Apple's Opening Court Statement Focuses on Samsung's Radical Shift in Phone Design

[samcraig]

And yet none of these things materialized until Apple took the risk on R&D and creating a market.

Woulda, coulda, never did...until Apple did it first.

Already disproven. But we can go on this carousel ride again if you'd like. Or you can read the thread. Up to you. Mostly rhetorical. If you can't be bothered to read the whole thread - I'm not going to engage in the nanny-nanny-poo-poo "argument" you just proposed.

 

[babyj]

think Samsung responded well to Apple's opening statements

Like the section where Samsung claim to make the guts of the iPhone and being the inventors of memory (flash and dram), high pixel density displays and the custom processor?

 

[Technarchy]

Creating a market hahahahaha, and what market would that be then exactly? Was it the first company to create a touch screen smart phone market then? Well I guess so if we totally ignore the mobile market for several years BEFORE the iPhone turned up.

You can say it, but can you prove it.

 

[faroZ06]

That just shows how geo-centric you are. $649 is the USD price. You're aware that the phone sells around the world?

The person I was replying to was using US currency, so I assumed that he is in the US. And Apple is a US company.

Or are you saying that I'm actually geocentric and not just a dumb American?

ge·o·cen·tric   [jee-oh-sen-trik]
adjective
1. having or representing the earth as a center: a geocentric theory of the universe.
2. using the earth or earthly life as the only basis of evaluation.
3. viewed or measured as from the center of the earth: the geocentric position of the moon.

Well I don't know about 1, but I'm pretty sure that I fit definitions 2 and 3.

 

[Technarchy]

Already disproven. But we can go on this carousel ride again if you'd like. Or you can read the thread. Up to you. Mostly rhetorical. If you can't be bothered to read the whole thread - I'm not going to engage in the nanny-nanny-poo-poo "argument" you just proposed.

There is some substance missing from your post.

There is no counterpoint to the fact that Apple made the market for capacitive, multitouch, minimalist, numeric-pad-less smart phones.

If someone else did it first, where is it, who made it, and who bought it?

 

[OrangeSVTguy]

I still don't see the resemblance...

 

[samcraig]

There is some substance missing from your post.

There is no counterpoint to the fact that Apple made the market for capacitive, multitouch, minimalist, numeric-pad-less smart phones.

If someone else did it first, where is it, who made it, and who bought it?

Sorry - are you arguing that Apple made it popular - or that Apple was first? It seems like you keep bouncing back and forth. I also think you're adding in specs now as qualifiers.

Lastly - even if we were to say Apple was first to market (which they weren't) and even if we say that Apple was the first to make that type of phone popular (btw - the original iPhone was a FEATURE phone not a smartphone) - that doesn't mean other manufacturers COPIED. If they already had phones in the pipeline. All it means, under this "what if" scenario is that Apple was first. 2nd does not automatically = "copy." Sometimes second just means second.

 

[Technarchy]

Sorry - are you arguing that Apple made it popular - or that Apple was first? It seems like you keep bouncing back and forth. I also think you're adding in specs now as qualifiers.

Lastly - even if we were to say Apple was first to market (which they weren't) and even if we say that Apple was the first to make that type of phone popular (btw - the original iPhone was a FEATURE phone not a smartphone) - that doesn't mean other manufacturers COPIED. If they already had phones in the pipeline. All it means, under this "what if" scenario is that Apple was first. 2nd does not automatically = "copy." Sometimes second just means second.

That's not what I asked you.

 

[apolloa]

If HTC, LG, and ASUS are incapable of putting in the R&D time and resources to find a better, infringement free way to skin a cat, then market their ideas and sell their products successfully, then they have no right to exist.

hahahahahahaha, your funny. Yeah. Well I don't know about America but in Europe we had a nice big smart phone touch screen market years before Apple, and lets not even talk about Japan and Taiwan eh

Ericsson R380 launched in 2000:
http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=specs&id=1062&c=ericsson_r380__r380s

Sony Ericsson P800 launched in 2003:
http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=specs&id=1047&c=sony_ericsson_p800__p802_se_linnea

Sony Ericsson P900 launched in 2004:
http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=specs&id=1048&c=sony_ericsson_p900_se_linn

Sony Ericsson P910 launched in 2004 also:
http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=specs&id=1050&c=sony_ericsson_p910__p910i_se_layla

Sony Ericsson P990 launched in 2006:
http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=specs&id=1053&c=sony_ericsson_p990__p990i_se_hermione

iPhone was launched in 2007.

All I have done is display ONE manufacturer, I could add Samsung and HTC and LG plus others like E-Ten. the list of touch screen smart phones with apps that existed before the iPhone is almost endless.
Apple did NOT create the touch screen market. In fact MANY manufacturers had been investing into R&D long before Apple did.

You can ignore blatant facts as much as you want, I just know I know a lot better. I remember thinking at the time the iPhone came out it's interface was great, but it's tech specs were utter crap compared to what had already been available for years.

 

[linux2mac]

And yet none of these things materialized until Apple took the risk on R&D and creating a market.

Woulda, coulda, never did...until Apple did it first.

Yup, and the same with the iPad. I am betting all the Android makers are dreading this coming September because when the iPhone 5 is launched, who would really want an Android?? The writing is on the wall.

http://www.idownloadblog.com/2012/07/30/strategy-analytics-survey-q212/

 

[Technarchy]

hahahahahahaha, your funny. Yeah. Well I don't know about America but in Europe we had a nice big smart phone touch screen market years before Apple, and lets not even talk about Japan and Taiwan eh

Ericsson R380 launched in 2000:
http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=specs&id=1062&c=ericsson_r380__r380s

Sony Ericsson P800 launched in 2003:
http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=specs&id=1047&c=sony_ericsson_p800__p802_se_linnea

Sony Ericsson P900 launched in 2004:
http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=specs&id=1048&c=sony_ericsson_p900_se_linn

Sony Ericsson P910 launched in 2004 also:
http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=specs&id=1050&c=sony_ericsson_p910__p910i_se_layla

Sony Ericsson P990 launched in 2006:
http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=specs&id=1053&c=sony_ericsson_p990__p990i_se_hermione

iPhone was launched in 2007.

All I have done is display ONE manufacturer, I could add Samsung and HTC and LG plus others like E-Ten. the list of touch screen smart phones with apps that existed before the iPhone is almost endless.
Apple did NOT create the touch screen market. In fact MANY manufacturers had been investing into R&D long before Apple did.

You can ignore blatant facts as much as you want, I just know I know a lot better. I remember thinking at the time the iPhone came out it's interface was great, but it's tech specs were utter crap compared to what had already been available for years.

I don't see any capacitive, multitouch, minimalist, numeric-pad-less smart phones in that list.

There is a lot of capacitive, multitouch, minimalist, numeric-pad-less smart phones now after the iPhone made the market for such a device.

Not everyone is as shameless as Samsung however when it comes to walking the line replication.

 

[samcraig]

I don't see any capacitive, multitouch, minimalist, numeric-pad-less smart phones in that list.

There is a lot of capacitive, multitouch, minimalist, numeric-pad-less smart phones now after the iPhone made the market for such a device.

Not everyone is as shameless as Samsung however when it comes to walking the line replication.

How long did it take you to come up with a laundry list of requirement (now) to try and prove your point. You're so far off track now it's almost funny.

 

[Technarchy]

How long did it take you to come up with a laundry list of requirement (now) to try and prove your point. You're so far off track now it's almost funny.

Those items are what especially separated the iPhone from the competition when it was launched. They are integral to the iPhone experience.

Take away any one of those features, and it wouldn't be an iPhone as we know it.

The fact that nothing else meets the criteria is incredibly telling...yet now there are dozens of phones that meet that mold...after Apple made it happen.

 

[babyj]

Sony Ericsson P800 launched in 2003:
Sony Ericsson P900 launched in 2004:
Sony Ericsson P910 launched in 2004:
Sony Ericsson P990 launched in 2006:

iPhone was launched in 2007.

All I have done is display ONE manufacturer, I could add Samsung and HTC and LG plus others like E-Ten. the list of touch screen smart phones with apps that existed before the iPhone is almost endless.
Apple did NOT create the touch screen market. In fact MANY manufacturers had been investing into R&D long before Apple did.

I owned all (or three) of those Sony P series phones and trying to compare them in any way to the first iPhone is ridiculous. It's like comparing a horse drawn cart to a current Formula 1 car.

If the iPhone was so obvious and if everyone already had the technology why didn't someone else release it first? Think a lot of people forget just how revolutionary the iPhone was when it was released. Within a few months of the iPhone being released all the other networks in the UK had sections on their website entitled "iPhone Clones" (or something similar).

It's not a matter of whether Apple were copied, just whether it was done legally or not.

 

[apolloa]

I don't see any capacitive, multitouch, minimalist, numeric-pad-less smart phones in that list.

There is a lot of capacitive, multitouch, minimalist, numeric-pad-less smart phones now after the iPhone made the market for such a device.

Not everyone is as shameless as Samsung however when it comes to walking the line replication.

Numeric pad less smart phones? Hmm well the ones I linked to did that, you just removed the flip cover, I could link to tons of numeric pad less smart phones long before the iPhone. Would like me to and prove you wrong?

As for multitouch I believe it is the first, it is most likely the first capacitive smart phone, but Apple didn't invent either of these technologies. It has brought the patents.

----------

I owned all (or three) of those Sony P series phones and trying to compare them in any way to the first iPhone is ridiculous. It's like comparing a horse drawn cart to a current Formula 1 car.

If the iPhone was so obvious and if everyone already had the technology why didn't someone else release it first? Think a lot of people forget just how revolutionary the iPhone was when it was released. Within a few months of the iPhone being released all the other networks in the UK had sections on their website entitled "iPhone Clones" (or something similar).

It's not a matter of whether Apple were copied, just whether it was done legally or not.

They do ALL prove though that touch screen smart phones with applications existed long before the iPhone did. Which was my point, of course you can't compare something in the tech world that 4 or 5 years or more apart. That was not my point.
Oh and I see, it's NOT a matter if APPLE copied but ONLY if SAMSUNG copied!

 

[boronathan]

How long did it take you to come up with a laundry list of requirement (now) to try and prove your point. You're so far off track now it's almost funny.

He does have a point even if you don't acknowledge it. You need a "laundry list"because a laundry list is what made the iPhone what it is. Those phones that were posted look nothing, and i mean absolutely nothing, like the iPhone.

Why do ppl just refuse to admit that people were inspired by the iPhones design. It just doesn't make sense, the denial.

 

[nickelt]

Does any1 know when this lawsuit is expected to finish?

 

[samcraig]

He does have a point even if you don't acknowledge it. You need a "laundry list"because a laundry list is what made the iPhone what it is. Those phones that were posted look nothing, and i mean absolutely nothing, like the iPhone.

Why do ppl just refuse to admit that people were inspired by the iPhones design. It just doesn't make sense, the denial.

It's not denial when I have, in my own personal experience, have witness to phones that were in development that were touch screen and monolithic in appearance several years before the iPhone was announced.

Why do people just refuse to admit that? It just doesn't make sense. The denial.

 

[boronathan]

It's not denial when I have, in my own personal experience, have witness to phones that were in development that were touch screen and monolithic in appearance several years before the iPhone was announced.

Why do people just refuse to admit that? It just doesn't make sense. The denial.

Well you're not providing proof. You're just saying things. We can all do that!

I don't know you from a hole in the wall so what gives you credibility?

 

[scoobydoo99]

"As we all know it is easier to copy than to innovate," he told the court. "Apple had already taken the risks."

How well is that argument going to hold up when it's easy to show how Apple copied and stood on the backs of several companies to produce the iPhone and other devices.

p.s. you can copy AND innovate at the same time. Because unless Samsung actually produced an iPhone - it's not a 1:1 copy

oh my. Your desperation in trying to defend Samsung is showing.

 

[kdarling]

think Samsung responded well to Apple's opening statements

http://www.forbes.com/sites/connieg...ith-one-juror-done-samsung-begging-live-blog/

Thanks. Very interesting to read a live blog of the trial.

I need some clarification on one piece: what exactly is she not letting in?

Judge Koh refused to let Samsung show the jury the pictures of the "Sony/Jony" prototypes that Apple internally created to figure out how Sony might design an all touch smartphone.

 

[samcraig]

Well you're not providing proof. You're just saying things. We can all do that!

I don't know you from a hole in the wall so what gives you credibility?

Sorry - that's all I got. And I agree - you can choose to believe me or not. But that doesn't change what I know or present as a fact as opposed to opinion or a link to some blog post.

oh my. Your desperation in trying to defend Samsung is showing.

Not all all - but feel free to think so. I think the real issue here isn't who copied who - everyone does it. The patent system itself is broken. Unlike others here (and I've posted this) I'm technologically agnostic. I own devices from various manufacturers. I don't personalize any loyalty to a product - the best one for the job.

I have and use many Apple products which are great. That doesn't mean I will defend them using false information. Nor does it mean I would try and defend Samsung with false information either.

Nice try though.

 

[boronathan]

Sorry - that's all I got. And I agree - you can choose to believe me or not. But that doesn't change what I know or present as a fact as opposed to opinion or a link to some blog post.
.

Ok that's fine. I hope you understand what i mean. I'm not calling you a liar but there really is no reason for anyone here to take what you say at face value when theres no proof.

Either way, no one can deny that there was a sudden influx of these phones with the laundry list of characters that were described after the iPhone.

It just seems a little bit too convenient to just be coincidental imo.

 

[djphat2000]

When Apple invited Schmidt Google already had started Google Docs and Android

----------



When your first fact is false, the rest can't be better

http://www.apple.com/pr/library/200...-Schmidt-Joins-Apples-Board-of-Directors.html


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_(operating_system)


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTC_Dream

While true he Google already started with android. There OS was not along the lines of what Apple was doing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FJHYqE0RDg

It's more like a BB IMO. Better then a blackberry IMO but not what iOS looks like at the time.

 

[Judas1]

These corrections (in red) should help.

All we can know are whats made public. We're not Jobs' personal friends.

There is some substance missing from your post.

There is no counterpoint to the fact that Apple made the market for capacitive, multitouch, minimalist, numeric-pad-less smart phones.

If someone else did it first, where is it, who made it, and who bought it?

You're too business centric. Businesses don't create markets. Consumers do. Businesses use the emerging market to sell their brand of things. Take a look at the housing market. No consumers buying houses equal a down housing market. Houses are at an all time low. If businesses are the one that create and control markets, why can't they capitalize on the low housing cost?