Okay, I'm game. Give me who they were copying at the time with a touch interface, OS, large screen, sleek design. I'll be over here waiting (and waiting).
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
Okay, I'm game. Give me who they were copying at the time with a touch interface, OS, large screen, sleek design. I'll be over here waiting (and waiting).
Then there would be hardly any discussions on MR since so many here wish to tout conjecture as gospel or facts. At least I had the courtesy to state clearly it was conjecture.
Further - the statement was about people in general. And Jobs fit that description on his death bed.
Even further - it seems to me (perhaps incorrectly) that you seem to take that statement so personally. Too personally in my opinion.
That's exactly what I was saying. I'm not taking any sides in this case. I was just saying Samsung's Legal Representation just put a small or large wrench in their side of the case, because they just pissed off the Judge with this stunt.
No where in any of my statements did I say Apple was mister good guy and Samsung must pay for their actions.
Interesting article!!!
I have seen all these Samsung peripheral images and they do look like they copied from Apple.
Granted, at the end of the day, I still bought the Samsung Galaxy SIII.... why? I think this phone (and in some ways S2) showed little signs of copying... instead, Samsung "innovated" (I'll give credit to them) for some of the nice features like S-beam, Smartstay etc...
Of course, there is S-voice that seems like a straight up copy from Siri... but whatever. I disabled it to pay homage to Siri.
I have seen all these Samsung peripheral images and they do look like they copied from Apple.
Granted, at the end of the day, I still bought the Samsung Galaxy SIII.... why? I think this phone (and in some ways S2) showed little signs of copying... instead, Samsung "innovated" (I'll give credit to them) for some of the nice features like S-beam, Smartstay etc...
Of course, there is S-voice that seems like a straight up copy from Siri... but whatever. I disabled it to pay homage to Siri.
You're not telling me anything I don't know. When Steve made his "thermonuclear war" comment it was after Android was a success. Part of the reason why Steve was okay with Android is because he thought he had an agreement with Brin and Page not to include multitouch because he mentored them. As the story goes, the Android team pressured Brin and Page to include multitouch in the Nexus One which had Jobs fuming on a number of levels. This sparked the comments from Jobs to Apple personnel in a town hall speech that the Android team wanted to kill the iPhone.
I've heard these anecdotes while living in NY with friends in the Valley.
Jobs also talked to Page and gave him advice. Knowing Jobs' personality, this is the result of a dying man. If you think Jobs wouldn't attempt to destroy Android if he were healthy then you've never understood the guy. All you have to do is take a look at his comments on Triumph of the Nerds to see what he thought of MS and Bill Gates.
I don't suppose you sued Apple for Siri not performing as expected because you didn't know about the beta label?
Research. It's important when you're buying a phone. (So most Apple fans say).
No one cares.
I asked a simple thing in response to the utterly irrelevant phones you mentioned that have nothing in common with the iPhone.
Before the iPhone who intro'ed and sold a capacitive, multi-touch, minimalist designed, numeric-keypad-less/keyboard-less smart phone?
We know a lot suddenly appeared after the iPhone was a success.
Save the dime store psycho-babble. It serves you no purpose. The point was no one here knows Job's state toward the end, so mentioning it borders on pathetic and in poor taste.
So lets not bother.
I wonder if Samsung might be overdoing it a bit with this whole court of public opinion. Even if it makes no sense for this 'Sony' evidence to be excluded , that's the way the judge ruled so you have to obey her ruling. If Samsung isn't happy about it go for an appeal. Or make an anonymous leak. But an official release with a statement is dumb (illegal?). Why piss off the judge? And if Samsung wins couldn't Apple request a mistrial?
I've said it many times.
If it wasn't for Apple/iPhone & the iPad, we would be stuck with QWERTY Keyboards and Flip, Slider Smart Phones and Windows Tablets.
I'm also thinking RIM would (still) be Number One! LOL
I love THAT Samsung COPIED Appple. We now have Super Phones!!!
If it wasn't for Apple/iPhone & the iPad, we would be stuck with QWERTY Keyboards and Flip, Slider Smart Phones and Windows Tablets.
I'm also thinking RIM would (still) be Number One! LOL
I love THAT Samsung COPIED Appple. We now have Super Phones!!!
Yea we sold the Lg Vu... complete piece. They may have had the touchscreen with a stylus first but apple made it NOT suck and capacitive touch with no send/end keys. And what about the phones OS? Garbage... Nothing like android or iOS. It wasn't even capacitive touch dude... if we go by that logic I guess anything with a touchscreen counts. See the new Samsung handsets aren't garbage... Those LG's were. But nonetheless, your right in a way.
Yeah, they'll definitely suffer the consequences. I wonder if it wasn't a planned slip though. As bad as the consequences may be, can the judge unilaterally decide that Samsung loses the case as a result? If the jurors still have a say in the end, then depending on what they revealed, it may have been worth it.
I mean, assuming that it was really persuasive evidence, no amount of a judge telling me to just pretend like that piece of information wasn't revealed at all would be 100% effective, and that may just help them in the case.
Intresting quote from Samsung opening statement...
"Samsung supplies 20 percent of the component cost of the iPhone. The gut that makes the phone work — the flash memory, the main memory, the application processor in the phone. They are all supplied by Samsung. “Clearly Apple thinks Samsung has invented something” since it’s putting Samsung products in the iPhone. Samsung also manufactures the A5X processor and is the sole supplier for the Retina display in the new iPad. Samsung is the only one who can supply the Retina display. Who’s the real innovator?”
http://blogs.forbes.com/connieguglielmo/
"Samsung supplies 20 percent of the component cost of the iPhone. The gut that makes the phone work — the flash memory, the main memory, the application processor in the phone. They are all supplied by Samsung. “Clearly Apple thinks Samsung has invented something” since it’s putting Samsung products in the iPhone. Samsung also manufactures the A5X processor and is the sole supplier for the Retina display in the new iPad. Samsung is the only one who can supply the Retina display. Who’s the real innovator?”
http://blogs.forbes.com/connieguglielmo/
I was using Canadian currency and even if that was the price with my 15 percent tax it's over 700. also it was a generalization
Samsung makes a good point, however a lot of the parts they are referring to where built to spec/order for Apple to use in the iPhone/iPod/iPad and some of Apples engineers have worked along with Samsung to create some of these parts.
And a lot are off-the-shelf parts, and the Apple engineers worked with Samsung because Samsung was the *best* at producing the parts (and Apple had no ability to produce them in-house).
Samsung's point (that Apple couldn't produce Itoys without Samsung) is valid.
This is my point. Google needed a starting point. It was not enough to have a starting point with the software because they needed to know how Apple did the hardware. RIM thought it was impossible and Cnet's Molly Wood in 2007 on Buzz Out Loud thought it was impossible as well. No doubt doubt it came from her sources at MS.
Are most people senile when a writer is composing an autobiography of them? Does it seem unlikely that Jobs would want to kill Android if he was healthy?
Also, I thought I addressed this in a post to samcraig about what was going on. The Nexus One, I believe, was the first to get multitouch which was in 2010 when Jobs was still "healthy". What I mentioned about Jobs occurred sometime after Page took office. I don't believe he lost sanity. I think he wanted to pass something on to future generations. That is why the Google of Page is so different from Schmidt's Google and why there was a mission statement from Page for Google engineers of "more wood behind fewer arrows".
Well , you've got me there. I was a geek in my youth but I did know Java when it was far more important than it is today. I disagree that the demo was enough. Apple spent at least 5 years on multitouch before the iPhone, bought Fingerworks and consulted with Jeff Han. There's no way that enough code would exist for Google to have a working prototype for demo by November on a mobile device without help.
I did mention that the guys came from Sidekick earlier in this thread but doing a smartphone without a physical keyboard is more difficult than it looks without help. Google didn't buy them to build an iPhone. They bought them to compete against Windows Mobile and RIM.
I just wanted to say that you have the best posts that I've ever read on any forum (Aiden Shaw included) and better than most tech blogs. I'm eager just to win one battle against you.
Last edited:
I agree.
In the end, this Lawsuit was a bad move by Apple, because this case has forced them to reveal many of their inner design processes, which were their best kept secrets before now. I for one am glad, we as consumers get to see these processes of design from both sides, but I don't think either side will win in the end.
I provided links all over the place in my original post. It's on page 4 or 5. Find my name through 'find' shortcut on any browser.
----------
A symbiotic relationship implies that Apple exists because Samsung does and vice versa. That is not the case. Most companies are looking for money that have sued Apple. I certainly won't argue that Samsung doesn't innovate. If Apple were not to exist Samsung would still continue.
Apple is not looking for this relationship because it is not symbiotic. It's parasitic. The end result of Samsung's goal is to use Android and Apple's creativity against Apple.
What's so incredible about the GS3? Sure, it's got good specs and is a good phone, but they skimped on the display, the camera is only as good as the almost 1 yr old 4S and the body is a fairly generic, uninspiring design made of plastic. There's nothing there that advances the state of the art. It's just a spec bump.
And Apple didn't just improve someone else's design; they completely upended the smartphone market with a completely new UI paradigm and combined that with very distinctive hardware, and how much of that was copied by the likes of Samsung and HTC is what's really at the crux of all these lawsuits.
The UI paradigm bit I take issue with. The grid layout on a PDA device isn't a new thing, in fact, it's quite old. They made it nice to look at and easier to use, but that's not redefining the base concept with a completely revolutionary design. They just improved upon what was already out there.
Anyway, I'm beginning to think this whole Apple vs. Samsung BS is nothing more than some semi-brilliant marketing ploy being played out in court.
Anyway, I'm beginning to think this whole Apple vs. Samsung BS is nothing more than some semi-brilliant marketing ploy being played out in court.
How do you know that for sure? There were large touch screen phones in development/a couple already launched before the orginal iPhone.
Though what I find ironic is that the original iPhone wasn't even a smartphone. At the time, my Windows Mobile phone blew it away, wasn't till the 3G that the iPhone became a massive hit.
No, actually I think history proves you wrong. Ever heard of parallel discoveries? Newton and Leibniz, Darwin and Wallace. Even if no one had the same ideas that Apple had at the exact same time, chances are the competition wasn't far behind (Google).
From the outside helicoptorview it's just damn clear that Samsung copied Apple's design. Does it matter. No, just let it be. The case is just not strong enough to own the rectangle / rounded corners with a single button design. Yes I know it goes a bit further than that. As long as Apple don't get sued by Samsung (the other way around) for copying these designs. That would really piss me off.
It all comes down to degrees, really. To what degree do you think that Apple improved on what was already out there? Because if you were to ask me, I can't think of any type of innovation that wasn't built upon the ideas and work of people up until the point of invention/innovation.