Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google “bought off Samsung” to limit app store competition, 36 states allege

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 105 posts

Re: Google “bought off Samsung” to limit app store competition, 36 states allege

#11

Post by deregulateMed »

tyleo wrote: post #9
deregulateMed wrote: post #8

After my S5, an SSD, and a Samsung TV, I've learned that Samsung delivers medium/low quality products at high prices through relentless marketing. Any company that needs to advertise as much as Samsung/Apple/Jeep/Nintendo should be cause for skepticism.

You lost me at Samsung/Apple/Jeep/Nintendo. I’d definitely put Apple in the top tier of phone and laptop quality. Especially w.r.t laptops, the majority of Windows devices seem comparatively low quality. I’m not sure about their other products but I also don’t see them advertised as much. Similarly with Nintendo, they seem to deliver consistently higher quality than competitors. They may not be as fast but they last…

I could see where you were coming from because Apple doesn't offer budget hardware and it's easy to mistakenly compare a $1000 laptop with a $500 laptop that doesn't have a video card.

But Nintendo is notorious for releasing low quality stuff with their IP skinned on it.

A product isn't more than it's quality metrics, if you believe so, I highly recommend taking a marketing class.

Re: Google “bought off Samsung” to limit app store competition, 36 states allege

#12

Post by whitepaint »

deregulateMed wrote: post #8

After my S5, an SSD, and a Samsung TV, I've learned that Samsung delivers medium/low quality products at high prices through relentless marketing. Any company that needs to advertise as much as Samsung/Apple/Jeep/Nintendo should be cause for skepticism.

I got my Samsung phone recently for ~$200 and it is absolutely amazing. I've had 4 by now from them, and they've all be great imo.

Which companies produce better phones?

Re: Google “bought off Samsung” to limit app store competition, 36 states allege

#13

Post by roblabla »

deregulateMed wrote: post #11
tyleo wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You lost me at Samsung/Apple/Jeep/Nintendo. I’d definitely put Apple in the top tier of phone and laptop quality. Especially w.r.t laptops, the majority of Windows devices seem comparatively low quality. I’m not sure about their other products but I also don’t see them advertised as much. Similarly with Nintendo, they seem to deliver consistently higher quality than competitors. They may not be as fast but they last…

I could see where you were coming from because Apple doesn't offer budget hardware and it's easy to mistakenly compare a $1000 laptop with a $500 laptop that doesn't have a video card. But Nintendo is notorious for releasing low quality stuff with their IP skinned on it. A product isn't more than it's quality metrics, if you believe so, I highly recommend taking a marketing class.

> But Nintendo is notorious for releasing low quality stuff with their IP skinned on it.

Nintendo is also widely praised for consistently releasing innovative gaming platforms at fair prices. And that's what they tend to market and invest in heavily - I've never seen an advertisement for any of their low-quality cash-grab toys (which, yeah, they do exist, and they do suck...).

> A product isn't more than it's quality metrics, if you believe so, I highly recommend taking a marketing class.

OP's claim was that nintendo's product are low-quality, sold at high-price, thanks to relentless marketing. But the products being heavily marketed by Nintendo do tend to be high-quality (for instance, The Switch, a portable console that can be used comfortably enough as a home console, with several innovative input methods and a fairly wide range of high-quality games).

If you purely look at the hardware specs, it may seem like a low-quality product, but that's not the correct quality metric to use in this case.

Re: Google “bought off Samsung” to limit app store competition, 36 states allege

#14

Post by thatguy0900 »

deregulateMed wrote: post #8

After my S5, an SSD, and a Samsung TV, I've learned that Samsung delivers medium/low quality products at high prices through relentless marketing. Any company that needs to advertise as much as Samsung/Apple/Jeep/Nintendo should be cause for skepticism.

Nintendo might not release cutting edge hardware, but they're pretty much the only big video game company left that doesn't openly release half finished games with the intention to maybe fix them a few months later.

Re: Google “bought off Samsung” to limit app store competition, 36 states allege

#15

Post by LatteLazy »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #10
LatteLazy wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm just saying, title doesn't match content doesn't match actual complaint...

It might be better if you contact Ars Technica's editors instead of sound off about it on HN.

You think they're more likely to listen given I've already been flagged by HN circle jerk?

Re: Google “bought off Samsung” to limit app store competition, 36 states allege

#16

Post by elliekelly »

LatteLazy wrote: post #2

Careful taking lawsuit claims seriously. Especially then the claim drops from doing X to "attempting X" by paragraph 2 and by paragraph 6 is just being "willing" to attempt X.

All of the phrasing you take issue with is directly from the linked complaint. The complaint flatly alleges Google “bought off Samsung” (as quoted in the headline) and that Google was both willing to attempt to buy off Samsung and did indeed attempt to do so. They are the logical order of events, no? I can’t have bought someone off without first having attempted to buy them off and before that having been willing to buy them off.

Re: Google “bought off Samsung” to limit app store competition, 36 states allege

#17

Post by deregulateMed »

roblabla wrote: post #13
deregulateMed wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could see where you were coming from because Apple doesn't offer budget hardware and it's easy to mistakenly compare a $1000 laptop with a $500 laptop that doesn't have a video card. But Nintendo is notorious for releasing low quality stuff with their IP skinned on it. A product isn't more than it's quality metrics, if you believe so, I highly recommend taking a marketing class.

> But Nintendo is notorious for releasing low quality stuff with their IP skinned on it. Nintendo is also widely praised for consistently releasing innovative gaming platforms at fair prices. And that's what they tend to market and invest in heavily - I've never seen an advertisement for any of their low-quality cash-grab toys (which, yeah, they do exist, and they do suck...). > A product isn't more than it's quality…

Take a marketing class to defend yourself from corporate brainwashing.

Nintendo has been literally brainwashing us since we were babies and had no concept of marketing.

I'm not even talking about hardware specs. The switch has joycon issues, expensive games that are mediocre, and for some reason you confuse investment and innovation with quality.

Wasting money and bad ideas are not qualities.

I used to be a Nintendo fanatic, but their systems and flagship games since N64 have woken me up to their quality issues. The fact that people suggested BOTW was a greatest game of all time despite having only 1 temple theme and 3 enemies (with various skins), shows you that we are under mind control.

Re: Google “bought off Samsung” to limit app store competition, 36 states allege

#18

Post by deregulateMed »

thatguy0900 wrote: post #14
deregulateMed wrote: post #8

After my S5, an SSD, and a Samsung TV, I've learned that Samsung delivers medium/low quality products at high prices through relentless marketing. Any company that needs to advertise as much as Samsung/Apple/Jeep/Nintendo should be cause for skepticism.

Nintendo might not release cutting edge hardware, but they're pretty much the only big video game company left that doesn't openly release half finished games with the intention to maybe fix them a few months later.

This stopped being true with the Switch.

Re: Google “bought off Samsung” to limit app store competition, 36 states allege

#19

Post by Ygg2 »

roblabla wrote: post #13
deregulateMed wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could see where you were coming from because Apple doesn't offer budget hardware and it's easy to mistakenly compare a $1000 laptop with a $500 laptop that doesn't have a video card. But Nintendo is notorious for releasing low quality stuff with their IP skinned on it. A product isn't more than it's quality metrics, if you believe so, I highly recommend taking a marketing class.

> But Nintendo is notorious for releasing low quality stuff with their IP skinned on it. Nintendo is also widely praised for consistently releasing innovative gaming platforms at fair prices. And that's what they tend to market and invest in heavily - I've never seen an advertisement for any of their low-quality cash-grab toys (which, yeah, they do exist, and they do suck...). > A product isn't more than it's quality…

> But the products being heavily marketed by Nintendo do tend to be high-quality

Didn't they have a few hardware related scandals. Like the famous joy control drift.

Re: Google “bought off Samsung” to limit app store competition, 36 states allege

#20

Post by gruez »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #10
LatteLazy wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm just saying, title doesn't match content doesn't match actual complaint...

It might be better if you contact Ars Technica's editors instead of sound off about it on HN.

What type of response is this? "if there are any inaccuracies send them to the editor rather than make a comment"? Adding a comment to inform other readers seems like the correct thing to do and happens fairly often on other comment sections.
Post reply on HN