Keeping us entertained while we wait for the multi-core, 4-inch, iPhone 5 with its 12-megapixel camera, things didn't go well for Samsung last week. Apple [AAPL] succeeded in its mission of proving its Korean partner a copycat, winning a billion-dollar compensation package and sending the Galaxy maker's shares into free fall. It seems inevitable Apple will bring the fight to Google next.
Since the verdict Samsung's lost $12 billion of its share value -- the value of Google's Motorola Mobility purchase. A senior Samsung executive walking into an emergency meeting concerning the case called the verdict "absolutely the worst scenario for us."
While the company will appeal against the judgment, it seems it hasn't learnt its lesson and continues to spout the same old reality distortion concerning innovation and consumer advantage. The verdict: "Will lead to fewer choices, less innovation, and potentially higher prices," the company said. My response is to wonder if choice, innovation and price mean all smartphones need to look the same?
With a sense of impending doom Google has already begun attempting to distance itself from the defeat. It knows that with this major victory against Samsung under its belt, Apple's next step will be to take on the Android OS and the company it regards as a traitorous ex-ally, Google.
You could say that while the last 18 months has been characterized as Apple versus Samsung, the coming weeks will see the story change to one in which we see Apple take on Google.
Google has taken steps to protect itself and continues to spout its argument that Apple is turning to litigation in place of innovation, even as the search giant prepares to abuse the spirit of Motorola Mobility's industry-agreed FRAND patents in order to innovate its own litigation.
The whole thing is really rather ugly.
History only repeats if you let it
I can remember a time not too long ago when Apple and Google were seen as the conjoined forces of liberation and change, working hard together to shift the dominant control of Microsoft.
Microsoft, a proven monopolist at the time under legal constraints in the way in which it was doing business needed Google and Apple to succeed in order to diversify the PC market. The Department of Justice wanted the market to be shaken up with the power of the dominant player diluted.
In those terms if you think about it, Microsoft CEO, Steve Ballmer, has successfully steered that company into shedding some of its ill-gotten advantages while remaining a viable business. Not a bad feat, and probably the best that could have been achieved in the circumstances.
Sign up for CIO Asia eNewsletters.