See, now HP is copying Apple macbooks because their design sucks.
http://www.engadget.com/photos/hp-envy-15-vs-the-macbook-pro/#4780889
http://www.engadget.com/photos/hp-envy-15-vs-the-macbook-pro/#4780889
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.
Jury Finds Largely in Favor of Apple in Apple vs. Samsung Trial, Awards More than $1 Billion in Damages
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
lets say if you leave your phone at a restaurant by mistake and someone else takes it, it won't be stealing UNLESS you report to police?
jeez, whether you report to police or not, fact is the other person TOOK your phone and that is the reality. so just because gooogle may or may not have patented this notification, it is OK for others to use it?
It was so freaking obvious that samesuck copied, it shouldn't have taken so long to reach a verdict.
I think the difference, though, is that Honda didn't build a carbon copy of the Taurus and call it the Accord. Look at the Galaxy S and it looks just like the iPhone. I think we've already seen some benefits of the lawsuits. The Galaxy SIII is legitimately different from the iPhone. Now, with a significant jury finding, we'll probably see even more divergence, and perhaps other technically worthy operating systems like Windows Phone will get a second look from Samsung and other manufacturers. That would increase choice, not decrease it.
----------
So did you follow your own advice? I bought Apple and Apple options around $350 and $400. I also loaded up after last October's "earnings miss," though I didn't think to do the same after July's. Apple's risen so far so fast I've decided to go conservative. I won't sell what I have, but I'm not doubling down at this point. Unless they have the fountain of youth in the works, their growth rate will slow. They may still grow, but I see the rate coming back down to earth. That said, it would still leave a massive company generating lots of cash.
if capacitive screens with multi touch predates 1980 how come it took until 2007 with the iPhone to bring it to the mobile phone?
I figured then you were talking about Samsung's owner lawyer fees then *slap face*. I realized now you mean if Samsung has to pay Apple legal fees. I do not think so. Paying for the other side's legal fees is only ever done when the plaintiff's lawsuit is either frivolous or fruitless and it is the plaintiff that pays the defendant. It was put in place so defending oneself doesn't get them ground into the dust. Sorry!
Well, Samsung asked for it. If they were smart, they would have avoided this trial by making sure of not violating any patents, but instead they decided to take a chance.
$ 2B is not pocket change, no matter who you are. I wonder if it may be close to the amount of profit they made selling all their Android phones to date.
Oh well, at least Samsung also makes TVs and other good stuff, so it should all compensate. I wonder who's head is going to be chopped off after this incident.
$ 2B is not pocket change, no matter who you are. I wonder if it may be close to the amount of profit they made selling all their Android phones to date.
Oh well, at least Samsung also makes TVs and other good stuff, so it should all compensate. I wonder who's head is going to be chopped off after this incident.
Ok I know Apple doesn't have a patent on silver or aluminum and they didn't pioneer the chiclet keyboard but geez HP how about a little originality.
Asus, Samsung and Lenovo have no problem making their laptops look original.
Now Apple, please use some of the court awarded ca$h and spread out your phone lineup a bit. After all, Steve himself claimed that we are in the Post-PC area. So: diversify your product line in the mobile sector! It would be great, if you could offer a 4", 4.5" and even a 5+" sized iPhone, so customers who prefer a larger sized iPhone with a bigger screen had a choice and don't have to look elsewhere. (*cough*, *cough*, Samsung, *cough*)
*That* would probably the biggest blow against Samsung or Android in general. You would be amazed, how many people here in Asia (I live in Hong Kong) can be seen in the public transport systems like Busses or Subways, using a big Samsung phone (Galaxy Note and now the S3) to watch news, movies or typing emails, doing Facebook, etc. And every time, you talk to people and ask them about their reason for choosing a Samsung or HTC, you will get the answer: because of the screen size! And the iPhone is too small!
I just simply can't believe that Apple just offers one size of a phone only. After all, we have multiple sizes of
laptops, etc as well. Desktops even. And again, according to Steve we are in the post-pc area. So, offer different sizes and everyone could have their weapon of choice.
I am convinced that would hurt the competition much more than exhausting court cases.
And no, that doesn't mean Apple should neglect their Pro Line Up either.
*That* would probably the biggest blow against Samsung or Android in general. You would be amazed, how many people here in Asia (I live in Hong Kong) can be seen in the public transport systems like Busses or Subways, using a big Samsung phone (Galaxy Note and now the S3) to watch news, movies or typing emails, doing Facebook, etc. And every time, you talk to people and ask them about their reason for choosing a Samsung or HTC, you will get the answer: because of the screen size! And the iPhone is too small!
I just simply can't believe that Apple just offers one size of a phone only. After all, we have multiple sizes of
laptops, etc as well. Desktops even. And again, according to Steve we are in the post-pc area. So, offer different sizes and everyone could have their weapon of choice. I am convinced that would hurt the competition much more than exhausting court cases.
And no, that doesn't mean Apple should neglect their Pro Line Up either.
So you'd rather have a panel of 70 year old judges deciding issues of technology?
I don't see Apple significantly expanding their product line. Their design philosophy is about selling a few well designed products, not releasing dozens of designs to see what sticks in the market.
Well, in terms of the iPhone it is more or less just *one* product, not even a few. And given the success of the recent larger Samsung phones (yes, they sell well), it appears that larger (i)phones would stick in the market quite well.
It seems to me that the court in Seoul took a "nationalist" view. The jury in California was randomly selected under a process where each side was given the opportunity to remove more than 20% of the jury pool for no reason at all (precisely to limit the impact of bias). The jury they got was pretty sophisticated (the foreperson was a technology entrepreneur). Sure, San Jose isn't far from Cupertino, but it's also close to Mountain View, which is where Google is located.
As far as I'm concerned, companies and individuals are free to defend their intellectual property. Respect for property rights is what has set the West, and the US in particular, apart from the rest of the world, and has served us well.
As for the market, consider that Microsoft has some interesting designs with Windows Phone 8 and Windows 8. Heck, Google is differentiating Android as much as possible, perhaps seeing the effects of the lawsuits. Most of the real innovation in the mobile market is coming from North America. I know that must be unsettling to Europeans, who are used to looking down on the American mobile device market, but it's the truth.
----------
So would a bunch of $299 netbooks back in 2008. However, it would have gone against Apple's design philosophy. Just because something will sell well doesn't mean Apple should sell it.
I think it's best in the long run for a company to find a coherent design philosophy rather than chase every popular trend. My mom has a Galaxy SIII, and in my view, it's just too big. Plus, it would require yet another screen resolution. It's a big enough leap for Apple to expand the resolution in the new iPhone. They really do seem to want to avoid fragmentation as much as possible.
Nice "snip", the moral is here is Apple simply cannot stop the evolution of it's competitors.
I didn't single out a specific competitor for my car analogy, that's for others to discover. The 1986 model year Honda Accord still took on a somewhat boxy/angular design. It took other companies a number of years to catch up. Sticking to American made cars, how would you in the same situation, defend the late RWD Chevy Caprice to the Ford Crown in Victoria both in Police livery? Same style doors, V8 powered with enhanced cooling, and body on frame design?
They both did the same job (although most patrolmen preferred the more powerful Chevy) and looked nearly identical to a non car buff.
Japanese cars? Accord vs. Camry?
It's all hogwash...
This. If Apple does bring a small iPad to market, it's over Steve's dead body - no disrespect but I mean that for what it is: Steve would never have let a mini iPad get near production.
Apple is about quality, not quantity. It always amazes me at how many big tech companies fail to realize this key bit about Apple's success. They simply throw as many models and model names at potential customers as they can; Pick a handful of products across key segments, design them as flawlessly as you can, use simple product names, and STICK WITH IT.
And for gosh sakes, design something for yourself. IBM laptops, back in the T23 days, were the coolest things. Fugly laptops, but cool for it and undoubtedly distinct. every company but Apple these days throws a million products with the same specs at their customers, with ambiguous names with apparently random letters & numbers in place of actual words the general public can latch onto.
The jury didn't find them invalid
Hah well looks like samsungs prior works didn't make it to the patent book in time
Or to the market for that matter
They did try to hide evidence such as the email describing "their crisis situation" and the fact that numerous people spoke of making their phones more like the iPhone
Also the comments from google about their need to change designs because IT'S TOO SIMILAIR
What the jury said to Samsung:
Furthermore, it took them almost no time to conclude as such. That speaks volume.
Indeed it does. Samsung without a doubt copied the **it out of Apple!
*Waiting for "fragmentoid Samsung usual suspects" to tell me again Samsung did not copy Apple.
*
Indeed it does. Samsung without a doubt copied the **it out of Apple!
*Waiting for "fragmentoid Samsung usual suspects" to tell me again Samsung did not copy Apple.
I was waiting for you to reiterate your 'Samsung copied Apple and this totally affects my life' spiel for the umpteenth time.
As tiring as Samsung fanboys on here are, you're just as boring and played-out. Just replace Samsung with Apple.
Indeed it does. Samsung without a doubt copied the **it out of Apple!
*Waiting for "fragmentoid Samsung usual suspects" to tell me again Samsung did not copy Apple.
No one is denying Samsung copied apple after iPhone release. But so did the other companies. Why not go after them as well? Apple only went after Samsung because Samsung is becoming a threat to apple.
Samsung phones are becoming better than the iPhone. S-voice is even better than siri.