Read more.Quote:
Meanwhile another firm launches a double screen smartphone.
Printable View
Read more.Quote:
Meanwhile another firm launches a double screen smartphone.
Samsung and Apple have been beaten to the punch by a startup.LOL.
One thing that both Apple and Samsung excel in over these less known companies is screwing us (Europe and US) over with pricing and blocking competition (e.g. spreading brain washing full of hipocrisy propaganda about chineese spying on us). Giving us less (benefits) for more ($$$). If they could give us cancer just to sell medicine they would.Quote:
Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH
We see this often in the medical space. A start up will get a technology out quickly, often get bought up by the bigger player and it's just rubbish. R&D has gone by the wayside to get the first mover advantage. Then another, established company will come along, charge more but do it properly.Quote:
Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH
There was an example of a fully implantable pacemaker called the Nanostim which did this - the small start up company was bought by St Jude Medical (a giant, recently bought by an even bigger giant) who then claimed "we were first!" and then it had to be recalled. Twice. Medtronic came out with their version called the Micra which was later to market but was far better and didn't require recall. First isn't always best and small companies may develop an entire product around a patent set for one feature but they have little experience with making the entire product and so, whilst that one feature is great, the product as a whole falls flat on its face.
Screen is folding the wrong way. Should close clamshell with screen-in, like a book.
Bit off topic but.... They do this already! Fluoride, GMO etc.... google the reports of the new G5 towers, the complains of the people who live by them (headaches etc) and the lack of provisions and testing done to make sure the technology is safe. It's just one big money loop!Quote:
Originally Posted by MoonisterIf they could give us cancer just to sell medicine they would.Quote:
Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH
And how fortunate we are for you to share your extensive knowledge to reassure us that these threats don't exist.Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonister
I feel so much safer now - thank you.
:rolleyes:
Please don't come here to post conspiracy theories, everything you mentioned above is proved safe in hundreds of scientific studies, only tinfoilers prefer to go for that single study made by a crazy guy with a youtube diploma as the "only real one cause you're all sheeps".Quote:
Originally Posted by overpowerlol
Just go elsewhere.
Don't worry Apple and Samsung will just put "revolutionary" on everything and keep polishing the same old stuff,wheeled out again and again.
But when they make a folding screen it won't be "revolutionary" it will be "epoch making" just like a sodding notch.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonister
You got it all wrong - think of their poor margins,so Apple and Samsung can just wheel out the same old things again and again,then forget how they managed to get there in the first place(being innovative). I expect their internet defence force will fall on their swords in 5..4..3..!Quote:
Originally Posted by philehidiot
But how would you then use it as a phone rather than a tablet?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ttaskmaster
Back on the topic of this two products, I like the Numbia X concept. I really hope that it pass Chinese fronteers and we see something similar here.
Several ways, but I don't want to post them lest Apple and Samsung rip me off by stealing my ideas and giving me cancer...Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilCycle
Hint: Earlier clamshell phones already did it.
I think a lot of the time these big companies fall into a couple of traps.
And I know what it's like to fall into a trap. Are they gay? Who truly knows?
I think they go from high risk high reward strategies that generate innovation to guaranteed return strategies which appease shareholders. They're in a position to take a risk but they end up plumping for a lesser, but more secure income generating mechanism in order to ensure a return to investors. Bear in mind that a lot of the people making these decisions will be given shares as part of their package. The smaller companies NEED to take a risk and innovate to even begin to penetrate the market. The bigger ones can turn a profit without taking the risk. The smaller companies get squeezed out and even when someone comes along with something truly disruptive and innovative, the odds are the best they can hope for is to develop the IP and either licenece it or get bought out by the bigger companies and be set for life.
The other major issue is that creatives are stifled at these big companies. The ones who progress into positions where they could actually affect the overall strategy are those who are recognised as being good by the company and they are judged by the company's existing values, structure and so on. As a result those who are truly creative and able to innovate necessarily stand outside the existing hierarchy, don't perform well within it and are seen as disruptive and not productive.
A good example of this is Ferrari in F1. They went down the conservative route with people who were entrenched in a way of doing things in key positions. It wasn't that the creative people and the skill wasn't there, it was simply that is was stifled and supressed. A reorganisation of the company has meant Ferrari have come on leaps and bounds as they are now taking risks with design (which you have to do on the cutting edge as if we knew how it would all perform and work then you wouldn't be on the edge of what is thought possible, you'd be operating in the realm of the known and that is not conducive to developing new technology to win F1 races) and coming along nicely.
I know a creative guy who was fired by ARM. He's now earning an absolute fortune working for himself. They couldn't integrate him into their structure as it was too rigid and conservative. As a result they lost him and his genius level IQ + creative abilities. And the stuff he's working on (which I can't share) is utterly brilliant and could have a major impact on certain component markets affecting all of us on here. ARM's loss.
Kind of looks similar to the "MS Surface Device" that was mentioned here back in July https://hexus.net/tech/news/laptop/1...urface-device/
Be interesting to see how patents play out, considering Microsoft had the patent for something like this back in 2017 along with LG etc.