Stephen Downes

I have a Samsung Galaxy SIII smart phone, which I bought about 6 weeks ago. It is an absolutely fabulous product - it has 4G (which the iPhone didn't), it multitasks (which iPhone doesn't) and it gives me full access to the OS and files (which the iPhone, well, you know...). Maybe the Galaxy Tab copies the iPad, I don't know, but if the Galaxy Tab compares the the iPad the way the phones compare, then using one is probably like a breath of fresh air and freedom, which Apple does not want. I see Apple's lawsuit against Samsung not as a way to protect the hardware, but to solidify lock-in to its online stores and media properties. And it's yet another example of the trend we see of American companies suing foreign competitors in U.S. courts and winning questionable - and very large - verdicts. So, Apple wins $1.05 billion from Samsung - minus whatever my future business and goodwill are worth (maybe not a billion, admittedly). I was enthused when Apple began to use the open source Linux as the core of its operating system. Now I just think of the company as just another megalith that takes and takes and gives nothing back. More on the verdict from the CBC,  E-Commerce Times, Mashable (on Android), BBC (on "abuse of law") and BBC (on Google's reaction), Doug Peterson ("Blogging today on a Macintosh computer just wouldn’t feel right."), and Wired (on the Korean verdict in an earlier hearing). The irony of all this is that Samsung is one of Apple's biggest suppliers (it invested $4 billion into a chip plant for the iPad, for example) - that's why I think it's about access to the content market, and not the tech.