Back in July, I posted “Still Not Sold On iPad Mini” where I outlined why I was skeptical of the then-rumored iPad Mini:
To say I am skeptical would be an understatement. It just isn’t adding up, and having prominent publications announcing something does not guarantee anything. Who knows, I could be wrong, it wouldn’t be the first time.
I could argue that my opinion came nearly four-months before the iPad Mini was announced, but the fact-of-the-matter is that I was wrong. Why am I writing a post declaring that I was wrong? Simple: not enough bloggers do.
Just in case you missed it: I was wrong.
In the piece “The 7-Inch iPad’s Biggest Critic: Steve Jobs,” Ina Fried of AllThingsD discusses why Apple may very well release a 7” iPad, even if it goes against Jobs’ beliefs:
And what has changed, obviously, is the entry of some serious competitors in the smaller-screen tablet market. Amazon proved the market for a low-cost smaller tablet with the Kindle Fire last year and the market will no doubt grow with the arrival of the Galaxy 7 from Asus and Google.
Both Amazon and Google have razor-thin margins on their tablets; their strategy seems to be “give the hardware away and make money on services.” This is not how Apple rolls. They instead prefer to cater to those who prefer spending more money on a better experience.
Even more interesting is the lack of leaks we usually see before a launch. John Gruber linked to Marco Arment’s post on the lack of leaks that are more common than ever:
It’s unlikely that Apple would be able to manufacture millions of iPad Minis without someone leaking some parts a few months ahead of their release. So if we don’t see such leaks by September, I don’t think this product, if it exists, will be released this year.
To say I am skeptical would be an understatement. It just isn’t adding up, and having prominent publications announcing something does not guarantee anything. Who knows, I could be wrong, it wouldn’t be the first time.
In my post Another Angle to Google’s Motorola Acquisition last year, I detailed why I believed Google was acquiring Motorola Mobility; patents:
With Motorola Mobility’s existing patent portfolio, it only seems logical that Google’s reason for the acquisition was to help protect Android licensees from further patent lawsuits.
While Google has helped out HTC in its legal battles with Apple—even if via proxy—they are being more direct in helping Samsung . From The Korean Times:
A U.S. court recently ruled to block the sales of Samsung’s Galaxy Nexus smartphones, which were designed in collaboration with Google. Since the decision, the two firms have been working closely to create a united front against Apple’s legal offensive, said Samsung.
I don’t believe this “united front” is solely because of the Galaxy Nexus ban. One thing both Google and Samsung are being investigated for are abusing FRAND patents, with Apple labeled a victim:
Samsung is demanding Apple to pay 2.4 percent of the retail price of iPhones and iPads, while Apple claims the rate is excessive considering the companies’ commitment to fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory licensing (FRAND).
The European Union is investigating whether Samsung abused FRAND-related patents, while Google is being investigated by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission as to whether it is illegally using FRAND patents acquired in a takeover of Motorola Mobility to block smartphone rivals.
My thanks to AppleInsider for The Korean Times link.
$60 million is pennies compared to the $1.6 billion Proview originally sued for in China. Accepting 5% of your original demand clearly shows you had no expectation of actually winning. Now Proview can pay back its debt and close up shop.