Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Galaxy Tab 10.1 Launch in Australia Delayed Again as Apple Objects to Design

The size of Samsung has nothing to do with it. There are too many prior use example popping up on the internet which relegates the iPad's concept into a variation on a theme. Apple has overplayed its hand and faces a blanket rejection of their 'look and feel' argument. It is about as futile as trying to patent bifocals after the fact.

Heck, as a Navy officer in the Pentagon in the late 1980's I made a presentation briefing of a Mobilization Support Center to the then Asst. Secretary of Defense, James Webb (now Sen. Webb, VA). In it I presented a design for an extremely thin laptop without a keyboard which could be held like a book or in landscape mode with a touch sensitive keyboard on the lower part of the screen. I did receive a medal for subsequently completing the facility (just prior to Desert Storm) but maybe I should go and find all those present at the briefing and apply for a patent? Of course since I was a U.S. employee the gov't would hold the patent...and then Apple would have to pay the U.S. a license fee for every iPad sold. Yeah, I know, it makes about as much sense as Apple's argument.

Rich
 
My 2001 Toshiba Pocket PC looks an awful lot like an iPod Touch/iPhone. It's got a similar shape, metal back, home button and volume toggle switch are in the same place.

Can Toshiba jump into a super manly tank and trample all over Apple?

9789407-2-440-front-2.gif


And what about http://www.google.co.uk/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=crunchpad&oe=UTF-8&redir_esc=&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wi&biw=1480&bih=861?

This level of nonsense is pushing me away from buying Apple devices.
 
Rich Gibson said:
The size of Samsung has nothing to do with it. There are too many prior use example popping up on the internet which relegates the iPad's concept into a variation on a theme. Apple has overplayed its hand and faces a blanket rejection of their 'look and feel' argument. It is about as futile as trying to patent bifocals after the fact.

Heck, as a Navy officer in the Pentagon in the late 1980's I made a presentation briefing of a Mobilization Support Center to the then Asst. Secretary of Defense, James Webb (now Sen. Webb, VA). In it I presented a design for an extremely thin laptop without a keyboard which could be held like a book or in landscape mode with a touch sensitive keyboard on the lower part of the screen. I did receive a medal for subsequently completing the facility (just prior to Desert Storm) but maybe I should go and find all those present at the briefing and apply for a patent? Of course since I was a U.S. employee the gov't would hold the patent...and then Apple would have to pay the U.S. a license fee for every iPad sold. Yeah, I know, it makes about as much sense as Apple's argument.

Rich
Click to expand...

Stop shattering their illusion that no one but the great Kim Jobs Il (no offense directed his way) couldve envisioned something as grand as the ipad. How are they gonna sleep at night?
 
Socialists

gcliv said:
Come on Apple, worry about innovating and bringing the best product to market rather than trampling the little guy.

Apple is the new Microsoft.
Click to expand...

And how would you like it if you were a professional writer, and every time you wrote something some turkey copied, distributed, and made a fortune on it. And then some idiot came along and told you to write new stuff and ignore the guy stealing you creations and making the money you should have made. On top of that, they tell you that you the devil from the darkside for not giving your creations to anyone that wants to copy and sell them.
 
JHankwitz said:
And how would you like it if you were a professional writer, and every time you wrote something some turkey copied, distributed, and made a fortune on it. And then some idiot came along and told you to write new stuff and ignore the guy stealing you creations and making the money you should have made. On top of that, they tell you that you the devil from the darkside for not giving your creations to anyone that wants to copy and sell them.
Click to expand...

http://techcrunch.com/2009/06/03/crunchpad-the-launch-prototype/

June 3rd, 2009

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

April 10, 2010

Looks like this writers story came almost a year earlier ;)
 
It's fun to see that many people begging to let Samsung sell his tablet are the same who, a few years ago, used to say that these devices would be useless and a big commercial failure.
 
alex.sebenski said:
So the iPad changed the definition of "tablet"? Yeah. That's what I said. Boom. They're copying. Done.
Click to expand...

Your selection of pictures is as accurate as the pictures in the Apple's presentation to the German court. There were "iPad-looking" tablets before iPad. There was a general shift in design in post-iPad time frame but it was caused not by iPad itself but rather by a switch to capacitive screens (not an Apple invention) with which it makes sense to get rid of most of the physical buttons.
 
notjustjay said:
I played with a Galaxy 10 last night at a "The Source" (Canada's reincarnation of Radio Shack). Other than "it's a 10-inch tablet" the thing looks and feels nothing like an iPad.
Click to expand...

Which is precisely why they aren't shifting anything like the numbers of the competing tablets which all the manufacturers predicted.




One certainly can't argue however with the fact that in the last 18-24 months there has been an exponential leap in the amount of these patent | tit-for-tat lawsuits. The only ones benefiting are the lawyers and attorneys. There is no benefit to the end consumer.
 
I guess my question is, how much different can competitors make their designs? They can't make a triangle or a circle.....
 
Gilles said:
It's fun to see that many people begging to let Samsung sell his tablet are the same who, a few years ago, used to say that these devices would be useless and a big commercial failure.
Click to expand...


To be honest, I still find these devices quite useless (read: not good-enough-value-for-money). However, this is in no way related to whether or not someone (samsung in this case) should be allowed to compete with Apple (or anyone else) in the making of such devices.
 
Rich Gibson said:
The size of Samsung has nothing to do with it. There are too many prior use example popping up on the internet which relegates the iPad's concept into a variation on a theme. Apple has overplayed its hand and faces a blanket rejection of their 'look and feel' argument. It is about as futile as trying to patent bifocals after the fact.
Click to expand...

These arguments are becoming political nonsense - supporting your opinions by distorting the facts.

Apple is not trying to get rid of all tablets, but rather tablets that LOOK like the iPad and could confuse customers.

For example, Pringles makes potato chips in a patented shape and stacks them in a can. If another potato chip manufacturer cut their chips the same way and put them in a can the same way, you can bet your ass Pringles would sue.

If you saw Charlie Chaplin eating potatoes out of a can, this is not prior art which invalidates Pringle's patent. Sheesh.
 
gcliv said:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)

Come on Apple, worry about innovating and bringing the best product to market rather than trampling the little guy.

Apple is the new Microsoft.
Click to expand...

The reward for innovating a unique and ground-breaking product should be that your competition doesn't get to clone your ideas with no investment of their own. If everyone wants to see companies like Apple continue to innovate, those companies need to enjoy the exclusivity of their ideas. That is the payoff and motivation for innovation.
 
Oletros said:
Can you explain me how Motorola XOOM looks like the iPad and how can confuse customers?
Click to expand...

To me its almost as if Apple is assuming its clients are stupid. They won't know the difference between devices, app stores, which apps to buy, which software they want, so we will just make all the decisions for them! :apple:
 
leroypants said:
Microsoft was never even remotely as bad as Apple is right now (go ahead fanboys down rate this even though we both know it's true).
Click to expand...

Microsoft sucked because they sat on their laurels and made average products until Windows 7 and XBox. Apple sucks because they sue everyone for seemingly stupid reasons. I don't know how Samsung can change their product to differentiate it from the iPad yet Apple sues. Apple should focus on promoting the benefits of iOS and iPad.

Promote your product rather than put down another.

P.S. I'm an Apple fan but hate their legal attack dogs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back