Australian Appeals Court Reviewing Galaxy Tab Sales Ban

[divinox]

Erm, no. Obtaining the specifications and licensing the patents is not the same as using the services (and servers in Apple's case)

The first are like buying the book, while the latter is like hiring the writer.

Like stated, i am tainted by S-DL, which would state that the book is nothing but the physical embodiment (or transport) of the service provided by its author. Second, why bring in _the_ services. I spoke of service. In using MSFT tech, Apple is being served. Apple not running MSFT cloud solutions (or what-not) have nothing to do with it. Heck, i'd easily put any interface or protocol in the service corner of the service/product dichotomy.

But Google didn't only have search. They had Maps, Mail... If they were still in alliance with Apple they might even have thrown in parts of iCloud as well, maybe tie Google Docs with iCloud documents. Lots of possibilities.

Google did not have Maps at its launch. Nor did it have Mail. Google originated with search. The rest falls easily within the "more data and/or better data" scheme.

Not sure if souring their relations by competing in the same market was really the best option.

Well, you're not running Google, so its really not your call. As for souring relations, geez... isn't Apple the king of that?

Well that 99% is about to get a major hit from Amazon's Fire . Are you sure it'll remain that high? What if the rumours of an Amazon phone are true?

Fire is one device, even if it sells billions. Buy yes, i thought about including that part, but i didn't think it was context relevant... haven't changed my opinion on that either. That said, I'm sure it'll sell a lot.

As for Amazon, while i do see them selling a **** ton of tablets, phones would - if proprietary - be a huge failure. I could see them partnering with Microsoft, going for deep integration of various sorts, but thats about it.

Apple and Google also had an alliance, see how that turned out.

Apples and Oranges. If you had made a Symbian reference you would've had a point. Now, not so much. And, Apple and Google had a business agreement. From what i can tell, that business agreement worked out fine for both. If anything, Apple became the big winner.

Don't see the rest of Google's alliances being any better, most manufacturers have other plans at the ready (Bada, Windows Mobile).

Not hedging bets would be stupid, given the low cost of doing so. Also, Bada is not competing anywhere near the same segments as Android, and Windows Mobile... well... it got killed 2 years ago. Sorry for being frank, but the cell phone industry doesn't seem like your thing.

If Google demands too much they'll just jump ship, and then Google is left with a heavy OS investment but almost no one to make decent phones using their services. To make matters worse Google has even been giving some of their patents away in the name of defending Android.

No ****? If Apple demands too much, so will carriers. Enjoy stating the obvious? Further, you neglect the obvious fact that phone manufacturers enjoy having more than one dominant OS to choose from (e.g. WP v. Android). That way they can play platforms v. each other, and thus exert more power and thus gain a larger share of the rents.

Also... why is helping OEMs "worse"? IF OEMs abandon platform due to legalities investment becomes worth jack in a sec. If the platform is worth jack, what good does platform specific patents do? Strange logic on your behalf.

Honestly it seems to me a certain company is not seeing the whole picture. But, while that company keeps dropping failed services every other week and is run by a pair of PhD dropouts, I can't believe they're that stupid so I'll just assume it's all part of the plan.

Given the impression you give with regards to your industry knowledge, more likely you are the one not seeing the whole picture. But hey, thats just my interpretation.

 

[thekev]

So I make a copycat product and start selling it in Australia around October and when Apple sues my company, I would want the judge to appeal that it will hurt my business as well as business of retailers in Australia.

Please allow me to infringe on IP and make copy cat products. Please.

Apple lost their case against a small company in Spain. Once again Apple had requested an injunction which really hurt these guys, yet in the case of the icloud thing, Apple requested a huge bond if an injunction was to be granted. Stop trying to suggest that Apple is always the one who plays fair.

 

[gkpm]

Not hedging bets would be stupid, given the low cost of doing so. Also, Bada is not competing anywhere near the same segments as Android, and Windows Mobile... well... it got killed 2 years ago. Sorry for being frank, but the cell phone industry doesn't seem like your thing.

Is that why even the rushed Lumia Windows Phone sold out at launch in the UK market?

http://www.bgr.com/2011/11/24/nokia-lumia-800-sold-out-in-u-k-despite-rumors-of-weak-demand/

I think some companies would like to be killed that way. Wanna bet they'll do well when it launches in the US?

You may want to reconsider begin so "frank" in your opinions, as your view seems too tainted by the Service-Dominant Logic marketing dogmatism you keep mentioning for no good reason.

 

[divinox]

Is that why even the rushed Lumia Windows Phone sold out at launch in the UK market?

http://www.bgr.com/2011/11/24/nokia-lumia-800-sold-out-in-u-k-despite-rumors-of-weak-demand/

I think some companies would like to be killed that way. Wanna bet they'll do well when it launches in the US?

You may want to reconsider begin so "frank" in your opinions, as your view seems too tainted by the Service-Dominant Logic marketing dogmatism you keep mentioning for no good reason.

1) Windows phone != Windows mobile. Point being?
2) Nokia has nothing to do with Windows mobile, nor is Windows mobile a company.
3) Yeah, except for SDL being science nor dogma. Why mention it? Because it gives a context to my comments for those who happen to know it. Simple.

p.s. my relationship to SDL is not in any way connected to your ignorance about the industry. so... didn't quite get the logic behind that one.

 

[Hulk12]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

...This lawsuit is just mascarade for money investors, and lets be honest Samsung is Korean brand and we all know that Korean people didn't invent ****...but they did steal almost everything posible from or Japan or Taiwan or China or USA.....

That's pretty arrogant to say. Since when does a company represent all the people of a country? Maybe you should throw away that iphone, if you own one, since it's contaminated by Samsing copied parts.

Doesn't apple buy parts from Samsung in bulk who then manufactures them, so that means they rightfully belong to apple now since they paid for them. That's like buying a car with my own money from Toyota or Ford who manufactures these cars and saying its not mine because the materials came from different parts of the world

 

[dethmaShine]

Since Android's development started more than four years before Apple even ANNOUNCED the iPhone, and Android was even offered to Apple before they introduced iPhone OS/iOS, I really, really wonder who's the real copycat here. Common sense tells me that Android can hardly be the copycat, especially not when it took Apple five MAJOR releases to introduce features that Android had right from the beginning.

Ah, you're talking about the hardware design? Rounded corners? You mean that rounded corner's concept that Steve Jobs stole from TRAFFIC SIGNS back in the early 1980s when the Lisa and Macintosh teams at Apple were busy stealing the idea of the graphical user interface from the Xerox Star?

Or do you mean the entire design concept that we could all already see in 2001: A Space Odyssey or Star Trek and that all simple digital frames had already had long before there even was an iPad on the market?

Really, it's not that Apple were the first ones to come up with ANY of that stuff. They created a well engineered, well designed product family. But, as we say in Germany, "es ist nicht auf ihrem Mist gewachsen" -- it didn't grow on their dung. Like everybody else in the industry, they're standing on the shoulder's of other giants and mostly just IMPROVED what others had already invented.

Yes, Apple puts a lot of culture in their products and make them feel 'unique' - but that is not always for the better. Just look at that annoyance that Apple calls "synchronization", which in their language means wiping out the target device while in everybody else's language it means bringing both the target and the source to the same levels by copying stuff in both directions.

Using words like "copycats" is just stupid Apple marketing blah like their overuse of superlatives like "awesome, revolutionary, magical, beautiful". But I admit that it never fails to amaze me how well their brainwashing works with their target audience. But at the end of the day, it was all just a shallow sales pitch.

And Apple farted iPhone OS in a day.
There is not a doubt who is actually brainwashed.

3 things wrong with your post. This lawsuit isn't about "copying" or design, it's about patents for hardware and software. Also, both sides have cited issues with patent infringement yet only Apple was granted an injunction. Finally, Samsung has not been found to infringe on the Apple patents yet, the trial is in March.

Facts, don't let them get in the way of a good bashing uh ?

Edit : gah should always stay logged in, that way my ignore list stays in effect and I don't see these posts by people who have a tendency for heavily biased rants wit no root in reality.

Ok, I may be wrong on the subject. But O totally welcome your insults as usual. Wonder how you live with your people around.