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.
UK Judge Rules Apple Must Publish Notices Acknowledging Samsung Did Not Copy iPad
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Being allowed to copy designs eventually leads to nobody being left to copy. Especially if a company repeatedly does this unchecked.
At face value that doesn't really square with
"When Corning began developing a tough new cover glass for electronic devices in 2006, Corning scientists, of course, drew upon the companys prior expertise with strengthened glass. However, Corning Gorilla Glass is a different product and glass composition than Chemcor."
Really? Here is your post:
That wasn't "quite clear" to me. To me, you suggested quite the opposite.
You understand context right? Read the two or three prior posts that I made and what they say. Once you've done that and contextualized the sentence you just quoted, get back to me. You can't just jump in the middle of a discussion and start chomping on the individual utterances. We are not writing published articles and our editing is extremely limited. Can we get back to the substance now?
This is great, Apple's design was a revolutionary design yes. But all laptops pretty much looked the same before, all the tablets all pretty much looked the same before. All the smart phones pretty much looked the same before.
Now present day what has changed. nothing.. all the tablets look the same, all the laptops look the same all the smart phones look the same.
Seriously did apple think they could make a design and not have people try to emulate it. This has been happening in the car industry since the time they first came out. Times change as companies make new designs and others try to improve on them. Apple doesn't have the right to copyright everything they think they invented when its just changing another design before it.
Now present day what has changed. nothing.. all the tablets look the same, all the laptops look the same all the smart phones look the same.
Seriously did apple think they could make a design and not have people try to emulate it. This has been happening in the car industry since the time they first came out. Times change as companies make new designs and others try to improve on them. Apple doesn't have the right to copyright everything they think they invented when its just changing another design before it.
Android was always designed to work on multiple devices. The fact that only one device came out at the time isn't proof at all that the OS wasn't developed that way.
Have a nice day.
Have a nice day.
Rarely ever does a single company flat out copy another's design without improving or tweaking it in some shape, form, or fashion. They have to do something to differentiate themselves from the competition, make their product more appealing, specially when they're going against a well entrenched, popular product. These improvements usually bring about some other innovation, which the originator might decide to incorporate into their original designs while adding a little something something somewhere else. And so on and so on.
...it's the circle of life, man! But with phones!
So you're saying they have to build every idea ever into the OS for the first release to design for a variety of devices? Did iOS have Apple TV support at 1.0?
Android didn't support custom IMEs at 1.0 because none of Google's prototypes lacked a physical keyboard.
Those icons look *very* different to me, don't know what you're looking at.
As for the devices? Have you used them? They work *very* differently than the iPhones.
But back to my point earlier... why do you care? If Samsung "copied" but put out a better product that suited *your* needs better than apple, you'd still pick Apple over Samsung?
Really?
Again... I'm a consumer. I care less about "who wins" or "who loses." I just want the *best product for myself*.
w00master
Apple could start a riot for sure. How many Brits would be trampled as the masses try to get the last iPad?
How can you not say Samsung has copied when the proof is right in your face? Whether this is illegal or wrong has nothing to do with that fact, and it shouldn't be taken as if I'm discounting the usability of Samsung's hardware...
Eventually, a company like Apple would not try to innovate, it would also just copy, and then the advancements would slow down. There would have been no iPhone to begin with, we'd still have plastic screens on our side loading WinCE based smartphones with crappy browsers and styli while Samsung would continue ripping off the Motorola RAZR.
Korean companies are known for this kind of behavior, I never thought I'd see a time when they'd be defended for it...it kind of makes me throw up in my mouth...that's why I care.
Ownage. Exhibit A.
{Watch out, the UK judge might make you post this where you work!}
You still clearly said that Gorilla Glass is Apple... That statement alone is plainly false.
It does if you substitute "the iPhone" for "electronic devices".
I haven't read up on it much though, just going from the Steve Jobs biography which has a number of quotes from the Corning CEO which backs it up.
i find this pretty offensive. Im not an apple fan boy but if somebody tells me I have to agree to somebody elses view... they might as well try and kill me. it will never happen. This guy is treading on liberty itself. I hope Apple fights this to the bitter end. This judge is a petty power monger getting off on his own sense of importance, and should be disbarred from all responsibility... what a fool
Thanks for all those images. Just proves how deluded people are if they think Samsung copied Apple with those icons (for example). Just because there are similarities for COMMON objects doesn't mean they were copied. The messaging icon looks nothing like Apples. In fact none of them look like copies.
Also - the i9000, while sharing some common elements could never be confused for an iPhone unless you were an idiot.
No it didn't and you can even look at the source tree to spot it.
Want more proof? Google designed Android 3.0 Honeycomb exclusively for tablets and never released it on phones.
I'd love to know how that FACT works within your argument?
Poor baby.
It's called Ice Cream Sandwich. And there's no reason Honeycomb builds wouldn't run on a phone, it would just give you a subpar experience because that part wasn't ready yet. That's why there are no Honeycomb phones.
Well it was OFFICIALLY stated that Honeycomb would be made for phones. Now find me that official statement that Android would only be made for hard keyboard phones before 1.5
But when he said that Samsung's device wasn't as cool as Apple- he was the best judge ever?