Microsoft takes to Twitter to chime in on Apple Samsung verdict

31. ardent1 (Posts: 2000; Member since: 16 Apr 2011)

The android mobile OS could to see its zenith.

The android handset makers are paying royalties to MicroSoft on one hand and getting sued (or about to get sued) by Apple on the other hand. It's a tough position to be in.

Despite android being a free mobile OS, MicroSoft's mobile OS looking much promising without the potential legal landmines.

38. pikapowerize (banned) (Posts: 1869; Member since: 03 May 2012)

yeah...android manufactures pay microsoft same price of the licensing fee of WP!!!

yes WP is really promising but its really dull looking... i like putting background pictures on start menus like on iOS, android, symbian and BlackBerry but WP somehow doesnt do that... i like the interface of windows 7 coz it has the ability of changing the desktop backgrounds you want to...

hey dont forget about BB10 if you like BB!

47. zibbyzib2000 (Posts: 221; Member since: 18 Nov 2010)

FYI: It's not Apple vs. Android. It's Apple vs. Samsung. So please just stop the whole Apple vs. Android fanboy nonsense on this article.

58. rusticguy (Posts: 2828; Member since: 11 Aug 2012)

In broader perspective it is Apple + M$ conspiring to gain control of the mobile market. They have conspired together earlier also against open source (Mandriva). They are lord of torts ... google through moto is just trying to balance the books a bit.

7. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5713; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)

Apple just got 1.05 billion from their business partner, apparently the turning on your business partner practice seems to pay off.

11. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5713; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)

just an unfortunate truth i'm afraid.

15. Berzerk000 (Posts: 4275; Member since: 26 Jun 2011)

King, I've been wondering about this; since Samsung makes Apples processors, wouldn't Samsung just make that money back from them in due time? I mean... it seems kind of pointless. Or am I missing something?

19. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5713; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)

it is pointless in terms of logical business strategies but in terms of one company being out to hurt another it makes some sense. if i were Samsung at this point i'd cut them off out of spite so i hope Apple has a fallback plan for if that happens.

20. Berzerk000 (Posts: 4275; Member since: 26 Jun 2011)

Samsung could do that... Then what would Apple use? Snapdragons? Then they would probably use an S3, because I doubt they would have a quad core like the Tegra 3, because it isn't compatible with LTE and that's just not how Apple works. And I doubt they will use the S4, because wasn't Qualcomm having shortages? And plus I doubt they would use a next-gen processor anyways.

25. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5713; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)

i'm sure Samsung is under contract to supply for the new iPhone so i wouldn't worry about that and alternative current gen SoCs but nothing is stopping them from signing another contract to supply for the next iPad or the next iPhone...

59. rusticguy (Posts: 2828; Member since: 11 Aug 2012)

Every contract has a "Force majeure" clause :)

28. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5993; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)

A jury award isn't the final word. I haven't heard where Sammy has written a check to Apple. If Sammy ultimately writes a check, it won't be for $1 billion.

30. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5713; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)

well after the Jury rules against you the game goes from "innocent until proven guilty" to "guilty until proven innocent" it's doubtful that Samsung's appeal will have much of an impact after such a ridic ruling so i'd consider that check written.

40. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5993; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)

Sorry, but the 'guilty' devices are either no longer being produced or can be easily modified (via software update) to be non-infringing. The Sammy GS III isn't on the list of infringing devices, so it gets a pass. Same for the tablets.

Regarding the check written, don't jump to conclusions so quickly. Larry convinced a jury to give Oracle a $1.3 billion award against SAP for copyright infringement. The award got reduced to around $272 million. Expect a similar outcome in this case.

43. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5713; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)

Apple wants compensation for damages that they believe were made to the company and it's reputation. it's done. nothing Samsung does now can change what's been decided not even "sorry, i won't do it again" gestures in the form of updates or halting production of the infringing devices.

after their victory today i don't think Apple will settle for anything else and they have this case wrapped around their pinky but it makes no difference. you don't have to hope so desperately that the cost of damages will be reduced, it's nothing to Samsung. remember they're the top selling Android OEM and Android Market Share is immensely high now. then there's Samsung's other divisions as well that are earning them profit, from their Television department to DVD Players to Washers and Dryers, they're not stressing the billi, it's their pride that took the biggest fall today, not their wallets and they'll need to recover from that but now Apple has had a taste of victory and has set open a path to severely damage many more companies, most not as wealthy as Samsung, like HTC for example, they can't take a hit like Samsung just took. let's hope our Google/Motorola wonder duo can whip it right back on them.

51. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5993; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)

Conceptually, you may be missunderstanding something about civil litigation. Just because a jury decides something, that is not necessarily the final word. At least not in the U.S. model. The example I gave regarding Oracle vs. SAP is illustrative. Larry was able to nullify the jury's objectivity in that lawsuit and he got a $1.3 billion reward for his effort. Has SAP written a check for $1.3 billion to Oracle? No.

Similarly, just because Apple was able to convince a jury that they can patent 'cool', doesn't mean that cool can be patented. Apple got a win in the P.R. battle, but that is effectively it.

Out of curiosity, how would you have felt if Sammy only got tagged for say, $300 million? 'Cause that is effectively what was decided. The $300 million grew to $1 billion because the jury found that Sammy willfully infringed Apple's patents. With willful infringement, there is a trebling of damages.

57. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5713; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)

hey, we'll see man but i don't think Samsung has what it takes now to effectively turn this around.

32. ardent1 (Posts: 2000; Member since: 16 Apr 2011)

Don't forget Samsung already spent hundreds of millions for legal bills.

Think about all those patents Samsung could have filed if they didn't throw away that money on defending itself when it copied Apple.

34. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5713; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)

i think you should read this.

http://www.droiddog.com/android-blog/2012/08/editorial-apple-successfully-wins-against-samsung-and-what-this-probably-means/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook

52. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5993; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)

$100s of millions? I doubt it. Even at a billing rate of $750/hour, that is a lot of coin to drop.

12. Penny (Posts: 1670; Member since: 04 Feb 2011)

Well, their tactic by saying this right now is probably to subtly poke at Android phone manufacturers to remind them that they have another, less troublesome option.

33. ardent1 (Posts: 2000; Member since: 16 Apr 2011)

However, MicroSoft is faced with a tough problem. If the android handset makers abandon android mobile OS, they get less royalties.

35. snowgator (Posts: 3604; Member since: 19 Jan 2011)

Tough problem??? Come on Ardent, you are a way more intelligent poster than that. MS would happily trade the money they are receiving from Android handsets to see a massive increase in WP. They would make way more coin.

45. ardent1 (Posts: 2000; Member since: 16 Apr 2011)

The android payment required little or no work and was just milking it's existing patent portfolio -- it was simply found money in the billions.

Windows mobile OS requires a lot of work given its small market share. Also, keep in mind android devices are being so for as low as $70 meaning Window devices will have to compete head to head against Apple's iOS ecosystem. If you are like most iOS users and sunk in hundreds in apps, that makes you sticky and highly unlikely to switch. Apple was smart to make the switching cost high to discourage defections.

53. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5993; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)

The MS license fee to Sammy for the MS patents that are being used is something on the order of $10 to 15/handset. Last I heard, the WP license fee is somewhere around $50 to $75 per handset.

There is a big difference between $10 - 15 and $50 - $75 when you are talking about 10 million handsets (GS III sales to date).

Not to mention whether the market would have bought the WP handsets. Nokia has been trying pretty hard to sell WP7.5 handsets without a whole lot of luck so far.

Net-net, notwithstanding MS' attempt to spin the outcome, WP has yet to be a serious alternative to iOS. That may change with WP8, but only time will tell.

46. ardent1 (Posts: 2000; Member since: 16 Apr 2011)

One more thought -- look at the Nokia Lumnia 900. Despite something like hundreds of millions in ad support, sales of this Windows phone wasn't great versus expectations and it was a 4G phone to boot.

This is a great example why Windows mobile OS phones will have a difficult road ahead.

54. remixfa (Posts: 14604; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)

im sure it had nothing to do with its single core processor, low resolution, not super impressive camera, and very limited app selection.