PDA

View Full Version : Apple Granted Access to Unreleased Samsung Hardware in Patent Suit




Pages : [1] 2

MacRumors
May 24, 2011, 01:15 PM
http://cdn.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/24/apple-granted-access-to-unreleased-samsung-hardware-in-patent-suit/)


http://cdn.macrumors.com/article-new/2011/05/galaxy_tab_8_9.jpg
Samsung's Galaxy Tab 8.9

Last month, Apple filed suit (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/18/apple-targets-samsung-with-new-lawsuit-over-galaxy-line/) against Samsung, claiming patent and trademark infringement from Samsung having allegedly copied Apple's "technology, user interface and innovative style" in its Galaxy line of smartphones and tablets.

Courthouse News Service now reports (http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/05/19/36708.htm) that a federal judge has given Samsung 30 days in which to provide Apple with samples of a number of unreleased hardware models in order to assist Apple with determining whether it would like to request an early injunction to halt the claimed infringement.Samsung Electronics was told Wednesday to fork over five of its not-yet-released mobile phones to Apple. Sitting in Federal Court in San Jose, Judge Lucy Koh ruled that Apple deserves the quick production of cell phone samples three months earlier than usual in the litigation process, though she drew the line at requiring testimony from Samsung executives.

"Apple has demonstrated good cause for some, limited expedited discovery," said Koh. "While Apple has not yet filed a motion for preliminary injunction, courts have found that expedited discovery may be justified to allow a plaintiff to determine whether to seek an early injunction," said Koh.The Samsung models in question include the Galaxy S2, Galaxy Tab 8.9, Galaxy Tab 10.1, Infuse 4G, and Droid Charge.

While the models have yet to be officially released to the public and Samsung has argued that examination of production samples that may not necessarily reflect final shipping versions is inappropriate, Koh noted that the argument is undermined by Samsung's publicity efforts that have seen images and even demo units handed out to members of the media. In one noteworthy example, 5,000 Galaxy Tab 10.1s were given away to attendees at the Google I/O conference earlier this month.

Article Link: Apple Granted Access to Unreleased Samsung Hardware in Patent Suit (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/24/apple-granted-access-to-unreleased-samsung-hardware-in-patent-suit/)



JAT
May 24, 2011, 01:19 PM
Really? That just seems....unfair.

cRuNcHiE
May 24, 2011, 01:20 PM
Not yet released?
How am I typing on my s2 then?

ten-oak-druid
May 24, 2011, 01:21 PM
Apple has to go through with this suit of course but it seems a waste of time. The galaxy tablets aren't selling. I guess the phone is of greater concern.

juicedropsdeuce
May 24, 2011, 01:22 PM
Oh, Steve. You bully customers, you bully poorly paid Foxconn employees, you bully your vendors, and you bully your competitors.

sciwizam
May 24, 2011, 01:22 PM
Galaxy S2, Infuse 4G, and Droid Charge are already in sale. S2 is available in Europe and Asia. Infuse 4G is out on AT&T and Droid Charge is out on Verizon LTE.

They gave out Galaxy Tab 10.1 to all of Google I/O conference attendees.

The only unreleased model is the Galaxy Tab 8.9, but that's just the 10.1 smaller in size and lighter in weight @ 1 lb.

And within the 30days Samsung has to comply, the Tab 10.1 is being released to the general public on June 8th.

zin
May 24, 2011, 01:23 PM
Oh, Steve. You bully customers, you bully poorly paid Foxconn employees, you bully your vendors, and you bully your competitors.

It's called business.

BC2009
May 24, 2011, 01:24 PM
Seems right to me -- Samsung should have tried to be a bit more original in their hardware and UI designs. Nobody would mistake a Motorola device for an Apple device -- Samsung has tried too hard to make their stuff look exactly like Apple's stuff. Since Apple clearly does NOT have a monopoly on cool gadget designs the only reason I can think that Samsung would do this is to try to make their stuff look as much like Apple's as possible so they can fool some customers into thinking Samsung devices are just a different kind of iPhone or iPad.

Arcus
May 24, 2011, 01:24 PM
When you can no longer innovate....litigate.

sciwizam
May 24, 2011, 01:26 PM
Also, while it might not be relevant to this case, I wonder how Apple would react if the situation is reversed and they had to provide access to their unreleased hardware.

Unggoy Murderer
May 24, 2011, 01:26 PM
You'd have to be pretty close to blind if I can't see the resemblance Samsung has to Apple. I hope that Apple win this case, they worked so hard to design the perfect device; and they did! It sickens me to see cheap ass companies ripping off Apple's hard work.

ciTiger
May 24, 2011, 01:27 PM
Sammy can't be happy lol...
So many people saying Apple had nothing... Well it turns out it may have something yet...

sciwizam
May 24, 2011, 01:27 PM
Another point, this is access to Apple's outside law firm. Not Apple's inhouse legal dept. or any product dept.

juicedropsdeuce
May 24, 2011, 01:27 PM
It's called business.

Almost. Actually it's called bad long term strategy. Compete on your own merits, don't try to win by handicapping others. Have you learned nothing from Microsoft?

BC2009
May 24, 2011, 01:28 PM
When you can no longer innovate....litigate.

I think the fact that Samsung is trying to copy Apple at every turn points to the fact that Samsung is the one who is failing to innovate. Many great gadget designs have come from HP and Motorola and great UI designs as well from the likes of Microsoft, Motorola and HTC. The fact that Samsung is copying Apple's design is sad.

whooleytoo
May 24, 2011, 01:30 PM
That seems strangely generous to Apple - offering them access to unreleased Samsung products in case they might, maybe, infringe on Apple's patents/trademarks. That seems a little 'guilty until proven innocent' to me.

You can't really imagine anyone ordering Apple to hand over any of their unreleased products. In fact, one side-effect of this ruling might be that Apple may get even more obsessive about future product secrecy, thus giving competitors a potential chance to file for a preliminary injunction.

dba7dba
May 24, 2011, 01:30 PM
Most of the devices are being sold in Europe/asia. Apple doesn't have employees that can go pick one up for their lawyers to check out?

dwd3885
May 24, 2011, 01:31 PM
I think the fact that Samsung is trying to copy Apple at every turn points to the fact that Samsung is the one who is failing to innovate. Many great gadget designs have come from HP and Motorola and great UI designs as well from the likes of Microsoft, Motorola and HTC. The fact that Samsung is copying Apple's design is sad.

idk. I have a Nexus S and it has NFC. Don't see an Apple product with that. Sure, I agree that Touchwiz is an iOS clone. Samsung should HOPE that Apple wins at least that part, because Touchwiz STINKS

dwd3885
May 24, 2011, 01:31 PM
Most of the devices are being sold in Europe/asia. Apple doesn't have employees that can go pick one up for their lawyers to check out?

and the Infuse is out on AT&T right now.

sciwizam
May 24, 2011, 01:32 PM
idk. I have a Nexus S and it has NFC. Don't see an Apple product with that. Sure, I agree that Touchwiz is an iOS clone. Samsung should HOPE that Apple wins at least that part, because Touchwiz STINKS

Touchwiz 4.0 on the Galaxy S2 is miles better than the whatever Samsung has now.

DroidRules
May 24, 2011, 01:32 PM
Some of you are sooo funny. I had a PDA that had a home button, Apple copied that. It also had a screen that you could touch, Apple copied that. It had a power button.... yep, you guessed it Apple copied it.

Apple is rediculous and I hope they lose every BS lawsuit they file. (As is my hope with any BS lawsuit.)

nunes013
May 24, 2011, 01:32 PM
Seems right to me -- Samsung should have tried to be a bit more original in their hardware and UI designs. Nobody would mistake a Motorola device for an Apple device -- Samsung has tried too hard to make their stuff look exactly like Apple's stuff. Since Apple clearly does NOT have a monopoly on cool gadget designs the only reason I can think that Samsung would do this is to try to make their stuff look as much like Apple's as possible so they can fool some customers into thinking Samsung devices are just a different kind of iPhone or iPad.

this... i was on the shuttle at my university a few weeks ago and there was a kid who had a device that looked the iphone. when i looked closer it was just a galaxy phone but a quick glance i couldnt tell the difference with the home button, and grid of icons. first manufacturers copy the ideas of Apple now the design of their products. there has only been a handful of innovative features that Apple hasnt deployed in there products that has been released these past few years.

Aduntu
May 24, 2011, 01:33 PM
Oh, Steve. You bully customers, you bully poorly paid Foxconn employees, you bully your vendors, and you bully your competitors.

What's the point in working hard to innovate if you're just going to let others blatantly copy your work without repercussion?

dba7dba
May 24, 2011, 01:35 PM
I think the fact that Samsung is trying to copy Apple at every turn points to the fact that Samsung is the one who is failing to innovate. Many great gadget designs have come from HP and Motorola and great UI designs as well from the likes of Microsoft, Motorola and HTC. The fact that Samsung is copying Apple's design is sad.

I think people can agree innovate = patents. Some may object to the patents given out but still.

Top-50 US Patent Recipients from 2009
http://www.ificlaims.com/IFI%202009%20patents%20011210%20final.htm

1 INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORP 4914
2 SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO LTD KR 3611
...
46 SAMSUNG SDI CO LTD KR 423


That's right Apple not on the list. I think Apple broke into top 50 in 2010 list though.

*LTD*
May 24, 2011, 01:36 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPad; U; CPU OS 4_2 like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C134b Safari/6533.18.5)

Lesson learned: ripping off Apple is a bad idea.

Beaverfish
May 24, 2011, 01:37 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

I think if I was Samsung, I would be giving Apple the crappiest most half finished prototypes I could find.

cirus
May 24, 2011, 01:37 PM
Seems biased somehow.

linoox
May 24, 2011, 01:38 PM
idk. I have a Nexus S and it has NFC. Don't see an Apple product with that. Sure, I agree that Touchwiz is an iOS clone. Samsung should HOPE that Apple wins at least that part, because Touchwiz STINKS

Sigh...NFC is NOT part of the trade marks and trade dress infringement claims by Apple Inc.

dba7dba
May 24, 2011, 01:39 PM
Sammy can't be happy lol...
So many people saying Apple had nothing... Well it turns out it may have something yet...

I don't see how you came to that conclusion after reading the article...

*LTD*
May 24, 2011, 01:40 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPad; U; CPU OS 4_2 like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C134b Safari/6533.18.5)

Lol at everyone crying about bullies. If you were in Apple's position you'd do the exact same thing. And if you didn't, your shareholders would hang you.

NebulaClash
May 24, 2011, 01:41 PM
Once again people are picking sides based on personal likes or dislikes about products and companies. Sorry, but this is being decided by laws. Apple has a legal obligation to protect its intellectual property or else they lose it. The courts have to decide on the basis what the law says, not which phone the judge likes. Apple won this preliminary step because the law said they should. It is only a small step of a much larger legal picture. The judge just felt Apple's legal argument carried weight.

Now go back to your cheerleading one side or the other based on everything but the law.

Lesser Evets
May 24, 2011, 01:42 PM
...you people don't get it, do you?

This is the most brilliant win-win. Win: Apple can shut down Samsung if they find something they can sue for/argue with. Win: Apple sees ALL the design and engineering, so they can learn from the superior design ideas and laugh at the flaws and clumsy bits.

Brilliant, but evil.

dscottbuch
May 24, 2011, 01:42 PM
Almost. Actually it's called bad long term strategy. Compete on your own merits, don't try to win by handicapping others. Have you learned nothing from Microsoft?

You're talking about Samsung, correct?

Rodimus Prime
May 24, 2011, 01:42 PM
and end result of this is that I expect nothing to be handed over as it will continue to get tied up in court. Also add to the fact that all Apple even get is mock up units. No hardware or software on them. Not like they can do much with that.
How many different designs are there for basically flat slab of different sizes.

juicedropsdeuce
May 24, 2011, 01:43 PM
What's the point in working hard to innovate if you're just going to let others blatantly copy your work without repercussion?

The idea of a touchscreen computer with applications is about as innovative as a Lodsys patent. Just because Apple implements it the best so far, doesn't mean they own the whole concept.

Jobs didn't invent something inconceivable. He just did it better. Now, no one else is allowed to further improve the concept?? Look around you, cars, monitors, keyboards all look pretty much the same but are made by different companies. We live in a world of THEIVESSZZZ!!! :rolleyes:

dba7dba
May 24, 2011, 01:43 PM
...you people don't get it, do you?

This is the most brilliant win-win. Win: Apple can shut down Samsung if they find something they can sue for/argue with. Win: Apple sees ALL the design and engineering, so they can learn from the superior design ideas and laugh at the flaws and clumsy bits.

Brilliant, but evil.

Most of the 'unreleased' Samsung hardwares have been released, just not in US.

sbrhwkp3
May 24, 2011, 01:44 PM
This is funny. Does the judge own an iPhone? :D:apple:

dwd3885
May 24, 2011, 01:44 PM
Sigh...NFC is NOT part of the trade marks and trade dress infringement claims by Apple Inc.

Sigh, i know it's not, but i was responding to the post that said Samsung is copying Apple, not to the entire lawsuit in question. NFC is not copying Apple, for example.

JAT
May 24, 2011, 01:46 PM
Galaxy S2, Infuse 4G, and Droid Charge are already in sale. S2 is available in Europe and Asia. Infuse 4G is out on AT&T and Droid Charge is out on Verizon LTE.

They gave out Galaxy Tab 10.1 to all of Google I/O conference attendees.

The only unreleased model is the Galaxy Tab 8.9, but that's just the 10.1 smaller in size and lighter in weight @ 1 lb.

And within the 30days Samsung has to comply, the Tab 10.1 is being released to the general public on June 8th.
Welcome to the court system.

unrealpatch
May 24, 2011, 01:46 PM
That seems strangely generous to Apple - offering them access to unreleased Samsung products in case they might, maybe, infringe on Apple's patents/trademarks. That seems a little 'guilty until proven innocent' to me.

You can't really imagine anyone ordering Apple to hand over any of their unreleased products. In fact, one side-effect of this ruling might be that Apple may get even more obsessive about future product secrecy, thus giving competitors a potential chance to file for a preliminary injunction.

Ah, but that is in fact what Apple does with Samsung. Samsung makes many of Apple's components, thus have "first look."

Themaeds
May 24, 2011, 01:47 PM
The idea of a touchscreen computer with applications is about as innovative as a Lodsys patent. Just because Apple implements it the best so far, doesn't mean they own the whole concept.

Jobs didn't invent something inconceivable. He just did it better. Now, no one else is allowed to further improve the concept?? Look around you, cars, monitors, keyboards all look pretty much the same but are made by different companies. We live is a world of THEIVESSZZZ!!! :rolleyes:

Finally someone who gets it. If this lawsuit makes so much sense then wouldnt the LODSYS people have a case against the devs?

cirus
May 24, 2011, 01:48 PM
this... i was on the shuttle at my university a few weeks ago and there was a kid who had a device that looked the iphone. when i looked closer it was just a galaxy phone but a quick glance i couldnt tell the difference with the home button, and grid of icons. first manufacturers copy the ideas of Apple now the design of their products. there has only been a handful of innovative features that Apple hasnt deployed in there products that has been released these past few years.

Seriously, how is a grid copying? Everything uses a grid (look at Windows XP or even 98 and icons are arranged in grids). Seriously, if it wasn't for the branding I would (and anyone would) have trouble differentiating some laptops (black plastic--is it an Acer, ASUS or MSI) they all look similar.

Home button is home button, not exactly something different.

Razeus
May 24, 2011, 01:50 PM
Wow. Samsung got pwned.

ten-oak-druid
May 24, 2011, 01:50 PM
I think the first galaxy tablet shipped 3 million and it isn't clear they sold all of those. It looks like version 2 is doing just as poorly.

I don't think the galaxy tablet is much of a threat to Apple really. Samsung will come around and realize they can make more money selling parts to Apple than trying to sell their own tablet. If their sales numbers don't convince them, then over time they will see the light as developers move away from android to more profitable markets and people leave the platform to get the better apps. Not to mention the growing malware threat to android.

sciwizam
May 24, 2011, 01:51 PM
...you people don't get it, do you?

This is the most brilliant win-win. Win: Apple can shut down Samsung if they find something they can sue for/argue with. Win: Apple sees ALL the design and engineering, so they can learn from the superior design ideas and laugh at the flaws and clumsy bits.

Brilliant, but evil.

Dude, 4 of the 5 "unreleased" products are already on sale. And if you think anything can shutdown Samsung. LOL.

sciwizam
May 24, 2011, 01:52 PM
I think the first galaxy tablet shipped 3 million and it isn't clear they sold all of those. It looks like version 2 is doing just as poorly.

I don't think the galaxy tablet is much of a threat to Apple really. Samsung will come around and realize they can make more money selling parts to Apple than trying to sell their own tablet. If their sales numbers don't convince them, then over time they will see the light as developers move away from android to more profitable markets and people leave the platform to get the better apps. Not to mention the growing malware threat to android.

Yeah, it's sales are dismal, considering it won't be on sale till June 8th. :rolleyes:

kiljoy616
May 24, 2011, 01:52 PM
It's called business.

Its called capitalist business model, and it works very well. :)

Ah I still remember those great Microsoft days as though it was yesterday. :D

ChazUK
May 24, 2011, 01:53 PM
I think the first galaxy tablet shipped 3 million and it isn't clear they sold all of those. It looks like version 2 is doing just as poorly.

Not a surprise.... as the 10.1 and 8.9 aren't out yet.....

http://www.infosyncworld.com/reviews/cell-phones/samsung-galaxy-tab-10.1-release-date-now-official/11891.html

It's hard to sell things that haven't been released. It's like complaining about iPad 3 sales.

ten-oak-druid
May 24, 2011, 01:53 PM
this... i was on the shuttle at my university a few weeks ago and there was a kid who had a device that looked the iphone. when i looked closer it was just a galaxy phone but a quick glance i couldnt tell the difference with the home button, and grid of icons. first manufacturers copy the ideas of Apple now the design of their products. there has only been a handful of innovative features that Apple hasnt deployed in there products that has been released these past few years.

At least the xoom has some originality. The galaxy tab is a blatant rip off of Apple's successful product. Samsung has no honor.

ChazUK
May 24, 2011, 01:55 PM
Once again people are picking sides based on personal likes or dislikes about products and companies. Sorry, but this is being decided by laws. Apple has a legal obligation to protect its intellectual property or else they lose it. The courts have to decide on the basis what the law says, not which phone the judge likes. Apple won this preliminary step because the law said they should. It is only a small step of a much larger legal picture. The judge just felt Apple's legal argument carried weight.

Now go back to your cheerleading one side or the other based on everything but the law.

Perfectly put. I think that the judge has made a fair judgement in this too.

BC2009
May 24, 2011, 01:55 PM
idk. I have a Nexus S and it has NFC. Don't see an Apple product with that. Sure, I agree that Touchwiz is an iOS clone. Samsung should HOPE that Apple wins at least that part, because Touchwiz STINKS

Certainly the hardware specs differ, but looking at a Samsung device is like looking like a tween girl trying her best to dress and do her hair like a favorite singer or actress. Touchwiz is the biggest offender here, but the Galaxy hardware looks alot like Apple hardware too. The "Nexus" line certainly differs.

I think people can agree innovate = patents. Some may object to the patents given out but still.
....
1 INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORP 4914
2 SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO LTD KR 3611
...
46 SAMSUNG SDI CO LTD KR 423
....


I don't think many would agree with you. Many patents are filed and then squatted on as the company cannot figure out how to implement them in a cost-effective manner and bring them to the consumer. Further, Samsung is far more than a mobile device manufacturer, they produce a much wider range of products than Apple and should have a much broader patent portfolio because of it (so should IBM since they are extremely diverse). Apple is a very focused company comparatively. So sheer volume of patents while one measure of innovation, is not (in my opinion) the end-all and be-all of measurements.

I would love to see the USPTO publish a measure of the number of patents actually implemented in the assignee's products. Since many of these big companies are essentially filing patent applications to stifle innovation of competitors (acting like a patent troll) or to use defensively when sued by other companies.

If you look at Nilay Patel's analysis (http://thisismynext.com/2011/04/29/samsung-sues-apple-infringing-10-patents-closer/) of Samsung's countersuit with Apple you will see he refers to it as "anti-climatic". Why? Because in that vast war chest of patents that Samsung holds they only managed to find 10 rather poor patents that remotely read on Apple's product.

With patents, and with pretty much everything, "Quality" and "Quantity" can be two very different things.

ten-oak-druid
May 24, 2011, 01:55 PM
Not a surprise.... as the 10.1 and 8.9 aren't out yet.....

http://www.infosyncworld.com/reviews/cell-phones/samsung-galaxy-tab-10.1-release-date-now-official/11891.html

It's hard to sell things that haven't been released. It's like complaining about iPad 3 sales.

ipad 3 sales will be stellar. Galaxy tab 2 sales will be pathetic.


Yeah, it's sales are dismal, considering it won't be on sale till June 8th. :rolleyes:

What are they waiting for? They should at least try!

You can harp on the error in tense. But you can't change the meaning of the argument. Nice try at deflection. You lose.

So it is settled. Galaxy tablets are a failed product.

kiljoy616
May 24, 2011, 01:56 PM
Seriously, how is a grid copying? Everything uses a grid (look at Windows XP or even 98 and icons are arranged in grids). Seriously, if it wasn't for the branding I would (and anyone would) have trouble differentiating some laptops (black plastic--is it an Acer, ASUS or MSI) they all look similar.

Home button is home button, not exactly something different.

Relax, Apple wants something, not sure what but they want something for less and this suit will get it for them. Its just how business is. Nothing new here unless you did not grow up in the 90's see all the lawsuit and other nasty happenings in the technology sector.

I will guess to say they want that retinal like screen that Samsung has but they want Samsung to make it to their specification and at a reduce price. :cool:

ChazUK
May 24, 2011, 01:57 PM
ipad 3 sales will be stellar. Galaxy tab 2 sales will be pathetic.

Galaxy tab 2? For someone who states that "version 2 is doing just as poorly", you don't even know what they're called.

Where are you getting your sales figures for this unreleased product?

*LTD*
May 24, 2011, 01:58 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPad; U; CPU OS 4_2 like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C134b Safari/6533.18.5)

Oh, Steve. You bully customers, you bully poorly paid Foxconn employees, you bully your vendors, and you bully your competitors.

It's the same strategy Apple's always had. Make boat-loads of money from great products, and try to corner the market while doing so.

You can apply to the courts for virtually anything. It all depends on whether you have a case. Seems in this instance Apple does. Welcome to democracy.

mactree
May 24, 2011, 02:00 PM
I don't know what the final product looks like, but from this photo... look at that bottom bar, you can't tell me there's not another way to do that. They want the customers that refuse to buy apple products (but deep down secretly want them).

kiljoy616
May 24, 2011, 02:01 PM
ipad 3 sales will be stellar. Galaxy tab 2 sales will be pathetic.




What are they waiting for? They should at least try!

Well it does make sense, Apple is a Cult where Samsung is so far from that there really is no way for them to compete. Samsung makes great technology but they really don't have the people to make something that makes people not just want it but hold it like a religions artifact.

I for one think Samsung really can sell a lot of their product the way they wish they could because the Android market is so saturated and that is not really a good thing when it comes to having a cult following.

kwfl
May 24, 2011, 02:01 PM
That what happens when a us judge rules in a conflict between a US and non-US companies. unfair.

BrianKonarsMac
May 24, 2011, 02:03 PM
The galaxy tablets aren't selling.
I wonder if that is because they're not available to purchase yet?

ten-oak-druid
May 24, 2011, 02:06 PM
I wonder if that is because they're not available to purchase yet?

Version 1 shipped 3 million. They didn't all sell. Nice deflection though.

*LTD*
May 24, 2011, 02:07 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPad; U; CPU OS 4_2 like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C134b Safari/6533.18.5)

It would be nice if this time the legal system will actually punish those who rip off Apple. Finally.

Skika
May 24, 2011, 02:07 PM
The only right thing to do! Samsung clearly doesnt know what the mainstream consumer wants, and is zero original.

That kind of blatant copying is shameful.

Consultant
May 24, 2011, 02:08 PM
That seems strangely generous to Apple - offering them access to unreleased Samsung products in case they might, maybe, infringe on Apple's patents/trademarks. That seems a little 'guilty until proven innocent' to me.

You can't really imagine anyone ordering Apple to hand over any of their unreleased products. In fact, one side-effect of this ruling might be that Apple may get even more obsessive about future product secrecy, thus giving competitors a potential chance to file for a preliminary injunction.

Samsung basically released the products to the press, and the products are being sold in part of the world already.

Might want to read the article next time. :rolleyes:

jonnysods
May 24, 2011, 02:10 PM
Geez, don't mention the word app store during the hearing Samsung!

acslater017
May 24, 2011, 02:11 PM
When you can no longer innovate....litigate.

Right...I'm sure Apple - at the peak of its revenue, profit, stock valuation, mindshare, and cash backup - is litigating out of its inability to innovate.

/s

maclaptop
May 24, 2011, 02:14 PM
It's called business.

It's also Bad Apple Karma.

Sitting pretty on top of the world, money flowing into Apple in vast torrents, they still live with unbridled greed.

Sue, sue, sue is Apples mantra.

yourstation
May 24, 2011, 02:14 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)

It's samsung here who are obviously not originating. 1-0 apple, not even half time.

tzeshan
May 24, 2011, 02:16 PM
idk. I have a Nexus S and it has NFC. Don't see an Apple product with that. Sure, I agree that Touchwiz is an iOS clone. Samsung should HOPE that Apple wins at least that part, because Touchwiz STINKS

I will bet you that when Apple implemented NFC on iPhone/iPad, it will be different from Google Android implentation and those Apple copycats will quickly redesign their clones.

ten-oak-druid
May 24, 2011, 02:19 PM
Well it does make sense, Apple is a Cult where Samsung is so far from that there really is no way for them to compete. Samsung makes great technology but they really don't have the people to make something that makes people not just want it but hold it like a religions artifact.

I for one think Samsung really can sell a lot of their product the way they wish they could because the Android market is so saturated and that is not really a good thing when it comes to having a cult following.

That's all you got? The cult thing again?

Samsung makes great parts for ipads an other devices. No one is knocking their ability to make quality parts and products.

Galaxy tab 2? For someone who states that "version 2 is doing just as poorly", you don't even know what they're called.

Where are you getting your sales figures for this unreleased product?

Oh man you don't know the galaxy tablet shipped a few million over a period of several months?

Well here is an update. At the end of last year it was announced that 2 or 3 million (lets say 3) units were shipped. Version 2 was supposed to be released already. But apparently it has been delayed. So I looked into it. Apparently through april, 6 million units have been shipped.

Compare this to the ipad 2 that sold 1 million the first weekend. Now you can see why I call it a failed product. I'll just call it a slow mover if it makes you feel better though.

And no if they changed the name I don't know what it is nor do I care. I'm not interested in buying one.

yourstation
May 24, 2011, 02:21 PM
How can you not see that Apple should have a right to defend it's own innovations? And as for Microsoft back in the day they just STOLE ideas and even blatant code in early Windows. What can we 'learn' from that? That it is OK?

*LTD*
May 24, 2011, 02:22 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPad; U; CPU OS 4_2 like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C134b Safari/6533.18.5)

We have a case of the real innovator capitalizing on their position within the limits of the law.

I fail to understand what's wrong with that.

If Samsung doesn't like it they should have released something better than the iPad before anyone else. Oh well.

ChazUK
May 24, 2011, 02:22 PM
Oh man you don't know the galaxy tablet shipped a few million over a period of several months?

Well here is an update. At the end of last year it was announced that 2 or 3 million (lets say 3) units were shipped. Version 2 was supposed to be released already. But apparently it has been delayed. So I looked into it. Apparently through april, 6 million units have been shipped.

Compare this to the ipad 2 that sold 1 million the first weekend. Now you can see why I call it a failed product. I'll just call it a slow mover if it makes you feel better though.

And no if they changed the name I don't know what it is nor do I care. I'm not interested in buying one.

How on earth does that babble answer this?

Where are you getting your sales figures for this unreleased product?

EDIT: All I wan't is Galaxy Tab 2 sales figures. Can you show us as you mentioned how poorly it was selling earlier?

No iPad 1 sales figures.
No iPad 2 sales figures.
No (7 inch) GalaxyTab sales figures.

Just Galaxy Tab 2 sales figures. Thanks!

sciwizam
May 24, 2011, 02:23 PM
That's all you got? The cult thing again?


Well here is an update. At the end of last year it was announced that 2 or 3 million (lets say 3) units were shipped. Version 2 was supposed to be released already. But apparently it has been delayed. So I looked into it. Apparently through april, 6 million units have been shipped.

Compare this to the ipad 2 that sold 1 million the first weekend. Now you can see why I call it a failed product. I'll just call it a slow mover if it makes you feel better though.

And no if they changed the name I don't know what it is nor do I care. I'm not interested in buying one.

Link please? Your version of "reality" is not a source.

Born Again
May 24, 2011, 02:24 PM
Samsung should hold apple hostage by not producing anymore chips and lcds

Lol

Mac-Rumours
May 24, 2011, 02:25 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-gb) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8C148)

Some of you are sooo funny. I had a PDA that had a home button, Apple copied that. It also had a screen that you could touch, Apple copied that. It had a power button.... yep, you guessed it Apple copied it.

Apple is rediculous and I hope they lose every BS lawsuit they file. (As is my hope with any BS lawsuit.)


I'd ban you for that.
Lol for what? Stating the truth that stevo isn't a very healthy person?

Love it, posts been up 2 minutes and I have 2 negatives lol..... Fan on Fanboys! Sometimes the truth hurts, especially with you poor poor fanboys.

Did your PDA look almost exactly like the iPhone - both hardware and software?

shandyman
May 24, 2011, 02:26 PM
Almost. Actually it's called bad long term strategy. Compete on your own merits, don't try to win by handicapping others. Have you learned nothing from Microsoft?

handicapping others? when they're making a cheap knockoff of your own device? rubbish. notice how its specifiying things that are cheap knockoffs and not different looking devices, such as the HTC models or whatnot. gotta protect your IP.

rodriguise
May 24, 2011, 02:27 PM
I think people can agree innovate = patents. Some may object to the patents given out but still.

Top-50 US Patent Recipients from 2009
http://www.ificlaims.com/IFI%202009%20patents%20011210%20final.htm

1 INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORP 4914
2 SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO LTD KR 3611
...
46 SAMSUNG SDI CO LTD KR 423


That's right Apple not on the list. I think Apple broke into top 50 in 2010 list though.

I wouldn't associate the level of innovation with number of patents, all that shows it that they have more lawyers than engineers.

farmboy
May 24, 2011, 02:28 PM
The idea of a touchscreen computer with applications is about as innovative as a Lodsys patent. Just because Apple implements it the best so far, doesn't mean they own the whole concept.

Jobs didn't invent something inconceivable. He just did it better. Now, no one else is allowed to further improve the concept?? Look around you, cars, monitors, keyboards all look pretty much the same but are made by different companies. We live in a world of THEIVESSZZZ!!! :rolleyes:

Why don't you come back here when study hall is finished and you can visit the USPTO web site and learn about patents.

ten-oak-druid
May 24, 2011, 02:32 PM
How on earth does that babble answer this?



EDIT: All I wan't is Galaxy Tab 2 sales figures. Can you show us as you mentioned how poorly it was selling earlier?

No iPad 1 sales figures.
No iPad 2 sales figures.
No (7 inch) GalaxyTab sales figures.

Just Galaxy Tab 2 sales figures. Thanks!


LMAO!

Galaxy tablet 2 isn't released yet!

I thought you followed the conversation.

Galaxy tablet 2 will sell dismally. Wait for it.

But do keep dwelling on this. It will keep you occupied until version 2 is released.

ivladster
May 24, 2011, 02:34 PM
Samsung designers should think sometimes. Even the iTunes, purple icon is identical to Apple's. It's not that hard to change a color. This means that those designs were made on purpose to look like Apple.

Keebler
May 24, 2011, 02:34 PM
It's also Bad Apple Karma.

Sitting pretty on top of the world, money flowing into Apple in vast torrents, they still live with unbridled greed.

Sue, sue, sue is Apples mantra.

disagree. sure, you can take that position that they're on top so they look bad for doing it.

regardless of it being Apple or not, I look at it from the basics of 1 company protecting its business model from another company copying products. plain and simple.

it just so happens that Apple is near the top so ppl think along your line. If I were a shareholder, I'd be ticked if Apple didn't go after any company copying their products. Despite the fact that Samsung's products are selling like hotcakes, Apple still has to set the precedent that they won't allow any other company to copy their products. What if another company is successful b/c Apple did nothing this time? Apple's sales fall, shares fall, stockholders are ticked. Some will be jealous of Apple's success but companies, successful or not, have to protect themselves.

On the outside, the products look similar, but i wonder what they look like on the inside with the actual technology. Can you imagine the blowdown if the circuit boards and what have you are also very similar or the same? Maybe some stuff will be just given how a cell phone works, but if they are too close, Samsung could really get slapped here.

Cheers,
Keebler

shandyman
May 24, 2011, 02:34 PM
The idea of a touchscreen computer with applications is about as innovative as a Lodsys patent. Just because Apple implements it the best so far, doesn't mean they own the whole concept.

Jobs didn't invent something inconceivable. He just did it better. Now, no one else is allowed to further improve the concept?? Look around you, cars, monitors, keyboards all look pretty much the same but are made by different companies. We live in a world of THEIVESSZZZ!!! :rolleyes:

lol way to over simplify the matter, if what you are saying was right ,they'd be doing it against all of them, HTC, Motorola etc, but nope, it's against a specific selection of devices made by samsung that are cheap knockoffs of the iPhone, look at the galaxy with the touchwiz interface, quick glance and it can be mistaking by joe public as an iphone, quick glance at any of the HTC, Motorola, etc they aren't similar enough to mistake them.

ten-oak-druid
May 24, 2011, 02:34 PM
Link please? Your version of "reality" is not a source.

Seriously? You can't search for units shipped?

i've posted these links before. They were easy to find. Trust me.

sciwizam
May 24, 2011, 02:35 PM
LMAO!

Galaxy tablet 2 isn't released yet!

I thought you followed the conversation.

Galaxy tablet 2 will sell dismally. Wait for it.

But do keep dwelling on this. It will keep you occupied until version 2 is released.


I think the first galaxy tablet shipped 3 million and it isn't clear they sold all of those. It looks like version 2 is doing just as poorly.

I don't think the galaxy tablet is much of a threat to Apple really. Samsung will come around and realize they can make more money selling parts to Apple than trying to sell their own tablet. If their sales numbers don't convince them, then over time they will see the light as developers move away from android to more profitable markets and people leave the platform to get the better apps. Not to mention the growing malware threat to android.

Make up your mind.

ChazUK
May 24, 2011, 02:35 PM
LMAO!

Galaxy tablet 2 isn't released yet!

I thought you followed the conversation.

Galaxy tablet 2 will sell dismally. Wait for it.

But do keep dwelling on this. It will keep you occupied until version 2 is released.

I wasn't on about future sales. Do you not remember what you wrote?

I think the first galaxy tablet shipped 3 million and it isn't clear they sold all of those. It looks like version 2 is doing just as poorly.

Where you just muttering bollocks when you wrote that then?

sciwizam
May 24, 2011, 02:36 PM
Seriously? You can't search for units shipped?

i've posted these links before. They were easy to find. Trust me.


Please provide a link of "version 2's" shipped numbers.

I think the first galaxy tablet shipped 3 million and it isn't clear they sold all of those. It looks like version 2 is doing just as poorly.

I don't think the galaxy tablet is much of a threat to Apple really. Samsung will come around and realize they can make more money selling parts to Apple than trying to sell their own tablet. If their sales numbers don't convince them, then over time they will see the light as developers move away from android to more profitable markets and people leave the platform to get the better apps. Not to mention the growing malware threat to android.

RalfTheDog
May 24, 2011, 02:37 PM
Also, while it might not be relevant to this case, I wonder how Apple would react if the situation is reversed and they had to provide access to their unreleased hardware.

It's not like Samsung was not passing out pre-release versions to the press all over the place.

Almost. Actually it's called bad long term strategy. Compete on your own merits, don't try to win by handicapping others. Have you learned nothing from Microsoft?

Microsoft is the only company that has been competing with Apple instead of copying their products. I don't know if any of their phones have sold, but they are proof you can make a product that does not look exactly like an iPhone or an iPad.

If I were unable to purchase An iPhone or an iPad, I would probably get a Win 7 phone over an Android.



Lol for what? Stating the truth that stevo isn't a very healthy person?

Love it, posts been up 2 minutes and I have 2 negatives lol..... Fan on Fanboys! Sometimes the truth hurts, especially with you poor poor fanboys.

Taking joy from the fact that another person is sick is wrong.

The idea of a touchscreen computer with applications is about as innovative as a Lodsys patent. Just because Apple implements it the best so far, doesn't mean they own the whole concept.

Jobs didn't invent something inconceivable. He just did it better. Now, no one else is allowed to further improve the concept?? Look around you, cars, monitors, keyboards all look pretty much the same but are made by different companies. We live in a world of THEIVESSZZZ!!! :rolleyes:

Again, read my comment above. Microsoft managed to create a competing product that was not a blatant copy of IOS devices. You can create a touch screen device that is not an exact copy of an Apple device.

i.mac
May 24, 2011, 02:40 PM
Oh, Steve. You bully customers, you bully poorly paid Foxconn employees, you bully your vendors, and you bully your competitors. Too bad you won't be around to witness the long term effects of these strategies. :rolleyes:

Have you yourself ever been sick?

Have you ever had any one close to you have cancer?

Your demonstrated lack of basic human decency says that you mostly care about yourself.

Thinking of any type of bussiness practice at the same level of human life is, shall we say, pathetic ?

Ah..., you don't care any way... Wasting my time here...

RalfTheDog
May 24, 2011, 02:40 PM
Please provide a link of "version 2's" shipped numbers.

I think the point is, Version 1 was a total fail. There is no reason to think version 2,3,4...256 will be any different until proven otherwise.

Eriamjh1138@DAN
May 24, 2011, 02:41 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)

Apple should go buy the products in question if they are for sale. Samsung can't argue about design changes.

RalfTheDog
May 24, 2011, 02:43 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)

Apple should go buy the products in question if they are for sale. Samsung can't argue about design changes.

It's kind of hard to find a store willing to sell them. Most companies don't like to clutter their shelf space with junk that does not move.

ChazUK
May 24, 2011, 02:44 PM
I think the point is, Version 1 was a total fail. There is no reason to think version 2,3,4...256 will be any different until proven otherwise.

But to post it as fact before it is has even been released is idiocy.

I'd guess if anyone came on here and posted "Windows Phone 7 sells more than the iPhone ever will" that there would be cries for proof/sources or at worst, ridicule over the poster.

Can you not see this yourself? I know he is biased but to spew inaccuracies leaves little credibility in a poster.

EDIT: I suppose that I could sum it up that there are good fallacies that are easily overlooked here and bad. This leaves little room for good, adult discussion. :(

Thunderhawks
May 24, 2011, 02:45 PM
Not a surprise.... as the 10.1 and 8.9 aren't out yet.....

http://www.infosyncworld.com/reviews/cell-phones/samsung-galaxy-tab-10.1-release-date-now-official/11891.html

It's hard to sell things that haven't been released. It's like complaining about iPad 3 sales.

Didn't the ipad3 ship 29 million in September/October 2011?

Sure beats the Galaxy 8th of June 2011 numbers.

tekker
May 24, 2011, 02:46 PM
WTF? The new Galaxy Tabs look absolutely nothing like iOS! Same thing goes for the Galaxy S2!

I could understand anything TouchWiz 3.0 violating these patents, but TouchWiz 4.0 really took a big leap from 3.0!

poloponies
May 24, 2011, 02:47 PM
For those who are apparently unclear on the concept, patent protection is a "use it or lose it" proposition. You get exclusivity on the use of the patent AND legal protection of your rights PROVIDED you monitor others' use/abuse of your patented IP. So Apple HAS TO go after any perceived infringement or it risks losing the rights to protect itself against future infringement. It's not bullying, it's what the law requires a patent-holder to do when it sees a possible infringing act.

An analogy would be property rights. You see neighborhood kids cutting through your property for years and do nothing and then you try to get one of them arrested for trespassing. They can use your inaction in the past to suggest that you weren't vigilant and in fact gave them license to cut through. Same here. If Apple lets Samsung slide, all the next guy has to do is to say "we're not doing anything that Samsung didn't do but Apple didn't care about them."

ChazUK
May 24, 2011, 02:48 PM
Didn't the ipad3 ship 29 million in September/October 2011?

iPad 3 didn't sell any in 2011 in the end. It was delayed until Q1, 2012. ;)

juicedropsdeuce
May 24, 2011, 02:48 PM
.
Aren't they (Apple) gonna change the UI on iOS5 anyways?

RalfTheDog
May 24, 2011, 02:49 PM
But to post it as fact before it is has even been released is idiocy.

I'd guess if anyone came on here and posted "Windows Phone 7 sells more than the iPhone ever will" that there would be cries for proof/sources or at worst, ridicule over the poster.

Can you not see this yourself? I know he is biased but to spew inaccuracies leaves little credibility in a poster.

I thought they had been released in several markets and were not doing well. That is why they have any number of design variations in the works. Apple is just wanting to see the changes they are working on. (I understand they are working on a music download service called uTunes.)

Bilbo63
May 24, 2011, 02:50 PM
Apple must have had some pretty compelling evidence to get this decision and we have no idea what that evidence was.

I suspect that they've already seen the devices being sold in Europe and feel that there is clear patent infringement. Evidently the judge agreed. IMO "some" of Samsung's designs appear to be blatant copies, while others, not so much.

It is an odd situation for sure.

sciwizam
May 24, 2011, 02:52 PM
I thought they had been released in several markets and were not doing well. That is why they have any number of design variations in the works. Apple is just wanting to see the changes they are working on. (I understand they are working on a music download service called uTunes.)

The phones are out, not the tablets. The Galaxy S2 is doing extraordinarily well for sales.

Aduntu
May 24, 2011, 02:54 PM
The idea of a touchscreen computer with applications is about as innovative as a Lodsys patent. Just because Apple implements it the best so far, doesn't mean they own the whole concept.


If you think the issue exists simply because of a "touchscreen computer with applications," you're dumber than you already look. You either haven't seen the blatant copying on Samsung's part, or you're being a troll.


Jobs didn't invent something inconceivable. He just did it better. Now, no one else is allowed to further improve the concept?? Look around you, cars, monitors, keyboards all look pretty much the same but are made by different companies. We live in a world of THEIVESSZZZ!!! :rolleyes:

Your ignorance is evident by your ridiculous comparison. You cannot blatantly copy something that was made by someone else and not expect backlash from the company you stole from.

ten-oak-druid
May 24, 2011, 02:55 PM
LMAO!

Version 2 of the galaxy tablet will be atrocious. I have a couple of groupies who want to argue my prediction but they will see.

As for some history of version 1, see these notes and links:

1. Galaxy tablet release date: September 2010

2. First 1 million units reported sold: December 2010 (http://www.engadget.com/2010/12/03/samsung-sells-one-million-galaxy-tab-units-throws-an-android-pa/)


3. I already posted a lot on this previously. See it here (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=12109253&highlight=#post12109253) as I will not waste time repeating it. The first two links above are not in the list

4. Wikipedia states 6 million shipped as of April this year but cites the WSJ article that does not provide this figure. So it is not clear that many shipped, let alone sold.

Jcoz
May 24, 2011, 02:56 PM
For those who are apparently unclear on the concept, patent protection is a "use it or lose it" proposition. You get exclusivity on the use of the patent AND legal protection of your rights PROVIDED you monitor others' use/abuse of your patented IP. So Apple HAS TO go after any perceived infringement or it risks losing the rights to protect itself against future infringement. It's not bullying, it's what the law requires a patent-holder to do when it sees a possible infringing act.

An analogy would be property rights. You see neighborhood kids cutting through your property for years and do nothing and then you try to get one of them arrested for trespassing. They can use your inaction in the past to suggest that you weren't vigilant and in fact gave them license to cut through. Same here. If Apple lets Samsung slide, all the next guy has to do is to say "we're not doing anything that Samsung didn't do but Apple didn't care about them."

Please, no need for reason or logic in this thread.

mack pro
May 24, 2011, 02:57 PM
That seems strangely generous to Apple - offering them access to unreleased Samsung products in case they might, maybe, infringe on Apple's patents/trademarks. That seems a little 'guilty until proven innocent' to me.

You can't really imagine anyone ordering Apple to hand over any of their unreleased products. In fact, one side-effect of this ruling might be that Apple may get even more obsessive about future product secrecy, thus giving competitors a potential chance to file for a preliminary injunction.

It looks like Apple's getting special treatment even if that's not the case.

quizdogg
May 24, 2011, 02:59 PM
Oh, Steve. You bully customers, you bully poorly paid Foxconn employees, you bully your vendors, and you bully your competitors.

Its not bullying, it business. I commend Steve and the rest of Apple for doing their best to stay on top.

ChazUK
May 24, 2011, 02:59 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.4; en-gb; Nexus S Build/GRJ22) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)

I don't know what that has to do with your original claim ten-oak but congratulations anyway.

I'll stop smashing my head into the wall and drop this now as it seems you have difficculties with the questions at hand.

You can't put sense where it won't go so to say. :)

ten-oak-druid
May 24, 2011, 03:00 PM
But to post it as fact before it is has even been released is idiocy.

I'd guess if anyone came on here and posted "Windows Phone 7 sells more than the iPhone ever will" that there would be cries for proof/sources or at worst, ridicule over the poster.

Can you not see this yourself? I know he is biased but to spew inaccuracies leaves little credibility in a poster.

EDIT: I suppose that I could sum it up that there are good fallacies that are easily overlooked here and bad. This leaves little room for good, adult discussion. :(

Adult discussion does not include dwelling on my mistake about version 2's release. You can keep up with that but you cannot argue the version 1 sales were anywhere near those of the ipads. And I will say again that version 2 will be a failure based on what I have seen. Go ahead and demand numbers for a product not released again. It won't change my prediction. Samsung is still "rethinking" version 2 as far as I know.

JAT
May 24, 2011, 03:00 PM
At least the xoom has some originality.
?? Really? Is that the buttons on the back?
Samsung should hold apple hostage by not producing anymore chips and lcds

Lol
Why would they break a lucrative contract? Apple is willing to buy every single panel they make in certain sizes. Your idea would be the stupidest thing Samsung could do.

gnasher729
May 24, 2011, 03:02 PM
I think if I was Samsung, I would be giving Apple the crappiest most half finished prototypes I could find.

Not producing what you are asked to produce in a discovery request usually ends very, very, very painful. If Samsung produces "half finished" prototypes so that Apple cannot determine whether or not they are copies of Apple products, then any judge would decide that obviously Samsung has something to hide, so they _are_ copies.


...you people don't get it, do you?

This is the most brilliant win-win. Win: Apple can shut down Samsung if they find something they can sue for/argue with. Win: Apple sees ALL the design and engineering, so they can learn from the superior design ideas and laugh at the flaws and clumsy bits.

Brilliant, but evil.

Totally clueless. Apple does _not_ see any of these designs. No Apple engineer will ever see them (until they are available to the public). No Apple in-house lawyer will ever see them. The only people seeing these devices are outside counsel, and if they show these to anybody, they will be in deep trouble. There would be contempt of the court first, theft of trade secrets next.

Mac.World
May 24, 2011, 03:03 PM
Also, while it might not be relevant to this case, I wonder how Apple would react if the situation is reversed and they had to provide access to their unreleased hardware.

They did that a couple of times. Got burnt by both companies as a result.

toddybody
May 24, 2011, 03:04 PM
Its not bullying, it business. I commend Steve and the rest of Apple for doing their best to stay on top.

Doing their best to stay on top? OMFG youve got to be joking. This is piss poor business ethics and completely unfair.

sciwizam
May 24, 2011, 03:04 PM
LMAO!

Version 2 of the galaxy tablet will be atrocious. I have a couple of groupies who want to argue my prediction but they will see.



Doesn't compute.

I think the first galaxy tablet shipped 3 million and it isn't clear they sold all of those. It looks like version 2 is doing just as poorly.

ten-oak-druid
May 24, 2011, 03:06 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.4; en-gb; Nexus S Build/GRJ22) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)

I don't know what that has to do with your original claim ten-oak but congratulations anyway.

I'll stop smashing my head into the wall and drop this now as it seems you have difficculties with the questions at hand.

You can't put sense where it won't go so to say. :)

From what I gather you only want to deflect my my comments on Samsung's failed tablet by harping on my mistake about version 2's release date.

Is there another reason you keep asking for sales or ship numbers for version 2?

Lets clear it up shall we?

1. Version one is a failure.

2. You want me to show you numbers for version 2 sales and shipments. I can't because it hasn't been released yet. Please tell me if this is what you are asking? Because I think it is established that it hasn't been released yet. But do make it clear if you are asking something else. We wouldn't want to get this wrong.

3. My opinion is that version 2 will be a failure just like version 1. See my other posted links on the dismal sales of the galaxy tablet. Do you understand that this is my opinion and what I base it on? Do you understand i can't give you numbers for version 2 but I feel confident about my prediction no matter how much you want to disagree or ask me again for sales nubmers that don't exist?

4. Now if you can get past asking me for numbers that do not exist, understand I am offering an opinion, and disagree with my opinion, then please explain why given the failure of version 1, that you disagree with my opinion?


Thanks

Doesn't compute.

Doesn't compute?

It is called a mistake. Can you understand a mistake? Version 2 is not released yet. I thought it was.

You should work for a political campaign. Constant deflection.

Now given everything else, explain why version 2 will not be a flop.

And let me add that continuing to focus on my mistake about the release date is not an argument. Attacking my mistake is not an argument at all.

tekker
May 24, 2011, 03:14 PM
From what I gather you only want to deflect my my comments on Samsung's failed tablet by harping on my mistake about version 2's release date.

Is there another reason you keep asking for sales or ship numbers for version 2?

Lets clear it up shall we?

1. Version one is a failure.

2. You want me to show you numbers for version 2 sales and shipments. I can't because it hasn't been released yet. Please tell me if this is what you are asking? Because I think it is established that it hasn't been released yet. But do make it clear if you are asking something else. We wouldn't want to get this wrong.

3. My opinion is that version 2 will be a failure just like version 1. See my other posted links on the dismal sales of the galaxy tablet. Do you understand that this is my opinion and what I base it on? Do you understand i can't give you numbers for version 2 but I feel confident about my prediction no matter how much you want to disagree or ask me again for sales nubmers that don't exist?

4. Now if you can get past asking me for numbers that do not exist, understand I am offering an opinion, and disagree with my opinion, then please explain why given the failure of version 1, that you disagree with my opinion?


Thanks
LOL if Apple really thought the Galaxy Tabs were going to be ******, they wouldn't be suing Samsung over it.

Thunderhawks
May 24, 2011, 03:16 PM
iPad 3 didn't sell any in 2011 in the end. It was delayed until Q1, 2012. ;)

So, Galaxy June 8th Sales win this year, unless ipad 2 comes out in August!

But seriously folks.... who in the world cares what is shipped when?

The constant pissing contest between ipad and others is a total waste. I like brunettes. That doesn't make all blondes or redheads bad choices.

Buy the product you like best and be on your merry way!

Everybody happy now?

ny3ranger
May 24, 2011, 03:16 PM
Really? That just seems....unfair.

It would be unfair if their products didn't really resemble apples products. They are close enough that they lost the ability to keep their upcoming products look and feel hidden from apple. Unfair but hey if you didn't make it similar then you wouldn't be in this scenario.

ten-oak-druid
May 24, 2011, 03:16 PM
LOL if Apple really thought the Galaxy Tabs were going to be ******, they wouldn't be suing Samsung over it.

A reasonable argument (compared to "show me version 2 numbers" when we all know it hasn't been released yet).


I disagree though. I think Apple is just protecting itself. If they allow Samsung to get away with such a blatant copy, then others will too.

inlovewithi
May 24, 2011, 03:17 PM
Some of you are sooo funny. I had a PDA that had a home button, Apple copied that. It also had a screen that you could touch, Apple copied that. It had a power button.... yep, you guessed it Apple copied it.

Apple is rediculous and I hope they lose every BS lawsuit they file. (As is my hope with any BS lawsuit.)

I bought a PDA in 2003, and if you change the home screen to the style where it shows Icons, and I showed it to a fanboy, they would say that it was a copy of the Iphone.

ridley182
May 24, 2011, 03:23 PM
In your face Samsung! Next time come up with your own designs.

Meandmunch
May 24, 2011, 03:25 PM
A tablet is ultimately a tablet, especially when the race is to get as thin and flat as possible. That said, I think the back of the Samsung is very distinctly Samsung (and rather nice I might add) Apple does not have a case there. However the interface smacks of iOS badly.

Just out of curiosity why was my comment voted down?

shaynes
May 24, 2011, 03:25 PM
What this thread makes clear is that few people here have actually read the lawsuit in question, or have taken any time to learn about the applicable legal terminology. For one thing, the majority of the claims in the lawsuit Apple filed with Samsung are concerning trade dress, not patents. Second, as soon as you claim that Samsung is not an innovative or influential tech company, you lose absolutely all credibility.

dba7dba
May 24, 2011, 03:25 PM
I wouldn't associate the level of innovation with number of patents, all that shows it that they have more lawyers than engineers.

Are you saying IBM is not innovative?

R&D spending by Apple & Samsung. Slightly different time frame but still...

Apple 1.1B in 2008
http://www.tuaw.com/2008/11/07/apple-adds-staff-boosts-randd-spending-in-fy2008/


Samsung 6B in 2009
http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/2010/1115/R-D-spending-Here-are-the-Top-10-firms/Samsung

ChazUK
May 24, 2011, 03:27 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

LOL if Apple really thought the Galaxy Tabs were going to be ******, they wouldn't be suing Samsung over it.

A reasonable argument (compared to "show me version 2 numbers" when we all know it hasn't been released yet).


I disagree though. I think Apple is just protecting itself. If they allow Samsung to get away with such a blatant copy, then others will too.

No one would of mentioned "version 2 numbers" if you hadn't posted them as fact.

Kudos that you eventually admitted a mistake tho. Had you done earlier I wouldn't have questioned your sources any further. We're all only human afterall and more than susceptible to make mistakes.

pcuser94
May 24, 2011, 03:32 PM
It's called business.
It's called forming a monopoly. Literally destroying all competition. It is a sin and it is a crime. Steve Jobs has horrible business tactics and should be sued.

MacAddict1978
May 24, 2011, 03:33 PM
Almost. Actually it's called bad long term strategy. Compete on your own merits, don't try to win by handicapping others. Have you learned nothing from Microsoft?

You were ass backwards in this statement, but turning it around a bit, Apple did learn from Microsoft. Don't forget that Microsoft did this exact same copy and paste deal in the 80's with the Windows interface. Apple did try to sure, but the problem was they'd been working with Microsoft and sort of accidentally gave the farm away. If not for a bunch of misteps in those dealings, the Windows user interface would look vastly different today or they'd be paying out the butt to Apple.

Apple is just not willing to repeat history and design an interface for a competitor again. Nor should they. Samsung has the little faux dock, IOS layout, color schemes, similiar icons...

Consultant
May 24, 2011, 03:35 PM
Are you saying IBM is not innovative?

R&D spending by Apple & Samsung. Slightly different time frame but still...

Apple 1.1B in 2008
http://www.tuaw.com/2008/11/07/apple-adds-staff-boosts-randd-spending-in-fy2008/


Samsung 6B in 2009
http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/2010/1115/R-D-spending-Here-are-the-Top-10-firms/Samsung

Money spent =/= innovation.

Case in point, Microsoft.

dba7dba
May 24, 2011, 03:37 PM
Money spent =/= innovation.

Case in point, Microsoft.

Ok so how about # of patents grants by US Patents office?

JAT
May 24, 2011, 03:37 PM
Are you saying IBM is not innovative?

R&D spending by Apple & Samsung. Slightly different time frame but still...

Apple 1.1B in 2008
http://www.tuaw.com/2008/11/07/apple-adds-staff-boosts-randd-spending-in-fy2008/


Samsung 6B in 2009
http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/2010/1115/R-D-spending-Here-are-the-Top-10-firms/Samsung
Those numbers are hardly comparable, as are the companies. Samsung is a giant company with products in a far wider range than Apple ever will bother with. Like Sony, Samsung is an IC maker, something Apple has little interest in. And Apple is notorious for spending less in R&D than expected. I almost wonder if they leave some things out of R&D that others might put in there.

Christian Science Monitor?? Ok....

dba7dba
May 24, 2011, 03:42 PM
Those numbers are hardly comparable, as are the companies. Samsung is a giant company with products in a far wider range than Apple ever will bother with. Like Sony, Samsung is an IC maker, something Apple has little interest in. And Apple is notorious for spending less in R&D than expected. I almost wonder if they leave some things out of R&D that others might put in there.

Christian Science Monitor?? Ok....

Ok how about

http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2010/05/17/samsung_to_triple_capital_rd_spending_this_year/

"Samsung Electronics said Monday it will more than triple investment in capital spending and research and development this year to a record 26 trillion won ($22.7 billion)" Note it's Samsung Eletronics' R&D $$$.

My point is that MAYBE Samsung is innovative. I bring up US patents ranking, and someone says that's because they have more lawyers than engineers. I bring up R&D spending and someone brings up how much Microsoft spends but they are not innovative (which I agree). Some just don't want to admit that maybe Samsung is an innovative company?

benpatient
May 24, 2011, 03:45 PM
So if i sue Apple can I get some early access to their prototype iPhones?

Next they're going to be demanding the source code for Windows.

SandynJosh
May 24, 2011, 03:49 PM
Another point, this is access to Apple's outside law firm. Not Apple's inhouse legal dept. or any product dept.

Still...this has got to feel like when Michael Jackson had his family jewels photographed under court order.

"No one unauthorized will see the results."

"Yeah, sure."

dba7dba
May 24, 2011, 03:54 PM
Still...this has got to feel like when Michael Jackson had his family jewels photographed under court order.

"No one unauthorized will see the results."

"Yeah, sure."

But seriously who cares. These (with the exception of tab 8.9) HAVE been released to the market, except for US market.

JAT
May 24, 2011, 03:54 PM
Ok how about

http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2010/05/17/samsung_to_triple_capital_rd_spending_this_year/

"Samsung Electronics said Monday it will more than triple investment in capital spending and research and development this year to a record 26 trillion won ($22.7 billion)" Note it's Samsung Eletronics' R&D $$$.

My point is Samsung is innovative. I bring up US patents filing, and someone says that's because they have more lawyers than engineers. I bring up R&D spending and someone brings up MS spends but they are not innovative (which I agree).
It's hard to see any company as innovative in the tablet market except Apple as of 2011. Tablets have been around for many years, including the earlier Apple models. None of them succeeded except the Palm Pilot for awhile, and now the iPad. And arguably, the Pilot was more a predecessor to today's phones than something like the iPad.

It's much easier to look at finished products (sales figures and user feedback) to see market success than an income statement. Patent numbers certainly mean nothing to the market. I think you are trying to look from a perspective that is not only different than some of these other posters, but is also ridiculously hard to actually prove anything. That's why R&D is kept separate, companies don't want to claim it is part of the actual mfgr of a product, which would upset its profit.

Funkymonk
May 24, 2011, 03:56 PM
lol Apple is scared as hell.

hexor
May 24, 2011, 03:58 PM
Doing their best to stay on top? OMFG youve got to be joking. This is piss poor business ethics and completely unfair.

Unfair to allow a competitor to copy your product to the point people can't even tell them apart :confused:

dba7dba
May 24, 2011, 03:58 PM
It's hard to see any company as innovative in the tablet market except Apple as of 2011. Tablets have been around for many years, including the earlier Apple models. None of them succeeded except the Palm Pilot for awhile, and now the iPad. And arguably, the Pilot was more a predecessor to today's phones than something like the iPad.

It's much easier to look at finished products (sales figures and user feedback) to see market success than an income statement. Patent numbers certainly mean nothing to the market. I think you are trying to look from a perspective that is not only different than some of these other posters, but is also ridiculously hard to actually prove anything. That's why R&D is kept separate, companies don't want to claim it is part of the actual mfgr of a product, which would upset its profit.

Apple innovative in tablet market? Yes I agree.

What I'm trying to say is that maybe samsung is innovative. Just looking at the firm measuring sticks (patents holding, R&D $), you kinda have to agree samsung does innovate. No?

entatlrg
May 24, 2011, 03:59 PM
Oh, Steve. You bully customers, you bully poorly paid Foxconn employees, you bully your vendors, and you bully your competitors.

So you think stealing others idea's is fair?

Strange.

Would you feel the same if it was your hard work others were copying?

:rolleyes:

Funkymonk
May 24, 2011, 04:00 PM
You'd have to be pretty close to blind if I can't see the resemblance Samsung has to Apple. I hope that Apple win this case, they worked so hard to design the perfect device; and they did! It sickens me to see cheap ass companies ripping off Apple's hard work.

why does it sicken you? Does it affect you in any way?

or are you concerned about heartless multi billion dollar corporations being nice, pleasant, and fair to each other? :rolleyes:

Sardonick007
May 24, 2011, 04:00 PM
Ha. Apple stole everything it ever used to create the empire it has. Admittedly by Steve. (and rightly so in pioneering innovation) so for them to b#tch and moan about Samsung is the whole kettle and pot thing all over again. Can you say "Xerox" gui?

dba7dba
May 24, 2011, 04:01 PM
So you think stealing others idea's is fair?

Strange.

Would you feel the same if it was your hard work others were copying?

:rolleyes:

Steve steals others' ideas also. Obviously you haven't been following up the lawsuit story as much. So many have posted on the threads here and others how Apple stole others' ideas.

Krevnik
May 24, 2011, 04:07 PM
...you people don't get it, do you?

This is the most brilliant win-win. Win: Apple can shut down Samsung if they find something they can sue for/argue with. Win: Apple sees ALL the design and engineering, so they can learn from the superior design ideas and laugh at the flaws and clumsy bits.

Brilliant, but evil.

Anything that Apple uses from their unreleased devices that is patentable tech could be used as part of a counter-suit later.

Plus, for that very reason, the Apple lawyers will never let the information from Samsung spread very far inside Apple. It exposes Apple to possible liability just having the information!

Kwill
May 24, 2011, 04:08 PM
All this hoopla so Steve could get his hands on a pre-production Samsung Galaxy Tab. Nicely played. :D

Actually, we all realize that patent infringement cases require specific examples of software code or hardware. Building the case based on photos or video, would severely limit Apple's chance for successful litigation.

Piggie
May 24, 2011, 04:09 PM
This is interesting and in a weird way it actually give a positive message about the Samsung product and I can't see how Apple don't see this.

By ignoring Samsung, and producing their own better product, Apple create the impression that they are not worried about a inferior product and they are confident about their own device.

By publicly appearing to be worried to this extent, and wanting to see the product, they are in effect lending their opinion the fact that this Samsung device muse be good, and good enough to threaten their "Apple" product. After all it's it's worse, why would they worry?

It's odd they cannot see this, and they are actually by this act, promoting the Samsung product as being good enough to threaten Apple.

hexor
May 24, 2011, 04:10 PM
Steve steals others' ideas also. Obviously you haven't been following up the lawsuit story as much. So many have posted on the threads here and others how Apple stole others' ideas.

Please provide us with some relevant examples.. This is more then just a simple feature here and there... it is the entire hardware and software being copied, right down to the icons themselves.... and for people to quote some Xerox GUI that is now 30+ years old.. people also ignore the fact that Xerox had no intention of selling any product based on that GUI.

dba7dba
May 24, 2011, 04:12 PM
Please provide us with some relevant examples.. This is more then just a simple feature here and there... it is the entire hardware and software being copied, right down to the icons themselves.... and for people to quote some Xerox GUI that is now 30+ years old.. people also ignore the fact that Xerox had no intention of selling any product based on that GUI.

http://gizmodo.com/343641/1960s-braun-products-hold-the-secrets-to-apples-future


http://www.droidmatters.com/news/steve-jobs-we-have-always-been-shameless-about-stealing-great-ideas/

There. And I wasn't even thinking of Xerox gui.
hexor, I hope you actually visit the 2 links. I spent all 2 minutes to put it together.
I disagree it's entire hardware/software being copied. Seriously?

swagi
May 24, 2011, 04:13 PM
ipad 3 sales will be stellar. Galaxy tab 2 sales will be pathetic.




What are they waiting for? They should at least try!

You can harp on the error in tense. But you can't change the meaning of the argument. Nice try at deflection. You lose.

So it is settled. Galaxy tablets are a failed product.

Actually, no, they aren't. If you refer to the Galaxy 10.1v (the actual product name) - it definitely looks great. And I'd really love Apple to implement the curved back-design because it seems to be more ergonomic.

And please watch some YouTube vids on this tablet. You will see that your claim of being a 'blatant rip-off' are just pure and utter nonsense.

Maybe check this one:
On YOUTUBE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtqXLGPzVMk&feature=related)

Blakjack
May 24, 2011, 04:20 PM
@ten-oak-druid

U need to go back and read your first comment. Maybe will understand why people are consider u half retarded right now.

Version 2 has not been released, therefore it has no sales numbers.

On another note, I don't consider the Galaxy Tab 10.1 a ripoff of the iPad. There is nothing about it that resembles the iPad other than the fact that it's thinner. The back is made of plastic. The screen size is different. The OS is honeycomb which is nothing like iOS.

Right now this lawsuit is more about the phones. For that, Samsung must pay. They have totally copied the iPhone within the past 2 years.

farmermac
May 24, 2011, 04:21 PM
Humm... I foresee production problems via a shortage of memory/chips for Apple

dba7dba
May 24, 2011, 04:24 PM
Humm... I foresee production problems via a shortage of memory/chips for Apple

I just find it ironic that Tim Cook is effectively in charge of daily operation while suing samsung. He rose up through the ranks of Apple by resolving parts shortage issue largely through working with samsung. I guess it's about the business.

pcharles
May 24, 2011, 04:27 PM
Also, while it might not be relevant to this case, I wonder how Apple would react if the situation is reversed and they had to provide access to their unreleased hardware.

I am sure they would be unhappy, but since Apple is not copying other manufacturers hardware it is irrelevant. As much as I loath litigation, companies with large amounts of IP are required by law to defend their IP. One single missed IP violation can be used as grounds for dismissal of all future litigation because it sets precedent.

Simple fact is that companies who innovate must litigate, and even then it does not always help because there are the people of some countries who appear to have no morals and copy everything.

kdarling
May 24, 2011, 04:30 PM
... and for people to quote some Xerox GUI that is now 30+ years old.. people also ignore the fact that Xerox had no intention of selling any product based on that GUI.

A few years before the Mac, Xerox sold about 25,000 Stars with their windowed GUI:

dba7dba
May 24, 2011, 04:31 PM
I am sure they would be unhappy, but since Apple is not copying other manufacturers hardware it is irrelevant. As much as I loath litigation, companies with large amounts of IP are required by law to defend their IP. One single missed IP violation can be used as grounds for dismissal of all future litigation because it sets precedent.

Simple fact is that companies who innovate must litigate, and even then it does not always help because there are the people of some countries who appear to have no morals and copy everything.

sheez, since you brought up IP in your post

http://www.ificlaims.com/IFI%202009%20patents%20011210%20final.htm

Samsung is #2, after IBM. Apple's not on the top 50 list.

farmboy
May 24, 2011, 04:32 PM
Doing their best to stay on top? OMFG youve got to be joking. This is piss poor business ethics and completely unfair.

So defending your intellectual property is piss poor business ethics? Yeah, OK...

thedbp
May 24, 2011, 04:35 PM
It's called business.

So any unethical behavior that is bad for consumers and competition is OK as long as it's under the heading of "business" ? Yeah, that sounds about right ... like the phrase "nothing personal, it's just business" somehow negates any ill will and makes behaving in an unscrupulous manner acceptable.

Not saying I agree with the original post, but this type of "business is business and anything goes" thought is downright dangerous.

beez1717
May 24, 2011, 04:40 PM
Some of you are sooo funny. I had a PDA that had a home button, Apple copied that. It also had a screen that you could touch, Apple copied that. It had a power button.... yep, you guessed it Apple copied it.

Apple is rediculous and I hope they lose every BS lawsuit they file. (As is my hope with any BS lawsuit.)

It goes way farther then that. If you take a look at many of the designs coming from Samsung, you will see that they actually LOOK almost like other apple products. Apple may not have a huge desire to stop Samesung as it does in protecting their own IP. Nobody wants their designee copied ant tweaked. I feel that Samesung should have seen it coming and should have not shaped, colored and designed their hardware and ui to look like an iPhone or iPad and iOS.

sswanky
May 24, 2011, 04:56 PM
When you can no longer innovate....litigate.

Don't you mean, when you can longer innovate...imitate?

CFreymarc
May 24, 2011, 04:57 PM
Really? That just seems....unfair.

Not really. There is a history of this.

In the 80's US automotive manufacturers got access via court orders to pre-release Japanese concept cars to see if they were infringing on various mechanical patents held by different parts of the Big Three Automakers before they went into productions and shipped into the USA. That is one of the untold stories of the "American automotive comeback of the 1990's" and not just higher quality American products.

Also, Samsung has a big history of just ripping off any good software or UI design to keep their electronic lines humming to avoid paying software engineers. The sad part of all this is if there is an injunction, it will mostly just stop shipments to US and other western countries.

These infringing products are then dumped to other less developed / third world countries at lower but still profitable margins. India, African countries and even South America gets the first shipment instead of Japan / US / Europe if there is an injunction. This is a big win / small win game for Samsung while a win / lose situation for Apple.

nonameowns
May 24, 2011, 04:57 PM
apple is a mean force. pretty soon all competitors will be required to have apple trees in the backyard.

JAT
May 24, 2011, 04:59 PM
http://gizmodo.com/343641/1960s-braun-products-hold-the-secrets-to-apples-future


http://www.droidmatters.com/news/steve-jobs-we-have-always-been-shameless-about-stealing-great-ideas/

There. And I wasn't even thinking of Xerox gui.
hexor, I hope you actually visit the 2 links. I spent all 2 minutes to put it together.
I disagree it's entire hardware/software being copied. Seriously?
You are rehashing things that are incorrect, or just semantics. The Braun thing is just funny at this point, there is no legal issue. Steve's comment was a joke, Apple quite clearly pays for IP when appropriate. Sometimes they get sued when there is a dispute, and then it is settled. That's how business works. Xerox agreed to let Apple make a similar gui (and therefore their semi-related lawsuit was thrown out), so what's the problem? Apple haters keep bringing this stupid crap up, ignoring facts.

Do you go to forums about every single company that has ever sued for IP infringement and post similar things? I'd like to see links to those posts.

How many people have to come to MacRumors and just search the net for anything you can possibly find to put Apple in a bad light and highlight some other company? Today it's Samsung. Yaaayyy for Samsung. Dowwwnnn with Apple. :rolleyes:

JAT
May 24, 2011, 05:01 PM
Not really. There is a history of this.

It was a joke, I....didn't think it out well. Maybe next time. :D

sswanky
May 24, 2011, 05:07 PM
It's called forming a monopoly. Literally destroying all competition. It is a sin and it is a crime. Steve Jobs has horrible business tactics and should be sued.

Defending trademark/trade dress is hardly "destroying all competition." Apple Inc. has a duty to its shareholders to defend what it feels is an infringement of its intellectual property. It's not dirty pool.

fixmdude
May 24, 2011, 05:16 PM
Not yet released?
How am I typing on my s2 then?

S2 isn't released in the U.S., unless you get it from another country.

I did get the Infuse from AT&T in the U.S. this week. Nice large 4.5" Super AMOLED Plus screen, glad I got it before the law suit stops them.

TheUndertow
May 24, 2011, 05:22 PM
Almost. Actually it's called bad long term strategy. Compete on your own merits, don't try to win by handicapping others. Have you learned nothing from Microsoft?
Who won the motion? Apple...

Samsung should follow your advice to avoid this sort of thing.

TheUndertow
May 24, 2011, 05:26 PM
Apple so scared of the crushing power of Android. I wonder if they will ever go after the best phone manufacturer HTC.

I've had the Mogul and Hero...enough of HTC for me.

justinfreid
May 24, 2011, 05:34 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

Maybe MacRumors should sue Apple in order to get a glimpse at some unreleased hardware...

koruki
May 24, 2011, 05:36 PM
I mean at least try, but when you go do something like this, you are just screaming for Apple's to take notice.

http://images.betanews.com/media/6772.jpg

aristotle
May 24, 2011, 05:44 PM
A few years before the Mac, Xerox sold about 25,000 Stars with their windowed GUI:
A few of points:
1. Apple paid Xerox in AAPL shares to gain access see the GUI.
2. Xerox execs did not see the value of the GUI at the time.
3. Apple hired away Xerox engineers to work on the Lisa.
4. The Star GUI Xerox showed to Apple did not have overlapping windows which is why MSFT windows did not have overlapping windows until they got access to an early version of the Lisa given to them by Apple to use as a dev machine.

LandOfTech
May 24, 2011, 05:45 PM
Steve just wanted a Galaxy Tab since he didn't want to pay $1,000 to get one since he didn't go to the I/O.

dba7dba
May 24, 2011, 05:48 PM
I mean at least try, but when you go do something like this, you are just screaming for Apple's to take notice.

Image (http://images.betanews.com/media/6772.jpg)

Haha, I knew someone would bring that up on this thread.

Ever heard of PDMI?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PDMI

"It has been developed by CEA (Consumer Electronics Association) as ANSI/CEA-2017-A standard Common Interconnection for Portable Media Players in February 2010. Chaired by David McLauchlan from Microsoft, the standard was developed with the input or support of over fifty consumer electronics companies worldwide. [1] It is designed as an alternative to the iPod interface which was used exclusively by Apple Inc."

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/2e/PDMI.jpg

LandOfTech
May 24, 2011, 05:48 PM
I mean at least try, but when you go do something like this, you are just screaming for Apple's to take notice.

Image (http://images.betanews.com/media/6772.jpg)

Fo sure brah! When i saw unboxings of it i was like wow that looks like the 30 pin dock connecter.

rjohnstone
May 24, 2011, 05:49 PM
I mean at least try, but when you go do something like this, you are just screaming for Apple's to take notice.

Image (http://images.betanews.com/media/6772.jpg)
As has been stated before, that is not an Apple connector.
Samsung is using a PDMI connector.

Glideslope
May 24, 2011, 05:50 PM
It goes way farther then that. If you take a look at many of the designs coming from Samsung, you will see that they actually LOOK almost like other apple products. Apple may not have a huge desire to stop Samesung as it does in protecting their own IP. Nobody wants their designee copied ant tweaked. I feel that Samesung should have seen it coming and should have not shaped, colored and designed their hardware and ui to look like an iPhone or iPad and iOS.

Precisely. This is a Samsung Mobile Division Problem. Let's not spread it out like Peanut Butter to all of Samsung, eh?The Judge obviously has good reason to allow this based on the speed.

Apple will reach inside Samsung's Mobile Division's Undergarments and pull out cloned Silicon Cahones. Samsung needs to regain control of their Mobile Division, and do it NOW. :apple:

PeterQVenkman
May 24, 2011, 05:51 PM
Haha, I knew someone would bring that up on this thread.

Ever heard of PDMI?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PDMI

"It has been developed by CEA (Consumer Electronics Association) as ANSI/CEA-2017-A standard Common Interconnection for Portable Media Players in February 2010. Chaired by David McLauchlan from Microsoft, the standard was developed with the input or support of over fifty consumer electronics companies worldwide. [1] It is designed as an alternative to the iPod interface which was used exclusively by Apple Inc."

Image (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/2e/PDMI.jpg)

Now that's what I'm talkin' about!

PDMI uses a 30 pin receptacle with approximate size of 2.5 mm by 22 mm; a cradle-style connector is also defined. The PDMI connector includes the following electrical interfaces:
2-lane DisplayPort v1.1a with AUX Channel, Hot Plug Detect, and 3.3 V power line
USB 3.0, USB 2.0, and USB On-The-Go
Analog stereo line-out for legacy audio
HDMI CEC for remote control
High output power line from both host and portable device

Everything the body needs...

Jobsian
May 24, 2011, 05:53 PM
Almost. Actually it's called bad long term strategy. Compete on your own merits, don't try to win by handicapping others. Have you learned nothing from Microsoft?
Deserves to be quoted as it's a measured insight.

I'd have to add however, much of today's big business is myopic, ie 'short' term gains are prioritised. For reference: see what's happening with the bailout money. Long-term risks are simply invisible when there's big money waiting to be had.

bikemonkey
May 24, 2011, 05:59 PM
Some of you are sooo funny. I had a PDA that had a home button, Apple copied that.

I don't know if I'm wasting my time here (probably), but you really don't get it. But at the same time I don't think you're trolling. Taking your particular example, Apple aren't suing Samsung just over the 'Home' button alone. Although, in this category of device, they actually implemented a unique approach for a 'Home' button.

Having a single button on the face of a device dramatically changes the user-interface and interaction with a device. By having a singular, prominent button on the face of a device you are immediately promoting its importance, and this will also have an affect on how the software operates. AFAIK, most (if not all) phones before the iPhone had at least 2 buttons on the face - one to make calls, and another to end them. More often than not they had a couple more too. On the iPhone you just have one physical button on the front and I would argue that this is a distinct feature of the iPhone (and iPad).

But it's not just because there is a button on the front. It's also the size of the button, the shape of the button and the button's placement, which must all be considered relative to the rest of the phone. Granted, Samsung's implementation on the S9000 isn't an _exact_ copy, but it's pretty close. A little too close to be called a coincidence.

However, if this was all that Samsung had done I doubt Apple would be taking them to court. As it stands Samsung have copied/borrowed a few more ideas from the iPhone with their S9000:

- The size and shape of the device
- The size/thickness of the bezel relative to the body of the phone
- The radius of the corners of the phone
- The size and shape of the earpiece

So if you take all of these things, and integrate the way Samsung have, then you've got a device very similar to the iPhone. And that's before we even look at the software side of things. You need to educate yourself on a few things here, and if you're really suggesting that the S9000 looks nothing like the iPhone then you're simply deluding yourself. I'm not bashing on Android here, as there are plenty of Android phones which are distinct enough such that they operate and look nothing like the iPhone. The Nexus and Moto Droid are two examples that spring to mind. And with that they are successful devices in their own right - which proves that their is still room for original design.

Some things cannot be changed (like the position of the earpiece and the mic, for example), but some can. Of course there are going to be similarities between devices from different manufacturers, but there is definitely a line between blatant and overzealous copying, and simply improving on an idea or offering an alternative solution. Take it or leave it, but I specialise in design, UX and UI, and I'm simply picking up on these similarities through my understanding of the established principles in these fields. I'm certainly not preaching anything new here. And hopefully you are one more person who can see the wood from the trees.

Of course, the phones aren't the only thing in this suit...

MacinDoc
May 24, 2011, 06:28 PM
sheez, since you brought up IP in your post

http://www.ificlaims.com/IFI%202009%20patents%20011210%20final.htm

Samsung is #2, after IBM. Apple's not on the top 50 list.
That's a specious argument. You can't compare the IP of a company that exclusively makes computers and handheld computing devices with that of a company that makes everything from microchips to kitchen sinks (OK, maybe not kitchen sinks, but dishwashers and refrigerators). As an entire company, Samsung does produce some innovative products, but the same can't be said for its mobile division, which can't even produce packaging and marketing materials that look different from Apple's.

In comparison, Dell, which is the leading retailer of computers in the U.S., and sells a much wider variety of models of computers and devices than Apple, is also not on the list, because like Apple, its IP is limited largely to computing devices.

kockgunner
May 24, 2011, 06:34 PM
Also, while it might not be relevant to this case, I wonder how Apple would react if the situation is reversed and they had to provide access to their unreleased hardware.

They would show prototypes of the original iPhone and it would fool people into thinking they are future products.

Seriously though, can't they just make some fake phones and call it an unreleased product?

faroZ06
May 24, 2011, 06:41 PM
You'd have to be pretty close to blind if I can't see the resemblance Samsung has to Apple. I hope that Apple win this case, they worked so hard to design the perfect device; and they did! It sickens me to see cheap **** companies ripping off Apple's hard work.

They get what they deserve anyway, the Apple knockoffs never win :)
Glad to see Apple is finally suing though.

faroZ06
May 24, 2011, 06:42 PM
They would show prototypes of the original iPhone and it would fool people into thinking they are future products.

Seriously though, can't they just make some fake phones and call it an unreleased product?

Yeah, they could just give Apple a random clump of dirt and say that it's an unreleased phone :D

kiranmk2
May 24, 2011, 06:57 PM
I don't know if I'm wasting my time here (probably), but you really don't get it. But at the same time I don't think you're trolling. Taking your particular example, Apple aren't suing Samsung just over the 'Home' button alone. Although, in this category of device, they actually implemented a unique approach for a 'Home' button.

Having a single button on the face of a device dramatically changes the user-interface and interaction with a device. By having a singular, prominent button on the face of a device you are immediately promoting its importance, and this will also have an affect on how the software operates. AFAIK, most (if not all) phones before the iPhone had at least 2 buttons on the face - one to make calls, and another to end them. More often than not they had a couple more too. On the iPhone you just have one physical button on the front and I would argue that this is a distinct feature of the iPhone (and iPad).

But it's not just because there is a button on the front. It's also the size of the button, the shape of the button and the button's placement, which must all be considered relative to the rest of the phone. Granted, Samsung's implementation on the S9000 isn't an _exact_ copy, but it's pretty close. A little too close to be called a coincidence.

However, if this was all that Samsung had done I doubt Apple would be taking them to court. As it stands Samsung have copied/borrowed a few more ideas from the iPhone with their S9000:

- The size and shape of the device
- The size/thickness of the bezel relative to the body of the phone
- The radius of the corners of the phone
- The size and shape of the earpiece

So if you take all of these things, and integrate the way Samsung have, then you've got a device very similar to the iPhone. And that's before we even look at the software side of things. You need to educate yourself on a few things here, and if you're really suggesting that the S9000 looks nothing like the iPhone then you're simply deluding yourself. I'm not bashing on Android here, as there are plenty of Android phones which are distinct enough such that they operate and look nothing like the iPhone. The Nexus and Moto Droid are two examples that spring to mind. And with that they are successful devices in their own right - which proves that their is still room for original design.

Some things cannot be changed (like the position of the earpiece and the mic, for example), but some can. Of course there are going to be similarities between devices from different manufacturers, but there is definitely a line between blatant and overzealous copying, and simply improving on an idea or offering an alternative solution. Take it or leave it, but I specialise in design, UX and UI, and I'm simply picking up on these similarities through my understanding of the established principles in these fields. I'm certainly not preaching anything new here. And hopefully you are one more person who can see the wood from the trees.

Of course, the phones aren't the only thing in this suit...

^This.

This has absolutely nothing to do with patents - you can't patent a look or feel. Instead you protect it with an "industrial design right." Yes phones had touchscreens, grids and home buttons before but as has been pointed out, no phone combined them in such a way as the iPhone. Again, as has been mentioned, the streamlined button UI (i.e. one singular button on the front of the phone) is very distinctive and was something completely new to the market. Look at the metal rim around the bezel, look at the home screen on the S2. It may turn out that it wasn't intentional, but that won't matter in the court. Unless Samsung can prove that they had this design on the drawing board before the iOS products came out the court can block their release.

lilo777
May 24, 2011, 07:09 PM
^This.

This has absolutely nothing to do with patents - you can't patent a look or feel. Instead you protect it with an "industrial design right." Yes phones had touchscreens, grids and home buttons before but as has been pointed out, no phone combined them in such a way as the iPhone. Again, as has been mentioned, the streamlined button UI (i.e. one singular button on the front of the phone) is very distinctive and was something completely new to the market. Look at the metal rim around the bezel, look at the home screen on the S2. It may turn out that it wasn't intentional, but that won't matter in the court. Unless Samsung can prove that they had this design on the drawing board before the iOS products came out the court can block their release.

Samsung Android phones have three or four buttons. This alone tells us that Apple claim is bogus.

gorgeousninja
May 24, 2011, 07:47 PM
Some of you are sooo funny. I had a PDA that had a home button, Apple copied that. It also had a screen that you could touch, Apple copied that. It had a power button.... yep, you guessed it Apple copied it.

Apple is rediculous and I hope they lose every BS lawsuit they file. (As is my hope with any BS lawsuit.)

It was probably also a gross mish-mash of usability and form... Apple didn't copy that.
(oh and the term PDA.... that was Apple).

keep up the good work.. eh?

erzhik
May 24, 2011, 08:04 PM
wait wait wait. So the judge told Samsung to give up unreleased hardware, which basically means giving up company internal secrets. How the hell is that fair? I would understand if Samsung was told to show unreleased hardware to court, but Apple?

I am sure if apple was to be told to give up some unreleased hardware, many of you here will call it unfair and start complaining.

Rodimus Prime
May 24, 2011, 08:06 PM
wait wait wait. So the judge told Samsung to give up unreleased hardware, which basically means giving up company internal secrets. How the hell is that fair? I would understand if Samsung was told to show unreleased hardware to court, but Apple?

I am sure if apple was to be told to give up some unreleased hardware, many of you here will call it unfair and start complaining.

you should read it and understand that the title is VERY VERY miss leading.
All Apple really gets pretty much mock ups with no hardware inside of them. You know those annoying cheap feeling phone phones you see at stores that are just display models. That is all Apple is really getting.

mdriftmeyer
May 24, 2011, 08:17 PM
^This.

This has absolutely nothing to do with patents - you can't patent a look or feel. Instead you protect it with an "industrial design right." Yes phones had touchscreens, grids and home buttons before but as has been pointed out, no phone combined them in such a way as the iPhone. Again, as has been mentioned, the streamlined button UI (i.e. one singular button on the front of the phone) is very distinctive and was something completely new to the market. Look at the metal rim around the bezel, look at the home screen on the S2. It may turn out that it wasn't intentional, but that won't matter in the court. Unless Samsung can prove that they had this design on the drawing board before the iOS products came out the court can block their release.

You're not too bright.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_patent

It's a Design Patent for a reason:


In the United States, a design patent is a patent granted on the ornamental design of a functional item. Design patents are a type of industrial design right. Ornamental designs of jewelry, furniture, beverage containers (see Fig. 1) and computer icons are examples of objects that are covered by design patents.

Outside of the US:


A similar concept, a registered design can be obtained in other countries. In Kenya, Japan, South Korea and Hungary, industrial designs are registered after performing an official novelty search. In the countries of the European Community, one needs to only pay an official fee and meet other formal requirements for registration (e.g. Community design at OHIM, Germany, France, Spain).

Take a wild guess where the Lawsuit resides?

A Design Patent is a subtype of a design right, but recognized as a US Patent requiring Apple to defend it or lose it, thus the lawsuit residing in the US.

*LTD*
May 24, 2011, 08:40 PM
Also, while it might not be relevant to this case, I wonder how Apple would react if the situation is reversed and they had to provide access to their unreleased hardware.

Why would this ever happen? :confused:

Apple 9 times out of 10 is the one being ripped off left and right by everyone. Samsung happened to get way too brazen.

They should go after HTC next. They already are, actually, though at this point there's no talk of any injunction involved if I recall correctly.

Dammit Cubs
May 24, 2011, 08:45 PM
It's called business.

Agreed. When you are dealing with BILLIONS of BILLIONS of dollars? Everyone would do the exact same thing.

Oh wait, I guess everyone on macrumors is a billionaire and understands how to manage one of the biggest and profitable companies in the world.

kdarling
May 24, 2011, 09:11 PM
Samsung Android phones have three or four buttons. This alone tells us that Apple claim is bogus.

Not to mention that Samsung phones, going back many years, have always had a prominent Home or Fire button.

Coincidentally, last night I was looking at my devices and my first thought was that Android and WP7 manufacturers should always have the Home button shaped and/or placed in such a way that it's easy to find.

So Samsung has just done what makes logical and common sense. Apple thought so too. Having a big home button isn't special or rare or some kind of unique idea. Having one button could be, but Samsung doesn't have just one button.

As I've said before, Apple's unique idea was to use the Home button to make the user abort the current app each time they went to start another one. Other makers used it to push the current app into the background or to freeze it. So you could argue that Apple copied everyone else in iOs 4.0+ as far as Home button design.

A Design Patent is a subtype of a design right, but recognized as a US Patent requiring Apple to defend it or lose it, thus the lawsuit residing in the US.

You're thinking of trademarks, which must be defended or lost. Patents don't have that requirement.

I've even read of a case "where the judge ruled it was reasonable for the patent owner to wait several years until lost profits due to the infringement were severe enough to justify the expense of enforcing the patent in court."

They should go after HTC next. They already are, actually, though at this point there's no talk of any injunction involved if I recall correctly.

I'll be surprised if Apple doesn't try to copy HTC's weather animations and other UI innovations.

diabolic
May 24, 2011, 09:32 PM
I'll be surprised if Apple doesn't try to copy HTC's weather animations and other UI innovations.

I'd put my money on Apple eventually finding a nicer and better way to implement those things.

btallada9870
May 24, 2011, 09:34 PM
Apple innovative in tablet market? Yes I agree.

What I'm trying to say is that maybe samsung is innovative. Just looking at the firm measuring sticks (patents holding, R&D $), you kinda have to agree samsung does innovate. No?

I really am not familiar with the respective timing of the releases of Samsung's products, so if you could please give me an example of a product that Samsung has released that was a major innovation, then I'd love to see it.

Samsung is a huge tech company, and I know they make great parts - but there is just not one product in recent years I can think of the top of my head that has absolutely changed the way I use my technology.

I choose Apple products, and do kind of "look down" on Android, but I respect it for what it is and how the competition does actually make iOS better in the end. All I ever wanted was a touchscreen iPod. When the iPhone was introduced, it took the mobile industry in an entirely new direction. I can remember what phones I was looking at before the iPhone came out - not even close to it. The internet experience was what made the first iPhone, while quite seamlessly integrating my iPod and phone functions.

The one innovation I will not give Apple is the app store as it was something I feel was only introduced due to the demand from consumers. So yes, I think that the only reason Android - and the millions of phones that run it - really only exist in their current form is because of Apple. Almost the same thing with the iPad.

Looking at the mobile and tablet industry, which lets just call the future of computing for the most part, I see Apple's innovations right at the top of my head, and while I believe everything else is a good thing because of Apple's attitude for giving me what they want me to have, rather than what I want. Now, many other phone manufacturers have made devices that yes have a touchscreen and a home button, but, quite frankly, you're blind if you don't see that Samsung's products resemble Apple products the most. So, while I would agree that Samsung is most likely innovative on the parts level of devices, I can't think of any product they've created first that has revolutionized anyone's life.

1nsanity
May 24, 2011, 11:00 PM
Looking at the mobile and tablet industry, which lets just call the future of computing for the most part, I see Apple's innovations right at the top of my head, and while I believe everything else is a good thing because of Apple's attitude for giving me what they want me to have, rather than what I want. Now, many other phone manufacturers have made devices that yes have a touchscreen and a home button, but, quite frankly, you're blind if you don't see that Samsung's products resemble Apple products the most. So, while I would agree that Samsung is most likely innovative on the parts level of devices, I can't think of any product they've created first that has revolutionized anyone's life.

The problem is that you are looking only at product innovation. You forget the importance of process innovation, which in Samsung's case has had a big impact. Innovation is outside-in, and in order to remain competitive, companies such as Samsung and Apple have developed 'over-time' core competencies and competitive assets, mainly processes that cannot be emulated or copied easily.

I find it interesting how you discard several of Samsung's innovation, only to put forward a product largely composed of those individual innovations you've just discarded.

You are entitled to an opinion and that is not what I try to debacle. I simply thought your points of reference to Samsung's lack of proper innovation in comparison to that of Apple didn't hold.

Samsung invest a lot more than Apple in R & D. As an example, Samsung as also redefined accepted memory growth standards and they are constantly working towards new products. If it wasn't for many of Samsung's innovative products, the company's insight and strategic intent developped over time, wouldn't have made all of this(e.g. iPhone) possible in the first place.

johncarync
May 24, 2011, 11:14 PM
Apple, I think you owe Samsung an apology. Samsung has their own R&D and Design departments. They don't need you! :rolleyes:

http://www.subarusvx.com/Samsung.jpg

jonomo
May 24, 2011, 11:29 PM
I'm glad Apple is doing this... I use to work at Samsung Electronics and I gotta tell you, their R&D department has more dissected products from other companies than their own... This was before the iPhone days, so I imagine now, it's just filled with Apple products... they do not know how to innovate, they just know how to imitate (to their respects, they can imitate much quicker than their competitors)...

Also, some argue that Samsung products don't sell, but that's only the case in the US.. in Korea, they sell well.. and Samsung uses very under handed techniques to keep Apple out of their main market, Korea.. I lived there through the launch of iPhone, and Samsung kept the iPhone out of the market for almost 2 years while they tried to catch up, which eventually led to the first Galaxy phone... it was total junk.. while it looked like an iPhone, they totallyl missed the boat on the UI and applications.. and now they're forced to go with Andriod...

Samsung Electronics is total junk... they survive because they take advantage of their local market in Korea.. ripping off their consumers with high priced electronics that they pretty much just give away in the States... and they disenfranchise local consumers by blocking innovative products made by their competitors...

JAT
May 25, 2011, 12:05 AM
Seems fitting to mention that one of the Tabs is now onsale at woot! for Wed.

Lunarstone
May 25, 2011, 12:12 AM
This is great! I can't wait for Samusung to lose this case. Isn't obvious that the interface is so similar to Apple's products? The only difference is the line of dots that are at the bottom for iOS now shifted to the top for Samsung.

You can't just make 1 minor difference and expect to get away with copyright infringement. You wanna copy, at least do it right.

JAT
May 25, 2011, 12:13 AM
I'd put my money on Apple eventually finding a nicer and better way to implement those things.

It would certainly be nice if they would pay attention to the Weather app for a minute or 2. They haven't updated it since before the iPhone came out.

Lunarstone
May 25, 2011, 12:17 AM
When I got the Samsung F480i, I showed my friend the phone and guess what? He was shocked! The F480i and the iPhone looked SO similar! Both had the line of dots to show when moving between panes, the F480i had 1 speaker and 1 home button. The difference was that the 1 speaker in front was same size as the home button on the iPhone. Likewise, the home button for the F480i was same size as the speaker on the iPhone.

lilo777
May 25, 2011, 12:55 AM
This is great! I can't wait for Samusung to lose this case. Isn't obvious that the interface is so similar to Apple's products? The only difference is the line of dots that are at the bottom for iOS now shifted to the top for Samsung.

You can't just make 1 minor difference and expect to get away with copyright infringement. You wanna copy, at least do it right.

That's exactly what Apple thought when they sued Microsoft. And they lost. Besides, nobody buys Galaxy phones because of TouchWiz. If anything, people want something less boring than iPhone icon grids.

Lunarstone
May 25, 2011, 12:57 AM
That's exactly what Apple thought when they sued Microsoft. And they lost. Besides, nobody buys Galaxy phones because of TouchWiz. If anything, people want something less boring than iPhone icon grids.

Apple sued Microsoft? I'm not in the know. Please enlighten? Thanks!

Forgive me, but so what if nobody buys Galaxy phones? Fact still remains that Samsung has copied interface designs for both hardware and software, not just from Apple but other companies too. Not only do they copy, they also fail at copying.

ten-oak-druid
May 25, 2011, 01:11 AM
Samsung's tablet is a flop. Version 2 will be just as much of a flop I'm sure.

Samsung should drop their plans for a tablet and concentrate on making parts for Apple.

Lunarstone
May 25, 2011, 01:12 AM
Samsung's tablet is a flop. Version 2 will be just as much of a flop I'm sure.

Samsung should drop their plans for a tablet and concentrate on making parts for Apple.

So agree with you! People criticize the iPad for being an oversized iPod touch. The Samsung Galaxy Tab is truly an oversized Galaxy phone.

AppleScruff1
May 25, 2011, 01:17 AM
Oh, Steve. You bully customers, you bully poorly paid Foxconn employees, you bully your vendors, and you bully your competitors.

How dare you talk about Uncle Steve like that.

Lunarstone
May 25, 2011, 01:19 AM
How dare you talk about Uncle Steve like that.

Yeah! How dare you! Steve may be harsh with his methods (though I don't think so) but his intentions are true. Without him, Apple probably wouldn't be where it is now.

AppleScruff1
May 25, 2011, 01:28 AM
Yeah! How dare you! Steve may be harsh with his methods (though I don't think so) but his intentions are true. Without him, Apple probably wouldn't be where it is now.

Exactly. Steve thinks only of the consumer and what is best for us. He is a selfless, giving man who only wants to better mankind. And he knows how to do it and nobody else does. Steve is all wise and knowing. And he does it just for us.

Lunarstone
May 25, 2011, 01:31 AM
Exactly. Steve thinks only of the consumer and what is best for us. He is a selfless, giving man who only wants to better mankind. And he knows how to do it and nobody else does. Steve is all wise and knowing. And he does it just for us.

I remembered there was a video that Macrumors posted of Jobs in 2001 giving a tour of one of the Apple stores. His words that he chose to speak and use gave me the impression that he knew what he wanted and more importantly, what the customers wanted. Though you can never satisfy everyone, you can satisfy most people. And that is what Apple is doing right now.

AppleScruff1
May 25, 2011, 01:38 AM
I remembered there was a video that Macrumors posted of Jobs in 2001 giving a tour of one of the Apple stores. His words that he chose to speak and use gave me the impression that he knew what he wanted and more importantly, what the customers wanted. Though you can never satisfy everyone, you can satisfy most people. And that is what Apple is doing right now.

The customer doesn't know what they want. Steve tells us what we want and we buy it. Only Steve knows.

shandyman
May 25, 2011, 01:52 AM
Apple so scared of the crushing power of Android. I wonder if they will ever go after the best phone manufacturer HTC.

do any of the HTC phones look like an iPhone? no. therefore apple won't go after them. use your brain, or is it too riddled from your love affair with HTC? lol

swagi
May 25, 2011, 02:32 AM
When I got the Samsung F480i, I showed my friend the phone and guess what? He was shocked! The F480i and the iPhone looked SO similar! Both had the line of dots to show when moving between panes, the F480i had 1 speaker and 1 home button. The difference was that the 1 speaker in front was same size as the home button on the iPhone. Likewise, the home button for the F480i was same size as the speaker on the iPhone.

You, sir, need to see an ophtalmologist!

Same applies to your friend.

Lunarstone
May 25, 2011, 02:34 AM
You, sir, need to see an ophtalmologist!

Same applies to your friend.

Why do you say that? :(

batchtaster
May 25, 2011, 02:36 AM
By publicly appearing to be worried to this extent, and wanting to see the product, they are in effect lending their opinion the fact that this Samsung device muse be good, and good enough to threaten their "Apple" product. After all it's it's worse, why would they worry?

Not really. There's nothing here that suggests it's "good", just that it's visually unoriginal. Inside, Samsung could be filling it with whipped cream and fertilizer. Doesn't make it "good". Makes it on par with the Chinese back-street iPhone knock-offs that have no telephone circuitry in them, except made by a large company who should know better.

batchtaster
May 25, 2011, 02:45 AM
Apple so scared of the crushing power of Android. I wonder if they will ever go after the best phone manufacturer HTC.

Protecting your product identity =/= "scared".

If Pepsi previewed a new cola with the Coke ribbon device on it, you damn well better believe the pair would be fronting up in court, and Coke would be demanding to see product samples. Does that mean Coke is "scared" of Pepsi? Hardly. (I personally prefer Pepsi.)

b0blndsy
May 25, 2011, 03:06 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPad; U; CPU OS 4_2 like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C134b Safari/6533.18.5)

Lesson learned: ripping off Apple is a bad idea.

Ripping off anyone, any competitor is a bad idea. You can't succeed by copying others. Take the example of Apple unique products, Apples products list is very small yet its the one of the leading company and most trusted brand in the world.

iansilv
May 25, 2011, 03:19 AM
"Oh- this- this phone Samsung- it's.. it's slippery! (crash) Oh! Whoops! Broke it!!"

D-Dave
May 25, 2011, 03:23 AM
Ah, just another reason why the current patent / copyright system is so broken.

It is no longer realy important who did what first or who innovated something but whoever brought something to a judges awareness first (like "yeah, i heard about that") will most likely win those cases.

The iPhone is actualy a perfect example for this. Most if not all features were there previously. The basic design to me looks like a reduced HP or HTC Phone as early as Windows Mobile 5 (for example the early HP ipaq models).

The grid arrangement of programms was also there in windows mobile 5. Considering the Hom,escreen being more like an information filled lockscreen an a tap on the programms button the unlock "slide" the layout is just the same. (that's probably one reason why so many people who previously used winmobile 5/6 had such an easy time transfering to the iPhone)

if you look at some developer sites like xda-developers you will also find that many things found in ios were done by independent developers for the various htc phones way before the iphone was presented.

Don't get me wrong, i'm not trying to talk down the iphone, i'm just saying the developement was not innovate something new but to combine existing tech and making it appealing to the average joe. This is also the reason why all those patent related law suits realy sicken me. All the big players in the computer and telecommunications business copy eachother like there is no tomorrow, so give me a break about all those "but but but YOU took my candy...GIVE IT BACK" whining.

If i had to say anything i would reduce the period of ANY given patent to a limited amount of time (like it was before disney got american legislators to extend patent duration endlessly) This would result in an advantage for the innovators for a set amount of time only. To stay ahead after that those innovators would have to come up with something new.

A great system for the customer (think about generic aspirin which works just as good as the stuff bayer makes but costs only a fraction). The only downside to this is that all those patent trool firms would be out of business....booohooo

1nsanity
May 25, 2011, 03:35 AM
Ripping off anyone, any competitor is a bad idea. You can't succeed by copying others. Take the example of Apple unique products, Apples products list is very small yet its the one of the leading company and most trusted brand in the world.

You are kidding right? by saying that you can't succeed by copying others? Please explain or better any examples?

adztaylor
May 25, 2011, 03:40 AM
Once again people are picking sides based on personal likes or dislikes about products and companies. Sorry, but this is being decided by laws. Apple has a legal obligation to protect its intellectual property or else they lose it. The courts have to decide on the basis what the law says, not which phone the judge likes. Apple won this preliminary step because the law said they should. It is only a small step of a much larger legal picture. The judge just felt Apple's legal argument carried weight.

Now go back to your cheerleading one side or the other based on everything but the law.

Best post in this thread +1.

Piggie
May 25, 2011, 04:11 AM
Problem is that Judges and Jurys.............. In fact everyone has personal feelings. No matter how hard you try to put on a professional front. You are human, not a robot and can't totally 100% be impartial.

It's easy when things are clear cut. did he kill him or not, but when it's an opinion or a feeling of how something looks or behaves then naturally different people even the very best people will see things differently.

Why you can get Judges, Lawyes, Jurys, Scientists etc etc disagreeing when presented with any set of data.

Northgrove
May 25, 2011, 04:23 AM
Almost. Actually it's called bad long term strategy. Compete on your own merits, don't try to win by handicapping others. Have you learned nothing from Microsoft?
Bad long term strategy? Did you watch Apple stock since Steve Jobs stepped up as CEO? What are you talking about? I mean - when speaking of reality. A CEO's job is to improve a company's stock value, since stock value is in turn a reflection of investors' trust in the company, and the CEO's long term strategy.

Northgrove
May 25, 2011, 04:26 AM
When you can no longer innovate....litigate.

Yeah, Apple is in dire need of innovating. They've gone nowhere since 2000!

oh wait

JakeBarnes12
May 25, 2011, 05:07 AM
Some of you are sooo funny. I had a PDA that had a home button, Apple copied that. It also had a screen that you could touch, Apple copied that. It had a power button.... yep, you guessed it Apple copied it.

Apple is rediculous and I hope they lose every BS lawsuit they file. (As is my hope with any BS lawsuit.)

Look at the Apple designs, look at the Samsung designs; it's clear Samsung copied.

I'm afraid you're letting your blind hatred of Apple destroy any reason you might have once possessed.

Also, please post an image of this unnamed "PDA" you mention to support your broad claims.

bushido
May 25, 2011, 06:09 AM
yet apple never bothered to sue the LG Arena ... oh wait, it wasnt such big of a threat :cool:

cirus
May 25, 2011, 06:14 AM
Why do you say that? :(

Same colour and shape but different. Different buttons and speaker with the logo right on the front. What makes it seem similar is the colour and the metal trim, neither of which can be licensed or copyrighted.

http://www.celltalkz.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/samsung-f480i.jpg

Look at laptops for a moment. If the logo and branding was removed from a typical laptop could you tell the manufacturer? All very similar with shiny black plactic (ASUS, acer, MSI) yet they don't bicker constantly about them.

mijail
May 25, 2011, 06:38 AM
The customer doesn't know what they want. Steve tells us what we want and we buy it. Only Steve knows.

Judging by where the market and the industry are today compared to where they were before the iPhone appeared, ...
... yes, looks like only Steve knows.

SAD. But true. But hey, it would be even sadder if it wasn't for him!

Steelers7510
May 25, 2011, 06:52 AM
Kinda seems like apple is being the big bad bully here. Yes samsung may have gotten some ideas from apple, but it's not like they made a blatant copy of the iPhone. Seriously though, does apple really think there going to find anything groundbreaking with these unreleased Samsung phones that they now have access to?

mikerr
May 25, 2011, 06:52 AM
And the original iPhone copied the LG Prada:
http://www.mad4mobilephones.com/images/lg-prada-vs-apple-iphone.jpg
Also look at its GUI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PSvpPXppXA&feature=player_embedded#at=183

They all copy each other...

Bonte
May 25, 2011, 07:02 AM
Almost. Actually it's called bad long term strategy. Compete on your own merits, don't try to win by handicapping others. Have you learned nothing from Microsoft?

Samsung is the Microsoft, or Lindows in another story. Microsoft became big after copying Apple and Lindows died after being sued by Microsoft. Yes, i believe Apple did learn from Microsoft.

Thunderhawks
May 25, 2011, 07:05 AM
Ripping off anyone, any competitor is a bad idea. You can't succeed by copying others. Take the example of Apple unique products, Apples products list is very small yet its the one of the leading company and most trusted brand in the world.

Can't succeed by copying others?

Have you ever studied the success of Japanese companies in many areas?

The have taken over entire industries.

And that started via copying, which is like learning what works, add some ideas along the way and bingo ..success!

BLACKFRIDAY
May 25, 2011, 07:09 AM
And the original iPhone copied the LG Prada:
Image (http://www.mad4mobilephones.com/images/lg-prada-vs-apple-iphone.jpg)
Also look at its GUI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PSvpPXppXA&feature=player_embedded#at=183

They all copy each other...

I think I need to get a good pair of eyes to spot a similarity there.

blow45
May 25, 2011, 07:13 AM
A can of whoop ass is opening up for samsung.

Come on Lar sue google for java, and let the real fun begin.

Bonte
May 25, 2011, 07:14 AM
And the original iPhone copied the LG Prada:
Also look at its GUI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PSvpPXppXA&feature=player_embedded#at=183

They all copy each other...

The interface doesn't work like the iphone and LG largely copied the old Newton and Palm interface.

http://www.applegazette.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/interfaces.jpg

Piggie
May 25, 2011, 07:15 AM
Can't succeed by copying others?

Have you ever studied the success of Japanese companies in many areas?

The have taken over entire industries.

And that started via copying, which is like learning what works, add some ideas along the way and bingo ..success!

Yes you are right, they see something, copy it to begin with for a lower price and then make it better.
Giving the customers extras for free/built in that they had to pay for on the original model.
They then increase it's power/quality/speed and often the original maker is just too stuck in their ways and too slow to respond, or just pig headed so won't change.

Apple are up against the big boys now and they don't like it.
The only way they will be able to compete is by genuinely making their devices better constantly.

It's like any race, just because they have started before the others and have a 1 lap lead, the others are now off the starting blocks, and if Apple does not keep on running, the other group WILL overtake them.

And no amount of moaning and lawsuits will change this in the long run.

Apple have their nice little niche with the iMacs and Macbooks where they do what they like and they don't really have to worry to much about PC's taking their loyal customers.

On the Tablet front, it's very early days and there are still hundreds of millions of fresh customers out there to get onboard your system.
More and more of them buying Android/Google phones every day.

Apple has to concentrate on excellent products that don't handicap the users, and promote a company image that people like.
If they gain a negative image, and boy, they seem to have been doing nothing but trying to create a negative image over the past year or so, well, we'll see long term I guess.

blow45
May 25, 2011, 07:19 AM
If they gain a negative image, and boy, they seem to have been doing nothing but trying to create a negative image over the past year or so, well, we'll see long term I guess.

huh? I was under the impression that within a year they are both bigger in capitalization than ms and in proft, I would think this is a postive image seeing as their products are flying off the shelfs.

and btw you proudly sport in your signature about 10 gadgets or so and none from apple but the ipad? how did you manage this?

shigzeo
May 25, 2011, 07:19 AM
Apple has to go through with this suit of course but it seems a waste of time. The galaxy tablets aren't selling. I guess the phone is of greater concern.

Why do people keep thinking the Galaxy isn't selling? Maybe in America, but in South Korea, it is incredibly popular. I see it more often than the iPad in public, but I imagine it is because it is smaller.

swagi
May 25, 2011, 07:32 AM
Why do you say that? :(

Because I actually had one for a week. It was sold during the time of the first iPhone. The UI sucked as it was still implemented for a stylus.

It had a comletely different screen, a completely different form factor and most of all 3 buttons at the lower end. I also had the first run of models with a plastic back.

There was absolutely NO similarity. Same applies to the Galaxy line of phones by the way. I own one, my wife owned several iPhones. I clearly never mixed our phones because they actually ARE DIFFERENT.

But, well, this all is posted in a forum, where people think a swipe-gesture to unlock the screen is patentable. :rolleyes:

jb1280
May 25, 2011, 07:39 AM
Apple has to concentrate on excellent products that don't handicap the users, and promote a company image that people like.
If they gain a negative image, and boy, they seem to have been doing nothing but trying to create a negative image over the past year or so, well, we'll see long term I guess.

It's not worth my time to offer a retort to your entire post, but one question: precisely where has Apple gained a negative image due to its actions in the last year where they did not already have a negative image?

Did the Flash dispute last Spring kill iPad sales for the year?
Did Google's rhetoric of "Openness" at 2010's I/O kill iOS app development and app sales?
Did "AntennaGate" result in a decline in iPhone sales?
Have magazine and newspaper publishers been totally unwilling to deal with the 30% for in app subscriptions?
Who, precisely is going to buy a Samsung Galaxy instead of an iPhone because Apple is suing Samsung?

By all accounts, consumers are broadly satisfied with Macbooks, iPhones, and iPads; satisfied with Apple's retail experience; and satisfied with Apple's customer support.

If we remove the true-believers (those that buy every iPhone and iPad) and those who are either ideologically or politically opposed to Apple (argue about openness, etc.), I think we would find that Apple has earned a great deal of good will among most consumers of electronic devices that will serve them well in the future.

Apple may very well end up with less than 30% of the smartphone market. The mobile phone market was well-established before Apple ended it and as people transition towards smartphones from feature phones, I doubt their purchasing habits will change much. (Based on carriers, contracts, price, and debating phone model last).

The iPad market may very well mimic the phone market, but there are many reasons to say this is not inevitable. Tablets are not necessary like phones and Apple does well where they can define an entire market, like the iPod. Carrier subsides and contracts are not as pervasive and the retail experience is hugely important.

ChrisTX
May 25, 2011, 07:46 AM
Many great UI designs as well from the likes of Microsoft, Motorola and HTC.
Please tell me you're not referring to MotoBlur?!

macsmurf
May 25, 2011, 07:47 AM
Samsung is the Microsoft, or Lindows in another story. Microsoft became big after copying Apple and Lindows died after being sued by Microsoft. Yes, i believe Apple did learn from Microsoft.

The main contributing factor for Microsofts success was the realization that you could sell software on its own merits and not just as something you gave away with the hardware. It is true that Microsoft got a lot of ideas from Xerox, though.

ChrisTX
May 25, 2011, 07:51 AM
And the original iPhone copied the LG Prada:
Image (http://www.mad4mobilephones.com/images/lg-prada-vs-apple-iphone.jpg)
Also look at its GUI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PSvpPXppXA&feature=player_embedded#at=183

They all copy each other...

The LG Prada was released in the spring of 2007, and the iPhone in June of 2007. If I'm not mistaken the iPhone was actually announced prior to the release, and announcement of the Prada.

ghostlyorb
May 25, 2011, 08:00 AM
those 5 phones are the ones that broke the patent! Apple will get access to 5 unreleased phones that we don't know about yet. And I had no idea that Samsung made the Droid Charge... gross.

ghostlyorb
May 25, 2011, 08:00 AM
And the original iPhone copied the LG Prada:
Image (http://www.mad4mobilephones.com/images/lg-prada-vs-apple-iphone.jpg)
Also look at its GUI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PSvpPXppXA&feature=player_embedded#at=183

They all copy each other...

Are you drunk? Those look nothing alike....

notabadname
May 25, 2011, 09:02 AM
How can people call this bullying. The products are a rip-off. They look like clones that you would find overseas, right down to the display of the Apps. I am really surprised by how many people on here think that it is OK to clone trademarked and intellectual property in the name of "competition". Must be the same group of people that flaunt their "copy-Rolexs" and faux Gucci bags.

Lunarstone
May 25, 2011, 09:05 AM
Same colour and shape but different. Different buttons and speaker with the logo right on the front. What makes it seem similar is the colour and the metal trim, neither of which can be licensed or copyrighted.

Image (http://www.celltalkz.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/samsung-f480i.jpg)

Look at laptops for a moment. If the logo and branding was removed from a typical laptop could you tell the manufacturer? All very similar with shiny black plactic (ASUS, acer, MSI) yet they don't bicker constantly about them.

Yeah, but the speaker and the home buttons, turned upside down, look at exactly like the iPhone except that the functions are different.

Not only that, the UI is also similar. You can slide between panels and there also a line of dots at the bottom of the screen to indicate which panel you are on. When going to the main menu, the way the programs slide in to place are also like iOS

toddybody
May 25, 2011, 09:05 AM
Oh, Steve. You bully customers, you bully poorly paid Foxconn employees, you bully your vendors, and you bully your competitors.

Wow, sucks to be crucified.

Anyways, I know the comment above was "toned down". But the reason Dr. Q edited it was "bad taste"? Im sorry, its either a forum violation [remove the post], or its an allowable post. Any middle ground is total rubbish.

PS: Educate me if I missed some part of the events folks, take care.

Lunarstone
May 25, 2011, 09:08 AM
How can people call this bullying. The products are a rip-off. They look like clones that you would find overseas, right down to the display of the Apps. I am really surprised by how many people on here think that it is OK to clone trademarked and intellectual property in the name of "competition". Must be the same group of people that flaunt their "copy-Rolexs" and faux Gucci bags.

It is NOT bullying! Apple is just protecting what's theirs.

silentnite
May 25, 2011, 09:37 AM
Kind of reminds me of the old Microsoft when they first started out. Apple & Steve jobs is taking it's place... What's mines is mines & what's yours is mines. I'll take that little brother.

Mattie Num Nums
May 25, 2011, 09:59 AM
The interface doesn't work like the iphone and LG largely copied the old Newton and Palm interface.

Image (http://www.applegazette.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/interfaces.jpg)

They are all the same minus the dock. I think thats the point. A grid full of icons have been around forever.

Xtremehkr
May 25, 2011, 10:39 AM
Samsung must have really infringed upon a few things for the courts to be giving Apple so much access to future Samsung products.

AppleScruff1
May 25, 2011, 11:08 AM
Judging by where the market and the industry are today compared to where they were before the iPhone appeared, ...
... yes, looks like only Steve knows.

SAD. But true. But hey, it would be even sadder if it wasn't for him!

I don't know how mankind survived for all those millenniums without Steve. Too bad he didn't put his knowledge and greatness to curing sickness and disease.

jeman
May 25, 2011, 11:09 AM
This is a good start to settling this copy cat issue. In the end we will know who actually copied who.

AppleScruff1
May 25, 2011, 11:16 AM
This is a good start to settling this copy cat issue. In the end we will know who actually copied who.

Apple copied Alexander Graham Bell.