Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Tim Cook Prefers Settling To Suing and Has a Huge Quarter

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the lead-differently dept.

Apple 246

An anonymous reader writes "Apple's current legal battles with Samsung encapsulate a large number of patents, innumerable suits and counter-suits, and have resulted in legal motions in 11 jurisdictions across the globe. As you may remember, Steve Jobs in his biography was quite vocal about his intent to go thermonuclear on Android, vowing to spend every last dime in Apple's coffers to destroy Google's mobile OS. But Tim Cook is a bit more level headed about things, expressing during Apple's earnings conference call yesterday that he has has always hated litigation and would much rather settle than to battle in court. The caveat, of course, is that Cook doesn't want Apple to 'become the developer for the world.'" It may not be what Jobs would do, but as zacharye notes, it doesn't seem to be hurting earnings. "Despite early-morning jitters on Wall Street, Apple on Tuesday reported yet another blow-out quarter. The Cupertino, California-based company managed the second most profitable quarter in its history, posting a net profit of $11.6 billion on $39.2 billion in sales. Apple sold 35.1 million iPhones into channels last quarter, along with 11.8 million iPads, 7.7 million iPods and 4 million Mac computers. While the firm continues to dominate the technology industry — Apple is currently the most valuable company in the world — several analysts think Apple is just getting started."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Tiring (-1)

OldGunner (2576825) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798129)

I suppose this is all necessary at some level that I can't pretend to understand. Nonetheless, I find it all quite tiring.

Re:Tiring (4, Insightful)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798409)

Simple really. It's the Golden Rule.

He who has the gold, rules.

Developer for the world? (5, Insightful)

serviscope_minor (664417) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798149)

Developer for the world sounds like a bit of a tall claim.

Apple really don't invent much new stuff. What they are excellent at is combining existing, often poorly implemented, inventions into very well polished consumer products. That's their business and they're very good at it.

But, it shouldn't be subject to patent protection, and their patents tend to be dubious at best.

The other thing is that patents or not, it's an extremely hard thing to copy.

Re:Developer for the world? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39798215)

so they don't invent new things, you might say they"develop" existing things into coherent other things?

Re:Developer for the world? (4, Insightful)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798301)

They don't invent things that deserve a 20 year monopoly and a legal right to run everyone else out of business.

Re:Developer for the world? (0, Flamebait)

oh_my_080980980 (773867) | more than 2 years ago | (#39799115)

Like Microsoft.

Re:Developer for the world? (5, Insightful)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798293)

But, it shouldn't be subject to patent protection, and their patents tend to be dubious at best.

Unfortunately, this is the situation we find ourselves in. Everything is patented, no matter how absurd, and companies are basically performing rent-seeking by suing everyone who makes something resembling one of their "existing, often poorly implemented, inventions" (which as often as not are just copies of other ideas which have been around a while).

The problem is the absurdity of the patent system, much more so than any of the players. They're all playing the same game, and nobody wins in the end except for the big companies.

How much is Microsoft making off every Android phone again?

I don't see how any company could possibly not be getting embroiled in this unless you simply roll over and cough up a percentage of your earnings to any schmuck who comes along and says he's got a patent.

Re:Developer for the world? (1)

serviscope_minor (664417) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798349)

The problem is the absurdity of the patent system, much more so than any of the players. They're all playing the same game, and nobody wins in the end except for the big companies.

Even the big companies aren't winning, as there is no way to easily defend against patent trolls.

The only people who win are the lawyers.

I don't see how any company could possibly not be getting embroiled in this unless you simply roll over and cough up a percentage of your earnings to any schmuck who comes along and says he's got a patent.

There are many ways of getting embroiled.

One way of avoiding it as much as possible is to only use patents defensively (i.e. only to counter sue if attacked).

Apple are very aggressive, and often attack first.

Re:Developer for the world? (1)

I Read Good (2348294) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798317)

I wish I had mod points. I'd mod this interesting. Thanks.

Re:Developer for the world? (1)

alen (225700) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798347)

they spent a few years doing research into coding just the right algorithm for an OS to detect a human finger and respond appropriately. its true they don't make or invented the touch screen but finding the algorithm to know when its a real finger and not accidentally touching is patent able.

no one is stopping samsung and others from doing the same thing to find their own algorithm

Re:Developer for the world? (2)

serviscope_minor (664417) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798371)

[citation needed]

or at least more context. Which patent are you referring to?

Re:Developer for the world? (5, Interesting)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798407)

> but finding the algorithm to know when its a real finger and not accidentally touching is patent able.

disputable

> no one is stopping samsung and others from doing the same thing to find their own algorithm

Chances are, they already have. It's just the Apple now "owns" the approach regardless of how it was derived. It doesn't matter if I read it in the patent, or if I was able to "re-invent" it myself.

The patent was likely never consulted because of the whole "treble damages" problem. So it is likely that the patent is competely worthless and unecessary.

Your perverse idea of how patents should work allows the first person to file to steal the intellectual work from the rest of the market.

Re:Developer for the world? (0)

alen (225700) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798471)

you can patent implementation, not the idea

car companies have all kinds of engine patents yet there are something like 10 different car companies selling cars in the US that all take the same gasoline

that's the whole point of patents. you take the time to research something and get rewarded. if someone comes out with an idea you can always find a better way with some time and effort.

its always the asian companies that only want to rip off someone's work just to sell it for less. this is why US companies like apple, MS and google will rule the next wave of home electronics. asian companies never got past dumb devices made on open standards like blu ray or DVD because all they seem to do is copy someone else. they missed the trend of smart devices with real software

Re:Developer for the world? (4, Informative)

serviscope_minor (664417) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798675)

you can patent implementation, not the idea

No, patents protect the idea, copyrights protect implementations.

car companies have all kinds of engine patents yet there are something like 10 different car companies selling cars in the US that all take the same gasoline

The basic idea you are referring to is the Otto cycle and it was indeed patented. The patent has long since expired.

if someone comes out with an idea you can always find a better way with some time and effort.

No, you can't, especially when patents are simply too broad. If someone patents the idea of multitouch on a phone, there is no way of implementing multitouch interfaces on a phone without violating the patent, no amtter how much research you do.

its always the asian companies that only want to rip off someone's work just to sell it for less.

Whereas, American companies want to rip it off, sell it for more, then sue the inventor?

patents do NOT protect an idea (1, Troll)

Chirs (87576) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798987)

They protect an implementation of an idea. If someone else can implement the idea in a way that doesn't infringe on the patent, you're good.

Re:Developer for the world? (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798677)

you can patent implementation, not the idea

According to whom? I do not need to look any further than my own field to know this is untrue: the Diffie Hellman patents were patents on the idea of public key cryptography, and cryptography patents in general are patents on math, not implementations of that math.

Re:Developer for the world? (1)

alen (225700) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798743)

its not like the math was always known. someone had to spend years in research discovering that math and the algorithms

if you want to make a crypto patent just devote your life to finding a better way. someone is always making something new. nvidia/intel/amd are always making better CPU's/GPU's even though they patent their designs

Re:Developer for the world? (-1, Flamebait)

the computer guy nex (916959) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798403)

Would you feel more comfortable with "hardware designer" for the world?

http://cultofmac.cultofmaccom.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/beforeandafteriphone.jpg [netdna-cdn.com]

Seeing what cell phones looked like prior to, and after the launch of, the iPhone is fairly amazing.

Re:Developer for the world? (3, Insightful)

Baloroth (2370816) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798539)

You mean before and after the LG Prada [wikipedia.org] , right? Which came out before the iPhone and was the first phone ever with a capacitive touchscreen.

Re:Developer for the world? (-1, Troll)

oh_my_080980980 (773867) | more than 2 years ago | (#39799149)

And yet the iPhone sold better...hmmm....

Re:Developer for the world? (1, Informative)

dyingtolive (1393037) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798715)

Sixth one from the left, top row looks predominantly rectangular and all touchscreen. I also find it interesting that they have all of the screens lit up on the left hand side, whereas the right hand side are all blacked out. That certainly goes a long way toward making them LOOK more uniform, not that a mac fan site should be slighted for using clever advertising.

Also, iPhone came out on June 29th, 2007. The N810 in October of 2007 and looked pretty similar. You can't tell me the N810 was in reaction to the release of the iPhone. There had to be a good deal of parallel development time there.

Finally, I bring you about to the LG KE850, which was announced in January, 2007. Seems if you run the circuit, everyone was pretty much doing the same thing at the same time. It's almost as if Apple's a marketing company first and a technology company at about the same time everyone else is. Funny how that works.

Re:Developer for the world? (2)

dyingtolive (1393037) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798783)

Oh, and for completeness sake, the Storm came out about a full year after the N810 (which I suppose technically isn't a phone), but RIM didn't end up on the bottom of the dogpile by being early adopters. Probably dismissed the whole "usable phone" thing as a consumer fad and underestimated the desire in the corporate world.

Re:Developer for the world? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39798411)

Here's Cooks' quote in full, from TFA:

Iâ(TM)ve always hated litigation always hated litigation, and I continue to hate it.. We just want people to invent their own stuff. If we could get an arrangement where we can be assured thatâ(TM)s the case, and that a fair settlement on stuff thatâ(TM)s occurred, I would highly prefer to settle vs battle.

The key thing is that itâ(TM)s very important that Apple not become the developer for the world. We need people to invent their own stuff.

I think the context is that *if* nobody else is inventing/developing stuff (because of the copyright/patent mine field), then Apple (and a few big players) would indeed become the developer of the world.

At the same time, Apple doesn't want to lose anything from people copying their stuff

In other words, Tim Cook is straddling between the two extreme positions of intellectual property.

Re:Developer for the world? (5, Insightful)

MikeMo (521697) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798523)

Ya know, maybe they don't "invent" things. Whatever. One can say for sure that most of the industry tends to copy Apple's, er, um, 'not inventions'. What did smartphones [gizmodo.com] look like before the iPhone? What did tablets [wikipedia.org] look like before the iPad? Aren't all of the ultra books attempted copies of the Macbook Air? For sure, Intel uses the Air as the target [wikipedia.org] .

The point is, whatever you want to call it, Apple does seem to lead the industry (at least recently) and they probably do get a bit tired of seeing everyone make stuff that looks and feels like theirs.

Re:Developer for the world? (4, Informative)

serviscope_minor (664417) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798807)

Ya know, maybe they don't "invent" things. Whatever.

Yes.

One can say for sure that most of the industry tends to copy Apple's, er, um, 'not inventions'.

Designs. The word you are looking for is designs.

What did smartphones look like before the iPhone?

Well, in 1992, you had the IBM Simon which was a blank slab with nothing but a touchscreen. Due to the manufacturing tech and other constraints of the time, it was quite thick and a bit lumpy, because the basic aerial and speaker tech was not advanced. But bsaically, it's a cuboid with a screen and nothing else.

Then, later you had the LG Prada which was basically the same idea with 2006 era manufacturing and phone tech. That makes it a rather slicker cuboid with a screen and little else.

So yes, Apple didn't invent the idea or basic design, but they produced a very refined version of it.

What did tablets look like before the iPad?

Er, pretty featureless cuboids with little else but a screen and as thin as possible given the state-of-the art manufacturing tech, like the Hp-Compaq TC1100?

Aren't all of the ultra books attempted copies of the Macbook Air?

Again, they were not the first company to make thin or light laptops.

You're again confusing inventing the original idea with producing a good or even leading implementation of the idea. The latter is what Apple do, not the former. There's nothing wrong with that.

Re:Developer for the world? (0)

FreshlyShornBalls (849004) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798841)

Ah. That's just it, though. The "inventors" of the smartphones, tablets and notebook probably are a bit tired of seeing APPLE make stuff that looks and feels like theirs. And before you get too excited, realize that I'm typing this on a MacBook. Here's the point: where does it end? What's past is prologue. And there's just no getting around the fact that just about every invention is based on an existing one, ad nauseum. The merry-go-round of patents and suits has to end. Make a better product (as Apple does quite well) and people will buy it--protections from the government or not.

Re:Developer for the world? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39798883)

Ultrabooks are copies of Airbooks in the same way that the Airbook was a copy of the Fujitsu Q2010, an awesome laptop from 2006 that was thinner than the airbook, and lighter then the airbook.

http://it.toolbox.com/blogs/ontherun/fujitsu-lifebook-q2010-laptop-thin-and-light-8882

Computer Technology has been chasing "thin", "light" and "small" for decades now. Apple did not invent any of these concepts. They are not even the best at it.

They are skilled, however, at recruiting their customer base to evangelize endlessly, if not truthfully.

Re:Developer for the world? (1, Insightful)

Xylantiel (177496) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798975)

Right, because Apple is the only one allowed to make clean, sleek designs. So anything clean and sleek is a copy of an Apple product. If that's not transparently ridiculous, nothing is.

I see someone else has already pointed out that your claims about phones and tablets are hollow. Current smartphones are very much like a palm from the late '90's on steroids. Exactly what any of us would have come up with given the resources. Basically capacitive touch screens made on-screen keyboards usable and the rest is history. Apple was in the right place at the right time with a good product. They deserve credit for good products and infrastructure, but not monopoly protection -- which is what they are requesting in the courts.

Re:Developer for the world? (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39798593)

Quite a few things new ways of looking at the world come directly from Apple, or employees they have hired and bought their inventions when no one else was looking at them -- not willing to foster these ideas into something tangible.

And most of the stuff Apple has been complaining about have been things that could have been found by others, but weren't. Or complaining that someone takes a surface level idea and tries to ride the coattails of something much more popular to the point if they didn't sue, it would encourage others to create identical devices without having to put the hours in.

I mean, with touch tablets...we all talk about how there really is only one form factor and that others are simply doing what they would have eventually done anyways, reducing the device to solely what was there. And if this is the case, why did every single tablet that came out before look pretty fucking shitty and now all want to try to look like the iPad. Wasn't like it was the first...yet, they took the time to do it right.

As for other patents...I've had two patents in my name over the years (currently my university is fighting to take my name off because I refuse to 'monetize' them). And everyone in my field has come out and publicly shouted that what I did was OBVIOUS to everyone in the field. And it kinda was. Using time tested techniques and putting it together in a unique way that no one else had. Others had worked for 40 years in the field and got angry that these were patentable...the only reason I even agreed to patent it was that I didn't want to get sued by someone else in the future (and sadly, my employer technically has a suit against me now). And yet, they couldn't put two simple concepts together and make it work because everyone was fighting over the fact that they believed in one or the other concept and never thought to work together (both of which long since past the patent...and it WAS a little more than just adding the two together, but once you did and saw the results, you realized you could achieve far more going down this path than anything else).

So yeah, when Apple combines existing inventions and actually makes them work when others that have had a lot more time and budget (at least 5 years ago)...they have done something that no one else could have done. And more to the point, they had the expertise to figure out what was important, and what isn't important. You really don't know a subject until you can make it useful to someone that isn't an expert in the field.

Re:Developer for the world? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39798971)

Nope.

Everyone knows Apple breaks into everyone elses shops and steals their plans and leaves behind a big question mark just to drive Batman crazy.

Re:Developer for the world? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39798923)

Yeah, the only thing Apple's ever developed is slick marketing and pretty packaging. That's why they can sell hardware that's half as good as real kit for three times what everyone else sells their stuff for, to their legions of fanbois who will buy anything with an apple on it because it makes them feel tough and cool as they ride around starbucks on their penny farthing bicycles, twisting the ends of their handlebar mustaches as they cackle out loud, imagining how pissed off people who know stuff about tech will be as they make Apple do better and better, when everyone knows they've stolen every idea ever and just wrap them up in new, shiney, easy to use paper and pass it off as improvements and how they believe that regular people will just like something even though it doesn't have a command line and can't compile a hurd colonel across 256 node cluster because it's just a tablet and they're only good for looking at your reflection in them or maybe see if that big truck that's barreling down on you is going to swerve in ti

Re:Developer for the world? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39798929)

Seeing as Apple are putting together off the shelf components made mostly by Samsung, and basing their OSes on OSS products, what exactly are Apple inventing?

They're the masters of paid sycophants and consumer cult control, but religion is well ahead of them in that game.

Maybe they should stick to making a better product, the market will selected them naturally. When you resort to doctoring images to present as evidence in court when trying to block alternatives no one is really going to bother with, you can see how pathetic their level of "invention" really is. Maybe their 'invention" is the fabrication of false "facts"?

Re:Developer for the world? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39799143)

Exactly! Until Apple can prove that they've clean roomed designed everything they make, from people who have been isolated from birth from the rest of the world, the market will continue to hold them up to approbation and laughter and will make sure they tank as a business.

Hardware vs Data (1, Funny)

Bigby (659157) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798163)

Apple is successful in their hardware, but data is the future of tech money. Targeted (and automated) marketing will rule the industry while Apple produces commodity products that will be copied and copied again, destroying the margins.

Re:Hardware vs Data (3, Insightful)

jjohnson (62583) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798225)

Ah, you've been digging up pundit's predictions from 2002, I see.

Re:Hardware vs Data (1)

Bigby (659157) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798297)

There is money in their productions. And they can continue to make money in it if they can keep inventing new devices. In 2002, they didn't invent the iPod, iPhone, iTunes, or iPad yet. Their business model will always make them profits, but there is a limit. The limit is based on how many new products they come up with.

In contrast, data itself has perpetual value. Anyone can make a device. Not everyone can collect data from such a HUGE segment of the population and have the capability to keep in contact with them every single day...like Google.

I am not talking about 1 year projections. I am talking about 10 years from now. It will be Google that can offer you a discount at the store you just left without buying anything. The value in that concept plants the seed for a market revolution. And revolutions are worth a pretty penny as Apple has seen with mobile devices.

Re:Hardware vs Data (3, Insightful)

jjohnson (62583) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798585)

And what makes you think they'll stop inventing new devices?

As someone involved the tech world in exactly this "data is king" business model, I can tell you from direct experience that there's a hard limit on the value of data, and that's the value placed on it by business consumers. To quote the Calgary Flames marketing department, "we don't give a shit about surveying our customers". And they don't. They know who their customers are, what their demographic profile is, etc. They cared about (and used) our product because it offered another avenue of engagement, which is a separate concern.

Everyone involved in the data side always spins great fantasies about precision marketing and deep knowledge of your customers, without acknowledging that in many cases, deep knowledge isn't even useful or worth paying for because it doesn't increase engagement or conversion rates or redemption ratios. Remember Xmarks, the bookmarks plugin people who thought there'd be tremendous value in having an aggregate-able database of everyone's bookmarks? They built that database, and then ran out of money because no one wanted to do anything with it. They were saved only because someone else saw an opportunity to sell a premium version of their plugin.

I'm not saying data's worthless, by any means. But it's not particularly valuable in and of itself.

Re:Hardware vs Data (3, Insightful)

mclaincausey (777353) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798269)

Your post doesn't make any sense. You can't accumulate, store, or access data without hardware. Advertising is a different industry than the ones Apple chiefly participates in (iAd being a mere blip on their earnings report). Apple's products are not viewed as commodities by the market, which is why they command huge margins--margins that went up year over year if you bothered to read the earnings report. Apple's products have been copied and copied again and they still maintain premium status in the eyes of the consumer--margins haven't been destroyed and there's no reason to think they will be in the near term.

Re:Hardware vs Data (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39799071)

But that's just do to slick marketing to brain dead fanbois who'd buy a dead fish and hold it up to their head if it had an apple logo on the side. It's all about the apple logo. There can be no other possible explination for why everyone eles in the world would buy stuff that smart people on slashdot know is crapple.

Re:Hardware vs Data (1)

DJCouchyCouch (622482) | more than 2 years ago | (#39799047)

Apple's been destroying their margins for decades.

But he is still arrogant. (3, Insightful)

halfEvilTech (1171369) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798165)

To bad the summory missed the best quote of the conference call

Finally, one analyst dared ask a question about Apple's litigation battles when it comes to patents. "I've always hated litigation and I continue to hate it," Cook said, but "we just want people to invent their own stuff."

He is still an arrogant ass (yes I will probably lose some karma for that one)

Re:But he is still arrogant. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39798307)

It's real rich coming from a company that shamelessly steals other peoples ideas.

Re:But he is still arrogant. (0)

serviscope_minor (664417) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798427)

"we just want people to invent their own stuff."

Well of course. Where else would Apple "steal" ideas from. After all, great artists steal...

Re:But he is still arrogant. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39798583)

Rephrased to better express what I'm pretty sure Cook meant. -- "I've always hated litigation and I continue to hate it," Cook said, "we just don't want people to outright copy our products."

The first half of that sentence is, in fact, the very attitude that countless Slashdotters have claimed they would like to see coming out of Apple. Kudos to Cook for not being knee-jerk litigious.

The second half of that sentence isn't at all unreasonable. Even if Apple isn't doing anything other than "combining existing, often poorly implemented, inventions into very well polished consumer products," that's still a valuable service and often extremely difficult to do well. So Apple shouldn't have to stomach competitors like Samsung coming along and stealing industrial designs and user interfaces which are the result of years of work and lots of R&D money. Seriously, Samsung has copied Apple's mobile devices so closely (right down to the packaging) that it would be laughable if it wasn't so pathetic.

http://www.iphonehacks.com/2011/09/is-samsung-really-copying-apple-you-decide.html [iphonehacks.com]

Aim low, score respectably (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39798177)

That seems to be the MO over at Apple. When you don't set your target isn't as high as you know it should be, every quarter can be a blow-out.

"Huge Quarter" - is this still SlashDot? (-1)

xxxJonBoyxxx (565205) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798183)

When I saw "huge quarter" in the lead I had to ask myself "Is this still SlashDot?" Most geeks HATE the quarter-to-quarter business focus of publically-traded companies (and we used to come here to escape).

>> several analysts think Apple is just getting started

My portfolio is betting otherwise. The marketing genius that was Steve Jobs is dead.

Re:"Huge Quarter" - is this still SlashDot? (2, Interesting)

mclaincausey (777353) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798299)

A sage move. I mean, look at how sales have fallen off since the "marketing genius" died...

Re:"Huge Quarter" - is this still SlashDot? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39798753)

Inertia?

What happens when all the people Jobs hired start drifting away?

I see AAPL as too late to buy and too early to short. It looks like a bubble, but it's PE and other metrics aren't too bubbly. At some point, the iDevice market share will saturate. They'll cut prices to fight that, the market will mistakenly regard that as a favorable move rather than a death gasp, and then it will be time to short.

Re:"Huge Quarter" - is this still SlashDot? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39798379)

According to Google, AAPL [google.com] has 60,400 employees. If it took its war chest ($100B) and paid it all out equally, each employee could receive $1,655,629. If I was a developer, I'd make damn sure there was an "app for that" if I got that kind of bonus. It has enough cash to keep going until the end of time if it can sustain 3% gain.

Re:"Huge Quarter" - is this still SlashDot? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39798723)

You can't cash all your stocks. Once you start selling large amounts of them the become devaluated. The stock-price is based on the marginal value of the company not on the total value.

Uh, no (1)

unassimilatible (225662) | more than 2 years ago | (#39799107)

That is SHAREHOLDER cash, not employee cash, Mr. Marx.

LOL, good luck shorting AAPL (1)

unassimilatible (225662) | more than 2 years ago | (#39799127)

Not that you really are short Apple. Just bluster, like the two bearish Apple analysts always on CNBC, not really short. Few if any retail investors have the equity to really short stocks. But I'll happily sell you some puts on AAPL.

"I don't like violence... (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798193)

I'm a businessman. Blood is a big expense."

People Like Shiny Things (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39798195)

Film at 11.

"What would Steve Jobs do?" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39798209)

Why are people saying "WWSJD"?

People just aren't ready to let go and see Apple as Steve's baby when in fact it's a corporation and has always been run as one even under Steve Jobs, he just had a good veil at fooling his fans to think the company really is human....

A ray of sanity (1, Interesting)

Grayhand (2610049) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798213)

It'd be nice to see Apple let up on the Vendetta approach Jobs took to so many problems. I'd love to see them ease up on the Adobe hatred as well. Flash may have it's issues but a good share of the web uses it so it's a pain my iDevices refuse to acknowledge it. For all his pluses Jobs had an irrational confrontational approach to companies he saw as competition or even companies that resisted doing things his way.

Re:A ray of sanity (2)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39798279)

I never thought I'd see "a ray of sanity" followed by a request for Flash on more products.

Re:A ray of sanity (2)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798339)

The "ray of sanity" is allowing the user to decide.

You don't need to be a jerk. You don't need to be a megalomaniac.

Being both of those things just makes it obvious you are a threat to the community at large. You shouldn't do that before you have gotten yourself fully entrenched. An appropriate smack down is much more likely to be effective.

Re:A ray of sanity (1)

rtfa-troll (1340807) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798507)

The "ray of sanity" is allowing the user to decide.

Flash is; together with Java (applets; server side Java is fine); the current big cause of security holes and both set out to be things that nobody could avoid having. These are two archaic, proprietary nightmares which, together with H.264, were disrupting the chance to have a standardised free web. Destroying Flash, which is taking .NET with it, is about the best thing Apple has done in the last ten years.

If Google only has the guts to completely kill off the companies using H.264 then we will see something really good and a real proof of the value of competition in the computing industry. I have been just blown away by the fact that, for the first time in a number of years, I am completely happy running a computer without any Flash install at all.

Re:A ray of sanity (2)

KlomDark (6370) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798705)

> Destroying Flash, which is taking .NET with it, is about the best thing Apple has done in the last ten years.

Taking .NET with it? Huh? The new hot thing in the mobile development space is C#/Mono (Open source .NET) because it's the only language/platform that's available on iOS/Android/Windows (Is it also on BlackBerry? I don't know.) Phone. You write 95% of your mobile code in Mono/Ximian and then only need some native 'glue code' to hook the UI to the shareable code. How's the taking .NET with it?

Sure, you can take pot shots at Windows Phone, and I don't know how that is going to turn out, but Microsoft has not really began that battle yet, not until Windows 8 is ready. They may lose this time, but they've always been late to the game and then monstrously won over time.

But still Windows Phone is not the point. Apple killing Flash has nothing to do with killing .NET. HTML5 is killing Flash, and Silverlight, but it's not really Apple killing either one. It's that there's finally a working cross-platform HTML specification available.

Re:A ray of sanity (3, Interesting)

cjhuitt (466651) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798303)

I don't want them to let Flash on iDevices. I've refused to install Flash on my development machine at work since before there was an iPhone (well, before the world at large knew about it, anyway), and IMO the web has improved with the reduction of Flash use where it was entirely unnecessary.

The only downside to all this is the ads that used to use Flash (and thus were automatically blocked for me, no effort necessary) are now using other techniques that don't rely on browser plugins.

Re:A ray of sanity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39798951)

Ads and the exploits that come with ad servers...

One reason iOS has had a sterling reputation with Joe Sixpack and Jane Jelloshot is because few iOS devices have been compromised in the wild, other than people who don't lock down their sshd [1].

Adding flash and other garbage means that the same ad servers which are the bane of Windows systems can easily deliver compromised items to iOS.

[1]: I like changing the root and mobile password, as well as making sshd only allowed via RSA keys. Still lets me in, but keeps password guessers out.

Re:A ray of sanity (1)

mlts (1038732) | more than 2 years ago | (#39799095)

What I would like is just the ability to access my iDevice's raw filesystem and the functionality I get by jailbreaking. I don't care if I have to buy an iOS membership to get this -- I want to be able to pop a command line, grab an E-mail attachment, edit it, encrypt it with a gpg key on the device, then scp it from the phone (likely in /var/mobile) to the remote device. Yes, this might be possible if one has enough apps that cooperate with each other, but it is far easier to just have a command shell where one can run mutt, vi, gpg, then sftp right in succession.

One reason Apple has not allowed this is because of the perception of compromise in the open Android ecosystem. If the JB-like functionality was limited to developers or some way where it wouldn't bite Apple in the behonkus if someone started bawling that their device got compromised because of a JB-functionality exploit, then this would be a must have. Even if it was something called a beta function, this would make iOS devices a lot more useful.

I'm sure this can be implemented in a way to minimize piracy (mainly because people with open devices would be known.) This way, someone going crazy with Installious would be quickly found and JB-equivilent access could be removed, relieving Apple of the pressure by app developers to keep making it harder to have a working jailbreak.

Perhaps another anti-piracy mechanism like Android's LVL that doesn't depend on the jail. However, there are toolkits that easily work around LVL, so it isn't a 100% guarentee either.

Re:A ray of sanity (4, Informative)

mikael_j (106439) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798313)

The thing with Adobe is that it's by no means all Apple's fault.

One of the core issues was Adobe's creative suite, when they ported it to OS X they used Carbon rather than Cocoa. They knew Carbon wouldn't live forever yet they threw a temper tantrum when Apple started dropping Carbon in favor of the all-Cocoa future. Then they seemed to realize that if they dropped OS X as a platform they'd most likely end up losing customers as others (possibly including Apple themselves) filled the void, apparently they figure out that users of Adobe software on Apple platforms are generally more loyal to Apple than Adobe...

Re:A ray of sanity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39798727)

Nice revisionist history. Apple continually stated that Carbon would be supported and even announced a new Carbon64 API. Then Apple cowardly sent out a junior developer to announce that Carbon64 was cancelled at a public conference, just to reinforce the fact they were fucking-over Adobe.

Of course the only people to get screwed in this affair were Mac users who had to wait several years to get a 64bit Photoshop. Adobe got a free upgrade cycle, so they made out fine.

Re:A ray of sanity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39798801)

That's a often repeated but nevertheless distorted view. Apple led all developers to believe that Carbon was a perfectly viable path. Apple even led themselves to believe that, to the point that Apple themselves suffered just as much. The evidence: Another app that relied on Carbon so much that its subsequent rewrite was out even later than almost anything Adobe had, because it was just as screwed over. The name of the software? Apple Final Cut Pro. Adobe's apps beat Apple's to Cocoa by many, many months. QuickTime has suffered the same fate: Not fully updated even after all these years. Adobe? Basically taking over the Final Cut market.

Adobe has also on many occasions taken advantage of Apple hardware before Apple themselves. Evidence: Adobe Lightroom reached 64-bit well before Apple Aperture, its direct competitor.

In both cases, Apple's own development teams were smoked by a company that is often wrongly said to be "lagging" on the Mac.

Re:A ray of sanity (4, Informative)

mclaincausey (777353) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798335)

Adobe killed mobile Flash last year. Are you expecting Apple to now build their own Flash client implementation for this buggy, insecure, dying technology? Jobs was right about Flash.

Re:A ray of sanity (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39798551)

5 years later

Jobs invented Flash

Re:A ray of sanity (1)

aliquis (678370) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798389)

As macs later got GPU accelerated video decoding on OS X I'd say the issue with Flash on Macs wasn't Adobes fault in the first place but rather Apples.

As far as crashes goes I don't know how much Flash affect things but Apple ran it separately somehow from Safari 3 or 4 so I doubt it's an issue longer anyway.

(You'd often heard how efficient macs is compared to PCs but still you'd also heard all the talk about how the latest version of OS X is so much better and faster than the old one. But how can it be if the old one was so awesome? Personally I think it has improved and that the first versions probably wasn't all that great (And I don't judge Windows 8 or XP SP2 on the merits of Windows 95 either.))

Re:A ray of sanity (1)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798557)

I dunno. Although I agree that the Vendetta approach is old and tiresome, it's really hard to let go of my deep and visceral hate for Adobe.

They make Larry Ellison look like the Easter Bunny.

Re:A ray of sanity (1)

Dog-Cow (21281) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798597)

Given the Adobe has given up on Flash for Android, I'd say it's time you let go and realized that Flash on a mobile device isn't happening.

Re:A ray of sanity (1)

mark-t (151149) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798653)

There are actually several reasons that Apple had for avoiding Flash, and I'm inclined to think that most (not all) were rather good ones. They don't avoid Adobe completely... their ibook reader handles PDF fairly well (although I do wish that the bookmark facility supported openable and closeable nested bookmarks, rather than just always having them all expanded out)

Huge Quarter? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39798229)

Pfft. Batman has giant penny. http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-_r9lJ9BuMjI/TwEjK7fDBFI/AAAAAAAAGpE/PAlzTbYsqEo/s400/gp%2B1

I'll pay your ransom... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39798247)

I'll pay your ransom, but I won't use your awful products.

I'm sure that obnoxious gay barista at the Cupertino Starbucks in will be happy to spend his entire paycheck on your next shitty phone... Again.

"Settle" (2, Insightful)

miltonw (892065) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798271)

"Settle" translation: We want Google to pay us lots and lots of money for OUR ideas (which we took from everyone who came before us -- and never paid for.).

Re:"Settle" (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39798601)

If they're so willing to settle and license rather than litigate and crush, perhaps they wouldn't mind finally licensing out the dock connector specifications and APIs to other 'mp3 player' / smartphone manufacturers.

"Apple Fever"? TMZ Meets Market Analysis! (3, Insightful)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798281)

several analysts think Apple is just getting started

I find this particularly interesting since I would assume that market penetration should be causing their growth to slow -- hell they did worse than they did last quarter which, although still good, is a sign they're slowing somewhat, right? So I looked it up on this BGR blog site and it appears that only one analyst thinks so, Brian White. Can anyone provide several other analysts who thing "Apple is just getting started"?

I also found some of Brian White's quotes to be less than analytical:

“Apple fever rocks on”

and

"Apple fever is spreading like a wildfire around the world and we see no end in sight to this trend"

I hate to engage in character assassination but that really doesn't sound like any of the analyst reports I've ever read. They're usually dry as hell and stick to the numbers. Numbers numbers numbers, usually that's all that matters. Anyone got numbers on market penetration instead of telling me "Apple fever has no end in sight"?

Re:"Apple Fever"? TMZ Meets Market Analysis! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39798357)

Hard not to laugh at your assertion that since "Apple did worse than last quarter" that it's a sign that they're slowing. Maybe you forgot that last quarter included a little thing called Christmas?

Re:"Apple Fever"? TMZ Meets Market Analysis! (1)

aliquis (678370) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798463)

People could bring up things like:

* Apple isn't big in the corporate space.
* Apple haven't released or have just recently released their phones in many areas of the world.
* Apple doesn't sell into the low-end (whatever that would improve profits is another question I suppose.)

Beyond that I guess people expect more sales to be done online and by digital distribution.

For instance what about TV from Apple instead of whatever you use now?

Re:"Apple Fever"? TMZ Meets Market Analysis! (2, Informative)

Fahrvergnuugen (700293) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798531)

hell they did worse than they did last quarter which, although still good, is a sign they're slowing somewhat, right?

Wrong. The holiday quarter and quarters containing new product launches have a huge influence over revenue. You can't measure things quarter to quarter, you have to go to the year ago quarter to check growth and even then you have to take into consideration if one or the other was a launch quarter.

If you want to know why certain people (yours truly included) are betting big on AAPL, consider this:

âoeJust two years after we shipped the initial iPad, weâ(TM)ve sold 67 million. To put that in some context, it took us 24 years to sell that many Macs, and five years for that many iPods, and over three years for that many iPhones

.

And also realize that the phone market is a billion+ handsets per year. Their customers love the iPhone more than any other phone and so the growth potential is huge.

Re:"Apple Fever"? TMZ Meets Market Analysis! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39798591)

It's clear you're brainwashed, so it must not be hard to drum up "several analysts" that say Apple is just getting started ... and yet we wait for that claim from the summary and article to be adequately cited ...

Re:"Apple Fever"? TMZ Meets Market Analysis! (1)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798619)

I think the part the analysts are looking at it the Asia Pacific market share. There are billions of potential customers in Chindia and surrounding villages. Even if / when the North American / European market gets saturated, you can count on sales figures from the 'developing world' to, well, develop.

Should give them a couple more years.

It's not much different from the US car manufacturers who are seeing stable to decreasing sales in NA / Europe but are busily building factories in China for domestic consumption. It's the New World Order folks.

Re:"Apple Fever"? TMZ Meets Market Analysis! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39798683)

hell they did worse than they did last quarter which, although still good, is a sign they're slowing somewhat, right?

Uh, wrong. Year-over-year comparisons of the same seasonal quarter are what you want (I'll leave it as an exercise to the reader to Google up the reason why). Apple's unit sales were up YOY in every single product category (other than old-style iPods, which are clearly on the way out).

See the "data summary" document linked from this page [apple.com] for more info.

Re:"Apple Fever"? TMZ Meets Market Analysis! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39798769)

These are the same analysts who were predicting a slowdown in iPhone sales and a slow quarter for Apple Inc. right until 4 PM EST yesterday. While it's true that Apple is just penetrating the global market (especially Asia), I wouldn't read too much into most analysts' predictions who swing between opinions several times within a week.

Re:"Apple Fever"? TMZ Meets Market Analysis! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39798799)

Apple's revenue is up about $9b over the same period last year. Holiday sales probably account for the drop from last quarter.

Their press statement pretty much sums up the incredible level of growth.

The Company sold 35.1 million iPhones in the quarter, representing 88 percent unit growth over the year-ago quarter. Apple sold 11.8 million iPads during the quarter, a 151 percent unit increase over the year-ago quarter. The Company sold 4 million Macs during the quarter, a 7 percent unit increase over the year-ago quarter. Apple sold 7.7 million iPods, a 15 percent unit decline from the year-ago quarter.

Analyst are right to be bullish on Apple for the time being. Their iPhone sales are still rising despite increased pressure from Android and WM8, no one offers a competitive alternative to the iPad, and Mac sales are up despite a severe lack of updated models since last quarter. Throw on the never-ending rumors of an "iTV" frothing up speculation. And don't forget Apple started paying dividends now that Jobs is gone.

I'm confused why anyone would be bearish about Apple.

Stocks are, in part, based on future growth (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798343)

Apple sold 35.1 million iPhones into channels last quarter, along with 11.8 million iPads, 7.7 million iPods and 4 million Mac computers.

In order to maintain the growth, they would need to see:

55 million iPhones into channels , along with 18 million iPads, 13 million iPods and 6.5 million Mac computers.

approx.

So, the question is, can then do that? can the sell 55 million new iPhone in the first quarter of next year?

Re:Stocks are, in part, based on future growth (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798437)

I have to wonder, what would Apple's numbers look like if you took away all the taxpayer subsidized contracts with public schools?

A very bad thing for Apple (0)

sl4shd0rk (755837) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798429)

Apple is going in a direction which will ultimately kill the company. Steve had one of the brightest minds in the business, possibly the world. If Steve wouldn't have done it, then that's all the reason you need to know it's a bad idea. If Apple doesn't beat Google, then Google is going to beat Apple and that's a horrendous thought.

I think Tim is going to be a very bad thing for Apple and it's already showing in that he "prefers not to litigate" - that's what every successful company does! (Microsoft and Oracle for instance). The profits Apple is claiming are what's coming in from the tail-end of Steve's leadership. Wait another year. It's all just going to fall apart and nothing we can do about it. They need a new CEO.

Re:A very bad thing for Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39798901)

Thinks Apple potentially dying is a bad thing, check

Thinks Steve Jobs is possibly the brightest mind in the world, check

"if Steve wouldn't do it, then doing it is wrong", check

Thinks Google beating Apple is a horrendous thought, check

Thinks "preferring not to litigate" is a bad thing, check
 
...comparing to Microsoft and Oracle as a positive example of the above, and worthy of following, check

Believes replacing the CEO will solve everything, check

Arise Sir Douchebag, Knight-Protector of Scumbagistan, born of Jack NoMoral and Latifah Clueless, raised on the coast of No Return. May you forever contribute to the part of society everybody else refer to as "yeah, that's pure bullshit", and drive random penniless people under your cloven lawyer-shoe to the tune of their screaming wife whom you screw in and out of court in all ways, meanings and permutations of the word.

Re:A very bad thing for Apple (1)

idontgno (624372) | more than 2 years ago | (#39799053)

Poe's Law [rationalwiki.org]

Huge quarter? (2)

Chris Mattern (191822) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798609)

Is it anything like Batman's giant penny? [wikia.com]

Hidden Meaning? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39798665)

Tim Cook Prefers Settling To Suing and Has a Huge Quarter

Is that a euphemism?

Suck it, freetards. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39798687)

Apple is only taking up its long denied place where it has always belonged. Apple is the Alpha and the Omega of the computer industry. Apple defines the qualities of advanced technology, speed, security, design, and usability. Apple is what all the micro-tards and free-tards WISH they were. Apple rules the roost because Apple, and ONLY Apple, know how to build computers that people want. The rest of you just need to give up already.

Think different. Think BETTER! Think !APPLE!

Huge quarters (1)

mbone (558574) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798719)

I knew about Steve Jobs "last dime" (which, sadly, I guess he has indeed spent by now), and so when I read

Tim Cook Prefers Settling To Suing and Has a Huge Quarter

I figured that must be some obscure reference to the size of either his warchest (for suing) or his pockets (for settling).

Well, it did get me to read the summary, so I guess it worked as a title.

Re:Huge quarters (1)

sm284614 (946088) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798941)

I assume this special Apple 'Huge Quarter' is essentially the same as any other quarter, but they've polished it up a little and will sell it to you for fifty cents. Or maybe it's mistyped and Tim Cook has a very spacious cabin on the USS Apple...

despite all the propaganda (-1, Troll)

superwiz (655733) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798845)

A short look at the numbers shows that their quarter actually sucked. They sold less units in this quarter than they did in the last quarter. The opposite quarter-over-quarter was true for the same period in '11. Their iPad sales dropped significantly quarter-over-quarter. Their absolute numbers are higher than they were last year because they entered new markets. But they are already declining in these new markets after being there for only 2 quarters. They have not gained any market share on Android. Everyone is trying to compare them to last year because it's something to compare to which shows an increase. But a quarter-over-quarter decrease is a very troubling sign. And they haven't quite beat the reduced market estimates. The estimates were that they would sell 13 million iPads. They sold less than 12 million iPads.

Yeah, uh there is this thing called "Christmas" (1)

unassimilatible (225662) | more than 2 years ago | (#39799081)

In Q4's, and they tend to make Q4's better than Q1's. No analyst compares sequential quarters, so keep your day job.

Their iPad sales dropped significantly quarter-over-quarter.

Again, Christmas, dude. And the new iPad was the worst-kept secret in the tech world for months, and it was only on sale for 3 weeks in Q1 and they couldn't make enough of them to keep up with demand. Apple DOMINATES the tablet space. Number 2 isn't even close.

Re:despite all the propaganda (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39799097)

Does there exist a consumer electronics company that makes more money after the holidays than during?

Doesn't this just mean their profit margin is too (1)

cvtan (752695) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798937)

Other companies must be having fits that Apple can sell shiny bits with rounded corners at high prices while everyone else squeaks by at much lower margins. When I have bought Apple products for my wife or granddaughter, it felt much more like buying jewelry or Steuben glass than a tech purchase. Beautiful and just as sensibly priced. Silly though.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?