You mean like it's obvious that Apple copied the design?
http://technologer.net/2011/03/03/did-apple-just-borrow-the-smart-cover-idea-from-incase/
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.
Samsung Cites Kubrick's '2001' Film as Prior Art Defense Against Apple's Injunction Request
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You mean like it's obvious that Apple copied the design?
http://technologer.net/2011/03/03/did-apple-just-borrow-the-smart-cover-idea-from-incase/
Are you saying that all the sites that have online Apple filing had manipulated the document?
Do you really are asking for green phone answer icons prior to iPhone? Really? You're joking, don't you?
This entire argument is a waist of time, everyone knows exactly how this is going to end.
Case gets thrown out after months of litigation, Samsung continues to sell Tab, and Apple successfully stalled their only real competition from getting any real traction before they were able to release the iPad 3 which completely dominates the Tab.
Case gets thrown out after months of litigation, Samsung continues to sell Tab, and Apple successfully stalled their only real competition from getting any real traction before they were able to release the iPad 3 which completely dominates the Tab.
Apple hasn't stalled anyone in the US, never having been granted an injunction. And with today's defeat in the Netherlands and the injunction overturn in Germany, I don't think they've stalled anyone, period.
actually no one lives on endor because endor is a gas giant. ewoks live on the forest moon of endor and chewbacca is a wookiee making him from kashyyyk so you might want to go ahead and watch episodes 3 and 6 one more
Nor did Apple have to use the same phone icon angle that HTC has used for years on their phones. The trouble is, there's only so many angles that make sense.
Anybody who has looked at the Apple lawsuits easily noticed images that were modifed to look more similar.
Put another way: if anyone posted those images in an internet forum, they'd be nailed immediately for trying to change reality. Apple's lawyers wouldn't last two seconds around here
LennHolm is right: the color green and a phone icon has been used on the Send/Answer key on cell phones forever:
Also, Apple didn't get a trademark for a phone icon on a plain green field. They couldn't. Go back to my thread post #427 to see why.
Hmmmm
I'm going to have to watch that movie again. I fall asleep during the opening scene every time it turns on. No wonder I don't remember that part...
I'm going to have to watch that movie again. I fall asleep during the opening scene every time it turns on. No wonder I don't remember that part...
I wonder how many different Star Trek (ST/STNG,DS9,etc.) shows/movies showed tablets... I'm sure you can find enough of to show prior concept art there as well
I don't know about you guys, but when the Ipad came out I wasn't impressed by its look (design) at all, I was impressed by how easy and fun it was to use (functionality.) Who didn't already envision a tablet as a flat rectangular computer dominated by a screen? The bezel isn't even a design feature, its a limitation of lcd technology. And the bezel looks ugly. If the technology is there that someone can make a tablet that all screen, then they would make that because its a better design. Thumbs up for Samsung. BTW, I'm on a netbook right now, and the screen part looks exactly like a tablet. A tablet is a generic concept and look that everybody already knew about but couldn't implement properly until Apple did it.
Whereas i agree that the bezel is in part due to technical constraints, i would like to say that there are some functional as well. For example, on a edge-to-edge screen it is hard not to block content with your hands while holding the device in a natural way. While unintentional presses can be resolved through smarter detection, blocking of the screen by our physical attributes is a harder nut to crack (ok, we can use projectors and such to make our hands appear as transparent, but lets keep realistic here).
edit: that said, someone will surely sell edge-to-edge devices in the somewhat near future. plus: worst case, you just use a soft-bezel when needed. Just saying that the bezel has functional dimensions.
(Aesthetical too for that matter, as evidenced by the use of passpartous).
Apple didn't invent lcds or touchscreens. To make a tablet, you need to use one of these products, and it would have needed a bezel to hide the edge of the screen. The bezel size easiest to implement is the 3/4 to 1 inch size because its easier to have a large bezel than a small one. So thats why practically all laptops have these bezel size until you get into the higher screen size laptops. So the tablet that Apple aimed for and achieved was the same tablet that everybody was aiming for. Plain and simple, no groundbreaking innovation from Apple at all.
Also in terms of design, you don't need the bezel. Most things out there from the web, to books, to magazines have indentations. If you make an all screen tablet, you can hold it without blocking much. Plus the most important thing in these products is big screen size while still being compact. I'd sacrifice the bezel for that any day.
Last edited:
Already stated that you dont need the physical bezel (i.e. you can use a soft(ware)-bezel). For now, however, it makes more sense to keep it than not to (from a non-technical perspective). But like earlier stated im sure that it wont stop anyone from offering it. It will probably look smashing*. :- )
* might see it first in TVs though, heck were almost there arent we?
I didn't read all posts on this topic, but this movie is pretty funny:
Captain Picard unveils the iPad
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_n7ZyS_g0DQ&feature=autoshare
The injunction was not overturned in Germany. It was limited to Germany, as opposed to the initial ruling that it was EU wide. And Samsung also delayed their tablet launch in Australia as a result of Apple's lawsuit there.
Doesnt really matter though as people can still sell what they have in stock (and in pseudo-practice import whatever they want, as the ban only applies to Samsung GMBH). I guess Samsung is already working on a german edition of the 10.1 too, i guess they want to hear the judges exact wordings before going into production though.
Still think they should go for the Touch of red, since they have trademarked that and it would change the front of the pad, making it more distinctive. Heck, make the back deep red too while theyre at it (it would surely match the GUI). Heck, i'd buy that (then again, im a sucker for nice looking reds).
SAMSUNG DESIGNERS:
...
..
.
No worries, you can thank me later!
(Also, when that one is done - green/yellow/cyan + silver+white. Trust me. :- )
Last edited:
Hey Samsung! Stanley Kubricks 2001 Didnt Invent Tablets, Apple Did. Heres Proof:
http://www.cultofmac.com/hey-samsun...t-invent-tablets-apple-did-heres-proof/110162
http://www.cultofmac.com/hey-samsun...t-invent-tablets-apple-did-heres-proof/110162
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.4; en-gb; Nexus S Build/GRJ22) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)
So it isn't a tablet because you can watch BBC on it? I'm sure you can view the BBC on modern tablets today.
Also, when did IBM become a big TV manufacturer?
So what we have here friends are thin IBM TV's designed to be used in a portrait orientation to watch the BBC (who record everything in landscape). Samsung almost had me....
Any idea where the aerial plugs into these TV's?
Consultant said:
So it isn't a tablet because you can watch BBC on it? I'm sure you can view the BBC on modern tablets today.
Also, when did IBM become a big TV manufacturer?
So what we have here friends are thin IBM TV's designed to be used in a portrait orientation to watch the BBC (who record everything in landscape). Samsung almost had me....
Any idea where the aerial plugs into these TV's?
How are they selling "what they have in stock" when they haven't launched yet (in Australia)?Regardless, I was just correcting an incorrect statement. You can interpret the significance of the rulings yourself.
Regardless, I was just correcting an incorrect statement. You can interpret the significance of the rulings yourself.
Obviously i was not referring to the situation in Australia, a market where the product has yet to be launched. And, does the Australia-situation prevent anyone else from importing the device? Does anyone know? =)