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

Google Looks to Distance Android from Apple vs. Samsung Ruling

There is plenty of stupid in this thread.

First, this case is not even close to done. No where near it. This is going to be going on for another 5-8 years. Second, this may shock some of you, but release date has nothing to do with development of an OS/App/Hardware. It is strikingly clear almost none of you have actually done any kind of development on anything and have no clue how long something that complex even takes. Shocker I know, but maybe just maybe, android was using a similar setup to an iPhone since grid icons have been used in a GUI OS since the beginning of time...Third, Samsung is fine, who do you think makes the chipsets/processors/screens to your iphones/ipads/mbp/etc... Take a wild guess on that one.
 
Varp said:
Google stupidly chose Android, which is slow, junky technology.
Google stupidly let Android be used on variety of screen sizes.
Google stupidly let Samsung embarrass it.
Google stupidly is stupidly sticking with Android.

Google is stupid.
Click to expand...

In a sea of ridiculous posts, this is probably my favorite.
Android is far from slow and junky. It had growing pains, but as I see it today, it is quite nice in many ways. It is nicer in some ways than iOS 5x as a matter of fact. While I prefer my iPhone, I can't even remotely say I don't think the Android OS is junk.
 
apolloa said:
It would actually highlight the stupidity of the American patent system with any luck.
Click to expand...

Perhaps that's the only good we can really hope for out of all this… that it highlights what appears to be a need for serious reform to the patent system.

Some intelligent comments about the Apple vs Samsung ruling here:
http://www.engadget.com/2012/08/25/editorial-engadget-on-the-apple-vs-samsung-ruling/

The very last comment pretty much sums up the current situation:

'It seems that every half-baked idea that pops into a designer's head is thrown into the patent bin, and a big chunk of those are actually approved. Not only does that stifle budding inventors and companies, it makes a mockery of what an invention actually is.'​

Also worth watching:
http://www.ted.com/talks/kirby_ferguson_embrace_the_remix.html
 
The IPhone Design has been clearly "inspired" by some already long existing PDAs:

A good example (2004):
http://asia.cnet.com/product/dell-axim-x50-520mhz-39075142.htm
And look at the Office-Icons there, square "round-edged" icons with symbols in it.
The design of the hardware and the homescreen for sure was not new.

The Palm-devices had a comparable look with auto-arranging icons long before (and also before the apple-newton).
 
monkor said:
The issue itself didn't even have to do with the Android OS; it had to do with Samsung's blatant copying of iOS with their TouchWiz skin and the designs of phones which clearly copied the iPhone. They were rightfully reprimanded, and Google just made the distinction that Apple's beef (this time, at least) had nothing to do with the core OS.

Previously, I thought Apple was acting like a whiny little kid, but then I realized that by copying and not innovating their way to the top, Samsung hurt the consumer in more ways than one. You don't see HTC getting sued, because their Sense skin and designs are unique/innovative. Yet HTC is being shafted in overall market share because Samsung's copycat phones are selling like hotcakes. It's disappointing, to say the least. Same goes for Motorola, whose RAZR Maxx has fantastic battery life and truly helped all companies in maximizing the battery potential in smart phones. Yet they're falling behind further still in market share, making it harder and harder to compete.

Google does innovate. Android is not a shot for shot copy of iOS, and they both steal ideas from one another in order to (hopefully) better implement them. Apple may indirectly go at Google via their handset makers, but attacking the OS itself isn't likely to work. Android is here to stay, and people should want it that way.
Click to expand...

Well said. Awesome summation and perspective.
 
Since the concept of the smart phone and tablet computer predate the iPhone and iPad, I think what needs to be watched are two things. Since neither device types were successful before Apple's entries, are these "other devices" close enough in form and function that normal consumers ca be fooled, and are they copying those aspects of the apple devices that contributed to their success?
 
Rocketman said:
Apple up 2% or about $13.00 is a $13B increase. Samsung is down about $12B.

The award was $1B and may be trebled and will certainly be appealed and delayed for at least a year and may eventually be reduced, or even a new trial ordered.

So perception trumps reality. The tail wags the dog.

Rocketman
Click to expand...

Your missing a few things here:

1) Apple will make a motion for 3x damages due to willful infringement. There is a good chance that Koh will grant that motion.

2) Apple will motion for an injunction on all infringing Samsung phones. With a jury verdict in their pocket, they will win those injunctions as well. This will severely limit Samsung's lineup to their newest models.

3) Apple and Samsung have another case pending regarding Samsung's most recent smartphone models. This verdict sets some legal precedents for some previously untested patents. Apple may be able to win injunctions against Samsung's latest smartphones as well as a result.

In the end, Samsung will be going back to the drawing board to come up with new designs. Without the "Apple look" that Samsung has been relying there is some question if those designs will resonate with customers in the same way. Apple may have just severely crippled the business of their fiercest competitor copier in the US market. Apple could easily role this win into expanded marketshare. The jury verdict will now put Samsung on the side of the fence where they are waiting on the court schedule to take action and they need to standby while Apple does their thing. Apple has been waiting two years for this verdict and has had to standby and watch Samsung release model after model that infringed the same patents and trade dress and the original smartphone models that were accused in this case. So while Apple awaits payment of their $1B or $3B (the $3B would be the equivalent of Samsung's worldwide mobile division profit from last quarter), Apple will be able to force Samsung to come up with new designs that may or may not be hits if they want to sell in the US market.
 
monkor said:
Previously, I thought Apple was acting like a whiny little kid, but then I realized that by copying and not innovating their way to the top, Samsung hurt the consumer in more ways than one. You don't see HTC getting sued, because their Sense skin and designs are unique/innovative. Yet HTC is being shafted in overall market share because Samsung's copycat phones are selling like hotcakes. It's disappointing, to say the least. Same goes for Motorola, whose RAZR Maxx has fantastic battery life and truly helped all companies in maximizing the battery potential in smart phones. Yet they're falling behind further still in market share, making it harder and harder to compete.
Click to expand...


Ein? Both HTC and Motorola have been sued by Apple. Well, in the case of Motorola they sued first Apple.
 
BC2009 said:
Your missing a few things here:

1) Apple will make a motion for 3x damages due to willful infringement. There is a good chance that Koh will grant that motion.

2) Apple will motion for an injunction on all infringing Samsung phones. With a jury verdict in their pocket, they will win those injunctions as well. This will severely limit Samsung's lineup to their newest models.

3) Apple and Samsung have another case pending regarding Samsung's most recent smartphone models. This verdict sets some legal precedents for some previously untested patents. Apple may be able to win injunctions against Samsung's latest smartphones as well as a result.

In the end, Samsung will be going back to the drawing board to come up with new designs. Without the "Apple look" that Samsung has been relying there is some question if those designs will resonate with customers in the same way. Apple may have just severely crippled the business of their fiercest competitor copier in the US market. Apple could easily role this win into expanded marketshare. The jury verdict will now put Samsung on the side of the fence where they are waiting on the court schedule to take action and they need to standby while Apple does their thing. Apple has been waiting two years for this verdict and has had to standby and watch Samsung release model after model that infringed the same patents and trade dress and the original smartphone models that were accused in this case. So while Apple awaits payment of their $1B or $3B (the $3B would be the equivalent of Samsung's worldwide mobile division profit from last quarter), Apple will be able to force Samsung to come up with new designs that may or may not be hits if they want to sell in the US market.
Click to expand...

Or not. Samsung could win an Appeal.

No one knows. It's all conjecture. Looking forward to seeing how it all plays out. Personally I don't forecast doom and gloom for either company.
 
Varp said:
Google stupidly chose Android, which is slow, junky technology.
Google stupidly let Android be used on variety of screen sizes.
Google stupidly let Samsung embarrass it.
Google stupidly is stupidly sticking with Android.

Google is stupid.
Click to expand...

You must be a genius!
 
I've said it before and I'll say it again. Google is smart.
I don't know if their tactic will work - but it's far smarter to backpedal than continue down stream to a most certain demise.
 
appleguy123 said:
Android phones before iPhone
Image

Android Phones after iPhone

Image
Click to expand...

Android phone after iPhone:

21_hero_media_1.jpg


Your argument is invalid.
 
Oletros said:
If there is no infringement the preliminary injunctrion doesn't make sense, despite of what boith companies can do
Click to expand...

But they're basing it off a ruling that they plan to appeal. Seems a bit hypocritical.
 
ChrisTX said:
They did, and I thank them wholeheartedly for the fire sale pricing on the touchpad! :D
Click to expand...

(Wish I could have afforded it at the time. Imagine, a tablet I would've actually bought!)

Feh, they didn't even give it three months before they pulled the plug on the whole thing. I know they were going through some leadership issues at the time, but really, was someone in the upper levels so against it they just threw their $1.2 billion investment away? Sense it does not make.

I honestly think webOS could be absolutely huge if they just put their resources behind it, it deserves way more than what it has gotten. :(
 
Rogifan said:
But they're basing it off a ruling that they plan to appeal. Seems a bit hypocritical.
Click to expand...

Redundant is the word I think your looking for. It may seem that way but it's actually 2 separate issues.
This motion is for the injunction on products - and the bond Apple paid while this process was occurring. Since the ruling has no effect on this particular injunction, Samsung is seeking for an expediting hearing and recouping losses from the injunction - on Apple's dime (bond).
 
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