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

Samsung's Massive Document Outlining How to Improve Galaxy S by Adopting iPhone Solutions Surfaces

aloshka said:
I don't agree. They make wonderful LCD screens and everything else. And their windows phones are actually very good. I just hate their Android side of the business. Android sucks (I've used it for a year, I HATE it), and they are just copying Apple to try to make it better. It won't be better. It still sucks. I won't post all the things that don't work / suck about it as the list will be too long.
Click to expand...

Jellybean is leaps and bounds above what we know as Android. However, i do understand your frustration. Before jb, Android was a mess and too many ppl just got complacent and tolerated the lag, reboots and glitches.

I think you should try a jellybean Android phone out tho. It's an amazing os, and a job well done by Google
 
craznar said:
I don't really think that posting the same thing 100+ times with different text is that useful.

The fundamental flaw with almost all the pages in that document - is that the decisions are obvious.

The fact that the O.P. on this thread picked the 'cream of the crop' as an example pretty much sums it up.
Click to expand...

I haven't read the whole document and so I can not comment, but it does seem obvious to me that if the usability changes were "obvious" or "common sense" then they would have been included in the initial Samsung design. Apple's brilliance is often that it delivers products that seem obvious but which nobody else does. In fact I think Ive has stated as much in the past.
 
JohnPhamlore said:
Bottom line, do people really think Samsung will either be enjoined from producing further phones that resemble iPhones or be forced to pay licensing fees equivalent to what Microsoft charges Android makers to use Microsoft patents such as for exFAT? Because I think there's no chance Apple achieves either outcome, in which case by definition Samsung wins the trial. And this trial is in a US court.
Click to expand...

no, that would be impractical... but they can be financially bitch slapped, and enjoined from doing it again.
 
ReanimationN said:
Do the Apple fans in this thread really not think similar memos exist at Apple HQ? There would be documents there, buried away or now destroyed, outlining the iPhone's approach to certain features vs those of competitors, in order to strengthen Apple's OS. For example, I'd be willing to bet any money people at Apple have been paid to sit down and pour through Windows Phone and Android, creating similar documents outlining Apple's approach to certain problems and comparing them to Microsoft's and Google's.
Click to expand...

Like I said in my previous post, the difference would be that this hypothetical document you describe mentions MULTIPLE competitor's approaches (Android, Windows Phone) and comparing them ALL to see who's got the best. Then take the best of all worlds, find a way to merge the ideas together, and call it your own solution.

THAT is how research is done. A Master's degree might legitimately be nothing more than studying how a bunch of other people approached a problem, analyze the pros and cons of each, pull the best of each approach, package it all together and publish it as a new thesis. The act of packaging them together IS innovation.

But copying just ONE other approach and saying "this is what I will do too" is called: plagiarism.
 
It has been pointed out that this is not proof of samsung infriging anything, and also it was pointed out that everyone does this.

has i see it this is proof that samsung based itself on the iphone to alter there own phone.

it might be true that everyone does the same thing, but the way that this is presented, by comparing iphone to the os on galaxy , leaves no doubt that what samsung was doing was directly making there os better based on what they saw on the iphone.

this is far from over, but this is indeed, jury wise, a big proof of samsungs intent on basing there os on the work of other's to make themselves better.

and that is the big moral question hanging in the air that might dam them in this case.
 
craznar said:
So friggin what!!

Samsung solves a problem that the button is too small by making it bigger?

Is that really some sort of amazing design copied off Apple ?

NO.

It is just common sense ?

Unless someone else here could come up with another way you can make a button bigger - that doesn't involve increasing the size ?
Click to expand...

It's always common sense once you see how someone else did it.

----------
donstenk said:
Mac OS had the same issue for many years, in the dock.
Click to expand...

No, they didn't.
 
2bikes said:
I also wonder if Hyundai has a similar document showing `improvement` they need to do compared to Mercedes-Benz and Toyota.
Click to expand...
It's filed right next to the ones about copying Honda.
Renzatic said:
If he does, it's done more out of respect for the original author rather than for any legal reasons. I'm pretty sure parodies are covered as fair use under copyright laws.
Click to expand...
His are, due to his methodology.
ristlin said:
Pretty sure he had legal snags before and does it for more than just respect (Michael Jackson comes to mind, Black or White). You can always bring a copyright claim to court -- especially if you can make an argument that the parody is somehow harming your work.
Click to expand...
I could have missed a court case, but I don't believe this is true. MJ was usually happy to work with Al, although MJ was also nuts, so anything's possible surrounding him. I think it was just an example of Al respecting original artists. Al has stated quite clearly that he will never release a parody without permission from the original author. And he backed that up this decade with the whole Born This Way fiasco.
See Flat said:
DECEMBER 7th Pearl harbor attack date on Samsung Calendar App.

Of course, but one must admit that is a pretty interesting date to put on an icon of a product competing with an american made product. (I'm Canadian if you think I'm a paranoid protectionist)

Perhaps just a dumb 1 in 365 chance.. but there had to be some intelligent engineer at Samsung who noticed!
Click to expand...
I'm "intelligent", and I couldn't tell you one date important to either current Korean country. Why should they know ours?
swagi said:
ORLY?

So you can use the notification slider in iOS to toggle hardware behavior?

Just asking, because I love being able to toggle WLAN, Bluetooth, GPS, Auto-Rotation and so on from my notification slider. And I love to control the MP3-Player app via the notification slider.

And I also think it's damn elegant to have top bar icon displaying which type of notification was triggered. Is that also in iOS? I don't know. All I know is that Windows Phone doesn't offer that depth of info.
Click to expand...
You can when jailbroken, it's all in there, they just turn it on when Apple won't. I find there isn't enough space to show every icon that might appear in the status bar, so I'm pretty happy Apple chose to leave many out. I've added back what I want via extended JB settings.
euphlyusUNO said:
I don't know about you, but generally when I'm speaking/communicating I tend to express MY OPINION, so for god's sake stop saying "It's your opinion".
Click to expand...
Where's the +1000 button? I'll click it 1000 times.
 
notjustjay said:
But copying just ONE other approach and saying "this is what I will do too" is called: plagiarism.
Click to expand...

It's very possible Samsung could've had multiple documents pertaining to multiple phone OSes. We don't know, and never will because it won't come up during this particular case.

The simple fact is that a single document going over the various points and features of one specific device isn't proof of copying in and of itself. The end result of that intense studying is what's on trial here, and right now at least, that's still very much up in the air.
 
KnightWRX said:
Samsung didn't want this admitted for the very reason you see in this thread. The context of it can be twisted to say things it doesn't and to present as something it is not.
Click to expand...

That is your opinion, not a fact. The jury are the ones that get to decide what it says and what it is.
 
I don't see how everyone claims this alone is damning evidence. Doesn't every company look to the competition for improvement, including Apple. If you aren't you simply aren't going to keep up. Apple cannot possibly be the only innovator in the tech industry, and likewise for every other company.

This only proves Samsung looked to Apple's iPhone (a top competitor) for ways to improve.
 
notjustjay said:
Like I said in my previous post, the difference would be that this hypothetical document you describe mentions MULTIPLE competitor's approaches (Android, Windows Phone) and comparing them ALL to see who's got the best. Then take the best of all worlds, find a way to merge the ideas together, and call it your own solution.

THAT is how research is done. A Master's degree might legitimately be nothing more than studying how a bunch of other people approached a problem, analyze the pros and cons of each, pull the best of each approach, package it all together and publish it as a new thesis. The act of packaging them together IS innovation.

But copying just ONE other approach and saying "this is what I will do too" is called: plagiarism.
Click to expand...

But do you know for a fact that Samsung only has this one document? Is it possible that they have several but only this one was subpoenaed by Apple? A sincere question.
 
wkadamsjr said:
I don't see how everyone claims this alone is damning evidence. Doesn't every company look to the competition for improvement, including Apple. If you aren't you simply aren't going to keep up. Apple cannot possibly be the only innovator in the tech industry, and likewise for every other company.

This only proves Samsung looked to Apple's iPhone (a top competitor) for ways to improve.
Click to expand...

Of course, but that makes for much less sensationalistic headlines and it doesn't help posters who absolutely have to see Apple as good guys and Samsung as bad guys.
 
babyj said:
That is your opinion, not a fact. The jury are the ones that get to decide what it says and what it is.
Click to expand...

He already stated it was his opinion
;)




wkadamsjr said:
I don't see how everyone claims this alone is damning evidence. Doesn't every company look to the competition for improvement, including Apple. If you aren't you simply aren't going to keep up. Apple cannot possibly be the only innovator in the tech industry, and likewise for every other company.

This only proves Samsung looked to Apple's iPhone (a top competitor) for ways to improve.
Click to expand...

Well kinda. Yes, they "improved" but that came from doing exactly what Apple did. In other words they didn't take apples ideas and try to expand them, they simply implemented exactly what Apple had into their own ui.

it's copying. Whether that's enough to sway the jury remains to be seen.
 
Renzatic said:
It's very possible Samsung could've had multiple documents pertaining to multiple phone OSes. We don't know, and never will because it won't come up during this particular case.

The simple fact is that a single document going over the various points and features of one specific device isn't proof of copying in and of itself. The end result of that intense studying is what's on trial here, and right now at least, that's still very much up in the air.
Click to expand...

this exactly
 
Does Samsung have other documents that show the same level of competitive research on other phones? If they do, wouldn't they want that out in public and presented as evidence?
 
KnightWRX said:
Anyone who's read the document can clearly see that. Most "solutions" are not to "copy the iPhone", simply to make improvements. This document in a sense is proof that Samsung did not copy the iPhone, but made usability improvements based on the fact that their initial designs had flaws the competition didn't have.

IE, the consumer got a better product thanks to Samsung revising their usability in light of what was on the market. Something Apple also does and that every company does.
Click to expand...
Right, except that most solutions are "copy the iPhone." Dunno what you were reading.
 
samcraig said:
this exactly
Click to expand...

But that's not the point. Even if they had six million other documents, they choose to do exactly what Apple did, so what those other documents say is moot. this is the only one that matters here because it, in black and white, says "we see apple does it this way, so go ahead and do it the same way".

It doesn't say "we see apple does it this way, so let's think of a better way" or "let's keep that in mind, and improve it"

Nope. It says "Apple did it, it's better, go ahead and copy it"
 
boronathan said:
He already stated it was his opinion
;)






Well kinda. Yes, they "improved" but that came from doing exactly what Apple did. In other words they didn't take apples ideas and try to expand them, they simply implemented exactly what Apple had into their own ui.

it's copying. Whether that's enough to sway the jury remains to be seen.
Click to expand...

I would think the definition of "copying" is probably the very center of both the defense and prosecution. How does one define/what criteria can be used to prove or disprove copying. On some levels - it's purely subjective or at least a very grey area.

IE - is changing the color of an icon that otherwise looks the same make it not copying? Does rounding corners to a different degree make it not copying? Does changing a process from 3 steps to 1 step - copying or process improvement. Perhaps semantics. But vital to both sides and their arguments.
 
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