Level Nine Sports, where families ski and ride...
The Kernel

 advertise with indeep media

Apple vs The Galaxy! Exploding iPhones?

Posted: July 16th, 2013 | Author: | Filed under: Apple, Samsung, Technoid Gadget News | Tags: , , , , , , | Comments Off on Apple vs The Galaxy! Exploding iPhones?

AppleAs if Apple’s war with Samsung, a pivotal supplier …or it’s recent brush with price-fixing, weren’t enough, the gadget giants products are now electrocuting users?

Apple says it will investigate claims that an iPhone electrocuted a Chinese woman who was making a call while charging the device. The case drew attention – both sympathetic and sceptical – after a woman in the western region of Xinjiang wrote about the death of her 23-year-old sister Ma Ailun on China’s popular microblog service Sina Weibo.

China is Apple’s second largest market, it’s products, many of them made in the country, are highly sought after. But the company came under criticism from state media in April for alleged “arrogance” and double standards, prompting an apology from chief executive Tim Cook. The People’s Daily, a mouthpiece of the ruling Communist Party, berated the US company for five days running, urging consumers to “strike away Apple’s unparalleled arrogance” ::::


“We will fully investigate and cooperate with authorities in this matter,” said Apple’s Beijing-based spokeswoman Carolyn Wu, offering condolences to the family.

The state news agency Xinhua said on Sunday that local police had confirmed Ms Ma died of electrocution but “have yet to verify if her phone was involved”. Ms Ma’s sister warned others not to talk on their iPhones while charging them, saying on Weibo on Saturday: “Hope Apple can give an explanation!”

“What a shame, to pass away like this,” she wrote of her sister.

Weibo users expressed concern about the potential danger but also questioned if it was real.

“If the accidents are real, let’s be more careful when using our mobiles,” one person said, but added: “Is someone trying to smear Apple?”

China is Apple’s second largest market and its iPhones and other products, many of them made in the country, are highly popular. But the company came under torrents of criticism from state media in April for alleged “arrogance” and double standards, prompting an apology from chief executive Tim Cook.

The People’s Daily, a mouthpiece of the ruling Communist Party, slammed the firm for five days in a row, urging consumers to “strike away Apple’s unparalleled arrogance”. Chinese consumers had to pay almost $90 for new back covers for their devices, even though they were free in other markets, local media reported at the time.

In a Chinese-language letter, Mr Cook said “we sincerely apologise for any concerns or misunderstanding”. Apple had “many things we have to learn” about operating in the country, he added.

All Over The News For ALL the Wrong Reasons

Last week A US judge has ruled that Apple conspired to raise the retail prices of ebooks in violation of antitrust law, and called for a trial on damages, in a decision that could reshape how books are sold online.

The decision by US District Judge Denise Cote in Manhattan is a victory for the US government and various states, which the judge said are entitled to injunctive relief.

Apple had been accused of colluding with five publishers to boost ebook prices beginning in late 2009, as the Silicon Valley giant was preparing to launch its popular iPad tablet.

The US Department of Justice said this conspiracy was designed to undercut online retailer Amazon’s dominance of the fast-growing e-books market. Each of the five publishers originally named in the US government’s civil lawsuit settled the case, leaving Apple to stand trial alone.

Among the publishers settling the case, the largest was with Penguin for $75 million, while a settlement with Hachette, Harper Collins and Simon & Schuster created a $69 million fund for refunds to consumers. Macmillan settled for $26 million.

Justice Cote said the conspiracy resulted in prices for some e-books rising to $12.99 or $14.99, when Amazon had sold for $9.99.

Amazon held “wholesale” contracts with publishers in which it set prices. Apple’s contracts shifted to an “agency” model where publishers set the price in exchange for a 30 per cent commission to Apple.

Prior to Apple’s entry, the publishers would complain about Amazon’s $9.99 price at private dinners in fancy New York restaurants, but each feared taking on the Internet giant alone.

“The plaintiffs have shown that the publisher defendants conspired with each other to eliminate retail price competition in order to raise ebook prices, and that Apple played a central role in facilitating and executing that conspiracy,” she said.

“Without Apple’s orchestration of this conspiracy, it would not have succeeded as it did in the spring of 2010.”

Justice Cote issued her 159-page decision after a non-jury trial that ended on June 20.

Apple did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Apple’s chief executive Tim Cook had said ahead of the trial that the California firm would not settle, claiming it had done nothing wrong but was merely pursuing normal business practices.

Apple says it will appeal against the ruling. Almost overnight, consumers had to pay more for ebooks as a result of Apple’s push for competition in the market.

It all goes back to 2007, when Amazon was trying to drive sales of its Kindle by selling popular ebooks at a loss. Under the wholesale model, it bought ebooks for $US13 and sold them for $US9.99.

Judge Denise Cote found publishers feared consumers would grow accustomed to the cheaper ebooks and that would erode prices for all books.

In late 2009, Apple proposed an agency model where publishers controlled the prices and Apple got a 30 per cent cut. But a key part of the deal was that if someone sold ebooks at a cheaper price, it could match it.

It meant if Amazon continued to sell books at $US9.99, Apple could do the same – meaning publishers would only get $US7.69, even less than they were getting under the wholesale model.

Judge Cote said Apple made clear to the publishers there was nobody else but the tech giant that could do it, and it was most likely a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.

The major publishers went back to Amazon and threatened to restrict new ebook releases, forcing the company’s hand.



Samsung’s Sampson Like Grip

The Wall Street Journal – WSJ – Online also reported earlier this month that Apple was having huge problems divorcing Samsung – it’s major component and chip supplier – WSJ said for evidence, look no further than Apple’s effort to find a company other than it’s rival Samsung to make the sophisticated chip brains used in Apple’s iPads and iPhones.

in what seemed like an out from the toxic relationship, Apple this month – after years of technical delays – finally signed a deal with Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing to make some of the chips starting in 2014, a TSM executive told WSJ. The process had been beset by glitches preventing the chips from meeting Apple’s speed and power standards, TSM officials said.

Samsung has been exclusively making chips for Apple’s iOS devices since the first iPhone shipped in 2007. WSJs report that Apple would switch to TSMC for next year’s iOS portfolio, seems now to be a premature celebration according to a local Korean publication.

Apple’s 2015 iOS devices will use Samsung’s 14 nanometer FinFET technology, starting with the iPhone 7. Which raises the question, why would Apple switch to TSM for just one device, iPhone 6?

Is Apple planning to rely on both TSM and Samsung for different product lines? Unfortunately, we’ll have to wait until Chipworks breaks out its microscopes to find out what’s really going on.

However, according to The Korea Herald, industry sources say Samsung and Apple may have signed a three year contract in May for this new technology.

Apple vs Samsung

A year ago the Apple vs Samsung war warmed up with Apple being awarded $1.051 billion in damages after a United States jury determined that Samsung copied critical features of the hugely popular iPhone and iPad.

The verdict might have lead to an outright ban on sales of key Samsung products, clearly however, this never eventuated.

Apple’s charges that Samsung copied its designs and features are widely viewed as an attack on Google and its Android software, which drives most of Samsung’s devices and has become the most-widely-used mobile software.

Apple and Samsung, two companies that sell more than half the world’s smartphones and tablets, have locked legal horns in several countries over the years.


Apple’s Tim Cook Flatout Rejects US Senate Caining

Apple CEO Tim Cook Rejects US Senate ReportApple’s CEO Tim Cook has defended his company’s tax avoidance  tactics, Cook faced a grilling by US lawmakers accusing the tech-behemoth of sham subsidiaries and convoluted strategies to shift profits offshore, however Cook strenuously denied the company used gimmicks to avoid paying taxes. Cook told a US Senate committee Apple paid all the taxes it owed, complying with not only the law, but the spirit of the law.

Cook said last year Apple paid $US6 billion to the US coffers, a tax rate of about 30 percent.

The high level US Senate committee investigating corporate offshore tax avoidance has accused Apple of shifting billions of dollars in profits to avoid paying US taxes on a massive scale. It found Apple avoided paying $9 billion in tax in 2012. Earlier, Panel chairman Senator Carl Levin accused Apple of “exploiting an absurdity” in its tax payments.

Mr Cook told the hearing that Apple lives up to its tax obligations and more, but some lawmakers expressed outrage over findings of the panel’s probe that the tech-behemoth avoided taxes by using a web of foreign subsidiaries, some without any tax jurisdiction :: Read the full article »»»»

Apple, Microsoft and Adobe Front Australian Parliamentary Inquiry

Australia’s parliamentary inquiry into consumer electronics and IT pricing has heard testimony from Apple, Microsoft and Adobe, the testimony however failed to impress. Australia consumers pay up to 90 per cent more for some of the most commonly required IT products, the trap of course is that programs like Adobe’s Photoshop are essential, irreplaceable tools in many businesses. The price discrepancies rely heavily on an enthusiastic abuse of copyright and a heavy handed approach to geo-blocking.

The price gouging by some of the planets largest companies led the parliamentary inquiry to take the unusual step of forcing Apple, Microsoft and Adobe – The Big Three – to front up and explain their obscene pricing policies. The inquiry issued a threatening summons to the world’s technology behemoths, demanding they answer accusations. Committee chairman Nick Champion says the inquiry has heard from many Australian consumers and organisations frustrated at the prices charged for digitally downloaded software, computer games, music, movies, and e-books. Matt Levey, head of campaigns for independent consumer organisation Choice, says Australian consumers should not have to pay so much more.

Microsoft, which employs 800 people in Australia, says attempts to compare absolute prices across different counties is of limited use because there are a range of regional factors that need to be taken into account. The company says it provides recommended retail prices for its products that take into account various market forces, such as the size of the market, and the consumers willingness to pay. Adobe, which sells a wide range of consumer and professional software packages, says most of its business in Australia is conducted through third parties which incur local costs. Adobe told the commission that it charges an extra $1,000 to download software in Australia because it offers a local, bespoke experience, while Apple blames local copyright holders for its iTunes prices, which are 50 per cent higher than in the United States. The inquiry heard examples of an Arctic Monkeys album costing $17.99 on iTunes in Australia but the equivalent of $13 overseas, and the movie Toy Story costing $24.99 in Australia but $10 overseas :: Read the full article »»»»


The consumer electronics and technology behemoth that is Apple, has confirmed that it’s the latest victim of a malicious hack attack.

However, the tech-giant says the invaders malware was repelled before any data was able to be plundered. Apple says a “small number” of its computer systems were infected, but they were isolated from it’s main network.

Apple is working with law enforcement to hunt down the hackers, who appear to be tied to a series of recent cyber attacks on US companies.

The malicious software, or malware, took advantage of a vulnerability in a Java program used as a “plug-in” for web-browsing programs :: Read the full article »»»»

Samsung Slips Passed Apple on 4G

Samsung Slips Passed Apple on 4G - Samsung's 4G PhabletThe war between Apple and Samsung over design and technology patents has cast Samsung as the underling, while Apple is painted as pushing at the edges of innovation. Ahh what a short sighted world we live in, I’d argue with such commentary, going so far as to say that most commentators have things wrong, very wrong.

While Samsung may have a little eggroll on it’s face over claims of plagiarism, the Korean consumer electronics behemoth is definitely no slouch on the technology front, winning the much more important war on patent innovations, particularly when it comes to 4G and it’s application in the mobile device wars.

4G isn’t so much a new technology but  a better use of existing technologies, Samsung has been working on 4G since 2005 and has pretty much perfected it’s use in mobile devices. The higher and more responsive – up to 10 x 3G – bandwidth of 4G is well suited to tablets and smartphones.

In Australia, Telstra has the largest geographic coverage in 4G and has been upgrading mobile cell towers to 4G since 2010, with a consumer roll-out from late in 2011. The benefits of running mobile devices on 4G are real, the simultaneous speed is pretty outstanding :: Read the full article »»»»

Apple vs Samsung vs Apple vs Samsung

Apple vs Samsung vs Apple vs Samsung

UPDATED! August 28, 2012: Apple is seeking speedy bans on the sale of eight Samsung phones, moving swiftly to capitalise on its resounding court victory over its arch-foe. The world’s most valuable company wasted no time in identifying its targets: eight older-model smartphones, including the Galaxy S II and Droid Charge.

Original Post! Just hours apart, in two separate courts – one in the USA and another in South Korea – two absolutely opposing views on the war that is Apple vs Samsung, – or should that beSamsung vs Apple? – have been handed down.

A South Korean court has handed down a split ruling over Samsungs claim that Apple infringed it’s intellectual property, ruling that some element of the iPhone do indeed use patented Samsung telecommunication technology. The court also ruled however that Samsung had – as Apple has been ranting – copy Apples interface for it’s early Galaxy phones and tabs.

The South Korean court found that both companies shared blame, ordering Samsung to stop selling 10 products including its Galaxy S II phone and banning Apple from selling four different products, including its iPhone 4.

Meanwhile across the pacific in San Jose, California, a US jury has found in favour of Apple in a case that was expected to take years to settle, Apples copycat rant has just landed it a $US1 billion dollar win! However, the US ruling runs much deeper than just a huge compensation payout, BILLIONS of dollars in future sales hang in the balance for both tech-behemoths :: Read the full article »»»»

Google Fined $US22.5 Million For Apple Privacy Breach

GOOGLEThat behemoth that is Google has been fined $US22.5 million for violating the privacy of millions of Apple Safari browser users. Last October Google signed an agreement that included a pledge not to mislead consumers about privacy practices, oops.

In fining the behemoth the FTC – US Federal Trade Commission – said that Google had broken an agreement made with the commission in October 2011, Google had agreed not to place tracking cookies on or deliver targeted ads to Apple Safari users, but then went ahead and did so. The fine is the biggest imposed by the FTC against a company for violating a previous agreement with the Commission.

In a statemnet the FTC said that Google has agreed to pay the record $22.5 million civil penalty to settle Federal Trade Commission charges.

“The record setting penalty in this matter sends a clear message to all companies under an FTC privacy order,” said Jon Leibowitz, Chairman of the FTC. “No matter how big or small, all companies must abide by FTC orders against them and keep their privacy promises to consumers, or they will end up paying many times what it would have cost to comply in the first place.” :: Read the full article »»»»

Comments are closed.