The Apple-Samsung juggernaut

If there was any question that there was a duopoly in the cell phone game, it's gone. A recent study shows that Apple and Samsung accounted for 95% of all the mobile phone industry's profit in the last months of 2012.

From the Los Angeles Times:

Apple alone claimed 70% of the cellphone industry's total worldwide profit of $16 billion, while Samsung had 25%, according to a report released late Thursday night by Counterpoint Technology Market Research.

In third place was Nokia with 2%. That left the remaining 3% to be split by about 300 companies.

"Apple has essentially created the smartphone sector as we see it today and its combination of beautiful, easy-to-use products coupled with a rich content and application environment has enabled it to attract outsize profits," Couterpoint Research said in its report. "Only Samsung has come close to replicating this success."

The two leaders' shares of the profit pool are up from sharply from 2011, when Apple had 51% of industry earnings, followed by Samsung with 15% and Nokia with 12%, Counterpoint said.

In 2010, Apple had 43% while Nokia had 20% and Samsung had 16%.

Given that Samsung is a major components supplier for Apple's smartphones, that arguably makes the South Korean tech behemoth the predominant player. Sure, Apple's still the largest second largest company in the world, but with lackluster sales (or rather, less than super stellar amazing), some are arguing that the gild is off the lily at Apple.

Perhaps Apple should focus more on innovation in Cupertino than in the courtroom. They just lost another bid against Samsung, but one has to wonder if all the litigation isn't a drag on the company's creativity.

...

Apple's award against Samsung too high?

Law professor Brian J. Love of Santa Clara University, writing in the Los Angeles Times, seems to think so:

The award, the third largest in the history of U.S. patent litigation, will likely cruise into first place next month when U.S. District Court Judge Lucy Koh decides what additional amount Apple should receive from Samsung based on the jury's finding that much of the infringement was "willful."

But even without that enhancement, which could add another $2 billion to Samsung's tab, the jury's $1 billion-plus verdict breaks down to just under $48 for each of the roughly 22 million infringing phones sold by Samsung. To the jury, 50 bucks per phone must have sounded like a reasonable figure, and it may well to you too.

But it's not — it's way too high — and here's why: The average smartphone may arguably infringe as many as 250,000 patents, not to mention myriad copyrights and other design-related intellectual property. (Companies don't sift through every patent coming out of Washington before engineering and releasing a product; they create devices and battle claims as necessary.)

If you were to divide the average retail price of a smartphone — about $400 — by those 250,000 potentially applicable patents, you'd find that each one would account for just $0.0016 of the phone's value. And, in reality, even that's too much, once you factor in the costs of raw materials, labor, transportation and marketing, which also contribute to a phone's value.

Yet for infringing just a handful of Apple's patents, Samsung faces a minimum payment of $48 per phone, a shocking 30,000 times the average per patent value. Put another way, if the owners of all the 250,000 inventions that might be present in Samsung smartphones were awarded damages at the same level as Apple, Samsung would have to charge a ludicrous $2 million per phone just to break even.

But wait, you say, the San Jose jury no doubt included some level of punishment in its award, in order to "send a message." But, by law, patent damages are meant to compensate not punish, as the jury was expressly instructed.

I'm no lawyer (though I've played one on TV) but that seems like sound logic. I don't know if it holds any weight in a courtroom, though.

...

You're both wrong!

In addition to sounding the death knell of the "real name system" for on-line users, the ROK judicial establishment has chimed in on the Samsung-Apple frenemy battle, saying that both companies ripped each other off. (They also said that Samsung could not sell its older models of the Galaxy and Apple could no longer sell the older models of the iPhone and iPad.)

From CNET:

A Seoul court has ruled that Apple and Samsung violated each other's patents, has prohibited the companies from selling the infringing devices in South Korea, and has awarded both companies fairly insignificant damages, the Wall Street Journal reported this evening.

The three-judge panel in the Seoul Central District Court also ruled that there was "no possibility" that smartphone buyers could confuse devices from the companies, the Journal reported -- an interesting fact given the headline-grabbing trial currently before a jury in Silicon Valley. In that trial, which is just one part of the international struggle between the two companies over intellectual property, Apple has raised the issue of consumer confusion.

"There are lots of external design similarities between the iPhone and Galaxy S, such as rounded corners and large screens...but these similarities had been documented in previous products," Reuters quoted one of the judges as saying in the Seoul case.

"Given that it's very limited to make big design changes in touch-screen based mobile products in general...and the defendant [Samsung] differentiated its products with three buttons in the front and adopted different designs in [the] camera and [on the] side, the two products have a different look," Reuters quoted the judge as saying.

The judge also said company logos on the devices would make it hard for consumers to mix them up, and that buyers also look at price, brand, applications, operating systems, and services when choosing a product, Reuters reported.

True that. I guess the fact that Samsung's and Apple's logos are so different makes the whole "whose product is this?" confusion sorta moot.

Unlike, say, Honda and Hyundai (car buyers seem to be confusing the Sonata with the Accord).

Anyway, I have been intrigued by the possibility lately that Samsung and Apple have decided (independently or collectively, I'm not sure) to keep this frenemy battle going because it is free publicity.

... 

The Main Event (a non-event?)

You'd be forgiven if you think all the fights were watching are in London, but the Apple-versus-Samsung and Samsung-versus-Apple fights are gearing up in San Jose.

Frankly, I like Samsung's opening just because I not only agree with it, but I've been running around saying it:

Samsung wants you to know it isn’t a copycat.

"Samsung's not some copyist, some Johnny-come-lately that's doing knockoffs," lawyer Charles Verhoeven said during the company’s opening statement in federal court Tuesday.

During his 90 minutes addressing the jury in federal court in San Jose, Verhoeven repeatedly insisted that an average person could tell the difference between Samsung’s mobile devices and Apple's, and said Apple "had no right to claim a monopoly" on a rectangle with a large screen.

And I say this as a long-time consumer of Apple products who loves his iPad 2 big time (and not just because I won it for free).

I have a friend who is a free-lance lawyer for Samsung on this case, but that's another post for another time.

Anyway, I hope these two frenemies kiss and make up soon. It's like watching my mom and dad fight.

...

Well, that certainly Samsucks for Apple...

In the latest in the ongoing Apple-versus-Samsung war, the two frenemies (frenemies because they compete with each other but Samsung also supplies many of the components in Apple's most coveted products), a judge in the United Kingdom has told Apple to run ads saying that Samsung did not copy the iPad.

From Reuters:

Apple has been instructed by a British judge to run ads saying that Samsung did not copy its design for the iPad in the latest twist in the ongoing patent battles between the two tech giants, according to Bloomberg.

Judge Birss, who ruled last week that Samsung did not infringe Apple's designs because its Galaxy Tab tablets were not "as cool" as the U.S. company's iPad, said Apple should publish a notice on its website and in British newspapers to correct any impression that the South Korean company copied Apple, Bloomberg said.

The notice, which is in effect an advertisement for Samsung, should remain on Apple's website for at least six months, the report said.

The judge, however, rejected Samsung's request that Apple be forbidden from continuing to claim that its design rights had been infringed, saying that Apple was entitled to hold the opinion, the news agency said.

As a long-time Apple user but also a Seoulite who recognizes that Korea's fortunes rise when Samsung does well, I don't know which side to take in this battle. While Samsung's tablets look like Apple's tablet, I'm not really sure how different you can make a tablet look.

Anyway, as I'm wont to do in any post involve Apple getting some unexpected news, I'll end this post with, "How do you like dem Apples?"

...

I guess they don't like them Apples

Korea bashers like to point to the Lone Star case (in which the Lone Star people ended up making a buttload of money, by the way) as an example of how Korea is too tough a place to do business, frequently citing it as a reason why foreign companies eschew Korea and go instead to China.

Yeah, this China:

Apple Inc.'s fight to use the iPad name in China has hit another snag after authorities seized dozens of the Apple tablet computers from store shelves in northern China.

The seizures in Shijiazhuang, the capital of Hebei province, were in response to a trademark infringement complaint filed by Chinese company Proview Technology, according to its attorney. Proview Technology, which is based in the southern Chinese city of Shenzhen, said it holds the trademark for the hot-selling device in China.

In December, a court in Shenzhen unexpectedly rejected a lawsuit in which Apple said it was the rightful owner of the iPad name.

Since then, Proview Technology has filed complaints in 20 cities, urging authorities to prohibit the California tech giant from selling or marketing its device. The company has also filed lawsuits against Apple and retailers in Shanghai, Shenzhen and Huizhou, a city in southern Guangdong province.

"You'll likely see more and more actions across the country," Xie Xianghui, Proview Technology's lawyer, said in a phone interview Monday. "Apple did not follow Chinese law, so we're confident the authorities will side with us."

Sorta reminds me of how Carrefour left its booming — but not #1 or #2 ranked — operations in Korea for supposedly greener pastures in China, only to become a tool in Beijing's engineered anger against France later on. (Forgive me for sounding bitter about this, but I have long felt that the flood of American, European, Japanese, Korean, and even Taiwanese capital and jobs into the People's Republic of China is borne of a dangerous mixture of intellectual laziness, political and social ignorance, and brazen greed, and it does no one any good, in the aggregate, including the people of China.)

I guess Apple should have seen this coming. And I'll be they're kicking themselves for not going with my iSlice idea.

...

Korean companies in the Superbowl

As I linked to a couple days ago, Korean corporations' ads apparently bought up some fifteen percent of the ads aired during the Superbowl, an event nowadays known almost as much for its hilarious, clever, or heartstring-tugging commercials as it is football.

The big three — Hyundai, Samsung, and Kia — are already household names, but they refuse to rest on their laurels as they compete with the likes of Honda, Toyota, Chevrolet, and Apple, most of whom also had ads during the Superbowl.

Anyway, they mostly have lived up to the challenge...



The above Kia Optima "Dream Car" ad features Adriana Lima, a Monster Island favorite. She was also in another favorite ad for Teleflora, which brought the message if you give her flowers, she'll give something in return:



Okay, then. To recap: Kushibo likes Adriana Lima, who, despite being an uber-rich super model, will have sex with you if you buy her a dozen roses. It's not that complicated.

And Hyundai has its workers — whom they seem to be emphasizing are American — singing the theme song to Liancourt Rocky to show they have that can-do spirit:



This Hyundai Genesis Coupe ad, while clever, is appalling from a Public Health perspective:



Just get out and do the danged CPR already!

The Hyundai Veloster ad also makes me wonder about issues of animal cruelty, and the public health dangers of raising exotic pets:



But that's just me. This Hyundai Elantra ad, tooting its own horn for having been chosen North American Car of the Year for 2012, was not in the Superbowl, I think (I missed a huge chunk of the game), but was Superbowl-adjacent:



Ditto with this one for the Hyundai Genesis, now in a new, even more powerful formula:



Samsung has an amusing ad that makes a lot more sense if you've seen their series of ads mocking people who wait in long lines for the latest Apple iTeration (see how I did that?):



For a round-up of all this year's ads (and previous years'), go to this handy-dandy Hulu site, which links viewers' favorites.

I'll just end this with my favorite for the year:



It's supposed to be a Volkswagen ad, but you tell me if dogs barking the evil imperial march isn't related to at least one of the Koreas.

...

Another tacky Chinese knockoff

Although this one is ROC Chinese, not PRC Chinese:



Really, despite the wings and the halo, if this is what Steve Jobs is doing now, you have to wonder if he's in the other place.

And speaking of homages in commercials, I found this amusing:



...

When Marky met Stevie

The Los Angeles Times is reporting that Apple's recently deceased guru, Steve Jobs, had expressed admiration for Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg:

In interviews with his biographer Walter Isaacson, Jobs said he respected Zuckerberg for not selling out and for dominating social networking.

"You know we talk about social networks in the plural but I don't see anybody other than Facebook out there. It's just Facebook. They're dominating this," he told Isaacson. "I admire Mark Zuckerberg. I only know him a little bit, but I admire him for not selling out. For wanting to make a company. I admire that a lot."

The admiration was mutual. When Jobs died Oct. 5 after a long battle with pancreatic cancer, Zuckerberg paid tribute on his Facebook profile: "Steve, thank you for being a mentor and a friend. Thanks for showing that what you build can change the world. I will miss you."

Zuckerberg is frequently mentioned as a possible heir apparent to Jobs.

Jobs said he felt an obligation to counsel other entrepreneurs since Silicon Valley gave him so much. Yet he did not dole out praise easily. He told Isaacson that Microsoft and Google "just don't get it."

In his official biography out Monday, Jobs assailed Microsoft's Bill Gates as "unimaginative," saying Gates never invented anything.

He saved his real venom for Google and vowed to destroy its mobile phone business, Android. Jobs had served as a mentor to Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin and had welcomed Google executive chairman Eric Schmidt to the Apple board. Google went on to launch Android, which is the main competitive threat to the iPhone.

Yikes. I can't say I've been immune to wishing destruction on my enemies (and occasionally plotting but rarely doing — rarely), but it sounds like Mr Jobs was someone whose bad side you'd want to steer clear of. As for the idea of Mr Zuckerberg as an "heir apparent" (whatever that means), all I can say is, God help us!

My beef with Facebook is that Mark Zuckerberg simply does not know the meaning of privacy. He seems to see secrecy as evil in and of itself and he does not understand that if we share something with one person that doesn't mean we want to share it with everyone else. In fact, he has made it clear he thinks people don't need to keep things from others, yet most of us in society realize (and I'm a tad bit older than Mr Zuckerberg, so maybe this is coming from experience) life is, necessarily, compartmentalized.

But maybe I don't want my thirteen-year-old niece to head to the comment her Facebook account says I left at the Los Angeles Times or New York Times and read my adult views on, say, marijuana legalization or my nuanced opinions on the rights of sex offenders, m'kay? But Facebook has insinuated itself so much into our online lives (which seep offline as well) that we end up commenting with our Facebook profiles when we didn't intend to.

Truth be told, Apple lately has also started pushing the envelope with privacy in a way that concerns me, but at least with iOS on my iPhone it's situations where I'm getting something in trade (an easier time finding something nearby or location-specific information, etc.). I'll keep my iPhone — for now — but at this point I keep a barebones Facebook profile only for commenting on sites that essentially require them, or for people whom I lost track of in the 1990s or earlier to get in touch with me (after which, I communicate with them by email, phone, or Skype).

It's kinda funny, though, to think about how this whole issue stands in marked contrast with Korea. When you're expected to hand over your Republic of Korea identification card number for just about any Korean-language online service, perhaps we get inured to that fundamental stripping away of our protective privacy shell. It no longer bothers us because, well, we're just so used to it... and nothing bad has happened — so far.

Back in America, however, where much of the problem with, say, illegal immigration or the threat of terrorism could be solved or mitigated with a national ID card, we scream bloody murder about government overreach and control. Yet at the same time, so many of us willingly hand over personal data to Facebook and so many other services.

Well, except for those who are off the grid. But it's getting harder and harder to be off the grid. The grid has a way of finding you.

...

Samsung offers a tribute to Steve Jobs

Despite the lawsuits that have developed into full-blown rancor lately, Samsung took time to offer a brief bit of condolence to Steve Jobs, the founder of Samsung's biggest rival and biggest client.

From the Los Angeles Times:

In Samsung's brief statement, which was widely reported Thursday, company CEO Choi Gee-sung said, "Steve Jobs introduced numerous revolutionary changes to the information technology industry and was a great entrepreneur. His innovative spirit and remarkable accomplishments will forever be remembered by people around the world."

For months, Apple and Samsung have been in an international patent battle: Suits and countersuits have been filed across Europe and in the U.S., Japan and Australia.

On Wednesday, before the news of Jobs' death, Samsung said it planned to file paperwork with courts in France and Italy to request a preliminary sales ban on Apple's iPhone 4S in those countries.

On Tuesday, Apple rejected an offer from Samsung to end its patent suits in Australia -- a step that could have possibly moved the two companies toward reconciliation in other countries as well.

I hope these two frenemies can get their act together. Maybe this can be the olive branch they need.

In the end, I don't see this ongoing lawsuit crap ending well for either of them. It's not good for Apple sales (in addition to Steve Jobs's increasingly deteriorating health since he stepped down as CEO, I believe the legal entanglements may have forced Apple to hold back a bit on its recent iPhone release) and therefore it's not good for the major supplier of Apple's innards.

UPDATE:
The Wall Street Journal reports on a number of others in Korea offering kind words in honor of Mr Jobs.

...

Scenes from A(la Moana) Mall (Or: 10월의 크리스마스)

So I spent much of the day yesterday at Ala Moana Shopping Center, Honolulu's premier mall and a mecca for tourists (Japanese and Korean in particular). Armed with my iPhone 4, I like taking pictures of the mundane stuff all around me, though some of it seems downright iconic at times.

Our first stop was Sears, where "M" was shopping for a golfing-related gift for her mother. While Sears's selection of cutesy golf stuff was extremely limited (i.e., nothing), they were already going full force with Christmas paraphernalia. Mind you, it's October — the beginning of October, not even Columbus Day — and this is what's on display. I guess they really want to corner the market early on being the "Christmas Shop."

I actually did go into the Apple Store to see if they knew what time on October 7 they would start pre-orders for the iPhone 4S (I'm not getting one, but "M" wants to upgrade from her two-year-old iPhone 3Gs). I have to admit, I was also curious to see how the Apple Store might be honoring Steve Jobs. As I expected, there was a picture with people laying leis around it.

I'm guessing the Ala Moana powers-that-be, who don't even like you plugging in your laptop in the food court because it distracts from the aesthetic appeal of Panda Express and some burger shop behind you, may have been telling the Apple Store folks to keep the outdoor memorial low key and as neat as possible. Actually, the above setup was originally on the ground, but by the time we did our respective shopping and came back this way, someone had thought to put a bench out for the picture. By the way, we weren't the only ones taking pictures of this.

And then there's this. I wear a small or medium at Old Navy, but I couldn't help but notice this XXL shirt. Please note what is written just below the plus-sized size.

Oh, and kudos to Old Navy for not making everything in China.

...

Mac book prose

The front page of Apple's website the day after Steve Jobs's death

Following his death, there has been an outpouring of kind words for Steve Jobs, an alternatingly kind and iron-fisted visionary credited with bringing us the personal computer and changing the way we do so many things in our daily lives (and the way we think), even if we don't use Macs, iPhones, iPods, or other Apple products directly. There is clearly a huge amount of interest and good will surrounding the man.



But some of that goes too far. Courtesy of Elizabeth Woyke at Forbes, we get word that one publisher has frantically upped the publication date of their book so they can ride this wave of interest following Mr Jobs's untimely demise:

Called I, Steve: Steve Jobs In His Own Words, it was originally set to publish in March 2012. When Jobs resigned as Chief Executive of Apple, the publisher, Agate Publishing, moved publication up to November 15, 2011. Now Illinois-based Agate is working to get the book to stores by the end of next week or the following week, which would be several weeks to a month earlier than the already-amended publication date.

“We’re doing everything we can to rush the book,” said Agate President Doug Seibold in an interview. I, Steve’s 160 pages are complete. The next steps lie in the hands of the book’s printer and distributor: laminating the book’s cover, which features a color photo of Jobs, binding the book, shipping it to warehouses and, finally, delivering it to stores.

Seibold says the rush is a response to increased interest in the book. He estimates that orders from online retailers like Amazon.com, traditional booksellers and wholesalers more than doubled in the past 24 hours as news of Jobs’ passing became public.

Maybe I'm a bit old school or just don't have the drive to make gobs and gobs of dough, but I can’t help but think that this rush to make money off the man’s death is a wee bit tacky.

But that’s me. I guess some people just think different.

...

Steve Jobs dies

Steve Jobs, the arbiter elegantiae of all that is cool in the digital world, has passed away at the young age of fifty-six.

I've bought more stuff (dollar-wise) from that guy than anyone else, including Mr Honda and Mr Chung.

Requiescat in pace, Mr Jobs.

Appropriately:
This succinct email was sent from my iPhone.

UPDATE:
Here is a post from August discussing how Mr Jobs's health problems forced his resignation.

Anyway, the wrong celebrity died from pancreatic cancer.

...

These are not the Android killers you're looking for.

Bear with me; there's a Korea connection to these two news items to ponder.

First, Apple finally came out with its latest iteration of the iPhone. But instead of the iPhone 5 that was supposed to be teardrop-shaped and wafer thin, run 4G, work as a near-field communications device that could pay for your latte, and fellate you after a hard day at work, they merely got a monstrous speed boost, a far better camera and optics, and a very cool voice-activated assistant named Siri that will help you navigate the phone and find things out (using the Internet) while you're driving.

But since it looks exactly like the iPhone 4, released in June 2010, Apple fanboys and Android users pretending to be Apple fanboys have flooded any and all Mac-related sites and posts with nasty comments about what a disappointment this was. In short, they were disappointed.

And then there's the Occupy Wall Street movement. By design, it has no leader, no list of demands, and no ideology, but they're mad as hell and aren't going to take it anymore. Meanwhile, in another key development, the Obama administration is extremely close to having the free-trade agreement with South Korea ratified.

So here's what I'm wondering. About the first story, just why didn't Apple come up with a wholly different iPhone 5? Sure, the iPhone 4S follows the pattern set with the iPhone 3G and iPhone 3Gs, but those were a year apart, not a year and three months (think of smart years as being like dog years).

Is it possible that Samsung's and Apple's increasingly nasty legal brouhaha forced Apple to wait on a new phone design and greater capabilities? Did Apple hold back this time around because of fears that Samsung cold take Apple to court if they came out with a new design? Is Apple waiting for resolution of their issues with Samsung (and perhaps a few others) before they come out in full force with a new design and major new features? Are their problems with Samsung forcing them to find a new supplier of some of their components, resulting in a slowdown in the New Products Pipeline?

And then, what about the KORUS free-trade agreement? Obama is going to get Democratic votes for the FTA primarily because he acknowledged that some Americans will lose their jobs even if there is a net gain, and they need job training. For now, the FTA's ratification seems a done deal, also because the less palatable FTAs with Colombia and Panama will be considered separately.

But is it possible that the gathering crowd of malcontents on Wall Street will turn against the Obama White House when the president starts pushing for passage of the FTA? I wonder if this will hold things up, enough that the FTA won't be ratified by the time ROK President Lee Myungbak comes for a visit.

...

Samsung seeking revenge on Apple?

And they may end up doing it by blocking sales of the upcoming iPhone 5 (or iPhone 4s) in Europe. A similar effort is supposedly underway in South Korea itself*. All this is apparently tit-for-tat retaliation for Apple blocking Samsung from selling a certain phone in Germany.

Make it stop! Make it stop!

* How many words will the resulting Metropolitician post be? 0 to 2000? 2000 to 5000? 5000 to 100,000? Over 100,000? 

...

Jobs loss

Although Steve Jobs's health problems have been the source of discussion for quite some time, it was a bit shocking to read the announcement that he is resigning as CEO of Apple, though he said he'd like to remain as the Chairman of the Board:

Steve Jobs, the visionary who remade Apple into the world’s dominant maker of tech gadgets, has resigned as the company’s CEO.

In a letter to the Apple Board of Directors and “the Apple Community” Wednesday, Jobs wrote that Chief Operating Officer Tim Cook will take over his CEO duties.

“I have always said if there ever came a day when I could no longer meet my duties and expectations as Apple’s CEO, I would be the first to let you know. Unfortunately, that day has come. I hereby resign as CEO of Apple. I would like to serve, if the Board sees fit, as Chairman of the Board, director and Apple employee,” Jobs wrote.

“As far as my successor goes, I strongly recommend that we execute our succession plan and name Tim Cook as CEO of Apple. I believe Apple’s brightest and most innovative days are ahead of it. And I look forward to watching and contributing to its success in a new role. I have made some of the best friends of my life at Apple, and I thank you all for the many years of being able to work alongside you.”

With Korea-based Samsung being a major competitor of Apple, this news is no doubt of interest to many. Here is the Wall Street Journal's Seoul correspondent Evan Ramstad's take on it, which comes as the good people of Seoul vote on a free lunch plan that pits South Korean deeply engrained post-war egalitarian ideals against recent calls for fiscal prudence:

The fate of Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon is dominating the South Korean media Thursday but the resignation of Steve Jobs from his CEO role at Apple Inc. isn’t far behind.

Mr. Oh presided over a failed referendum Wednesday to reduce the scope of Seoul’s school free-lunch program and strongly intimated that he’d resign as a result. So people are waiting for that shoe to drop.

But Mr. Jobs’ departure from his main operating role at Apple is also getting huge attention. In part, that’s because of a media-driven narrative that Apple and Google are threatening to South Korea’s “national champion” companies Samsung and LG. On the other hand, Mr. Jobs is widely admired in South Korea as a visionary and entrepreneur.

His resignation speech was quickly translated into Korean and posted on the country’s main portal site, Naver. And thousands of South Koreans took to Twitter to write short tributes to Mr. Jobs.

“He was the greatest CEO, a visionary to create the dream, a strong person who practices what he pledges,” Jeong Ji-hoon, a medical doctor and prominent tech blogger in Seoul, wrote via Twitter. “We are paying our respect to the resignation of the greatest giant of our time.”

I guess we're still waiting for a couple sets of shoes to drop. I wish some other long-serving chief executive would resign instead over health reasons.

...

A new slimmer iPad with a camera?

That's what's being speculated. If it really does have better resolution, I'd seriously consider buying one. While I doubt they could get it as good as the "retina display" on the iPhone4, if it were at least on par with the newest version of the MacBook Air, it would be very, very tempting. (But then again, that 11-inch MBA is also very, very tempting.)

And then I could do this.

Beatles come to iTunes

Kushibo is too lazy to download pirated music. That's why I like iTunes, a service which underscores a fundamental aspect of music piracy: At some point you're taking on more than 99¢ worth of work and/or headache just to avoid paying 99¢ for a legal download. Just pay the folks who made the music and enjoy a guilt-free listen.

Anyway, as someone who fondly remembers a childhood of listening to his parents' old audio tapes on road trip after road trip in the family station wagon, I've always wanted to add a few Beatles hits to my iTunes-purchased collection of Johnny Cash. And now I can, finally.

I've been growing my facial hair for Movember,
and I'm starting to look like John Lennon, circa 1969.

It has indeed been a long and winding road:

Tuesday's announcement brought mixed reaction from Beatles fans, spanning cheers from those happy to finally to have a way to legally download their music to jeers from others who long ago ripped and burned their favorite songs off CDs or from unauthorized websites.

"Almost anyone who has wanted to download Beatles songs has already done it via P2P torrents, and they can get them free," reader FGaron posted to The Times' Pop & Hiss music blog. "iTunes and Apple Corps missed the revenue stream a long time ago. The songs have been available on numerous torrent sites for years."

What kept the Beatles' catalog off iTunes for so long was a complicated web of legal entanglements. As long ago as 1978 — long before digital downloading was a reality — Apple Corps, the company the Beatles set up to release its own music, sued Jobs' Apple Computer over its use of the Apple name.

Shortly after the 2007 resolution of that long-standing dispute, a settlement put to rest another lawsuit between Apple Corps and EMI Records over royalty payments that Apple said was owed by EMI.

The Beatles and Steve Jobs seem like shrewd businesspeople, but the holdup always struck me as throwing away a bunch of money in order to gain a little.

Anyway, I like what Ringo Starr had to say about the whole thing: "I am particularly glad to no longer be asked when the Beatles are coming to iTunes."

Samsung to make televisions equipped with Google TV?

So hints Bloomberg:

Samsung Electronics Co., the world’s largest television maker, is planning to make an announcement in January about introducing TVs using Google Inc.’s software, as the company aims to spur demand.

Details of the plan have yet to be decided, Yoon Boo Keun, head of Samsung’s TV business, said in Seoul. The company is “open” to using Intel Corp.’s chips for its TVs, Yoon said.

A partnership between Suwon, South Korea-based Samsung and Google will follow a similar move by Sony Corp., the world’s third-largest TV maker. In October, the Japanese company began offering Internet-enabled TVs in the U.S. as consumer electronics manufacturers try to combat falling prices with products based on new technology.

Internet-enabled TVs will let viewers buy third-party video games and programs that do anything from forecasting the weather to measuring the string tension of a tennis racket. Apple Inc. fueled its expansion into music players and phones by developing the iTunes software that made it easier to buy and organize songs, TV shows and games and is expanding the model to television.

Frankly, I never really got the whole Internet TV thing, but that may be because I live in a dorm room where my iMac's screen is as large as my Samsung TV's screen anyway. I do watch a lot of TV on my iMac and my MacBook Pro, through hulu.com and the various network's own sites (e.g., Survivor at cbs.com), but not the 20-inch computer screen experience is just fine when you live in a 10'-by-14' cement cell.

Perhaps if I lived in larger surroundings I might consider a Samsung equipped with Google TV, or an AppleTV hooked up to a larger television than I have now so as to enhance my Netflix membership. Truth be told, however, I'm more likely to watch Netflix on my iPhone4 than on either of my computers.

KT doing very well thanks to Apple

Thanks to sales of the wildly popular iPhone, as well as some corporate restructuring, Korea Telecom saw profits shoot up 44 percent.

The Reuters article goes on to explain some of the challenges faced by KT in the saturated South Korean market, but the release of the iPad is expected to bring a new wave of cash.