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.
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 Granted Access to Unreleased Samsung Hardware in Patent Suit
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
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.
I wouldn't associate the level of innovation with number of patents, all that shows it that they have more lawyers than engineers.
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!!!
Why don't you come back here when study hall is finished and you can visit the USPTO web site and learn about patents.
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.
Ummm
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.
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.
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
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!!!
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.
Seriously? You can't search for units shipped?
i've posted these links before. They were easy to find. Trust me.
I wasn't on about future sales. Do you not remember what you wrote?
Where you just muttering bollocks when you wrote that then?
It's not like Samsung was not passing out pre-release versions to the press all over the place.
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.
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!!!
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.
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.
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...
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.
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.
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.
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.
Didn't the ipad3 ship 29 million in September/October 2011?
Sure beats the Galaxy 8th of June 2011 numbers.
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."
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."
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.)
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.
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.
The phones are out, not the tablets. The Galaxy S2 is doing extraordinarily well for sales.