A guilty party was found guilty - and you think they should be innocent because the "system is broken"? Samsung knew how this system worked before they copied, and if they didn't this is their wake up call.
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 Executive Calls Apple vs. Samsung Ruling 'Worst Scenario for Us'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
A guilty party was found guilty - and you think they should be innocent because the "system is broken"? Samsung knew how this system worked before they copied, and if they didn't this is their wake up call.
Excuse me while you take 5 years to invent a rear view mirror, patent it, and I copy it in a manner of months, and call your invention obvious
Tell me how a grid of icons isn't obvious. We've been seeing a grid of icons for YEARS now. From the first desktops, to the PDAs, to earlier smartphones. The only thing Apple added to the base concept was "colorful icons".
No, I didn't imply that at all. I explicitly said that they may opt to remove/alter features for US versions of their phones.
Sorry. You're right
Though you said "removed the smartphones" from market instead of "remove features" to comply with the court result so they won't be doing something illegally and sued again (I presume, or am I wrong?).I really hope Samsung blows up our mind in response to this ruling and brings something new and different.
If you ask me what's wrong with e PC industry, it is that no one dis "different" HP, Dell, Acer, Tosiba and all of then all run the smoe OS and the same software and few buyers care what brand PC they own. They simply buy the cheapest one. No one makes any money that way.
If Samsung were smart they would notice the above and try hard to not let that happen in the cell phone and tablet market. What we DON"T want and in the long term what Samsung does not want is to make look-alike Andriod phones were everyone just re-sells Google's software and buyers go for the lowest price.
HP and Dell and all the other PC makers and the phone makers need to create their OWN SOFTWARE. That is the only way to get out of this unprofitable race to the bottom.
If Samsung were smart they would notice the above and try hard to not let that happen in the cell phone and tablet market. What we DON"T want and in the long term what Samsung does not want is to make look-alike Andriod phones were everyone just re-sells Google's software and buyers go for the lowest price.
HP and Dell and all the other PC makers and the phone makers need to create their OWN SOFTWARE. That is the only way to get out of this unprofitable race to the bottom.
Nobody had a touchscreen phone with multi-touch technology around the time Apple was working on it.
If they did.... THEY would have patented it. (remember... it's not who invents it first... it's who FILES for the patent first)
Yeah... NOW it's essential because almost every phone has a multi-touch screen.
But not back then.
Below is the phone Palm announced just 2 days before Apple announced the iPhone. It has a touch screen... but no pinch to zoom.
I guarantee Palm, and others, had no plans to introduce new touchscreens with multi-touch technology.
But Apple did.
Last edited:
Uh...no. There was no company that made capacitive touch, miniaturized computers with telephone functionality built-in.
My mistake if they did but still, as you said, the patent, rights and usability then belong to Apple.
Or you might consider that, in the long run, this forces companies like Samsung to have to innovate rather than copy...which then forces companies like Apple to innovate again to beat that. The shortsighted Chicken Little BS is really getting out of hand.
----------
Funny, then why wasn't it done so often before this?
samsung has their own design patents on refrigerators and everything they sell. check the patent office
for pinch and zoom, someone had to put in a lot of hard work to make up the algorithms to do it on the touch screen. its not like it just works, someone had to code all the software for it from scratch.
They got what they deserved. Apple put years and tons of money into developing the iPhone and Samsung took the sleazy road and just copied them.
Time to pay up!
Time to pay up!
0. Samsung violates the hell out of their customer's (Apple) patents to compete with said customer. Not a nice thing to do.
1. Apple creams Samsung in court.
2. Apple gets triple damages because Samsung was willfully violating patents.
3. Samsung stock plunges.
4. Apple picks up 51% ownership of Samsung for pocket change out of petty cash.
5. Samsung is now a manufacturing division of Apple.
6. Things settle down.
7. Nobody else tries this move.
1. Apple creams Samsung in court.
2. Apple gets triple damages because Samsung was willfully violating patents.
3. Samsung stock plunges.
4. Apple picks up 51% ownership of Samsung for pocket change out of petty cash.
5. Samsung is now a manufacturing division of Apple.
6. Things settle down.
7. Nobody else tries this move.
FingerWorks It was called, a multitouch company of some sort where all the multitouch tech came from. Which Apple aquired.
Last edited:
Instead of having all these frivolous lawsuits with suppliers/competitors, Apple should just buy Samsung and be done with it.
It's your money that goes to Apple's lawyers.
It's your money that goes to Apple's lawyers.
First off, Apple's patents were not out there for anyone to license. Second, FRAND REQUIRES that essential patents be licensed, that is the point of FRAND. I can't believe you have this so confused.
----------
Really? You can find nothing good? Then you probably shouldn't even discuss this further.
Not in the way some of you seem to believe. It eventually becomes a big mess of workarounds.
Wrong. Samsung already has the very well executed motion control where you can zoom without even taking your hands off the screen to make a gesture.
So no it isn't essential.
Yes, one reason alone, Samsung copied the **** out of the iPhone.
----------
They bought Siri, so it is their own.
----------
When you reduce the argument to one aspect of a patent, you're not even discussing the topic anymore.
I think you underestimate the size of Samsung, and no triple damages will not plunge Samsung stock that low, they prob make more than 3b a quarter.
Welcome to the new Apple! " Waaaa! We refuse to update our phones/OS and wonder why why competition starts steaming ahead ".
I"ve been buying macs for over a decade, but the way Apple has been behaving lately, shows apple is anti innovation, and anti competition. They are worse than the 90s Microsoft. They would rather sue the company that beat them at their own game than compete with them.
I"ve been buying macs for over a decade, but the way Apple has been behaving lately, shows apple is anti innovation, and anti competition. They are worse than the 90s Microsoft. They would rather sue the company that beat them at their own game than compete with them.
I would've posted a picture of a dumb phone, and proclaimed Apple to be the inventor of everything.
See, I'll give the iPhone props. It was at least 2-3 years ahead of it's time. Apple is very good at predicting what's to come, and capitalizing on it with great products.
...but even then, they used available technologies to produce the iPhone. Apple didn't invent multitouch, high capacity batteries, LCD screens, or any of the other things that make the iPhone the iPhone. Even the UI is an extension of what's come before. Most of the work Apple did was combining these technologies into a device that worked well for the tech available at the time.
So Apple's current implementation of the touchscreen phone is theirs. But a grid of icons, or the idea of a capacitive touchscreen phone itself? No. It's anyone's to use. There was already proof that the industry was headed in that direction. Why should Apple have exclusivity on the concept of the modern smartphone just because they leapfrogged everyone by a couple of three years?