Needless to say, total coincidence !
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.
Xiaomi VP Hugo Barra Defends Against Copycat Accusations in New Interview
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You are absolutely correct, Apple does NOT have the right to dictate how the industry designs their phones. And in reality, they don't need to. They produce their designs, and the then the rest of the industry copies their design language. Maybe they use iPhone 5C colors on an iPad clone or perhaps use the chamfer from the iPhone 5 and the glass back from the iPhone 4 in a new model, it's still following Apple design.
As someone else mentioned, this happens in other industries as well. Like BMW's Bangle butt, that was then copied by everyone else (even though most BMW enthusiasts thought it was hideous).
Looks like Xiaomi is following Samsung's example (who followed Microsoft's example and then expanded it) by now moving on to copying other items (air cleaner in their case while Samsung copied Dyson's vacuum cleaner designs).
When you were going out of your way to avoid saying anything about copying and making it a point to just say that the designs are simply similar it certainly comes off as you trying to avoid saying that Apple was copied. Just logical reasoning at work.
When on top of wavering on this you were also shown to be incorrect about assumptions about patents on design that you were using to support your arguments (and admitted that you were wrong as well).
And this was all after you simply were trying to deflect focus on nitpicking some random things here and there from some Jobs speeches which have little to do with what is in question here.
All classic signs of not having an argument that can stand on its own. Going further only keeps things going in a circle around that simple reality that there really isn't an argument there to begin with.
So... basically he says: "If everyone else is copying, what we do (copying) can't also be considered copying".
The copying is so shameless, that's not even worth considering unless it is to make money.
The copying is so shameless, that's not even worth considering unless it is to make money.
This business of calling out companies that "copy" Apple remains deep in our DNA, and I wish it would mutate out. It's absurd. If Apple feels they need to legally defend themselves, so be it; but it makes them look aggressive and petty. The bickering among us mere users, however, is so laughable.
I don't buy for one second that Xiaomi and Samsung's "antics" cause any significant amount confusion in the marketplace. The iPhone's performance remains healthy. Users are not drooling idiots that can't tell the difference between handsets and gradations of quality in software.
Jony hates it. I understand and respect that, as these are his designs. I don't care. It doesn't affect my enjoyment of the product.
Furthermore, shame on Hugo Barra for playing the race card.
I don't buy for one second that Xiaomi and Samsung's "antics" cause any significant amount confusion in the marketplace. The iPhone's performance remains healthy. Users are not drooling idiots that can't tell the difference between handsets and gradations of quality in software.
Jony hates it. I understand and respect that, as these are his designs. I don't care. It doesn't affect my enjoyment of the product.
Furthermore, shame on Hugo Barra for playing the race card.
They are the same thing if you're defining invention the same way that the patent office does. That is why Jobs said they invented it - they were awarded the patent. If they didn't patent it someone else would've patented it and sued Apple eventually. The patent system might be broken but at least we get good products out of it and most copycat companies like Samsung think twice before ripping off everyone.
The funniest thing about your diatribe against apple in this thread is the evidence you cite to back up your claims. The speaker was actually making an argument for "remixing", or copying if you prefer, and how patent law may be actually stifling future product development because it isn't nuanced enough to allow for "remixing" which has been, according to the speaker, a critical component of innovation in the past.
Indeed, the 1st iPhone, is a classical example of the "remixing" the speaker is talking about and is also a classic example of Apple's consistent ability to bring to the masses repackaged and reimagined technological developments that have been either sitting on a shelf or poorly implemented previously.
The speaker goes on to say that once you have a vested interest in a "remixed" product you tend to become very protective of the remix, and Jobs certainly is guilty of that, and this natural bias makes you more likely to defend a patent system that is, in the speaker's opinion, unproductive and stifling future developments.
But there is a crucial difference between being a "remixer" and a copier or stealer. The remixer borrows and improves upon the ideas of others. The copier/stealer just slavishly copies and steals.
Apple, fairly consistently, has been the remixer. Xiaomi isn't bringing anything new to the table here and that's the difference.
No doubt Xiaomi makes good quality hardware. There's also no doubt at all that they copy BLATANTLY from Apple. Hardware, software, Keynote presentation, advert media, shops. The entire company looks like a sister company of Apple.
Sure... The chamfered edge is the only thing...
Assuming none of these photos have been doctored, that's pretty darn funny. And appalling.
The only reason why Apple can maintain a level of quality and still profit is because of their legal stances. Why don't we all make knockoff iPhones and ride that marketing and R&D that Apple has already spent billions on? We don't want to get sued, that's why. That's also why Asian companies don't care as much. Their court systems don't really care about IP cases.
So you seriously equate buying intellectual property from someone with just ripping it off for free? Is that you, Karl Marx?
What you advocate would be Apple ripping off the design for the Skylake processor and having Samsung or TSMC making the chips. Its entirely different from licensing a different chip design from ARM and enhancing it to reduce dependence upon Intel.
The clever thing about Xiaomi product launches is that upon release they heavily restrict availability of whatever brand new cheap ass phone they sell.
That way the razor thin profit margins don't really affect them too much. A year later, that poorly made 2000rmb phone is much cheaper to make and they're fully available.
That way the razor thin profit margins don't really affect them too much. A year later, that poorly made 2000rmb phone is much cheaper to make and they're fully available.
No one believes Apple invented a touch phone or a computer or an MP3 player. But are you really going to argue that they don't deserve the credit for making the best of those devices? Why would we as consumers care about anything else? Are you really fighting for truth and justice or just trolling against anything Apple?
Sure... The chamfered edge is the only thing...
I think Apple could legally file for a restraining order with this much stalking going on. Damn.
Dude are you serious? Of course Apple is going that direction. They've been working on it for years, way before it occurred to these copy cats. Would have been introduced earlier this summer but is being held up by local network affiliate TV deals. Be clear: the smart home hub is another badly ripped off Xiomi product that will suck because it wasn't original, thought through, or given enough ecosystem development time.At least they didn't copy the oversize top bezel
I love how Mi Note Pro comes in the colours of the 5c! I can't believe that guy can say all that with a straight face...
That being said, I love how Xiaomi went into the smart home kit market. I really thought Apple would have gone this route, not just with an App, but really make the Apple TV the hub of home automation.
Who cares? I don't. If it wasn't for Apple, you would probably still be using a stylus now on 2015. Apple may have not invented multitouch but where the first one to make it work on a mobile device for consumers. There were some Microsoft table touch concepts before, I never so them become reality. Just a white noise,
No doubt they make good quality hardware? That's a big statement. Do you have any evidence that they produce good quality hardware? Just wondering. In a thread that should be about a copycat, but then turns into random unfounded accusations against Apple, I wouldn't want to accept a statement like that without good evidence.
Oh well. Ok, one might say "certainty that a statement is false" isn't the same as "doubt that a statement is true". Admittedly, this is just anecdotal evidence. Maybe someone else has a colleague where the "Mi" logo on his phone lasted at least weeks.
I'd love that too. The last company doing that was ordered by court to pay $2.500 per computer they sold. (That was Psystar. Of course Apple never got any money because these guys went bankrupt. Not even Psystar's lawyers got any money. Xiaomi would find it harder to not pay and keep their company running).
Fully agreed. That clock face cost Apple about $17 million (and I have a niggling feeling that it cost some top executive at Apple his job). So how much do you think should Xiaomi pay?
That's why I think it might have cost someone his job - someone at Apple was bloody stupid; licensing that clock face _before_ using it would have been a lot cheaper. And having one of Ive's designers spend a month on creating a nice clock face would have been an awful lot cheaper.
Samsung certainly cares. These guys are up to Samsung's heels by copying more blatantly than Samsung ever did (and for the last few years, Samsung phones didn't look like iPhones), and Samsung's shrinking profits are partly due to this company.
Last edited: