Is Apple winning too often?

 
Apple store Apple has four stores in China which generate the most revenue of all its branches worldwide

Last week, right in the middle of the silly season when most people aren't paying attention, there were seismic events which changed the face of the technology landscape.

They saw one giant name in America's computing history - or at least its mobile division - swallowed up by another, and a firm with an even more prestigious past effectively giving up on personal and mobile computing.

And they left another computing Titan looking even more dominant.

Apple was not as busy as its rivals last week, but it still managed to hog a few headlines.

We found out for instance that, as well as having more money than the US government, it appears to be worth more than all of the banks in the eurozone put together.

But it was Google, with that takeover of Motorola Mobility, and HP, turning its whole business upside down, which were really making waves.

And while I'm sure Apple executives were watching carefully as their rivals strutted their stuff, it's hard to think they were worried.

Google's move on Motorola and its warehouse of patents appeared bold at first sight, offering the prospect of a more integrated Android ecosystem.

A week on it looks defensive, and hardly likely to produce the kind of end-to-end, software-to-stores operation that generates such huge margins for Apple.

And a share price which fell 10% over the week did not suggest that the market saw the Motorola bid as a stroke of genius.

HP's hyperactive Thursday, which saw it dump WebOS, buy the UK's Autonomy and announce plans to hive off its personal computing division will have been even less of a concern in Cupertino.

Apple executives - like the England cricket team - must be asking themselves "where did it all go so right?"

The iPad alternative

It's only 18 months since Steve Jobs told us that the iPad was part of a revolution that would take us beyond the PC - and now HP is not only agreeing, it's throwing in the towel.

In particular, the axing of its Touchpad tablet computer, just weeks after a hugely hyped launch, is not only a humiliating and expensive setback for HP, it threatens to sap the confidence of consumers in all rivals to Apple's device.

I'm not sure most casual buyers will distinguish between WebOS or Blackberry or Android tablets, seeing them all as just potential iPad alternatives.

The Apple iPad and Samsung Galaxy Tab The Samsung's screen is longer and narrower than its Apple rival

So if a product like the Touchpad can die within weeks who's going to want to invest in any of the other iPad killers?

The one tablet that might stand a chance is the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1, a device I've been using for the last few days.

It's very impressive - light, fast, with a great screen and a better camera than the iPad 2.

A real contender in other words - but there's a big but.

Apple is in the middle of a legal battle in a German court over the alleged similarities between the Tab and the iPad, which saw Samsung's device temporarily banned from most European countries.

The ban has been lifted, outside Germany at least, but the whole affair has not helped market the tablet.

Who will go out and buy an iPad rival if all they are hearing is that it's a copy of the original, and no cheaper?

Whatever the merits of Apple's case may be, patent and intellectual property disputes now appear to be harming the interests of consumers and innovators in the computing industry.

Steve Jobs and his company have enjoyed win after win over the last couple of years.

But many consumers - as well as rivals - may be hoping that on Thursday when the German court rules again on the copycat case, Apple suffers a rare defeat.

 
Rory Cellan-Jones, Technology correspondent Article written by Rory Cellan-Jones Rory Cellan-Jones Technology correspondent

More on This Story

More from Rory

Comments

This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
 
  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 193.

    186. "However, if someone had patented the steering wheel then there would have been competition to come up with other ways of steering."

    Of course it wouldn't be described as a steering "wheel". More likely something along the lines of "User operated device for controlling the steering mechanism of a vehicle".

    The modern usage of patents is to exclude competition not protect investment.

  • rate this
    +2

    Comment number 192.

    I get sooo irritated with all the arguments about who 'invented' what!

    To my mind all of this has been inevitable since lillienfeld invented / discovered the transitor in 1925.. and in turn this is only because Pliny the Elder noted the electric shocks from catfish!

    Wasn't it Newton that talked about dwarfs standing on the shoulders of giants?

  • rate this
    +2

    Comment number 191.

    I really can't believe all the IP litigation. It's a touch screen phone - but with a bigger screen!!

    Where Apple really have the IP is in the marketing which gets people to pay £500 for something that has cost them relatively little in terms of product development and production.

    If other companies make the same thing but without the fruity logo thats for the buyers to make their choice!

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 190.

    It's a bit like watching table tennis at high speed. You never know where the ball will come down next. For myself, I intend to apply for sole ownership of the definite article. If granted, I'll make even Apple look like paupers, at least in the English speaking world.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 189.

    Am i the only one wondering why there are no Microsoft v Apple lawsuits going on anymore ? They used to be at it all the time. Given the number of patents and IP they got from xerox i cant believe there arent disputes.

    If they are agreeing not to sue each other then surely that would be anti competitive ?

 

Comments 5 of 193

 

Features

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.