Which is what, exactly? Is this one of those cases where it's ok to hate a company?
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
Which is what, exactly? Is this one of those cases where it's ok to hate a company?
we're saying the same thing then.
i think I got confused with who was makign what argument. my apologies.
Do I think that Samsung borrowed ideas from apple?
YUP
Do i think that Apple borrowed Ideas from others.
YUPPPPPPPP.
I'm not trying to come across as a troll. I like apple products to an extent. I'm a firm believer in buying the technology that best suits what you want it to do. Apple has done that for me. I've owned a first gen ipod, 3rd gen, and a 5th gen. I own a 1st gen touch. I have a 2011 MBA and I had an ipad2 for a few weeks before i gave it to my brother.
Apple makes some great products.
But the fanboyism that pops up everywhere, and especially here (I know it's an apple centric forum, that doesn't excuse the lack of critical thinking), is the people who truly believe Apple has invented just about everything we have today.
Is this one of those cases where it's ok to love a company (and no doubt think the courts we wrong).
I think it's blatantly obvious most companies who are selling pad computers lately are copying Apple's iPad in a manner of speaking (i.e. to sell something similar since it's selling like hotcakes) and Samsung is the most blatantly similar looking. To have to say they didn't copy it when they OBVIOUSLY DID is ludicrous, IMO.
OTOH, I don't think there's anything wrong with copycats when it comes to generalized hardware. It's also obvious the Samsung product is NOT THE SAME in that it uses different hardware and a different operating system. Looking similar could get a LOT of companies in trouble (most products of a given class look similar to a greater or lesser extent).
What is obvious is that companies are sue happy anymore and it's ridiculous. The small companies and individuals that can't afford long drawn out legal battles are the ones that really suffer from things like software patents, etc. Companies should compete on the merit of their products, not the quality and quantity of their lawyers (and the ability to pay them endlessly), IMO. On that front, they should all get slammed in court, IMO.
OTOH, I don't think there's anything wrong with copycats when it comes to generalized hardware. It's also obvious the Samsung product is NOT THE SAME in that it uses different hardware and a different operating system. Looking similar could get a LOT of companies in trouble (most products of a given class look similar to a greater or lesser extent).
What is obvious is that companies are sue happy anymore and it's ridiculous. The small companies and individuals that can't afford long drawn out legal battles are the ones that really suffer from things like software patents, etc. Companies should compete on the merit of their products, not the quality and quantity of their lawyers (and the ability to pay them endlessly), IMO. On that front, they should all get slammed in court, IMO.
Apple's lawsuit wasn't stupid? I'm glad apple is getting this WELL DESERVED ruling.
That's what people said about the cell phone and the iPad. Good thing we still have companies with employees than Can Imagine!
I knew someone would say something to this effect when I posted that. The way I see it Samsung used the same concept in their product, but they didn't do the exact same thing. Apple tries to patent everything in sight and if they always got their way then they'd be the only computer company in the world. Macs use mice and keyboards, and so do PCs.
There's more than one side to this story, and the Court made its decision based on the evidence and testimony of both sides with respect to the letter of the law. If you disagree with the decision then that's your prerogative, but I sincerely hope you don't automatically side with every corporation's legal argument based on the fact that you like their stuff. I've been playing the PlayStation since the first console and prefer the PS3 to any other gaming system out there, but that doesn't mean I had to agree with Sony when they sued George Hotz for making custom firmware.
I feel you either misunderstood, or purposefully took that notion out of context for the sake of argument (though I'll give you the benefit of the doubt). As I said earlier, I have nearly every Apple product on the market today. I clearly prefer Apple other computer companies. No one ever said that liking Apple better than Microsoft (for example) is a bad thing. That preference is based on the product quality and customer service among other things each company provides.
The point is, there's a difference between brand loyalty and fanboyism. On a forum like this you'll see accusations going either way, and I don't mean to imply that anyone is a 'fanboy' for whichever opinion they choose to express. I just expressed my opinion and explained that while I like Apple as a consumer, I don't blindly love and support them as a huge corporation who's involved in all kinds of litigation all over the world. I never said that you are a fanboy if you choose to agree with Apple on this decision. All I'm saying is that I don't really care nor do I take sides in which company sues who over what. I look at this case as a neutral observer and see Apple as trying to stifle the competition with law suits instead of putting their money where their mouth is and making better products.
Never Happen
Yes, it would be humiliating if it ever happened. It will never come to pass. It's just this particular judges swipe at Apple for doing something he thinks is uncalled for. He's entitled to his judgment, but it ain't gonna happen. Maybe he should make Tim shave his eyebrows off too?
Now that's just humiliating.
Humiliating, but funny
Yes, it would be humiliating if it ever happened. It will never come to pass. It's just this particular judges swipe at Apple for doing something he thinks is uncalled for. He's entitled to his judgment, but it ain't gonna happen. Maybe he should make Tim shave his eyebrows off too?
Thank you!! That's why the down-vote button came in so handy when we had it. Sometimes it's best to just ignore certain people altogether. Why even HONOR them with a reply, when all they're going to do is fireback with something rude or condescending. I don't mind someone correcting me but the delivery of it certainly makes a world of a difference.
I recall many people making the accusations of copying long before apple even took legal action.
That's not a problem, it's a feature, Apple gets to sell more USB chargers.
I mean it's not like they can make older, still working, chargers obsolete by OS upgrades.
In breaking news: Apple decides not to sell in UK. Tells judge to Fsk Off.
Late breaking news: Queen is pissed. Tells judge to Fsk-self. Judge Fsked on own ptard. Judge replaced. Ruling rescinded. Samsung still considered not very good. Queen knights Apple. Apple resumes sales in UK.
Late breaking news: Queen is pissed. Tells judge to Fsk-self. Judge Fsked on own ptard. Judge replaced. Ruling rescinded. Samsung still considered not very good. Queen knights Apple. Apple resumes sales in UK.
In fact I have had an iPhone 3G, an iPhone 3GS, an HTC Hero, a Nexus One, a Galaxy S and now I own a Sony Ericsson Xperia Ray and a iPod Touch.
So yes, I have used BOTH of them.
And my question remains, seeing the G1 and those prototypes, including the touch only one, the framework and foundations was the same.
Please, do it. But before posting anything, look at the dates. Anything after January 2.007 doesn't count
Not All "Negative" PR is Negative
With every negative bout of PR, breeds positive messaging. And no other Marketing team on the planet could handle something like this better than Apple's.
Is it really that harmful to Apple's business for them to be required to remind people, over and over, that the Galaxy - is in fact - NOT an iPad?
Think about it.
With every negative bout of PR, breeds positive messaging. And no other Marketing team on the planet could handle something like this better than Apple's.
Is it really that harmful to Apple's business for them to be required to remind people, over and over, that the Galaxy - is in fact - NOT an iPad?
Think about it.
...cept for the small fact that physically the iPad and the Galaxy Tab are only superficially similar, rather than blatantly so.