You sure about that?
I don't think anyone's missing the days when there were three copies everything (AOSP Calendar, Samsung Calendar, Google Calendar...).
A provision in Samsung's 2014 patent-sharing settlement with Google could hurt the South Korean electronics giant's efforts to rebound from the Note 7 recall. Edison Investment Research analyst Richard Windsor says that efforts by Samsung to recover from the disastrous phablet release and subsequent removal from the market …
They still offer their own calendar. I installed Google Calendar and disabled the Samsung one.
Similarly, there are still multiple email applications (Gmail and a Samsung one), even though the Gmail app can pick up from any account now.
I'd be surprised if Viv isn't fully functional.
But did you *actually* disable the Samsung calendar? The last time I had a Samsung device, it was chock full of S-this and S-that, all of which forcibly restarted themselves if I shut them down, and none could be uninstalled.
Ultimately, I was forced to root the device and install Cyanogenmod. My battery life shot up a good 30% after that.
If they want to go after Google. Samsung obviously has the upper hand in the patent portfolio given how broad their business is, but Google holds the cards when it comes to patents related to Android. So they've used that to force them (and probably other OEMs) into agreeing not to compete with Google by offering alternatives to their stuff.
How very Microsoft of them. Do no evil my ass - they've learned from the best, they have!
I also sincerely hope that your ass does no evil. (One of those, "A comma could be handy." moments).
But seriously - google do indeed stick rigorously to their "Do no evil" motto. Why should they do evil and get their hands/claws/tentacles dirty? That's what they pay the lawyers for.
Not quite sure I agree. Samsung have done *very* well out of Google. They're one of the top selling smartphone brands in many regions using a free O/S. Samsung could have used its own OS or forked Android if it wanted too but it recognised, I presume, that the brand and the weight behind Android would help, not harm them.
Google have also done very well out of Samsung, ensuring that they get big exposure for their wares and manage to use it to collect marketing data across both mobile and pc (Google as well as Facebook are one of the few who can track many people cross device).
Samsung have some very expensive lawyers and therefore must have freely accepted the patent sharing deal as being a good deal with them, even if it did have some sort of non-compete clause. I'm sure it wasn't as strict as zero compete because there are many Samsung branded apps that replace the default Google set.
I just don't get this whole "poor little Samsung getting bullied by Google" crap. Samsung can look after themselves very well and, as I said have prospered massively due to Android. If it was a small start-up running into the Google brick wall I'd care more, but any agreement Samsung went into they did with their eyes open and knew it was a win for them.
All the PC makers like Dell, HP, Compaq, IBM etc. did very well selling Windows PCs. So I guess you believe that the FTC suit against Microsoft tying Windows to purchases of new PCs was just fine and dandy because Dell's lawyers knew what they were getting into, right?
The problem with this isn't that Google is taking advantage of poor Samsung. It is that Google is taking choice away from consumers by making it so all Android phones are required to include Google's bits. If they were a minor player that wouldn't be a big deal, but they have the large majority of the smartphone market - enough be able to wield considerable market power and a quasi monopolistic dominance. What if Samsung through their purchase could do a better personal assistant than Google? Guess their customers will never find out...
"A provision in Samsung's 2014 patent-sharing settlement with Google could hurt the South Korean electronics giant's efforts to rebound from the Note 7 recall."
Samsung have probably done very well out of the sharing of patents and that has allowed it to continue to dominate the market.
It just seems a little bit short sighted of them to have put themselves into a position where if things went wrong they would have a difficult recovery. Let's face it most companies will go through hard times.
Were Samsung just expecting to be able to dominate forever without evolving or expanding into new markets?
Ok, maybe because I'm old and tired of this shit.
But, Samsung needs to put their big-boy pants on and develop their own services first (copy iTunes), develop their own OS (copy IOS) and then the easy part: design chips that deliver the optimal customer experience.
To expect to command control of this market by skipping all the way to step 4...
Exploding phones aren't going to get you there.
Nor will this S-Fanboi sense of entitlement to Apple-like profits and Apple-like market acceptance without steps 1 through 3...
Thank you Samsung, for advancing display, memory, and chip technology. But, you're stuck in the same boat Nokia is in: too late by a decade on steps 1-3 and left with copying Apple...again..
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021