Apple Calls in Experts to Explain Why Samsung Owes $2B in Damages

[Shrink]

Oh, comeon. I'm doing far better than that. I think I deserve at least an 8.

Since my life is totally devoted to the care of those with troubled self concept and in need of support and validation...

8/10...and possibly 9, if that will help you get through another day.







I live to serve...

 

[tongxinshe]

Logics?

My post to you has nothing to do with being logical or not. Clearly your feelings were hurt because I called your post out for being over the top. Obviously I must be paid by Samsung to point out that your post wasn't based in fact. It couldn't possibly be because I disagreed with what you wrote.

Interesting that you've been monitoring my likes though. That's more than I do. It's not something I care about. I post my opinion without regard to how popular it is.

What I am most happy about is your most recent post (even though it was hard to understand - but I know English isn't your native tongue) is that you ARE able to type Samsung correctly. Well done!

Native English speaker or Korean speaker, hired by Samesung (this is actually the correct spell, according to its nature) for posting on the internet, or not, as long as you can stick to the reasoning of the topic (the design similarity of Samesung’s 2008-2011 Android phones to the design of the regarding iPhones’ 6-9 months before that), no one could look down upon you.

 

[easytake123]

maybe samsung should steal inspiration instead of existing outcomes just like what Jobs did before .

 

[kdarling]

maybe samsung should steal inspiration instead of existing outcomes just like what Jobs did before .

That's like saying that Apple should've used air gestures, or a round shape or a more futuristic UI with the first iPhone. Instead, they just copied existing icon grids, touchscreen pinch zoom and flick scrolling, and a bar shape with basic smartphone functionality.

Everybody adds on to what comes before, and/or what has become popular (like larger screens for phones and smaller screens for tablets, or notification shades, or flat UI design).

As for Samsung inspiration and innovation, they just showed off the world's first 5.7" foldable smartphone screen (with touch) at the recent CES, reportedly using new materials to solve previous problems with broken traces.

 

[LordVic]

Y'all are stealing my focus. *I* was the one accused of astroturfing!!

Weve been over this before!

Samcraig
SamSung

COINCIDENCE?! I'll leave that for interpretation

this is called stirring the pot...

 

[samcraig]

That's like saying that Apple should've used air gestures, or a round shape or a more futuristic UI with the first iPhone. Instead, they just copied existing icon grids, touchscreen pinch zoom and flick scrolling, and a bar shape with basic smartphone functionality.

Everybody adds on to what comes before, and/or what has become popular (like larger screens for phones and smaller screens for tablets, or notification shades, or flat UI design).

As for Samsung inspiration and innovation, they just showed off the world's first 5.7" foldable smartphone screen (with touch) at the recent CES, reportedly using new materials to solve previous problems with broken traces.

I'm also following their progress with Graphene. Interesting stuff!

http://www.cnet.com/news/samsung-gr...-wonder-material-from-the-lab-to-your-pocket/

 

[Giuly]

Let me help you out and clarify the facts:

"Samsung developed its first mobile phone (or "hand phone" in Korea), the SH-100 in 1988. It was the first mobile phone to be designed and manufactured in Korea."

Remember when in doubt Google is your friend

When that phone was released, people definitively went all

I mean, why would't you pick that over i.e. these:

Samsung wasn't a brand but more of a generic term for the cheapest, least exciting option when you were buying a mobile phone. The initial argument was that people bought those phones because of the "Samsung brand" in 2010. That's like saying people buy a smartphone because of the Huawei brand in 2014: There is none.

 

[Oletros]

Samsung wasn't a brand but more of a generic term for the cheapest, least exciting option when you were buying a mobile phone.

What are you talking about? Samsung Ultra Series were regarded as premium phones and Samsung has never been seen as a cheap phone brand, at least in Europe.

 

[deluxeshredder]

I mean, why would't you pick that over i.e. these

Samsung actually had some very nice phone designs back in the day.

 

[LordVic]

When that phone was released, people definitively went all
Image

I mean, why would't you pick that over i.e. these:

Samsung wasn't a brand but more of a generic term for the cheapest, least exciting option when you were buying a mobile phone. The initial argument was that people bought those phones because of the "Samsung brand" in 2010. That's like saying people buy a smartphone because of the Huawei brand in 2014: There is none.

I love how you took a stat from 1988, linked phones from mid 2000s, and put up samsungs low end flip phone that was really cheap to buy (I had that phone, i bought it cause it was one of the cheapest flip phones available)

and then compared it to higher end top of the line phones from the time.

how can I refute those facts! Infallible!

cray thing about that flip phone. it had expandible Micro SD memory card. was super duper think (I mean probably about on par with the iphone5 thinness) and had full MP3 playback capability from SD card...

 

[sixrom]

What are you talking about? Samsung Ultra Series were regarded as premium phones and Samsung has never been seen as a cheap phone brand, at least in Europe.

Very true.

Regarding Samsung phones offered in the USA during that same period, AT&T was one of their main carriers, who in turn asked Samsung to build inexpensive models with AT&T co-branding. Thus the rather "cheap" price point and quality.

Fast forward to 2007, upon witnessing the iPhone success Samsung deliberately decided to build one smartphone model comprised of quality, attention to detail, and offer it worldwide. The Galaxy S was that phone. Offering models for the four major U.S. carriers as well as an international model, that was the beginning of Samsung's success all over the globe.

 

[samcraig]

Irony is that Apple wants to claim that a few patents which Samsung has already worked around are worth so much based on whether or not a customer would choose one device over another but assert that the FRAND patents to make their phone work were too high. I don't know about you but as a customer I'm inclined to get a phone that works over some cute features.

 

[Giuly]

Samsung Ultra Series were regarded as premium phones and Samsung has never been seen as a cheap phone brand, at least in Europe.

Reviews for the silver/black version

The Samsung Ultra phones didn't exactly win the European version of the JC Penny customer satisfaction survey, either. And they were copies of inspired by reinterpretations of the Nokia 7650 which came three years earlier with a much more sophisticated operation system and a little Motorola Rizr sprinkled in for thinness and metal.

Fast forward to 2007, upon witnessing the iPhone success Samsung deliberately decided to build one smartphone model comprised of quality, attention to detail, and offer it worldwide. The Galaxy S was that phone. Offering models for the four major U.S. carriers as well as an international model, that was the beginning of Samsung's success all over the globe.

The Galaxy S is a copy of the iPhone, hence this lawsuit. And it also came after the iPhone 3G. This, along with BlackBerry clones, was what Samsung initially threw in the ring against the iPhone 3G:

Sprint sent us this Samsung phone to review mere hours before Apple will likely announce iPhone 2.0 to make a point: If you want an iPhone, but you don't want to switch from Sprint, the Instinct is almost as good.

Not only the iPhone 2.0, but also iPhone OS 2.0 with the App Store, and "almost as good" became feature phone with a KIRF UI from the iPhone.

Just for completeness, here's that announcement they talk about:

 

[Oletros]

The Samsung Ultra phones didn't exactly win the European version of the JC Penny customer satisfaction survey, either. And they were copies of inspired by reinterpretations of the Nokia 7650 which came three years earlier with a much more sophisticated operation system and a little Motorola Rizr sprinkled in for thinness and metal.

Please, if you don't know what phones where available in Europe in 2006 from Samsung, don't post thing like this where you clearly show that you don't know that

And no, the ****ing Ultra series were not a copy/inspired on the 7650, they were a whole class of different premium devices.

Funny how you put an screenshot from a unknow site to try to make a point. Wilol you put the link tot hat site?

 

[Giuly]

Please, if you don't know what phones where available in Europe in 2006 from Samsung, don't post thing like this where you clearly show that you don't know that

And no, the ****ing Ultra series were not a copy/inspired on the 7650, they were a whole class of different premium devices.

Funny how you put an screenshot from a unknow site to try to make a point. Wilol you put the link tot hat site?

There were three Ultra phones, this one was the 2007 model. Even the OS is similar to what was later called Nokia Series30/40 and one of the two music players this phone had was an almost exact copy of the Nokia Music Edition player, down to the light green color scheme. Here's the unknown site: Amazon.de, which should be representative for similar markets in Europe.

You can look at everything Samsung from phones to refrigerators, virtually everything somehow either has a story like this where they just blatantly copied a successful product along with it, or it sucked a** like the Galaxy Gear.

It may work great as a business for them, yet it seem somehow highly objectionable ethically.

 

[Oletros]

Here's the unknown site: Amazon.de, which should be representative for similar markets in Europe.

You're definitely joking, but if it makes you happy, yes, in Europe Samsung smartphones were the cheapest brand, there were seen cheaper than unknown Chinese brands.

Still trying get to grasp what the heck has to do your continued bashing about copying with how the heck was seen Samsung in 2006. But feel free to show how much you know about the smartphone market in Europe 8 years ago.


5 Amazon reviews from 2012-2013 for a 2007 model? That has a name

 

[Giuly]

Bro... c'mon. The very matter of this lawsuit are some devices which are so ancient that pre-socratic philosophers wrote tractates on them.

Let's look forward instead. iPhone 6 is shaping up to look great thus far and I'm counting the days until I get to see all the fantastic things that people come up to get the most out of the larger screens.