Ban on Sale of Samsung Galaxy Smartphones in EU Set for October 13th

[KnightWRX]

There exists on this forum a cabal of individuals who, for reasons best known to themselves, are simply incapable of conceding any creativity, innovation, or positive effect on the part of Samsung/Google/HP/Dell/Motorola/Microsoft/IBM/HTC and others.

Fixed that there for you.

Maybe it's just that some of us are more lucid to the realities of the tech industry and more in-tune with what is actually going on so that we don't go around claiming "Android abandonned their development on Blackberry type technology" when it's a plain fact that the statement itself is quite erroneous and full of misunderstanding of what the Android project is.

 

[divinox]

They always manage to miss the point.

Except for those times when they change the subject; start mumbling blather about Xerox Parc; or degenerate into another rant containing references to "fanboys", "sheeple", or post pictures from a long-forgotten episode of Lost In Space to better prove their point that Apple's position as the most succesful company in Tech is all due to Steve Jobs and Jonny Ives plunder of the brilliant innovations wrought by some genius at 20th Century Fox' prop department.

No.

There exists on this forum a cabal of individuals who, for reasons best known to themselves, are simply incapable of conceding any creativity, innovation, or positive effect on the part of Apple.

No.

Why they choose to do this is frankly beyond me. Why they choose to spend their days trolling a forum dedicated to Apple the company, its products, and its enthusiasts, is something we can only speculate about.

Thanks for the false caricature, but we are not mere strawmen.

They make a point of relentlessly voting down any post that contains references to actual relevant facts; or that is well thought-out. Bonus negative points are awarded for logical reasoning; well-articulated arguments; dry wit; mild irony; or güd speling. Wear your "negative" points in a thread like this as a Badge of Honor, for Thee Hath surely Made the Haters Squirm!

No.

Engaging these individuals can be an exercise in Sisyphean frustration. One may conclusively refute one piece of arrant nonsense, only to be faced with a flurry of yet-further erroneous, irrelevant nonsense that springs, Hydra-like (to mix my mythological metaphors), from their fervid brains.

Think you got it backwards.

There are undoubtedly many individuals who post here on MR whose knowledge, insight, wisdom, and writing abilities add greatly to the community. People who can - and do - rationally discuss Apple's products, people, policies, and plans - both good and bad - in an engaging and edifying manner. I have learned a great deal from this forum and its members.

So have i, however more often and not from the people you come down on with this post, people like knightwrx et al.

----------

Fixed that there for you.

Maybe it's just that some of us are more lucid to the realities of the tech industry and more in-tune with what is actually going on so that we don't go around claiming "Android abandonned their development on Blackberry type technology" when it's a plain fact that the statement itself is quite erroneous and full of misunderstanding of what the Android project is.

this.

 

[Bilbo63]

They always manage to miss the point.

Except for those times when they change the subject; start mumbling blather about Xerox Parc; or degenerate into another rant containing references to "fanboys", "sheeple", or post pictures from a long-forgotten episode of Lost In Space to better prove their point that Apple's position as the most succesful company in Tech is all due to Steve Jobs and Jonny Ives plunder of the brilliant innovations wrought by some genius at 20th Century Fox' prop department.

There exists on this forum a cabal of individuals who, for reasons best known to themselves, are simply incapable of conceding any creativity, innovation, or positive effect on the part of Apple.

Why they choose to do this is frankly beyond me. Why they choose to spend their days trolling a forum dedicated to Apple the company, its products, and its enthusiasts, is something we can only speculate about.

They make a point of relentlessly voting down any post that contains references to actual relevant facts; or that is well thought-out. Bonus negative points are awarded for logical reasoning; well-articulated arguments; dry wit; mild irony; or güd speling. Wear your "negative" points in a thread like this as a Badge of Honor, for Thee Hath surely Made the Haters Squirm!

Engaging these individuals can be an exercise in Sisyphean frustration. One may conclusively refute one piece of arrant nonsense, only to be faced with a flurry of yet-further erroneous, irrelevant nonsense that springs, Hydra-like (to mix my mythological metaphors), from their fervid brains.

There are undoubtedly many individuals who post here on MR whose knowledge, insight, wisdom, and writing abilities add greatly to the community. People who can - and do - rationally discuss Apple's products, people, policies, and plans - both good and bad - in an engaging and edifying manner. I have learned a great deal from this forum and its members.

The trick, as they say, is being able to distinguish the latter from the former.

Nah, it's all fine. I've not seen the other Android flavours in the wild, so I'll man up and say bad on me. It really hasn't changed my opinion about Google and iOS though.

Truthfully, the exchanges back and forth are entertaining and educational. I don't always agree, but we don't always have to agree. Some people are more... what's a good word... "abrasive" than others, some people don't respect others opinions, some people feel that their opinions are holy nuggets and all that matter while everyone else is wrong. (and I am not referring to anyone in particular, before I get jumped on again) We're all passionate. I have no problems with any of the exchanges of opinions.

Everyone has some valid points and they are entitled their opinions. I honestly feel that way. I "try" not be abrasive, but it's sometimes difficult in textual format to get context of an opinion across as intended... DON'T MAKE ME USE ALL UPPERCASE!!! LOL

While I don't agree with everything Apple does, I feel they don't get the credit or the respect that they are due in some cases. (in my opinion)

Seriously it's all good.

 

[KnightWRX]

Everyone has some valid points and they are entitled their opinions.

It's just hard to respect someone else's opinion when it's so obviously based on ignorance of facts or on pure speculation and paranoia. It's even harder to respect once you've corrected their factual deficiency yet they still refuse to alter their opinion in light of their new gained knowledge.

That's the pesky little thing we call credibility. If someone were to say something like "Google ripped off Apple! Look at Android before/after the iPhone, see how they abandonned their Blackberry type technology!" and then be proven completely wrong by the fact that Android currently works just fine and is shipped on BB Bold form factor phones, and that person keeps his opinion that "Google ripped off Apple!" in light of this, then this fellow has just lost a lot of credibility because his agenda has just shone through.

 

[DeathChill]

I don't understand your point KnightWRX. So what if some device makers ship Android devices that resemble a Blackberry device? Google was specifically developing it for that form before Apple and switched gears once they saw the iPhone. In fact wasn't it said that Google was actively showing Jobs their prototypes and he was fine with them because they resembled a Blackberry device?

 

[Oletros]

I don't understand your point KnightWRX. So what if some device makers ship Android devices that resemble a Blackberry device? Google was specifically developing it for that form before Apple and switched gears once they saw the iPhone. In fact wasn't it said that Google was actively showing Jobs their prototypes and he was fine with them because they resembled a Blackberry device?

There was prototypes touch screen only, not only BB ones

 

[KnightWRX]

Google was specifically developing it for that form before Apple and switched gears once they saw the iPhone.

Citation needed. As far as I know, Google was developing a mobile OS, not a hardware form factor.

Android is hardware agnostic. It runs on TV Set-top boxes, tablets, BB type phones, PSP type phones, full touch phones, PMPs, etc.. etc...

It's an OS, not a hardware platform.

In fact, this was the first Android phone released, the T-mobile G1 :

iPhone look alike ? I think not. Heck, even the UI doesn't even look close to iOS, it looks... gasp, like a modern Android phone with a different clock widget and background.

 

[BaldiMac]

The fact remains, Android didn't "change" from Eric being on Apple's board. It's still a piece of software that is hardware agnostic and provides high level functionality for mobile devices.

I agree it probably had nothing to do with Schmidt on Apple's board, but it seems pretty obvious that the UI was based on buttons, scroll wheels, and context menus before the iPhone and was changed to focus on multitouch input after the iPhone. Despite your attempt to pigeon hole this argument by posting pics of Android phones with a hardware keyboard. Which, of course, have nothing to do with the point you are criticizing.

Thus maybe you want to revisit the basis for your opinion and maybe rethink it a bit.

Right back at you. You keep focusing on the hardware similarities in your pictures that "prove" Android did not change because of the iPhone. But you don't even acknowledge the change in the software between the before and after pics that you posted.

 

[ChazUK]

I agree it probably had nothing to do with Schmidt on Apple's board, but it seems pretty obvious that the UI was based on buttons, scroll wheels, and context menus before the iPhone and was changed to focus on multitouch input after the iPhone.

Symbian has followed just the same evolutionary path as Android and has evolved with the hardware that was available at the time.

Android as it stands today still uses buttons (home, menu, back, search + physical keyboards), context menus (menu button handles a lot of the contextual menus) and things like scrollwheels (G1, Nexus One, HTC Hero) & directional buttons (Droid/Milestone). It's quite possible to use an Android device without touch input at all provided it has the additional input methods needed to manipulate it. It's very scalable to different hardware needs.

Multitouch didn't really come in to play officially until Android 2.1 which was only limited to third party support and was later added to Google's stock apps.

iOS and the iPhone has undoubtedly had an influence on other platforms but has also taken cues from other platforms too (for the better IMO).

 

[BaldiMac]

Symbian has followed just the same evolutionary path as Android and has evolved with the hardware that was available at the time.

Android as it stands today still uses buttons (home, menu, back, search + physical keyboards), context menus (menu button handles a lot of the contextual menus) and things like scrollwheels (G1, Nexus One, HTC Hero) & directional buttons (Droid/Milestone). It's quite possible to use an Android device without touch input at all provided it has the additional input methods needed to manipulate it. It's very scalable to different hardware needs.

Multitouch didn't really come in to play officially until Android 2.1 which was only limited to third party support and was later added to Google's stock apps.

iOS and the iPhone has undoubtedly had an influence on other platforms but has also taken cues from other platforms too (for the better IMO).

Yep.

 

[KnightWRX]

Android as it stands today still uses buttons (home, menu, back, search + physical keyboards), context menus (menu button handles a lot of the contextual menus) and things like scrollwheels (G1, Nexus One, HTC Hero) & directional buttons (Droid/Milestone). It's quite possible to use an Android device without touch input at all provided it has the additional input methods needed to manipulate it. It's very scalable to different hardware needs.

That's my whole point. Android is agnostic to the hardware. If you make it, Android will support it (disclaimer : once support has been added by the vendor or Google). Android was not developed around a form factor nor did a form factor "change" Android. Android just supports any form factor you throw at it and is flexible enough for adding support for new ones.

The prototype Android is running the beta code of what is now on devices. It just happened to have a "blackberry" form factor. A form factor that isn't as popular today but is still in use and very much support by Android. There is no "before/after" iPhone for Android.

iOS and the iPhone has undoubtedly had an influence on other platforms but has also taken cues from other platforms too (for the better IMO).

A point oft-ignored, though harder to deny now with Notifications/OTA updates. Though multi-tasking/copy&paste/MMS are also things that Apple added because of pressure from the competition having these features.

 

[BaldiMac]

That's my whole point. Android is agnostic to the hardware. If you make it, Android will support it (disclaimer : once support has been added by the vendor or Google). Android was not developed around a form factor nor did a form factor "change" Android. Android just supports any form factor you throw at it and is flexible enough for adding support for new ones.

The prototype Android is running the beta code of what is now on devices. It just happened to have a "blackberry" form factor. A form factor that isn't as popular today but is still in use and very much support by Android. There is no "before/after" iPhone for Android.

And the point people who you are criticizing are trying to make is that the UI that was demoed (before the iPhone) was based on a Blackberry like UI. After the iPhone debuted with a multitouch UI, Android added a similar multitouch UI. It's really not that controversial a statement. Nobody cares if the kernel is basically the same.

Of course, some people take it to far because they can't tell the difference between copying an idea and IP theft.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

I agree it probably had nothing to do with Schmidt on Apple's board, but it seems pretty obvious that the UI was based on buttons, scroll wheels, and context menus before the iPhone and was changed to focus on multitouch input after the iPhone. Despite your attempt to pigeon hole this argument by posting pics of Android phones with a hardware keyboard. Which, of course, have nothing to do with the point you are criticizing.

You also have to factor in in 2007 capacities touch screen had finally come down in price and reliability that they could be used on cell phone. Before then everything was resistive touch screen. I do not give Apple credit for making capacitive touch screen.

Factor that in the change is not very surprising. At the time when Google got Android all there was out there was resistive touch screen and then it was just getting working hardware.

 

[BaldiMac]

You also have to factor in in 2007 capacities touch screen had finally come down in price and reliability that they could be used on cell phone. Before then everything was resistive touch screen. I do not give Apple credit for making capacitive touch screen.

Factor that in the change is not very surprising. At the time when Google got Android all there was out there was resistive touch screen and then it was just getting working hardware.

Yessir, it was all a big coincidence. It's amazing how change is not very surprising in hindsight.

 

[voonyx]

Yessir, it was all a big coincidence. It's amazing how change is not very surprising in hindsight.

And "trivial" things are so "obvious"...

 

[Oletros]

Yessir, it was all a big coincidence. It's amazing how change is not very surprising in hindsight.

Yap, big coincidence that LG started to use capacitive screens and full touch phones at the same time.

Perhaps because the technology started to be ready by then

 

[BaldiMac]

Yap, big coincidence that LG started to use capacitive screens and full touch phones at the same time.

Perhaps because the technology started to be ready by then

Not questioning the timing of the technology. (It's almost as if Apple waited for the technology to come available to provide a user experience that met their standards.) But the LG OS was nothing like the iPhone OS, so I have no idea what point you are trying to make.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

Not questioning the timing of the technology. (It's almost as if Apple waited for the technology to come available to provide a user experience that met their standards.) But the LG OS was nothing like the iPhone OS, so I have no idea what point you are trying to make.

The point is until capacitive screens making a fully touch based OS was rather limited and top it off capacitive screens were the only ones even able to do multi touch. The capacitive screens were the biggest game changer in terms of allowing fully touch screen OS really take off.

Apple choose to stay out of the market until the hardware could run what they wanted so they were not hammered by legacy support which killed what was left of WM at the time, is really hurting rim now and killed symba off.

Little things really changed around 2007 in terms of hardware and Apple had the advantage of not dealing with legacy support at the time.

 

[brdeveloper]

Conclusion

Basically, if you own an iPhone, you prefer iPhone. If you have an Android based phone, you prefer it. If you have a Nokia, you prefer Symbian. The same for Blackberry. I'm a recurring Nokia customer although I can afford an iPhone or Android-based device.

Symbian to me stands for a "natural" user experience since it's based on early cell phones developed by Nokia. I love its J2ME support as it is straightforward for a Java programmer to play. It supported multitask around ten years before iOS4.

I'm not too religious as iFundamentalists from MR. I know iPhone have nice features just like my N8. That's all about personal preferences. Apple fundamentalists insist on that boring speech of Apple pioneering on everything.

iQuit

 

[Bonfire22]

Question

As I recall, the iPhone style of Android came along after the iPhone did it not? This is why so many people feel as though Google scammed Apple and having Schmidt on the board makes everything very suspicious.

I'm just asking.

 

[BaldiMac]

The point is until capacitive screens making a fully touch based OS was rather limited and top it off capacitive screens were the only ones even able to do multi touch. The capacitive screens were the biggest game changer in terms of allowing fully touch screen OS really take off.

Apple choose to stay out of the market until the hardware could run what they wanted so they were not hammered by legacy support which killed what was left of WM at the time, is really hurting rim now and killed symba off.

Little things really changed around 2007 in terms of hardware and Apple had the advantage of not dealing with legacy support at the time.

Again, you are rewriting history. Capacitive touchscreens took off because of Apple. Not the other way around. The iPhone wasn't revolutionary simply because of capacitive touchscreens. They were simply one factor in the complete product.

If you want to hypothesize that if the world was different and Apple didn't introduce the iPhone, then capacitive touchscreens would have dominated the smartphone industry anyway and Android would still have been introduced at the same time with the exact same UI, then go for it. Just be aware that this situation did not actually happen.

The idea that the iPhone was "not that surprising" because different parts existed before is the epitome of not seeing the forest for the trees. Every invention is based on existing technology. All of them. It's how various technologies were put together in one unit that made the iPhone revolutionary. Multitouch, capacitive touchscreen displays, webkit browser, iTunes, desktop class OS, multitouch input conventions, and much much more.

Google copied a lot of ideas from the original iPhone UI. Apple has copied a lot of ideas from Android and others. There is a distinction that seems to be missing in these forums between copying ideas and IP theft. The same reason ignorant people keep repeating Jobs reference of Picasso's quote "Good Artists Copy, Great Artists Steal" as an admission of IP theft.

 

[divinox]

Again, you are rewriting history. Capacitive touchscreens took off because of Apple. Not the other way around. The iPhone wasn't revolutionary simply because of capacitive touchscreens. They were simply one factor in the complete product.

If you want to hypothesize that if the world was different and Apple didn't introduce the iPhone, then capacitive touchscreens would have dominated the smartphone industry anyway and Android would still have been introduced at the same time with the exact same UI, then go for it. Just be aware that this situation did not actually happen.

The idea that the iPhone was "not that surprising" because different parts existed before is the epitome of not seeing the forest for the trees. Every invention is based on existing technology. All of them. It's how various technologies were put together in one unit that made the iPhone revolutionary. Multitouch, capacitive touchscreen displays, webkit browser, iTunes, desktop class OS, multitouch input conventions, and much much more.

Google copied a lot of ideas from the original iPhone UI. Apple has copied a lot of ideas from Android and others. There is a distinction that seems to be missing in these forums between copying ideas and IP theft. The same reason ignorant people keep repeating Jobs reference of Picasso's quote "Good Artists Copy, Great Artists Steal" as an admission of IP theft.

why leave out the ending? "...And we have always been shameless about stealing". :- )

p.s.

i disagree with your point. converge was already happening, big time. further, touch-based interaction was blooming in research centers all across. as such, its not so much the vision, but the execution (and timing) that lead to what later became such a success. surely, the iphone may very well have been a massive catalyst for change - but that change was taking place already.

as for copying of the ui, i will never get that argument. then again, maybe we have different definitions of a ui.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

Again, you are rewriting history. Capacitive touchscreens took off because of Apple. Not the other way around. The iPhone wasn't revolutionary simply because of capacitive touchscreens. They were simply one factor in the complete product.

Sorry you are the one rewriting history right there. Apple did not make Capacitive touchscreens take off. Capactive touch screens allowed fully touch OS to take off. Apple just jumped on board with the tech early and got a head start on it since they did not have to deal with legacy support nor have to figure out how to make their software work with capactive touch screens.

Just because Apple lead the charge does not change the fact that it was the fact that Capactive screens finally had become cheap and reliable enough to work in a cell phone around that time.

Proof of that is the fact Apple was not the first to use it and the first to see it be used was around 2007. The fact that it was not there until that time tells us that it just was not cheap or good enough yet before hand. It changed around that time.

Techology no matter what if you follow it you will see an explosion of certain tech all take off at about the same time. Follow LCD TV for example. For the longest time the largest size you really saw them was around 40 in. After that point it was plasma screens. Then follow it and with in a short time span everyone was cranking out large LCD TV.
Other tech to follow is look at CD burners. Around the same time point everyone started dropping burners in computers they sold and same again happen with DVD burners. It just the tech changes.

Apple just was and did jump on board earlier than everyone else.

The fact that you are making the argument that Apple was the reason capacitive screens took off is rather sad and very fanboyish.

 

[divinox]

Sorry you are the one rewriting history right there. Apple did not make Capacitive touchscreens take off. Capactive touch screens allowed fully touch OS to take off. Apple just jumped on board with the tech early and got a head start on it since they did not have to deal with legacy support nor have to figure out how to make their software work with capactive touch screens.

Just because Apple lead the charge does not change the fact that it was the fact that Capactive screens finally had become cheap and reliable enough to work in a cell phone around that time.

Proof of that is the fact Apple was not the first to use it and the first to see it be used was around 2007. The fact that it was not there until that time tells us that it just was not cheap or good enough yet before hand. It changed around that time.

Techology no matter what if you follow it you will see an explosion of certain tech all take off at about the same time. Follow LCD TV for example. For the longest time the largest size you really saw them was around 40 in. After that point it was plasma screens. Then follow it and with in a short time span everyone was cranking out large LCD TV.
Other tech to follow is look at CD burners. Around the same time point everyone started dropping burners in computers they sold and same again happen with DVD burners. It just the tech changes.

Apple just was and did jump on board earlier than everyone else.

The fact that you are making the argument that Apple was the reason capacitive screens took off is rather sad and very fanboyish.

Well written. I mean, would anyone in their right mind say that MSFT invented "motion-based controller-free interaction" with Kinect? I know sure as hell that i wouldnt. Were they the first to make proper use of said technology? Probably.

I think the problem here is that some people think we are trying to "take away" from Apple the success that they have had. I can only speak for myself, but i am truly not. I just prefer staying true to facts, and technological history.

 

[marksman]

They always manage to miss the point.

Except for those times when they change the subject; start mumbling blather about Xerox Parc; or degenerate into another rant containing references to "fanboys", "sheeple", or post pictures from a long-forgotten episode of Lost In Space to better prove their point that Apple's position as the most succesful company in Tech is all due to Steve Jobs and Jonny Ives plunder of the brilliant innovations wrought by some genius at 20th Century Fox' prop department.

There exists on this forum a cabal of individuals who, for reasons best known to themselves, are simply incapable of conceding any creativity, innovation, or positive effect on the part of Apple.

Why they choose to do this is frankly beyond me. Why they choose to spend their days trolling a forum dedicated to Apple the company, its products, and its enthusiasts, is something we can only speculate about.

They make a point of relentlessly voting down any post that contains references to actual relevant facts; or that is well thought-out. Bonus negative points are awarded for logical reasoning; well-articulated arguments; dry wit; mild irony; or güd speling. Wear your "negative" points in a thread like this as a Badge of Honor, for Thee Hath surely Made the Haters Squirm!

Engaging these individuals can be an exercise in Sisyphean frustration. One may conclusively refute one piece of arrant nonsense, only to be faced with a flurry of yet-further erroneous, irrelevant nonsense that springs, Hydra-like (to mix my mythological metaphors), from their fervid brains.

There are undoubtedly many individuals who post here on MR whose knowledge, insight, wisdom, and writing abilities add greatly to the community. People who can - and do - rationally discuss Apple's products, people, policies, and plans - both good and bad - in an engaging and edifying manner. I have learned a great deal from this forum and its members.

The trick, as they say, is being able to distinguish the latter from the former.

It seems to be some sort of illness. They even create fake accounts just to vote up and down posts.

We should feel bad for people who have nothing in their life that is interesting enough to them to attract their attention. I can not personally fathom spending hours upon hours every day hating on some company or product on the internet. I really do not know what kind of mental or emotional hole you must be living in to keep that up.

There are plenty of products I do not like or enjoy and some I really have some bad feelings towards, yet I spend no time at all on a regular basis hunting down people discussing them and then bashing them at every turn. I am curious as to what people with this illness did before the internet. Were they the bitter and angry letter writers to newspapers, magazines and companies? What form did their illness of inappropriate hatred manifest itself back then.

The best is when they try to deflect their own illness and claim that people who like something and support it are equally ill. Of course this is not true because spending your time pursuing things you enjoy is normal behavior. Spending your time obsessively stalking products and people you do not like is an illness.

It is not like they take an issue with one thing in particular but positively view everything else, these groups of people take the negative position on every single story and discussion that is posted on this forum as it relates to Apple. That in and of itself proves they are behaving irrationally.

I am starting to think this might be a good area for counseling and rehabilitation. This Interhate Syndrome is not uncommon. You see it too often, and the obsessive level we see in many cases is scary. Some of the people here post in every single thread and make scores of posts every single day always bashing and attacking a company and its customers. I know if a friend or family member of mine spent hours a day hating on people and companies on the internet, I would be working hard to try to get them some serious treatment for a serious problem.

Not to mention that constant barrage of negative thoughts and negative attitudes have to color and effect their perception on the world and the rest of their life. Again this is not normal behavior. I would hope they could all get help sooner rather than later. I really do try to encourage these Interhaters to direct their energies towards positive pursuits and areas of interest, but they tend to dismiss it and use it as another place to launch an attack from. I have so many different interests that I can not ever find the free time to ever get to review and research and talk about them as much as I like yet I am fortunate enough to have a lot of free time to pursue such things.

If I could spend 140 hours a week just reading Internet forums for anything I wanted, I still would never reach a point where I was reading forums for a company or products I do not like, let alone do it hours a day like some people here do.