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's Opening Court Statement Focuses on Samsung's Radical Shift in Phone Design
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm always getting yelled at for criticizing Apple or praising it. I guess it's a sign that I'm neutral.
Yap, and a company that thinks that an ex board member had done industrial theft never ever would sue him.
Baloney my ...
active directory, IIS, one of the earliest PDA / Smartphone platforms (even if it wasn't very good).
Some of the first online / disc based encyclopedias, games, network infrastructure technologies (who else doesn't miss Novel's networking). Plug N Pray support..
i think the point is that the list goes on, And On, And On, Microsoft has done more innovation in the Information Technology sector than Apple has ever done.
The HTC Diamond was a Windows Mobile device and it did not feature a physical keyboard. Not all devices that ran WM featured a physical keyboard either. The iPaq lineup was another great example of a solid device that lacked them. It used Graffiti input.
Those were the good old days .. :.)
OH NOES a candy bar phone running WinMo
i can spot a lot of similarities between it and the iphone, and samsungs phones, and HTC's, and....
I also spot enough difference in most if not all the devices in question.
there are only so many design elements you can do and use when you've narrowed yourselves down to simplicity. What does apple want? Everyone to start making circlular screen phones?
And your guess would be wrong. We're talking specifically about Samsung, not HTC or LG or Motorola, all of which seem perfectly capable of creating a device that doesn't look like an Apple clone.
But hey, we're talking about Android, so of course the Google Defense Force must rush to Samsung's aid.
Here's what I know.
Google acquired Android, wanting to have its customers to have a mobile Google experience. It was designed to be a multi-device compatible OS, designed for QWERTY phones, touchscreens (not Multi-Touch), etc. It's first prototype was rendered in 2006.
Later in 2006, Schmidt was asked to be on Apple's Board of Directors. Apple, having already been developing iPhone, did not allow Schmidt into iPhone talks.
Now, this is what I think.
Apple released the iPhone with its Multi-Touch and lack of QWERTY keyboard. Android phones were released later, and although Android was designed for nearly any kind of phone, the wild success of the candybar, Multi-Touch, QWERTY-lacking iPhone led many high-profile Android phones to adopt similar form factors and specifications.
Remember, though, everybody copies. Palm OS inspired both iOS and Android greatly. iOS and Android, in their existence, have borrowed from one another as well. However, since Apple has been granted patents for many of the "core" features that many people take for granted, like auto-disappearing scroll bars, Apple seems to have the advantage. You may debate over the legitimacy of such patents, but remember, he who patents it, wins.
Last edited:
Well by that argument iOS looks a lot like the old Palm OS does. (A basicly grid lay out with touch icons.
To claim apps design is an lay out is original is funny.
A touch-based OS that used to offer keyboard accessible menu to perform certain important functions?
Android was a Blackberry clone adapted to the emergence of touch technology, but the OS design clearly kept using the same old paradigms present at that time.
Why sue the guy who's giving your stuff away for free when you can sue the people creating real, sellable products from it?
Google is simply following Microsoft's browser scheme. Rip off someone else's work, give it away for free, and profit from collateral services. Not that the Google fans (one of which I once was) will ever be able to admit it.
Have you looked at the picture dates? They are from November 2.007
And no it is not a Blackberry clone, it is a prototype from HTC than runs on HTC Windows Mobile hardware. There were touch only prototypes from the same date
Any source for that?
People sometimes have short memories.
Jobs did not start ranting about Android until they turned on multi-touch in 2010, THREE YEARS AFTER the iPhone was first shown off, and over a half year after Schmidt left the Apple board.
In January 2008, Jobs dismissed Android just as rival Ballmer had dissed the iPhone:
“Having created a phone, it’s a lot harder than it looks,” he said. “We’ll see how good their software is and we’ll see how consumers like it and how quickly it is adopted.” In seeking not to get locked out of the mobile phone world, “I actually think Google has achieved their goal without Android, and I now think Android hurts them more than it helps them. It’s just going to divide them and people who want to be their partners.”
Even by mid 2009, when Schmidt left the Apple board, and after Android phones had been selling for half a year, Jobs STILL had nothing bad to say about Android, because he didn't see it as a real threat yet.
It wasn't until early 2010, after Google finally enabled multi-touch and some other features also used by the iPhone, that Jobs went ballistic over Android and started accusing it of copying.
Among other reasons, Jobs apparently thought that Apple owned a patent on all multi-touch devices and no one else should be able to use it.
Funny. I am not surprised though that Apple claims that App Grid to by itself but then the claims are very specific. But leaving the Palm thing aside, how about Newton? No?
Agree with this.
Even though I myself have been a long time Apple fan, I'm starting to get annoyed with all the patents and lawsuits that are just limiting innovation.
The world was not made for Apple.
Now that Jobs is dead, I believe this will be the start of Apple downfall.
Apple did however watch the companies that made many of the technologies you mentioned and proceeded to buy them, securing the tech as THEIRS. Samsung had opportunity to do they same and now they want to profit off of apple acquisitions. I think that $2.5 B is high but Samsung IS copying a lot, a new "Samsung Store" just popped up at a local mall. I understand apple didn't invent retail, but I have some knowledge of the plans for these stores and they have actually taken ideas directly from apples retail play book. They are chasing the winning company insteading of trying to become the leader. There is a sutle difference
What accessible menu to perform certain important functions are you talking about?
