from America, I owned Galaxy S3 love it so much, I keep it in my pocket all the time even at home.
9. marchels14 (unregistered)
Samsung is on the rise every year but apple jumps up and down because the sales of their products changes but Samsung sales rise slowly and steady,maybe that's why apple so scared or worried so apple is doing everything to stop Samsung.
12. jroc74 (Posts: 4720; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
How can Apple claimed to be harmed....when the iPhone has outsold each previous version....set sales records on Verizon, AT&T and Sprint???
16. ardent1 (Posts: 1991; Member since: 16 Apr 2011)
> ....when the iPhone has outsold each previous version
That claim is irrelevant. So is the claim that there are 9 moons around the planet Nectar in the 18th dimension on the 6th day when Saturn crosses into the house of Jupitar when it rains in Menlo Park, Ca.
The fact that iPhone have out sold each previous version is INDEPENDENT of the fact that Samsung stole Apple IP.
The germane issues are:
(a) theft of IP
(b) unjust enrichment by the copyist
(c) loss of sales by Apple
See this article for more info:http://www.fosspatents.com/201
17. taz89 (Posts: 2014; Member since: 03 May 2011)
Anything other than Foss patent links... Everyone knows they are apple pro... There was even evidence that they were getting paid to be biased
21. ardent1 (Posts: 1991; Member since: 16 Apr 2011)
He may be pro-Apple or write with a pro-Apple spin, however FACTS are FACTS.
He's just reporting the facts from publicly filed documents with the court. I am a fact-checker and I am just sharing the source where I got the facts.
26. taz89 (Posts: 2014; Member since: 03 May 2011)
Facts can be easily made to look a certain way depending on the writer... You just have to go through various sites and see how one person will spin a fact to be pro apple and then another site using the same fact making look anti apple for example... Not nothing against you mate just I personally don't read anything from Foss knowing how blatant bias they have towards apple.
32. Pdubb (Posts: 239; Member since: 08 Aug 2011)
"and in an ideal scenario for Cupertino, Samsung will then realize that it can't win, and back down."
This is simple bias, no facts involved just wishful thinking.
34. tedkord (Posts: 4508; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
The fact is that Florian Meuller had been licking Apple's boots for years, and he is dead wrong as often as he is right. You could literally flip a coin and get the outcomes of these cases right as often as he. He was predicting a huge loss for Google, versus Oracle. Ask him what he thought of Samsung v. Apple I the UK.
Getting facts about any Apple vs Anyone court case from FOSSPatents is like getting facts on the Jewish people from the Third Reich.
29. tedkord (Posts: 4508; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
Even if theft were a fact (and its far from a fact), loss of sales still can't be proved. Even if Samsung had dropped out of the smartphone game all together, I still would not have gotten an iPhone. I'd have gone WinMo again if that was the only other choice.
The problem here is Apple feels that basic geometric shapes, colors and patterns are IP. The sane world doesn't see it that way.
38. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
if basic shapes could be patented, then every phone that ever had a portrait Qwerty keyboard should have/would have been sued by RIM. Moto Q, Dash, and a few dozen other phones all had a similar button layout to a blackberry, and the look was always called "blackberry style" by most people, yet you didnt see RIM suing the daylights out of all of them.
Any touch screen, keyboard free phone will look "similar" to an iphone somewhere, just like the iphone looks like a bunch of other phones. Its not because its "iconic and everyone is copying", its because it uses the most basic and nondescript shapes. Rectangle.. circle.. centered screen. Yup, they should have a patent for that...
40. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
while your at it, you should convince Ford to sue all car makers for having similar design cues.. 4 tires.. a windshield.. steering wheel.
Its the same damn thing.
31. jroc74 (Posts: 4720; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
I'm talking about how Apple is showing because of market share, they were harmed....
What are you going on about?
Stick to the article, thanks.
15. jroc74 (Posts: 4720; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
I dont think Apple has had a bad, losing quarter financially since the iPhone launched....
How are they being harmed?
So....NOW Apple cares about market share again. It shifted away from that to profits when Android stated eating away at their market share.
The market share doesnt translate into them losing money financially tho. Didnt some analyst say Apple could be the first trillion dollar company?
So I ask....how is Apple being harmed by market share? Ppl that want an iPhone will get it. Ppl that dont, wont.
Doesnt Apple realize if Samsung was to drop off the face of the earth in the mobile market.....another manufacture would start to rise and probably replace them as the most popular Android phone?
18. ardent1 (Posts: 1991; Member since: 16 Apr 2011)
I am not a lawyer but I had to sue someone in district court over a breach of contract. In my complaint, I had to outline how I was harmed; I had lost thousands of dollars due to the other party's non-performance.
If you didn't read Apple's complaint(s) filed [or like the rest of that read summaries of these compliant(s)], then you are clueless about the RULE OF LAW.
All you are doing is pontificating aloud over the internet on a website that is dominated by androrid fanboys that habitually conduct witchhunts on Apple on an ongoing basis.
While you are entitled to your opinion, you still need to get your FACTS straight, and in this case, an understanding of the RULE OF LAW.
23. Pdubb (Posts: 239; Member since: 08 Aug 2011)
"These are the per-unit royalties that Apple calculated for its different intellectual property rights-in-suit:
$2.02 for the "overscroll bounce" (or "rubber-banding") '318 patent
$3.10 for the "scrolling API" '915 patent
$2.02 for the "tap to zoom and navigate" '163 patent
$24 for use of any of Apple's design patents or trade dress rights"
From the article you pointed to in a previous post. After reading the article color me confused on the stance it takes. Rubber banding is a more important patent than 3g tech? I am not a fan of either company but these claims are foolish. The over scroll effect is what makes the iPhone an iPhone seems like total and utter BS.
30. tedkord (Posts: 4508; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
It's ironic that you see Apple as the victim of witch hunts.
33. jroc74 (Posts: 4720; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
If each iPhone has outsold the previous one...
Please explain how they were harmed? They made ....more money...with each new iPhone...
35. jroc74 (Posts: 4720; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
Are they claiming that all the money Samsung made from their phones woulda went to Apple?
Thats a lil arrogant if you ask me. Did Apple consult a crystal ball or a psychic? How do they know if Samsung wasnt around....Motorola or HTC wouldnt have climbed that high?
Apple is claiming harm on hindsight I see.....
And last time I checked....its a FACT that each iPhone has outsold the previous one. That means they NEVER LOST MONEY with each new iPhone sold.... I would love to hear Apple explain in detail how they were harmed....
42. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
i still wouldnt have bought iOS. I would probably have bought another HTC.
Apple is acting like they are the only game in town and all profits should be theirs and theirs alone.
The truth is, had another manufacturer become so dominant in Android.. say HTC or LG, they would be in court with this exact same lawsuit and exact same "proof". Samsung is only here because they are the dominant name in Android right now.
36. Aeires (unregistered)
Ardent, stop being so self righteous. The simple truth of the matter is anyone can sue anyone else for any reason. Doesn't make it right, nor justifies much of anything. That's the simple facts about how the law works.
41. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
we have a broken patent system. Anyone can sue for anything. Being sued doesnt make you guilty, neither does losing automatically make you guilty. If that were true then there wouldnt be any prisoners on death row that were later proven innocent.
37. VZWuser76 (Posts: 1309; Member since: 04 Mar 2010)
Your situation and the Apple/Samsung situation are two different matters.
In your situation you lost money because the other party didn't honor their end of the contract by performing a service for you.
In the Apple/Samsung situation. Apple is assuming that if Samsung wasn't using their "stolen" IP, that any consumers who bought a Samsung product would have absolutely bought an Apple product. Ignoring the fact that besides any other android OEMs, there was at the time Windows, RIM, Symbian, Meego, Bada, & WebOS to choose from. Apple has it in their head that the only choice is Apple, when it's not. I used to be an Apple fan, but after a sour experience with their support, I will not buy another of their products. So even if android as a whole was out of the picture, they still wouldn't have gotten my business. And I doubt I'm the only one.
Personally the problem here is not with Apple (though they are taking advantage of it) but with the patent system itself. What they are allowing in these patents is not the raw software code, but the action performed by the user and it's end result. Meaning if someone comes up with another way to get the same result, it wouldn't matter because it would fall under the other patent due to it's broad wording. In many cases there are only one way to implement certain features.
Finally, as I've said numerous times here on PA, if all they were going for was licensing their patents (receiving royalties) I'd have no problem with it. But so far all they have tried to do is ban their competition. When they were finally forced to go into discussions for licensing, they claim that appearance patents are worth $24 per phone, but patents that are vital to being ablet make a call are worth less than a dollar. How does that make sense? Without Samsung's 3G patent, the iPhone would be and iPod Touch.
44. JunkCreek (Posts: 402; Member since: 13 Jul 2012)
here is the case. iphone 2 edge 400mhz procc, samsung galaxy s has 3g 1ghz procc --> samsung has higher spec. iphone 3g 400/800 mhz (i forgot), samsung gs2 had 1.2ghz --> again, samsung gains a power over iphone. iphone 4 1ghz procc, samsung galaxy note has 1.4ghz dual core. iphone 4s has still only 1ghz dual core while samsung galaxy s3 has quad core!
consumers choose samsung for it's higher specs for the same price they choose iphone. that's why iphone gone low. iphone always left one step behind just like deff lepard.
logical that most people choose higher offer even it says unstable or something than the stable one but only with standards.
46. SirCheese (Posts: 15; Member since: 28 Jul 2012)
It's only quad overseas, it's dual core in the US.
47. JunkCreek (Posts: 402; Member since: 13 Jul 2012)
ah, so iPhone loose from overseas instead?
And that's the reasons why, the people in US didn't know that Samsung Galaxy S III had revolutionary quad-core proccie.
I feel sorry for that feature missing in US.
45. soshi (Posts: 154; Member since: 08 Mar 2012)
samsung increasing market share is a prove? what the hell about their logic, there are many reason to make that happen: Android, technology, etc. Apple just trow everything to make excuse because cant accept reality. So childish
48. JunkCreek (Posts: 402; Member since: 13 Jul 2012)
iPhone surely lost. When it's competitors (not jus Sammy) had 3G, iPhone still had EDGE instead. As the other guy had 800 MHz - 1 GHz speed, iPhone only offers 400 MHz. At the time iPhone intoduce it's 1 GHz speed, the rivals has already reach the two-headed "hydra-like" proccs. And again, iPhone introduce it's dual "heads" core procc, it simply swept away because the era has changed into quad "four-deadly-headed hydra" core procc.
So, it is logical that iPhone lost their market share in the worldwide. The world has expect to monsterous "four-deadly-headed hydra" quadcore procc while iPhone still offers only dualcore.
It is simply as is.