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's Massive Document Outlining How to Improve Galaxy S by Adopting iPhone Solutions Surfaces
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Hum, in Google press material or interviews with them about Android or Google in general ? Maybe for Andy it was back in his days with Danger Inc, where he made... mobile OSes for devices which happened to be ... phones. You probably know Danger Inc. too since Steve Wozniak was on its board of directors.
Dunno, lots of place you could have heard those names.
That was a long quote. Perhaps you could tell me which part you don't get and I can explain my reasoning better ? Not the first time you've pulled this stunt, quote a big text and say "I don't get what you mean", you did it to Samcraig just a few pages ago.
Maybe you don't know how to cut up a quote to only the relevant portions ? It's easy, just manually insert the
tags.
Oh look, a piece from AppleInsider denigrating Android, how unbiased, factual and objective that must be.
Next link me some piece of www.phandroid.com about how bad Apple is with iCloud security or what new OS X "virus" is in the wild.
I would definitely think that there would be documents comparing the two at Apple. Apple would not have been ignoring their competition. The Prada would have drawn intense interest from Apple- it was a capacitive touchscreen smartphone, exactly what Apple was working on. If anything, it probably spurred Apple's late development on the iPhone to get things exactly right, as they knew competitors were heading in the same direction as them.
Oh really? Do you really think someone at Apple didn't sit down and comb through the way Xbox Live works? That the way Game Center works, with its unlockable achievements, integrated friendship system, matchmaking, leader boards etc is a purely original Apple creation? It's a clone of Xbox Live (although a pallid imitation, it's nowhere near as good), Apple even poached MS talent that worked on Live to come and work on Game Center.
There were also clear examples of Apple lifting features from competing operating systems in iOS 5. For example, MS even has a patent on the ability to swipe between the viewfinder and the picture gallery- I'm guessing that patent cross licensing agreement between MS and Apple is still good, all MS did was say that they were flattered.
There haven't really been any real innovations in iOS for a while now. iOS 5 borrowed heavily from Android, WP and BB for its new features, as has iOS 6.
Hum, in Google press material or interviews with them about Android or Google in general ? Maybe for Andy it was back in his days with Danger Inc, where he made... mobile OSes for devices which happened to be ... phones. You probably know Danger Inc. too since Steve Wozniak was on its board of directors.
Dunno, lots of place you could have heard those names.
That was a long quote. Perhaps you could tell me which part you don't get and I can explain my reasoning better ? Not the first time you've pulled this stunt, quote a big text and say "I don't get what you mean", you did it to Samcraig just a few pages ago.
Maybe you don't know how to cut up a quote to only the relevant portions ? It's easy, just manually insert thetags.
Oh look, a piece from AppleInsider denigrating Android, how unbiased, factual and objective that must be.
Next link me some piece of www.phandroid.com about how bad Apple is with iCloud security or what new OS X "virus" is in the wild.
I quote everything because I have a problem with my fingers and hands due to a physical disability I have.
Thanks for the insult though.
You've probably noticed most of my posts are short.
There's a reason for it.
Lack of Patents
As far as I have been made aware, none of the jailbroken app developers filed patents within the one year(within the US) after releasing the app or prior to release(outside of the US). Therefore(i believe) it is essentially public domain after that point. Also, if the any of the functionality designs of android are not patented as a "Design Patent", which are difficult to defend regardless, then anything android is also fair game.
As far as I have been made aware, none of the jailbroken app developers filed patents within the one year(within the US) after releasing the app or prior to release(outside of the US). Therefore(i believe) it is essentially public domain after that point. Also, if the any of the functionality designs of android are not patented as a "Design Patent", which are difficult to defend regardless, then anything android is also fair game.
How would you feel if the date on the phone sold in Japan was August 6 or 9?
That carelessness is a slap in the face or plain stupidity.
Outlining flaws is something typical. While balancing yourself against the competition may seem somewhat limiting to the potential of a product, it's pretty typical across industries. The GUI layout has gone away from being iphone like if you take a look at the SIII. Regarding the dock connector, usb at one end (typical, most popular port on a computer) and the other end is similar to (but not) PDMI. You look at this like it's a foregone conclusion.
You make this sound like it is simple. Apple has avoided owning any large companies as manufacturing doesn't tend to carry the fattest margins. Anyway when you're the size of Apple, very few vendors can provide reliable service. Removing one as large as Samsung would be tough for Apple.
If the designs were so obvious...why did they get it wrong the first time? 132 pages worth of non-obvious design decisions that needed to be changed...
I see where the problem lies. Some of you are incapable of using a search engine to find out information for yourselves and you have trouble with perusing multiple page documents that you have to click through.
So I am going to help you out and post a link to all of the slides (126) on one page:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/102317767/Samsung-Relative-Evaluation-Report-on-S1-iPhone
They cover just about every aspect of the iPhone UI from the Safari to the dialer screen, SMS screens, notepad, calculator, date/time picker UIs, notification area for battery status and how installation of app progress is shown.
They even go as far as to look at iTunes as an example of how their syncing software should work.
But you continue to be "objective" and ignore all of this evidence. I think you guys need to either come clean with regard to your relationship with Samsung or buy a dictionary so that you can understand what "facts" and objectivity are all about.
For a start this isnt all the evidence the trial is due to run for the month of August. So it's wise to remain objective we've no idea how this evidence will play out it could be the smoking gun your implying or it could be insignificate by the end.
It's hardly objective to say on this piece of evidence the trial is over till all the evidence from both sides is out, only then can we all form an opinion on it. And let's be honest all our opinions aren't important as we're not on the jury.
It's a shame this wasn't released while Jobs was still around...
Apply cold water to the burned areas...
Apply cold water to the burned areas...
Apple is probably better at hiding this stuff. How do you think Apple came up the the "notification center"? That is just as much a rip-off as this is.
Notification centre came from the jailbreak community. Apple later hired the person who developed the tweak.
When did the jailbreak community release it I remember having it on my 3g in 2009. But it was demoed on android in 2008
not proud of myself
not proud of myself and tasting sick as I type - so lets say upfront,
companies that meerly wait to leech innovative "others" who have enjoyed months of frustration trying to get an idea to work thro investigations / studies / prototypes, also enjoying the costs of failed direction and ideas etc are top of my s*** list.....
But, the document appears to be a benchmarking, and all consumer companies benchmark, run customer clinics for thier own products (future) as well as including competitor products. Sometimes the "customers" dont even know who the sponsoring company is.
I believe / hope Apple have more than this because they will have a hard time progressing anything from this document.
not proud of myself and tasting sick as I type - so lets say upfront,
companies that meerly wait to leech innovative "others" who have enjoyed months of frustration trying to get an idea to work thro investigations / studies / prototypes, also enjoying the costs of failed direction and ideas etc are top of my s*** list.....
But, the document appears to be a benchmarking, and all consumer companies benchmark, run customer clinics for thier own products (future) as well as including competitor products. Sometimes the "customers" dont even know who the sponsoring company is.
I believe / hope Apple have more than this because they will have a hard time progressing anything from this document.
You have destroyed a favorite meme of Android fans.
Here's a link, and there are many more.
http://techcrunch.com/2011/06/03/ap...d-together-a-better-ios-notifications-system/
----------
If it is standard operating procedure at Samsung, then we should expect documents from Samsung to demonstrate that this isn't a singular and unique evaluation, but one that is performed on other market leading devices.
If not, then this document stands on its own amongst other evidence that Samsung was reacting to the disruption that iPhone was in the industry.
No insult meant. If you have a physical disability and you want to quote a long post to say "I don't get what you mean by that statement", at least clarify the statement in question if not quoting it. Or just erase some parts of the quote to only leave the statement in question.
Because otherwise, it's quite hard to hold a conversation with you, as we don't actually know how to reply to "I don't get what you mean by that statement" after you've quoted a dozen or so statements.
----------
You do read most of our posts right ? You know, the ones with links to patents, links to court documents, links to articles...
You think we don't read this stuff and we don't use search engines to find them ?
How condescending. "You don't think like me, so you guys are incapable of having independant thought". Sorry, repeating "forum mantra" and falsehoods like some of the "Macrumors is an Apple fan site!" camp does is what shows lack of reading comprehension, lack of understanding of the actual proceedings in Apple v. Samsung and a lack of independant thought by repeating the same stuff that's always repeated here.
You guys sound like broken records sometimes. Hey, how about you post up that picture of Euronics' Samsung kiosk surrounded by Apple icons once more, so we can explain to you again that Euronics is an independant Italian mobile store that also sells Apple products and that the decor is their own ?
Hum, you do understand this is the document we're discussing here right ? We've all read it and see... it doesn't say what you think it says, at least to most of us. Otherwise, we wouldn't be participating in this very thread.
If you go in thinking "Samsung copied Apple... Samsung copied Apple... OH LOOK PROOF!" then sure, that's what you'll read. If on the other hand you just read the document, and not just look at the pretty pictures, you'll notice that it has nothing to do with copying.
A point - and agree, I hope it stands. But competitors will definitely aim for a leading product / solution. There are countries that have a very healthy GDP thats based almost exclusively on copying & repackaging "anothers" work for less money.
"Peoples" in Apple (who earn a lot more than I do) have decided that its time to make a point with Samsung, and they know more than I so heres hoping.
Only thing that crosses my mind is what they hope to gain at the tail end of millions - in reality. Unfortunately I have a feeling small insignificant charges (relative) and small changes at the most.
Of course it does. What set's this apart from a normal design review document or a UX analysis is the direction for improvement section, which always suggests a change to be like the iPhone in the comparison. Combine this with the crisis of design memo reported about in another thread here.
Samsung said:
It was developed in 2011, but it was created in the jailbreak community.
Edit: At least MobileNotifier was.
Yes but in witness testimony - the phrase "crisis of design" was pretty typical lexicon for the execs. Meaning - they language like this all the time to the point it's become relatively meaningless inside the organization. Whether that is true or not, is of course, a matter of opinion
When Apple's lawyer Bill Lee grilled him about the e-mail, Denison suggested that the "crisis" language didn't mean much.
"This is pretty typical hyperbole used inside Samsung," said Denison.
"You know what the difference between Heaven and Earth is, right?" asked Lee. "It's a big difference."
"Yes," said Denison. "It's hyperbole. Exaggeration."
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...is-offensive-company-wants-to-simply-compete/
I also have said earlier that intent is one thing. But intent alone can't win this case in my opinion. Apple has to prove that they executed on that intent. Otherwise - this 132 "smoking gun" as some people have said is nothing more than an internal document with a wish list.