According to you. Maps where no big deal before Apple made their own, or rather, it's not something most people paid much attention to.
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.
ITC Rules Apple Infringed on Samsung Patents, Issues Cease and Desist Order for Older Apple Devices
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
According to you. Maps where no big deal before Apple made their own, or rather, it's not something most people paid much attention to.
On and on and all that happens is that lawyers get rich
agreed, lawyers getting rich and consumers forced to buy the same device at a higher price. these lawsuits are nothing but a way to increase the product's selling price, govt. should do something to stop it.
Probably because it wasn't such a contentious issue before Apple Maps showed up.
Hey, it's just another battlefield in the Apple vs. Google war.
The revolution will be vectorized.
It was still misrepresentation. But when Apple does it - you're cool with it. It's ok - just admit that you excuse apple but Samsung doesn't get the same treatment.
YOU can choose to believe what you want. That doesn't make it fact. It also doesn't make it ubiquitous among others.
Sorry are you suggesting I believe Samsung over Apple? I have the same trust and mistrust in both Apple and Samsung. As I do with any company.
Yes, you are fair and unbiased. I forgot that, sorry.
But it sure applies to anyone who by default attributes the Apple screenshot to a mistake.
No sir.
Jobs was still trying to show that the iPhone showed "the real internet" and that it was faster at it. He wasn't even publicly anti-Flash at the time.
Everyone noticed it. Everyone did a screen compare at the time. It was pretty big news.
(Jobs' demos onstage are usually done over WiFi to a backstage dedicated Apple server with its own modified copies of websites. This is done partly to make sure the demo works, and partly to make sure there are no visual surprises.)
And in some ways, that's really too bad. It was getting better and faster all the time. I think that's why Jobs finally came out against it. He could not stand the idea of device independent apps that he could not control.
As for Flash being "dead", I sometimes use an Android tablet with an older OS version to surf the web, because I keep running across sites that use Flash.
Let's say for arguments sake that you are right, they did this to hide how widespread Flash was in reality in their demo.
How does that relate to, or make Samsung's use of an iOS screenshot a mistake?
It's just pointing finger isn't it?
The first version of iOS did not have native apps.
It's dead because Adobe has come out and officially told the world it doesn't intend to maintain it.
http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/
Maybe you should take a look at the date at the bottom of that rant. I mean letter. Long after iOS 1.0 - where Jobs actually was excited about web apps. What changed? Deciding to open an App Store. Then web apps were evil - and flash had to die.
All irrelevant to this thread and the original topic. It seems as though some people are really annoyed that Apple was the receiving end (not Samsung) on an ITC decision banning older devices. I'm sure everyone will get over it soon enough and move on to more important topics. Like - what the hell Apple's plan is for the Mac Pro
iOS never had Flash support so the date of that letter is not relevant. He, and Apple was always agains it from the start, and did never support it. I don't believe they ever said that web apps where evil, in fact Jobs mentions HTML5 as the way forward and now everyone seems to be in agreement of that, including Adobe.
What is missing for the last dinosaurs moving on is DRM.
You seem to keep changing the goalpost or switching what you want to talk about. Whatever man - you have angst against Samsung. And apparently Flash. Whatever helps you to sleep at night.
What goal post did I change?
I did not bring up Flash. You quoted me and a letter from Jobs reasoning about Flash support.
I addressed your claims in the post.
Here's the bottom line. Both Apple and Samsung - and probably every company - has had gaffes when it comes to advertising, demos, etc. It's the nature of the beast. It happens. Time to move on. When it happens - it's not proof of one company or another ALSO being copycats or any other epithet. It means there was a glitch. Again. It happens. Move on.
That's correct, unless one company actually COPIES the other company, then it's arguably at least a valid suspicion to have.
No. Not if you look at the big picture. But this whole conversation is again irrelevant unless one is upset and needs to finger point because they don't like ITC's ruling.
Apple (for this and only at this time) "lost." No biggie in the scheme of things as it's relatively meaningless.
Everything else is - as you wrote "It's just pointing finger isn't it?"
I do look at the big picture, they have a history of copying, for example look at the Blackjack being their interpretation of a Blackberry. And I agree that it's irrelevant, but you brought it up and quoted my post wanted to discuss Flash so I don't think it's fair that you blame me for diverting the subject.
Apple (for this and only at this time) "lost." No biggie in the scheme of things as it's relatively meaningless.
Everything else is - as you wrote "It's just pointing finger isn't it?"
Again, I did not bring up Flash. I agree that it's irrelevant to the ITC ruling.
I didn't bring up flash. I only supported the fact that Steve didn't really speak against Flash (and start his real "vendetta" against it) until the publishing of that letter/declaration.
I think you mean to say someone else brought up flash.
Did I say that you brought up Flash? It doesn't matter though, you are actively discussing it with me, yet want to blame it fully on me, which seems a bit hypocritical.
You didn't support anything, because that letter came as a result of a s.h.i.t.s.t.o.r.m on the internet about the lack of Flash support in iOS, people anticipated that it would come in newer versions of iOS (I'm sure you remember).
Last edited:
Actually, Samsung's 2006 Blackjack was seen as a copy of the 2005 Motorola Q. Both devices ran Windows Mobile 5 Smartphone version (non-touch).
Later, HTC did a bunch of similar designs, one of which was used as the basis for the non-touch version Android development phone, called "Sooner". They all had Home and Back and Menu buttons.
This is because Android was targeted at Windows Mobile, which had both touch and non-touch versions. (It was not trying to compete with Blackberry. At the time, that was seen as impossible.)
Google was worried about Microsoft and Bing search, not RIM which was mostly business oriented back then.
Last edited:
Well, but none of the phones you mentioned was black and had a similar name to the Blackberry, while the one from Samsung did!
Or Samsung's take on the Motorola Razr, which was called.... (can you guess it?)...
Blade
And that Android was meant as a competitor to Windows Mobile is obvious, they were afraid of WM dominating mobile and Bing dominating mobile search.
But then a wild iPhone appeared, killed Windows Mobile and suddenly Windows Mobile was no longer a threat.
Too bad for Google that they didn't stop Android then and instead tried to change it to become an iPhone OS competitor/clone.
That angered Steve Jobs and instead of being best friends with Apple and being the sole/most important provider of web services on iOS they got kicked out with the release of iOS 6.
Why they had to stop Android?
Android was not changed, Android had touch only development from the start.
Google developed Android to not be at expenses of others in the mobile web and the your answer to the iPhone is being at the expenses of Apple.
Yap, very smart