Is that the most recent data? Thee article I linked to says the iPhone is almost 2/3rd of Apple's profit. But that was back in August...
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple and Samsung Seek to Extend Infringement Claims in Second U.S. Patent Lawsuit
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Is that the most recent data? Thee article I linked to says the iPhone is almost 2/3rd of Apple's profit. But that was back in August...
I said revenue, so that's not at odd with your article (your article even cites the 51% of total revenues). Revenues are gross, Profits are net.
I would eventually like to be a UI guy, and while I think Apple should attempt a settlement out of court, I will not stand for UI's being stolen like samsung has done. The overall look and feel of the devices are extremely similar - and samsung wouldn't be making the NoteII or the S3 if they hadn't been successful with the near-direct copies that are the Ace, S1, S2 and Mini (not s3 mini...).
Putting multitouch in a phone?
The homescreen grid and icon design?
Need I bring this picture back?
Are you suggesting that Apple invented or was the first to use a grid and icon design in a phone?
Do you have any idea how hilarious that is?
Not as hilarious as the fact that he doesn't know about the SE P800 or the Nokia 7650 :
Oh, you mean that technology that was going into computers more and more anyway as part of a trend, and Apple was the first to market it though internal documents of Samsung indicate that they were indeed working on such a device?
Interesting. Heck, for reference, I'll include this: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/02/if-android-is-a-stolen-product-then-so-was-the-iphone/
And that grid. I haven't seen it in MS windows before? You do realize that's not the default screen for Android and Samsung, right? No? Doesn't matter much.
So Apple took an existing technology and brought it to market a little bit faster. And put in a grid that looked a lot like Windows 3.1. Got it.
I thought the real innovations were things such as applying Gorilla Glass to electronics, which was a Steve Jobs idea. Too bad you missed the real innovation to go after rectangles, grids, and existing prototypical technology.
Anyone else want to try to name a real Apple innovation? I can. Can you?
My Treo had a grid of icons. So did my Palm Pilot. It wasn't just a computer OS that had this easily recognized "idea"
Blinders are blinders though, right?
Software is protected by copyright. Someone rips off your program, you can sue the for copyright infringement.
If someone comes up with a better/different way to implement your program without using any of your copyrighted code they should be free to do so without fear of being sued.
This is called progress.
With software patents, the code itself becomes irrelevant. The process is protected and progress becomes much more difficult to achieve.
Considering Samsung invented many core technologies including standard essential patents regarding 3G and LTE radios, memory, CPU manufacturing, display tech, etc.
Those are true core tech. Without it, you have no iPhone.
Last edited:
I agree.
And I would prefer Apple to copy a few more cydia tweaks instead of replacing a usable maps app with a broken one and calling it a feature.
Go ahead, spend millions designing SOMETHING, whatever it is, I'll just knock it off, that's Okay right?
Look and feel, baby, look and feel.
----------
Not as hilarious as the fact that he doesn't know about the SE P800 or the Nokia 7650 :
![p800_7650.jpg]()
those are round and irregular shaped icons, and the iPhone looks nothing like those devices. Go back to my image, from a distance you can't tell the two apart.
----------
I still fail to see how, except from the 0day glitches, the app is broken. I've used it across the country and I haven't gotten lost once. Gmaps got me lost in the past because it wasn't a GPS app, it was a map app and didn't do turn by turn.
----------
Look and feel are not protected by copyright, that's where patents come in, please look things up before you talk about them.
Code? Code?? I never mentioned code. I said UI.
A better way? Yes. the exact same way? Hell no.
Samsung hasn't invented sh**.
Let's go 1 by 1 here.
3G/LTE radios - manufacturing yes, design? hell no they just manufacture other people's (QComm and others) designs
Memory - DDR, DDR2, DDR3 were all JEDEC - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JEDEC
not samsung. They manufacture them.
Display tech - nope. nothing to do with the iPhone, OLED yes - but even Samsung is abandoning those.
Okay - so they have a lot of Fabrication patents, so they can make more iphone chips than anyone else. To correct your statement, without Samsung, we would have fewer iPhones. Not "no" iPhone
Look and feel is a BS metric to judge anything by. It's such a vaguely defined thing, you could practically put anything underneath it and call it your own because it "looks and feels" like sorta like something you'd do.
If it were more than at least a half assed argument, you'd think maybe Apple would've won a case after attempting to use it in court time and time again.
You have to understand when arguing the "iPhone look-a-like" argument, they'll say any phone that looks vaguely like an iPhone made after 2007 is an obvious rip off, whereas any phone that vaguely looks like the iPhone before 2007 has to look exactly the same, otherwise they'll say they have nothing in common, and Apple couldn't have copied it.
Anything that came before has to have rounded corners, be the same color, the same thickness, the same silver edging. It has to be the same down to the tiniest detail to be considered an iPhone before the iPhone. On the other hand, anything after 2007 only has to be a candybar phone with a large screen to be considered a ripoff.
It's a heads I win, tails you lose situation.
This looks like a shot across the bow. The processors will likely go next and that will be very damaging. Apple has been "grooming" TSMC for 2 years now and they still don't appear to be ready to mass-produce processors yet.
I also don't know if I should be worried that Apple is changing to these no-name companies for their components. These may be household names in China for all I know, but will Amperex Technology Limited and Tianjin Lishen Battery make reliable products? With Samsung, at least we knew we were getting quality components.
Ohhhhh I understand alright
I figured as much. Still, it's good to spell it out to show we're on to them.
Patents don't protect look and feel, they protect some aspects of design, but what you're referring to is Trade Dress and Trademarks. Things Apple did assert against Samsung, since their lawyers are much better about knowing IP than some forum goers around here.
And btw, your pics ? I have no problem telling them apart, no matter how far you hold them.
If you ever become a UI guy, I guarantee you that you'll take as much inspiration from others, as ideas that you come up with yourself. In fact, to be successful, your users will expect a lot of familiarity.
For example, Apple used a phone icon with green, because the combination was common symbology used on every cell phone made since day one. They did it so users would instantly recognize how to make a call.
In fact, Apple copied 90% of the core design of every smartphone made up until then: a rectangular slab with physical volume, power and home buttons, with apps for phone, maps, contacts, notes, music, etc. Then they added in some UI choices that commonly arise on any all-touch device. They didn't invent these things, but they picked out and improved on what was best. Likewise, others have done the same.
Notice, however, that no one followed some of Apple's poorer initial design decisions, like leaving out a Back button that every other smartphone OS has, or not having downloadable apps or multitasking at first, or scattering app-specific settings between the app's local menu and the global settings menu, and so forth.
Do you have a specific UI similarity in mind, or is it all about a vague overall look and feel including the case design. I agree that the overall impression was similar, but without overt copying.
Last edited:
You're repeating the same nonsense again. If someone wants the look and feel of the iphone, they buy the iphone. Apple has subsidized options in many countries down to $0. Unsubsidized purchases where some options may be hundreds cheaper most likely wouldn't have turned into iphone sales anyway. You need to at least say something with substance rather than an incredibly dated use of slang.
You should probably deal with some of those anger issues. In many cases registered designs just protect ornamental design elements. They don't specifically protect look and feel. You're confused because this is likely the only situation you've ever reviewed on the topic (not really my forte either).
They hold a number of the patents that make these things possible. Typically patents claim elements which describe how something would be made or achieved. It only becomes really confusing if you look at some of the "rectangle with rounded corners" types that don't really describe a complete device.
Here we go again!
----------
Although to be fair, they did not come up with the only 3G inventions.
----------
Although to be fair, they did not come up with the only 3G inventions.
Look and feel cannot be patented... it can be trademarked, but not patented.
No you didn't say anything about UI... you said you were a "dev".
Developers write code.
So your saying none of Samsung's 819 LTE patents, some of which are currently used inside those Qualcomm chips, are not real?
The very same patents Samsung is suing Apple for.
Ahh yes... JEDEC. Standard base memory patents, many of which expired a while ago.
Samsung has thousands of patents related to memory chip design and controllers.
But if you want to go that route, all cell phones must be a rip off of Bell Labs 1946 radio phone or Motorola's original 1973 patented designs right?
That IPS display in the original iPhone is Samsung's patented design.
One of their IPS LCD display patents goes back to 1999 (USPTO 5907379).
Of course not.
Many of the very things people are complaining about being "copied" or "stolen", were created by various entities and improved upon over time.
The world does not need companies that try and lock out future development by claiming exclusivity through intimidation and lawsuits using weak if not completely bogus patents.
Yes... at some point the discussion might actually past the patents.
I'm guilty of it from time to time.
Last edited: