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-Samsung Dispute: Galaxy Tab 7.7 Pulled in Germany, iPad Sales Disclosure in Australia?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Next time you spend years working on something and then someone else copies your professional work with a cheap and blatant imitation, you can say something about this. Apple employs people. Those people went to school, and built their entire lives around professional design careers. Why the hell WOULDN'T Apple protect their efforts? And why wouldn't you?
I don't understand why you feel that Apple's design and execution MUST be the only way in town. The world still turned before Apple was doing so well, and things weren't ALL referencing their designs and style. Why don't you want some of these other companies to do their OWN work to develop products? Sounds like you're more in line with communism than people who expect those who actually do the WORK to reap the rewards.
Doesnt matter. Tablets were invented long before Jobs started working on the ipad. Time to face the music.
I think most businesspeople would like a situation where their product was a) in high demand, b) at a price that allowed them to make large profits and c) there was no competition.
Obviously, for various reasons, this sort of situation is hard to come by.
I think people need to recognize that pure copying is far more "anti-competitive" than filing patent infringement lawsuits. A company that spends millions of dollars developing a new product, only to see a competitor come in an "piggyback" on their innovations without having to spend that R&D money, is going to find itself at a serious disadvantage.
Pure copying presents a strong disincentive for companies to innovate. Why should brand A spend a lot of money creating new technology if they know that Brand B will be free to come along and mimic their work?
Try taking this argument to an unlikely exreme: Say that Samsung, by copying the iPad and iPhone and NOT having to spend money on R&D, was able to price their Galaxy phones and tablets far cheaper than the iPad and iPhone. Apple goes out of business. The market would then be dominated by Samsung - a firm with little history in consumer computing devices. Consumers everywhere would lose as a result.
Patent, Trademark, and Copyright protections exist for a reason. This is not to say that there aren't examples where these laws get misused. But merely asserting one's legal rights is not, in and of itself, "anti-competitive."
That's why cases are judged. Nobody here knows what the entire case consist of or even if Apple has a case or doesn't. Please use "I think ...." since you don't know.
Computers were invented long before Gates and Jobs were even born, it was Gates and Jobs that had the foresight to see that computers would be mass market and be an essential part of people's lives, they are visionaries so the actual person that invented the tablet computer is irrelevant, Jobs was the first to see that tablet computers would be an incredible success.
I'm afraid CWT1965 might agree.
OK, now yo got me - is that from Orwell's "1984"?
(I read it so many years ago - and I can barely remember yesterday
)
So you can claim credit for the invention anything as long as you do it successfully? I don't think that's how it works. We've acknowledged that Apple made the iPad a success, but that's a far cry from inventing something, as you first claimed.
Except in the case we are discussing, the very same case was thrown out almost entirely by a Dutch judge already. All the design and "copying" claims. The only claim that stuck in that case was a patent infringement for how a photo gallery app behaved to certain gestures.
Dude, you're a loon. Apple would have no reason to do any of those things if all of its other competitors were out of the market. Why would they improve their tablet if there's no competition? The only reason why Apple is being pushed forward is because of Android and the other OSes as well as the hardware that the manufacturers bring to the table.
All of the Apple devices that you know and love were born out of Apple's need to compete with others. Why do you think that the iPod was invented? Why do you think that Apple moved to Intel?
I completely agree. It was so bad that Apple had to alter the dimensions of Samsung's devices in the lawsuit filings in order to make them look like they were infringing on Apple's work.
Depends, I mean if I designed a car that ran purely on cooking oil and had a prototype and a few drawings but thought it was a silly idea and did nothing with it then a few years later GM developed and sold in hugh volume a car that runs on cooking oil who would be the person in the public's minds as the one who developed the car that ran on cooking oil ? me or GM
Most people would say GM as they had the foresight to take it to market and I didn't
It would be the person who first created it. In that case it could be you who invented it. The public are a bunch of idiots, forget what they think. Half the public think the iPhone 4 is 4G capable, are these the people you want backing your argument?
That is not Steve's vision, Steve does not believe in standing still, Steve looks at things from a consumers point of view and wants his products to be nothing but perfection, Steve may well not be with us for much longer but his culture and philosophy will live on.
Even if Apple had a monopoly they would still strive to perfection with technology
exactly the point I was going to make - this is just a waste of time - and at the same time HTC, Lenovo, Asus, SONY are all sending out tablets into the EU... this is not even a fight.
Apple constantly challenging the industry through litigation rather than superior products will in the long run see them and the consumer lose out.
Despite their marketing spin, they make very little components and do not manufacture their designs. They rely on the wider industry, whom they seem to be obsessed with suing.
If the consumer market was really driven to purchase the superior product, then perhaps Apple's objection to the Galaxy Tab would be moot. Consumers would invariably buy the 'superior' ipad. In fact, consumers aren't just one homogenous lump, so some would buy competitor products. That's the what the market does.
Trying to obliterate competition, will stifle competition and lead to a lazy Apple putting out half finished products like say, FCP X and expecting the market to take it. Without competition, why innovate? It would be cheaper to do incremental upgrades, and sell them as 'magical' and 'giant' leaps in technology...now where have I seen that before?
Despite their marketing spin, they make very little components and do not manufacture their designs. They rely on the wider industry, whom they seem to be obsessed with suing.
If the consumer market was really driven to purchase the superior product, then perhaps Apple's objection to the Galaxy Tab would be moot. Consumers would invariably buy the 'superior' ipad. In fact, consumers aren't just one homogenous lump, so some would buy competitor products. That's the what the market does.
Trying to obliterate competition, will stifle competition and lead to a lazy Apple putting out half finished products like say, FCP X and expecting the market to take it. Without competition, why innovate? It would be cheaper to do incremental upgrades, and sell them as 'magical' and 'giant' leaps in technology...now where have I seen that before?
Steve's vision is money. Look at the iPhone and the iPhone 3G. A whole year passed, with little competition and all that was added was 3G capability. Then when Android launched, Apple had to step things up, hence the vastly improved 3GS. It doesn't get much clearer than that.
Man. Get of smoking that cheese, right now. Ill call your mom!
Yes we have many things to thank Jobs and Gates for, and even more the giants which shoulders they stood upon getting us where we are today. That, however, does not change simple facts. Jobs did not invent the tablet computer.
(and no, Jobs want the first to see that tablet computers would be an incredible success. Weiser predicted that say, 30 years ago. And i strongly doubt that he was even close to being the first).
I can guarantee you that they would not. They have a responsibility to their shareholders. In a monopoly, there is no need to innovate. Apple would make much more money by raising profit margins through high prices and old technology.
You do know that diesel engines were pretty much capable of running on cooking oil from day one, right?
Also, who gives a **** about what the public thinks? Either you invent something or you dont. Jobs didnt.
What was the mega pixel on the original iphone? Did it have cut and paste? Did iphone 4 work as a phone without a third party case because you had thumbs? Did the ipad print right out of the box? Perfection is a very interesting concept...that is the Apple of old, the Apple of late wants you to live in the Apple cocoon where they own your data and censor everything that goes on your device. That's Steve's vision.
Specs are not everything, user experience and the feel of a product are just as if not more important.
I have an iPhone 4 with 5mp camera, my partner had a Nokia N8 with 12mp camera and particularly with macro images like flowers and insects and in sunny conditions the 5mp camera on my iPhone 4 tears the 12mp Nokia a new ******* so the iPhone doesn't need to fight specs wars, they are nothing but cheap headlines, Apple's user experience, the way you flick through screens, the way you pinch images, the way app loads is superior to any phone on the market so even if some Apple products aren't a massive leap specs wise they don't need to be.
Just reading all this stuff is making me sick - people longing for fascist regimen on their media devices just don't have a clue.
I for one will never ever buy any Apple mobile device again - as long as I see fasctoid tendencies in the fanboys.
Sorry to break it to you - iPhone WILL NOT be to the mobile market what iPod was to MP3-players.
Apple knows that Samsungs products are really dangerous. That's why they sue. So sorry for them they brought the whole attention to the Samsung Note (which by the way is a splendid new device given the handwriting recognition with the stylus really works good).
Yeah, my k800i from early 2006 still kicks my 3GS's ass in taking photos. If you're just going to ignore a blindingly obvious example of how Apple stagnates when there is not pressure, then I can't help you.
China is only a paper communist country. Almost exclusively politically communist, almost everything else is just capitalism.
Monopolies are simpler. Imagine if some manufacturers made left hand drive cars and some right hand drive, and then people using them on the same roads. The situation now is simpler because there are only two relevant platforms, but things could still be twice as better.
Dude seriously... you make the typical Apple kool-aid drinkers look tame.
The iPhone 4's camera is marginal at best. The hi pixel density screen on the iPhone 4 gives the illusion of a better quality pic.
the N8 screen is average at best.
Take both images and view them on the same screen. The N8 camera with the Carl Ziess lens and larger image sensor hands down kills the iPhone 4's camera.
If you're only taking pics to be viewed on your phone, a 1MP camera is perfect. Want to make a print... you need superior optics and sensors (high MP count is really moot if the lens and sensor suck)