Welcome Guest | Sign In
E-Commerce Times TechNewsWorld CRM Buyer LinuxInsider

TechNewsWorld Talkback

ECT News Community   »   TechNewsWorld Talkback   »   Re: Samsung vs. Apple: Why Samsung Wins a Pyrrhic Victory

Re: Samsung vs. Apple: Why Samsung Wins a Pyrrhic Victory
Posted by: Rob Enderle 2012-12-10 12:32:33
See Full Story

Last week was defined largely by two interesting stories. One had Apple bringing some manufacturing back to the U.S., and the other revolved around the outcome of the latest trial between Apple and Samsung. It shows you how hard it is to read a judge, though. I thought Judge Lucy Koh would likely raise the award from $1.05
Samsung and Apple appear to be in a dance to the death. Though I'm a big fan of competition, I don't see this battle doing anything but hurting both firms and the buyers of their technology.

Re: Samsung vs. Apple: Why Samsung Wins a Pyrrhic Victory
Posted by: MitchH 2012-12-10 12:50:13 In reply to: Rob Enderle
The article states: "Samsung is executing on a strategy very similar to the one Apple used to displace Sony at the top of the TV stack..."

Shouldn't it be "Samsung" instead of "Apple" in the above sentence?

There are more than a few word slippages in this article. I generally let these slide, but I just want to verify that the above example is in fact slippage, and not intended.
Jump to:
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Google+ RSS
Is native advertising good for journalism?
Yes -- It's a reasonable source of additional revenue for media outlets to support their traditional editorial efforts.
Yes -- Paid-for articles can contain useful information, but readers might bypass them if they look too much like ads.
Maybe -- But only if it's clearly labeled as paid-for content.
No -- I don't trust any information from media outlets that cloak paid-for content as objective journalism.
No -- Native advertising is confusing and devious, and it threatens the fabric of traditional journalism.
I Don't Know -- I don't understand what native advertising is.