why doesn't apple sue creative?

By the way... Which of those 2 products looks nicer?

That Creative... thing looks butt-ugly as sin.
Just goes to show how lime-green in the wrong hands can go horribly awry.

Back to topic: Isn't the click/scroll/touch-wheel thingy the patented bit?

 

Why Apple isn't suing Creative:

They would probably want to go after these guys first.

http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000600024290/

 

This is insane.
This can not be legal, can it?

 

Certainly worthy of investigation. If I were Apple Legal, I'd be all over them.

OLED = teh new hotness, but that UI is pathetic.

 

I am not even sure that apple would have any legal standing to sue creative over the software interface. If i recall correctly, since i cant be bothered to check my iPod's legal menu at the moment, the software interface on the iPod was actually developed by another company for apple. The creative interface may also be provided by the same company. Even if it isnt, creative could argue that they simply choose the simplest and most intuitive method. If the design is something that could have been easily produced or developed by another company, then a patent carries far less weight.

 

Good marketing

If you ask me, these other players that look like iPod/mini make me go and want to go "ewwwww". Then I say to myself, hmmm that looks like Apple's iPod/mini only Apple's looks much better, I think I'll get the iPod instead; thanks Creative for reminding me that Apple's product is better.


Course that is subjective so maybe others feel different

 

For a possible reason why Apple may not want to sue Creative, see http://www.audiogogo.com/content/view/52/50/ The point of the article is that technology is evolving too rapidly for legal solutions to be effective. By the time Apple obtained any legal relief, they probably will have the next generation iPod out.

 

Blech! Creative's attempt at copying the iPod mini just looks awful It also makes me want Apple's iPod/iPod mini instead. I don't like the UI on the device at all - neither the buttons nor the interface on the screen appeal to me.

 

Yeah, but it's the principle of the thing. They're copying someone else's design, they know full well what they're doing, they need to pay. At least that's my opinion.

 

as long as wheel-based navigation isn't copied (it's patented), i don't think apple should bother. (on that note, the koreans with the almost-exact copy of the mini will be in serious legal trouble.)

iPod's success is partially due to that patent. a wheel-based design is ergonomically the best way to navigate through 1,000+ songs, nevermind 10,000 songs. iPod's usability will be unmatched as long as competitors can't use the wheel design, so apple shouldn't bother wasting their legal money for color schemes being copied, menu looks being copied, etc.

 

why doesn't creative sue apple?

If you bother to look closely at the menus, you'll notice that creative's menu systems is quite different. The only real similarity is that they're both menus put onto a screen so small that there is very little graphical difference between them. In all real honesty, Creative would have as much a right to sue Apple as Apple would to sue Creative. That's not to say that either company should be suing the other. Oh yes, the Creative one is butt ugly.

 

If I remember correctly Apple sued imitators of the original iMac. Could they sue? Yes. But I doubt they would unless until they see significant sales drops in the mini. I think they are still selling them as fast as they can make them.

 

The interface isn't really copied. The idea behind a menu has been around for so long now, and the iPod menu isn't so unique that nobody else could have ever figured it out for themselves. Its not like mobile phones haven't been using menus like that for 10 years or anything.

But if someone copied the click-wheel design, then yes, they should sue sue sue.

 

Creative had a jukebox before apple had the ipod i think! with lookalike menus!

Also creative zen micro has larger hd, longer battery life, better sound quality, so u r just apple biased to say that u prefer the mini ipod to the micro zen! (i own a 40GB ipod and a mini-ipod, and i would prefer having the micro zen to the mini)

 

Right now, the only thing in the iPod mini's favor is the fact that it works with iTunes. You're right - the iPod mini could definitely use some improvements to "catch up".

 

Honestly, I consider myself pretty neutral in the whole Mac v. PC debate... but really... those Creative products SUCK! I used to have a Nomad Jukebox... the first HD MP3 player ever, 6gb. Then I upgraded to a 20gb Nomad Zen. Then my 30gb 3G iPod... the new creative products really suck. They had a demo at Fry's last week and it was just not fun at all to play. The only product that can come close to the iPod mini is the Rio Carbon (and honestly... it might be better... Hopefully the NEW iPod mini at mwsf will be even better!).

As far as the regular iPod... Not a damn thing comes close in my mind.

 

Perhaps to get sued, a mp3 player has to include rumors in mp3 format of all the new products that will be introduced at the next MacWorld.

 

Hmm...which one of the MP3 player manufacturers would be bold (or stupid) enough to try this? Maybe ABOSS?