Samsung Executive Calls Apple vs. Samsung Ruling 'Worst Scenario for Us'

[TomMcIn]

No, apple got pwned by Bill Gates. They signed a peice of paper licensing all the Apple patents for every single version of windows ever made, they got burned in court when they tried to get out of it. Then apple refused to follow an MS business model, and thats why the Mac never took off.

Thats the one thing I don;t like about Bill Gates, he pretty much singlehandly made sure the mac would be a niche product, forever.

A niche product by the most valued company in the world. You don't have to own everything, just enough to be successful. As we are seeing, many people are adverse to paying for the innovation and quality produced by niche companies. The rest of us are very happy.

 

[samcraig]

Software patents do not hinder progress - they require...no...they FORCE innovation.

In a perfect world, yes. But I think it's impossible to argue that the patent system is completely broken and there are hundreds if not thousands of patents than should never have been accepted and will have a tough time even being enforced.

 

[firewood]

The solution is simple:

Dear Tim Cook,

Good luck finding replacements for all the parts we make for you for your iPhones and iPads.

Love,

Samsung

followed by:

Dear President of Samsung,

You are fired for giving up over $7B dollars per annum of on-going revenue (which is growing extremely rapidly and profitably), to spite a mere $1B one time fine.

Love,

Samsung's shareholders and board of directors

 

[Purant]

How about getting the actual fact straight. Apple doesn't have a patent on pinch to zoom exactly. You'd know this already if you bothered to read your fellow board member posts. Both KDarling and I have both given links and full explanations as to what Apple does and does not have in their patent.

So yes - they could have a variant of pinch to zoom. If they don't violate the patent - or - get this - they decide to license it from Apple (if terms can be met).

Saying "no it won't have pinch to zoom" is premature.

Woah there hang on. It's probably my fault I wasn't clear enough. I'm paraphrasing myself, what I meant to say is "No (samsung won't have to remove it), they (apple) don't have a patent on that (pinch to zoom)". I'm tired and sleepy so let's blame the misunderstanding on that

 

[Sora]

Samsung, just take this one in the rear and move on. Google has developed a great OS already. Stop propagating the theory that all Asians do is KIRF others art or intellectual property, there is no need to window dress Android any longer. Stop with this S-Cloud and S-Voice stuff. Just stop. The carriers will still buy boatloads of your phones, there aren't any other manufacturers left who profitably produce alternatives!

Hahahaha @ S-Cloud. Samsung - oh how you perpetuate the stereotype of Asia being the knockoff kingdom.

 

[SpectatorHere]

I had a mid 2006 HP iPAQ, I can go dig it out of the basement and find the exact model number tomorrow or tuesday if you want. I have not seen it in a few years.

But, it had the following.

MMS
GPS with voice activation
full touch screen ( it had a pen, but I never used it )
3G
Third Party Apps.

The first iPhone did NOT have 3G, it did NOT have Third Party Apps, it had sub standard hardware, it did NOT have GPS, and it could not send or receive pictures.

The only " new " thing about it was the multi touch. The first iPhone was a feature phone, Not a smart phone.

It was not until Apple unlocked iOS for alot of third party developers, added MMS, 3G, and GPS and Maps, then it became a true smart phone, and it went totally insane ( the first iPhone was actually sales wise, worse than RIM's numbers ). And once it became a real smart phone, with the 3/3GS. Thats when I bought my 3GS. And I used that until I had a crappy freebie from sprint ( they just mailed it to me without asking, I used that for a few months, it sucked ), then I went to a S3. If Apple can impress with the Next iPhone, I'll buy that. But I don't see that happening. Apple impressed me with the 3/3GS, and thats why I bought one, I always buy what impresses me.

And yes Windows Mobile 5, supported its own full fledged web browser, as well as many third party options.

Ok, hard to find much info, but here's what I've come up with. First a photo of your better than iPhone

Now, I'll give a data sheet to compare with the original iPhone. http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=specs&id=151&c=hewlett-packard_ipaq_hw6915__hw6925__hw6945__hw6965_htc_sable

I never mentioned 3G as the first iPhone had Edge, but I'm not even seeing your phone as having that. Regardless...it's a 240 x 240 screen compared to the 320 x 480 on the iPhone. Despite what you keep saying, it was a crappy mobile browser, Internet Explorer Mobile. It wasn't until 2008 that even MS claimed full html-like browsing. There's a quote on the Wikipedia, take a look: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Explorer_Mobile . IE Mobile 6 (2 years later) "will bring full version of IE 6 to Windows Mobile." And even then that's just marketing nonsense as it still sucked.

I've found some screen shots of your wonder phone which in your mind was in the same category as the iPhone: http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=os&id=c5103p&c=microsoft_windows_mobile_5.0_for_pocket_pc_phone_edition

Here are some beauts:

The great messaging of WinMo 5

How about the futuristic settings page? Straight out of 2002 Palm Pilot land

One could go on and on as these phones didn't do anything well. I wish they had! I wanted such a phone and tried out everyone I could get my hands on.

There was a reason the iPhone changed the whole industry...it WASN'T LIKE ANYTHING OUT THERE. It worked. It was beautiful. It really did browse the full web.

 

[Sora]

In a perfect world, yes. But I think it's impossible to argue that the patent system is completely broken and there are hundreds if not thousands of patents than should never have been accepted and will have a tough time even being enforced.

I do agree that some patents are useless, but are none the less granted. But once a patent has been upheld and found valid in court I believe that patent has a leg to stand on.
The patent system needs an external validating process.
In this particular case, Apple's patents were found to be valid. Thus the validity of those specific patents should not be questioned.
It's just sad that litigation is the proving ground for validating patents.

 

[MacDav]

The fact pinch and zoom as well as a grid payout with rounded icons can be patented this is completely nuts.

Excuse me while I patent the rear view mirror and sue any car maker that dare use it.

I dont see how samsung is supposed to get around pinch and zoom, its an essential component to a touch screen.

Yes, you have a valid point. What it all comes down to is the general philosophy
regarding patents. If there is only one way do something, should a company
be able to patent it? This is the ultimate question it seems. Apple is only playing by the current rules regarding the patent process. You can't blame them for playing the rules to thier advantage. If the rules are wrong, then those rules need to be changed. All this is of course up to debate. If a drug company is first to patent a drug and it has patented the only way to create the drug, no one complains. Everyone must wait for the patent to expire to get a "Generic" at cheaper price. So either change the patent system or keep quiet. Complaining on MacRumors won't change anything.

 

[tomegun]

No one can copy Apple's implementation. That's theirs and theirs alone. But do you think Apple should have exclusive rights to concepts like pinch and tap to zoom?

Isn't everything a concept that was implemented? I don't understand where you are going with that question.

 

[Purant]

The thought of justifying copying by implying that's it's part of the natural process of innovation is absolutely ridiculous.
Software patents do not hinder progress - they require...no...they FORCE innovation.
All those who think that patents hinder progress are the ones who have never come up with something unique. Never created anything. And most importantly, have never patented a thing in their life and then have someone infringe on their patent.

/Elaborate completed

Fair enough. I disagree 100% with everything you said and since the topic is pretty big to go over here, I guess it's my turn to brand your post "FAIL!" (and hope you don't sue me for copying you, although there probably is a lot of prior art around).

 

[samcraig]

There was a reason the iPhone changed the whole industry...it WASN'T LIKE ANYTHING OUT THERE. It worked. It was beautiful. It really did browse the full web.

That's pretty much all it did at launch though. It was a fun toy to lock, unlock and play with all the screens. And surf the web on a phone.

But for someone like me (who owned the original and also a blackberry and treo at the time) - it was relatively useless beyond that. I couldn't get corporate email. Data was slow. I couldn't MMS. I couldn't copy/paste.

yes - the original iPhone was slick and fun - but I guess it really depends on what you consider a full feature phone and your use case. Clearly not everyone is the same.

 

[Sora]

The solution is simple:

Dear Tim Cook,

Good luck finding replacements for all the parts we make for you for your iPhones and iPads.

Love,

Samsung

More like....

Dear Samsung,

1. Thanks for the extra billion in our coffers - your basically paying us to build iPhones
2. Continue to fullfil your contractual obligations to us under our current contract.
3. We are currently aligning ourselves with other partners and will bypass you shortly.

Continue the good work.

Tim Cook and Co.

 

[Peace]

Ok, hard to find much info, but here's what I've come up with. First a photo of your better than iPhone Image

Now, I'll give a data sheet to compare with the original iPhone. http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=specs&id=151&c=hewlett-packard_ipaq_hw6915__hw6925__hw6945__hw6965_htc_sable

I never mentioned 3G as the first iPhone had Edge, but I'm not even seeing your phone as having that. Regardless...it's a 240 x 240 screen compared to the 320 x 480 on the iPhone. Despite what you keep saying, it was a crappy mobile browser, Internet Explorer Mobile. It wasn't until 2008 that even MS claimed full html-like browsing. There's a quote on the Wikipedia, take a look: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Explorer_Mobile . IE Mobile 6 (2 years later) "will bring full version of IE 6 to Windows Mobile." And even then that's just marketing nonsense as it still sucked.

I've found some screen shots of your wonder phone which in your mind was in the same category as the iPhone: http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=os&id=c5103p&c=microsoft_windows_mobile_5.0_for_pocket_pc_phone_edition

Here are some beauts:

The great messaging of WinMo 5Image

How about the futuristic settings page? Straight out of 2002 Palm Pilot land Image

One could go on and on as these phones didn't do anything well. I wish they had! I wanted such a phone and tried out everyone I could get my hands on.

There was a reason the iPhone changed the whole industry...it WASN'T LIKE ANYTHING OUT THERE. It worked. It was beautiful. It really did browse the full web.

I'll go one better.

In 2006 before the iPhone came out I had the typical samsung "smartphone"

 

[G51989]

Ok, hard to find much info, but here's what I've come up with. First a photo of your better than iPhone Image

Now, I'll give a data sheet to compare with the original iPhone. http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=specs&id=151&c=hewlett-packard_ipaq_hw6915__hw6925__hw6945__hw6965_htc_sable

I never mentioned 3G as the first iPhone had Edge, but I'm not even seeing your phone as having that. Regardless...it's a 240 x 240 screen compared to the 320 x 480 on the iPhone. Despite what you keep saying, it was a crappy mobile browser, Internet Explorer Mobile. It wasn't until 2008 that even MS claimed full html-like browsing. There's a quote on the Wikipedia, take a look: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Explorer_Mobile . IE Mobile 6 (2 years later) "will bring full version of IE 6 to Windows Mobile." And even then that's just marketing nonsense as it still sucked.

I've found some screen shots of your wonder phone which in your mind was in the same category as the iPhone: http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=os&id=c5103p&c=microsoft_windows_mobile_5.0_for_pocket_pc_phone_edition

Here are some beauts:

The great messaging of WinMo 5Image

How about the futuristic settings page? Straight out of 2002 Palm Pilot land Image

One could go on and on as these phones didn't do anything well. I wish they had! I wanted such a phone and tried out everyone I could get my hands on.

There was a reason the iPhone changed the whole industry...it WASN'T LIKE ANYTHING OUT THERE. It worked. It was beautiful. It really did browse the full web.

Let me be 100% straight with you: Your full of so much ****ing **** its insane. I'm not dignifying you kool aid post with a response, you pick and choose tiny tittle things to make your argument work. Ignore list.

----------

A niche product by the most valued company in the world. You don't have to own everything, just enough to be successful. As we are seeing, many people are adverse to paying for the innovation and quality produced by niche companies. The rest of us are very happy.

Did I say Apple was a niche product? I didn't. I said the Mac was, don't put words in my mouth.

 

[Sora]

Fair enough. I disagree 100% with everything you said and since the topic is pretty big to go over here, I guess it's my turn to brand your post "FAIL!" (and hope you don't sue me for copying you, although there probably is a lot of prior art around).

Unfortunately I can't patent the F, A, I or L.
But, if your on a Samsung product and you scroll down to this post and it bounces - well...you know the drill - I don't think I need to elaborate.

 

[Risco]

The fact pinch and zoom as well as a grid payout with rounded icons can be patented this is completely nuts.

Excuse me while I patent the rear view mirror and sue any car maker that dare use it.

I dont see how samsung is supposed to get around pinch and zoom, its an essential component to a touch screen.

Here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HqsfkUKHlyY

Innovate > Patent > Licence

Samsung copied, therefore they should pay the licence.

 

[Peace]

Let me be 100% straight with you: Your full of so much ****ing **** its insane. I'm not dignifying you kool aid post with a response, you pick and choose tiny tittle things to make your argument work. Ignore list.

----------



Did I say Apple was a niche product? I didn't. I said the Mac was, don't put words in my mouth.

I wouldn't call this a small thing.

 

[Sora]

If you don't know the difference between patents and trade dress, the legal differences, and the different standards of evidence, just don't even comment, please. That will cut down on the ignorant flamebaiting dramatically, and we'd really appreciate it.

If you find yourself tempted to accuse the jury for making the decision they did, based on evidence the jury was not allowed to see, please don't comment either. If you don't even know what the jury did and did not see, likewise please remain silent.

If you disagree with patent and trade dress law, and find yourself tempted to blame Apple for the current legal state of affairs, please hold back your remarks as they are not helpful.

If you find yourself wanting to take quotes from former jury members, and saying they are grounds for appeal or mistrial, instead of posting, please go elsewhere and educate yourself on the actual legal grounds for mistrials and appeals, and learn that nothing said by those jurors are relevant to Samsung's case.

Wow. Well ***** said.
Can't get more crystal clearer than this post.
Kudos.

 

[Purant]

Unfortunately I can't patent the F, A, I or L.
But, if your on a Samsung product and you scroll down to this post and it bounces - well...you know the drill - I don't think I need to elaborate.

Also be careful not to mistakenly open the notification center because google might take notice and bother to sue (ios 5 would have been so much better without the notification center, right? Oh great patent system). Also, I'm on an iPhone 4.

 

[7racer]

seems to me that his argument is pretty valid and you are the one biased and ignoring the information.

I have that same iPaq. Even though it was advertised to do all those things you mentioned, it just frankly couldn't.

Let me be 100% straight with you: Your full of so much ****ing **** its insane. I'm not dignifying you kool aid post with a response, you pick and choose tiny tittle things to make your argument work. Ignore list.

----------



Did I say Apple was a niche product? I didn't. I said the Mac was, don't put words in my mouth.

 

[Sora]

Google is next and im sure 2 billion will be awarded to google.

Are you kidding me? Google is smart - they told Samsung - Back OFF! But they didn't. And they got burned by Apple's thermonuclear can of whoop ass!

Lastly, the phrase, there is more than one way to skin a cat comes to mind when I think about what Apple is doing.
They aren't going after Google directly. They are going after manufacturers. Brilliant. Absolutely brilliant.
If manufacturers who are in bed with Google are being attacked left and right, or fear being on the radar, who will Google turn to with their Android OS?

I just wish that companies would stop behaving like 3 year old kids during a pop quiz and copying over shoulders.
INNOVATE. INNOVATE. INNOVATE. That's how you win. You win when you innovate. That's the only way to defeat Apple. It's their achilles heel. Out innovate Apple and you win.
If not, and you choose to copy, just get out the cheque book and ask how much do I make it out for - because you will pay. One way or another. You will pay.

 

[golf1410]

More like....

Dear Samsung,

1. Thanks for the extra billion in our coffers - your basically paying us to build iPhones
2. Continue to fullfil your contractual obligations to us under our current contract.
3. We are currently aligning ourselves with other partners and will bypass you shortly.

Continue the good work.

Tim Cook and Co.

Dear Tim Cook,
I am pretty good what I am doing up here right now. Especially, I fly over in real 3 D through cloud up here. It was a great fun to watch you guys battle down there. At last, a big win that I was always dreamed of since we were against Microsoft. However, Bill Gate is inventing a toilet right now. We should look in to it. Keep your good work.

PS. Please keep my wallet secure for memory of me

Steve Jobs

 

[linkgx1]

Are you kidding me? Google is smart - they told Samsung - Back OFF! But they didn't. And they got burned by Apple's thermonuclear can of whoop ass!

Lastly, the phrase, there is more than one way to skin a cat comes to mind when I think about what Apple is doing.
They aren't going after Google directly. They are going after manufacturers. Brilliant. Absolutely brilliant.
If manufacturers who are in bed with Google are being attacked left and right, or fear being on the radar, who will Google turn to with their Android OS?

I just wish that companies would stop behaving like 3 year old kids during a pop quiz and copying over shoulders.
INNOVATE. INNOVATE. INNOVATE. That's how you win. You win when you innovate. That's the only way to defeat Apple. It's their achilles heel. Out innovate Apple and you win.
If not, and you choose to copy, just get out the cheque book and ask how much do I make it out for - because you will pay. One way or another. You will pay.

You win when you innovate? The sales of Windows PHONE 7 are gong swimmingly.

 

[Rocketman]

For those talking about Kool-Aid . . . .

You know what happens next . . . .

You make news . . . .

 

[G51989]

seems to me that his argument is pretty valid and you are the one biased and ignoring the information.

I have that same iPaq. Even though it was advertised to do all those things you mentioned, it just frankly couldn't.

Please tell me how it couldn't, Mine had 3G speeds, I ran the Opera Web Browser which was great, the camera was very good for its time, as was the battery life, I could do MMS, and GPS, very well. Sure it wasn't as " flashy " as an iPhone, but it still did the job, just fine.

The iPhone didn't have third party apps nor did it have GPS, MMS, 3G, or swappable batteries ( still doesn't ).

I got lots of great work done on my Windows Mobile phone. It served me very well.

After that, my iPhone3S served me VERY well.

Then I got my S3 ( sprint just gave me a freebie replinish, didn't use it for to long ).

If Apple makes something crazy again, I'll buy Apple.