Is st Steve actually worried ?
It looks like the sainted Jobs is actually worried by Samsung.
This can be nothing but good news for consumers and competition in the market.
BigBro, 'cause Apple has gone from rebel to dictator.
Apple has told the Dutch court it expects Samsung to write to all its European dealers recalling Galaxy phones and tablets, with stock to be returned within 14 days at Samsung's expense. The letter, seen by Dutch publication Webwereld, requires all stocks to be immediately shipped back to the Netherlands (where Samsung handles …
Why would he be worried?
Given their market capitalisation figures, huge stock pile of cash and good sales figures.
I think it's more a case of him being sick of imitators and I agree to a point. There's so very little design talent in the market and those who have it should be kicking the cloners in the teeth (via the courts) to get them to put more effort into producing their own look and feel.
Dieter Rams states himself there's only Apple and the company he works for who don't "devalue" the term "designer" and looking at the dull designs HTC and others chuck out I agree. Those who think their HTC phones look nice obviously have no taste (the popularity of Comic Sans has always proved that most people don't care).
This post has been deleted by its author
Aside from the fact that the Samsung is a different shape from the iPad, and uses a different OS with a different interface, how different are you expecting this 'look and feel' to be?
The Samsung tablet is so different from the iPad in fact that Apple had to lie in their court documents, distorting the image of the Samsung to make it resemble the shape of the iPad and presenting it with the app drawer (i.e. a sub menu of the OS) open to give the false impression that Samsung had copied Apple's home screen.
This case comes down to the fact that Apple have decided they own the idea of a black rectangle of any given ratio. Out of interest, if you were going to design a tablet, what shape would you make it?
... this brings us back to the '2001' part of the story that was reported earlier today!
Sorry lads - not only did Kubrick and Clarke come up with the idea of tablet computing before you, they also came up with the blag rectangle that controls your actions at a genetic level through brain manipulation before you too!
"Given their market capitalisation figures, huge stock pile of cash and good sales figures." - easy come and easy will be gone....they done that before...
"I think it's more a case of him being sick of imitators..." - like iApple never imitated nothing...right...all is original work....
"and looking at the dull designs HTC and others chuck out I agree" - you mean the one that any one can change? Oh yes, is not like iApple invented any design in the last 4 years for their iGreat devices...taking HTC would be to obvious...
My HTC phone does look nice, and it's lovely to hold as well. If you want a dull design then take a look at an iPhone! It's dull before you turn it on and it stays dull after you turn it on. It's just that dull grid of icons and no pretty widgets. Given time they'll copy...err, I mean innovate and patent...the Android homescreen concept.
Anyway, the reason he's worried is that huge pile of money and the market capitalisation figures. Investors buy the future, not the past, and Apple won't be generating such a lot of money if they allow competition in their markets. They have no technological edge and are no longer cool, so they're using the money pile to build a moat in the hope that investors will see value in that. It's either that or compete on price. Put it this way: Steve doesn't wear shades.
My HTC phone looks frakkin awesome. Mostly because I've changed the default homescreen/launcher, and tweaked it to the way I want it to be. BECAUSE I CAN.
I'll hand it to Apple, they DID patent the whole one-button functionality thing. When I saw their single button mouse, ages ago, I completely wrote off the whole company as a joke. But now, i see it was just them recognizing that the average world citizen is a complete moron, and if you give him or her two or more buttons to push, they're invariably going to screw something up. Good on Apple for recognizing that people are idiots and enabling them to remain so. But for me? I'm not an idiot, so I don't need their handholding and oversimplifications.
Well. IMHO most newer Apple kit simply looks tacky - the kind of design where 50yrs later there will be not the least bit of doubt from what (semi)decade it came from. But that Probably means I just have no taste. Well,I also didn't have any taste ~95 when I refused to wear low-slung baggy-pants.
Back on topic: I got my HTC desire very much because its UI is not very much like the iPhone's. Maybe I'm just not hip enough, maybe I didn't drink enough kool-aid - but Apple's UIs have always driven me up the wall. Even more so than MSes. And that means something.
Sure, HTCs phones aren't able to compete with d&g jewellery-boxes on the "oh, shyiny"-factor, but they look simple and unobtrusive enough, and work pretty well.
And I don't have to hold 'em in any specific way to make a call.
Well. It's hard to admit, but I most likely don't have the taste to be a web-designer or work for an advertising company.
Oh - wait. No it isn't. I'm actually fucking glad that is so. While I-phone-wielders might be proud of drinking crappy^w high-priced, big-brand chianti instead of good beer, I mostly stick with the latter, because I have an Idea or two about good wine and know I can't afford to buy the good big-name wines and lack the time to track down the cheap, good stuff for the locales I frequent.
Oh, never mid, I'll get my coat. It's the white one with 12 black buttons, a couple of biros stuck on the lapels and the nice sprinkling of jus, thank you very much.
It's just normal corporate behavior.
Once a company has clawed its way to the top of the heap, it's SOP to stomp on anyone else trying to claw their way up there by any means possible.
(I call myself a realist, others say I'm just a cynical bastard, I hold both points of view equally valid.)
"Once a company has clawed its way to the top of the heap, it's SOP to stomp on anyone else trying to claw their way up there by any means possible."
Yep, you're daft alright.
Said company spend many years and billions of dollars developing it's design and technology. Others then copy it. Company tries to protect its' hard work and IP.
What would you have them do instead?
"What would you have them do instead?"
Fuck off and die, since you ask. I don't care how many billions of dollars you threw at a product if the end result is "It's a desktop metaphor you work with your finger instead of a mouse". That's not interesting, it's not clever, and it's not an original idea.
why aren't car firms or motorbike manufacturers or cycle designers or whatever else where there is competition suing each other?
Apple, amongst other tech firms, reminds me of the baby that's had its lollipop pinched, bawling away, even though it knows it has a bag of lollipops in the pram.
That is a case of a similar product being sold with the exact same model number. If it were similar to the Apple Vs Samsung case they would have sued over the fact that both cars have wheels of the same shape, doors that open, brakes that slow you down then bring you to a stop etc etc
Sueing for using "F150" for a car name, I can give Ford that. But sueing because a car is black with chrome accents and has "aerodynamic" (read: "rounded") corners and you drive it with a circular device (steering wheel) and a gear-shift.... I propose that all car manufacturers sue for injunctions against each other for obviously stealing each other's "look'n'feel" and failing to be "innovative." Perhaps when we're all riding in horse-and-buggies again, bureaucrats will wake up and realize that the world could be a better place without such petty wastes of (consumer) money.
(yes, it is us that eventually have to pay for all these lawyers)
I always thought that If I was going to get a tablet, it would be an ipad. The prices aren't that different (for a decent tablet) so might as well go with the masses and get guaranteed new software regularly.
But now, with Apple making such a big deal other this, I'm actually really intrigued to check out the Samsung. They make some pretty decent Blueray boxes (not so great Freesat boxes it seems, lets hope software updates come soon for those).
Considering practically every slab looks the same, why are Apple getting so worked up over this one? It must be pretty feckin decent to have them this worked up!
@AndyS It is about patents: design patents. It seems Apple are claiming rights to any device with rounded corners (like all my ancient phones and laptops). This is going nowhere because it will be kicked out but in the meantime its cheap publicity (no news its bad news) as publications like this report Apple's actions .
beyond reasonable doubt is a concept of criminal courts. In civil cases the boot is squarely on the other foot. Rather than having to "prove" that the defendant is guilty "beyond reasonable doubt" the defendant has to demonstrate their innocence on the balance of probability.
I mean, even if Jobs wants to tell that to the court, most lawyers are smart enough not to say something that is likely to perturb the judge and make him more adversarial to their case. I've never met a judge who is unperturbed by being told how he has to handle something before he has heard the case.
"Since when do companies tell courts what to do, it’s the other way around."
Since Apple officially had more free cash than the US government, I guess. Basically Apple are now the biggest bully in the playground, and they seem to have a major chip on their shoulder after being picked on by the bigger boys throughout the 80s and 90s.
Wozniac must be cringing with embarrassment nowadays when he sees what a monster his baby has become.
Samsung's responsibilty if a court order found for apple would be to not sell any Tabs.
How it does it would be entirely down to it's agreements and contracts with distributors and retailers. No doubt there is a very effective recall mechanism that can swing into action but is normally reserved for more serious issues of consumer protection than a Jobsian "paddy".
I don't think that patents (or in this case "design" patents) actually stop you making something. What they do is make it an offence to supply it (for money, or giving it away).
If a shop sells something to someone that breaches a patent, then the shop is responsible. I think it is also the same as bootleg/counterfeit goods too; these are either rip-offs (design patent/copyright), or trademark infringments, or copyright infringments. However IANAL
And there I was thinking that the whole point of a free market was self-optimization through competition.
I kind of like the whole iPhone/iPad thing but I have no intention of buying them from Apple so shutting down the competition is not going to get them my money. Is not like I actually _need_ these products so "do without" is a perfectly good option for me.
How about Apple suing Samsung for the details of customers who have already bought the GPad?
Samsung, like Apple has cohorts of lawyers, but individual consumers would much more easily be scared into submission on receiving an unpleasant letter from Apple.
That would appear to be the logical next step, given Apple's behaviour so far.
Finding something that looks (and works) as well for a significantly lower price.
I'm not saying you can't but I had a look round at the weekend and for the price of an even 1/2 decent tab from any manufacturer I could have an iPad (yes, the basic 16Gig one), Now, I dont need a tablet of any flavour but I "want" one.
I have an iPhone, I know what to expect from IOS and I know it's limitations and I'm also very lazy so I dont want to be spending loads of time learning a new OS, etc (and then worrying if I'm on the latest OS version and if not will my tablet support the latest version or even if I can find the latest version for my particular tab!) and for what I need it to do the iPad (yes, the base model is fine for me) is perfect.
Horses for courses, if you want a cheap Tablet they can be found without a doubt but if you want something that approaches the iPad in size, functionality and, dare I say it "shiny-ness" then you will be hard pushed.
"Good luck Finding something that looks (and works) as well for a significantly lower price."
amazon is your friend here
"for the price of an even 1/2 decent tab from any manufacturer I could have an iPad"
funny, because on amazon I couldn't find a non ipad tablet for more than £400, or an ipad for less than £425.
The injunction they got has been shown to be seriously flawed and has been overturned. They haven't reached the dutch court yet so no decision has been made and that doesn't even take into account the fact that the whole design patent is a joke that should never have been granted. Don't we have some kind of law to prevent frivolous lawsuits? Something with a megabucks fine to show them we aren't happy about it.
This Apple crowd need a bloody nose.
They have done some pretty UI stuff. That's it . Zilch other real innovation.
I designed a small tablet with touch screen back in 1987. Basically any such device has certain obvious features that NO-ONE should be able to copyright or patent as they are too obvious.
1) Rectangular as skinny as possible.
2) Rounded corners.
3) Screen takes as much of front as is possible.
4) Icons on the main screen for all the commonly used functions (Since Xerox in 1970s)
5) Maybe a button or two separate from screen.
My was called the Pen and Pad.
The "pen" had a 2.5mm optically read ball and option for ink (as you can make IR transparent black or coloured ink). Microphone near tip, Earphone at top. Three buttons. WiFi, Bluetooth etc didn't exist then so the Cordless link for voice and data from Pen to Pad was 60kHz Ultrasound. OK the FM receiver had doppler shift issues if you waved it about too much.
If any good lawyer wants to work on a no-win-no-fee maybe the lapsed patent can be revived and we sue EVERY blue tooth headset maker .... :-) I don't think so.
It's time Judges, Juries and patent offices did some real research and stop all this nonsense.
Of course there was the same thing in 1920s over valves and 1930s, 1940s on Radio and TV patents.
Not to mention the despicable behaviour of "Enforcers" of Cine Camera patents at the dawn of Cinema (Nickelodeon isn't a Documentary, but it gives the flavour well).
... with bloody huge pockets.
I mean really. When you think about it, a tablet is a screen without a keyboard. How many shapes could it be ? Corners don't come in that many variations and Apple seems to be saying "all rounded corners are Apples...."
Pathetic f#@!ing morons, all of them.
There's nothing evil about protecting your work and designs. If it was some little outfit claiming the patent against Apple you'd be praising them as the new messiah.
When Apple released the first *good* laptop and got Sony to manufacture them, the first thing Sony did was to make their own clones and jump into bed with Windows, so in Apple's shoes I'd be doing everything possible to make sure competitors weren't profiting from my work.
And this picture says it all..
the link that you posted looks like, Windows XP vs Android. Android was built from day-one to use a touchscreen, Windows XP wasn't. Plus the older Windows XP tablets were built with cooperates in mind. Those XP tables were meant to allow workers to continue using their ERP from the field, hence the ugly by steady design. You could use those tablets while you are repairing a tank!
sorry mate, wrong example.
Ok, a more accurate picture for the iPad side would have simply have been a blank space before the iPad as there weren't any iPad clones (modern tablet computers as you call them) before the iPad. Just heavy, slow flattened PCs that consumers weren't interested in.
And yes, android was built from day one to use a touchscreen, because it's was built as a copy of iOS. even then, it wasn't designed for tablets and there are still iPad clones out there being released with non tablet versions of Android for unwary consumers to buy thinking they're getting a cheap iPad.
You might want to refer to this:
Sorry to use Wikipedia as a reference but .... Anyway, according to this, Android dates from 2003 which is a little before iOS was launched so I'm not sure you can say "was built as a copy of iOS".
I'll give you credit, despite numerous examples, on this thread as well as several others, of tablet computers that look near identical to the iPad, all of which predate the iPad, some by over a decade, you're sticking to your guns.
Good on ya. You hang in there sunshine, you're a credit to your cause.
Dedicated to the Apple viewpoint. Deluded, but dedicated.
You mean the Knight Ridder video mockup (not an actual tablet that could be used) or PC paving stones that totally failed to sell to anyone in any serious numbers?
How come Samsung etc. waited until after the iPad was launched to start doing their 'innovative' tablets rather than the laptop PC with the screen on the back attempts they'd been selling until then? Were they just saving their clever designs up until after Apple made them popular?
go take a look at the pictures of the HP tablet that a couple of others have mentioned. Take a good look at it. If you can say that the iPad does not bear any resemblance to the HP, then I call you a liar.
The iPad is as similar to the HP as the Tab is to an iPad.
You can claim that the iPad is thinner, well, what the hell do you expect? It was created over 5 years ago, technology advances, devices get thinner.
@Aaron Fothergill, Do you work for Apple or are you one of those religious nutters they talk about here - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/05/19/fanboi_brain_study/ . Seriously copying the design what rubbish.
How else should a tablet look, its not like a car with a multitude of possibilities. To my memory we didn't see Laptop makers complaining that everyones portable notebook computers looked the same, even though they were. Whether it was a Dell, HP, NEC they all looked the same, pretty boring things, but they all looked the same.
The more and more apple related articles that come up on her the more I'm convinced its one big cult. Who needs a marketing budget when you've got jokers like this prepared to defend every action a company and every product they make. I just dont get it these jokers are defending companies who only motivation is to make money.
Competition is a good thing and outrageous patent claims do nothing to help our interests as consumers. I want choice as a consumer and so do most other people
<QUOTE>Just heavy, slow flattened PCs that consumers weren't interested in.</QUOTE>
Yeah, because they were running Windows XP.
I doubt anyone here would really argue that Apple haven't done well to make the tablet form-factor as popular as it is. Well done lads.
<QUOTE>And yes, android was built from day one to use a touchscreen, because it's was built as a copy of iOS. </QUOTE>
So what you're saying is that Android, which was in development long before St. Jobs started Apple going on iOS, copied iOS in having some icons that you press with fingers on a touchscreen device?
And this despite the fact that on Android you get a widget-able homescreen, instead of just the icon-grid when you power on and unlock an iPhone? Aside from having (admittedly) a grid of icons when you open the app drawer on a 'droid handset, but frankly, how else are you going to do it, they bear no resemblance in appearance! And the icon grid has been around for quite some time. Most OSs use it in fact.
<QUOTE>even then, it wasn't designed for tablets and there are still iPad clones out there being released with non tablet versions of Android for unwary consumers to buy thinking they're getting a cheap iPad.</QUOTE>
I'm not sure what your point is here.
Is it that the operating system (Android) designed for a phone OS wasn't suitable for larger, higher resolution tablet screens that weren't out at the time? Then yes, you're right. I seem to recall iOS having a similar problem with apps not working properly on iPads as well... So it needed a software update - big deal. Google have ALWAYS said that pre-3.0 releases weren't for tablets.
And quite how it is the fault of Google that unscrupulous hardware manufacturers KIRFing iPads, I'm not sure.
It's clear you're an Apple fan, and fair enough. Each to their own. Personally, I like the Apple hardware, but that walled-garden puts me off - i'll install whatever I want on *MY* device thanks - as does the fact I'd be forced to use iTunes, which is a horrific piece of software.
But honestly, if you want to pick holes in Android, feel free - you're entitled to your opinion, and there's plenty of legitimate grievances with Android as an OS. But just making crap up makes you look like an idiot.
near enough #
"Ok, a more accurate picture for the iPad side would have simply have been a blank space before the iPad as there weren't any iPad clones (modern tablet computers as you call them) before the iPad. Just heavy, slow flattened PCs that consumers weren't interested in.
And yes, android was built from day one to use a touchscreen, because it's was built as a copy of iOS. even then, it wasn't designed for tablets and there are still iPad clones out there being released with non tablet versions of Android for unwary consumers to buy thinking they're getting a cheap iPad."
Wow. I mean wow. Like really, wow.
I´ve not read anything as surreal as that in quite a while. The last line is simply breathtaking for its, well, craziness.
> because it's was built as a copy of iOS
Android came into being a couple of years before iOS - though Google's aquisition of it coincided with the launch of the first Apple mobile phone - amusingly a joint effort with Motorola [the E790] the IP legacy of which must be keeping Apple lawyers up at night right now.
A quick look on google and I found this from 2007.
Rounded corners, shine surface with screen. If touch screen technology was availible then it would have been used. And just for the record Apple pay Creative for nicking its design for its control interface.
apple only wishes it was their own design
have a close look at this and then tell me jobs shat out the ipad in a cloud of diamond dust and unicorn vomit.
i pray for knight-ridder to appear in court when apples lawyers are in full flow and introduce themselves with a polite "excuse me, heres a summons you arrogant tossers."
or perhaps i should just email a copy of that story to the judge concerned and laugh as apple sinks in flames.
Sorry I got a little confused when you said Aplle released the 1st good laptop & Sony copied it.
I seem to remember NEC & Toshiba amongst others releasing good laptops before Apple.
Oh right a laptop is only good if it's from Apple.
Lets see thin with rounded edges, that sounds like a credit card, perhaps Apple will sue credit card companies too.
But quite a lot evil about falsifying evidence to make it look like a competitor's product does precisely ape your design, when in fact it doesn't. It has been proven beyond doubt that Apple did this in their evidence for the German ruling on the Galaxy Tab 10.1.
Here's the simple equation: Apple didn't say a thing about other tablets that look a lot more like the iPad, because they were poorly supported and of not particularly high quality. As soon as there existed a well-supported tablet that matched or surpassed the iPad for spec, Apple cried "patent violation!" and tried to have sale of the offending item banned.
Take a closer, unbiased, look at the pictures in your link:
The old pads...
all have rectangular screens
have rounded corners (except for the ruggedized ones. Note that the top left one has a similar colour edge to the background, making it look like it's not round)
all have flat screens and bezels
are all in landscape mode
has a rectangular screen (check)
has rounded corners (check)
has a flat screen and bezel (check)
Is in portrait mode (INNOVATION!)
The new pads...
have the same feature which the ipad borrowed from pre-existing pads (CHECK)
are not all in landscape mode (COPY)
But what should make you realise you've been had is that 2 of the new pads have been photographed in their native landscape mode and the picture has been rotated to make them look like ipads. How desperate do you have to be to attempt propaganda like that?
If you take 5 cars from the 80s and 5 cars from today you will see definite style differences between the cohorts and similarities within the cohorts. You could pick a car from the 90s and say it was the root of the design from then on, but you could pick any other car and say the same thing. It's not the case that because the entire market moved from similar styles in one decade to other similar styles in another decade that they were all copies of any design from either decade.
So Toshiba tablets (M200 circa 2004) never auto-rotated to portrait, or landscape depending on how they were held?
I still have mine and it still gives decent service. Ok, so it's a little heavy and gets a little hot and yes it is a quite thick, but it is +7 year old technology and it actually lets me run whatever I want on it (read: do real work) and converts to a real laptop with keyboard at the twist of the screen.
Oh and it has those extra pen buttons off-screen, which you just hover your pen over, to lock caps, control, (or user-defined action), etc. Perhaps Apple will "invent" those too, soon.
Maybe Apple should enforce their patents on thin-ness and cool-ness, which they undoubtedlly have thanks to an idiotic patent office and system.
"There's nothing evil about protecting your work and designs. If it was some little outfit claiming the patent against Apple you'd be praising them as the new messiah."
There is everything evil in getting State to protect "your work" and "your designs". Because it's not "yours" at all - it's built on others' work and others' designs. You have a success and suddenly its "all yours, all of it!"? Sod that.
The market should be about competition and selling things people want. Not about locking out competition and forcing people to only buy your stuff.
Basically, that link just shows the evolution of tablet designs.
The older technology was heavy so they tended to have handles but that disappeared as things got lighter. The rounded corners that Apple claim are a feature Samsung copied can clearly be seen in pre-iPad designs.
All of the earlier designs also have a screen surrounded by a bezel. Those earlier tablets are running XP and so also show a grid of icons on the desktop when you turn it on.
Of the post-iPad designs, half of them have been rotated 90 degrees to make them look more like the iPad than they actually are and disguise the fact that they all use a widescreen format.
Of course, you'd know all that already if you'd bothered to read the comments under the picture.
Apple may not have invented rounded corners on tablets, but when it comes to suing for the copying of design rulings are based solely on multiple points of similarity.
For example, none of the features of the Ford Ka are original to that vehicle; however, if Nissan made a car to an apparently identical design then Ford would be within their rights to sue. Nissan would have to show that their car was significantly different in some way in order to continue selling it.
Where it all falls down for Apple is that the Galaxy Tab does have enough significant differences that it cannot be easily confused with the heilPad. Once that has been established, then Apple could only successfully sue if Samsung had stolen a design feature that was unique to Apple products. Or if they bought the judge, of course.
In the weeks before the iPad was released EVERY Apple hater was ridiculing the idea of the device. Remember the comments about the iPod touch and iSanitary towel?
It took hold with the public (even Jake Humphrey carries one) and all of a sudden all the manufacturers who were left behind rushed to bring out their version.
I used a pen tablet PC. It was and is still horrible. (I don't have an iPad - no need for one)
The iPad form factor was new at the time of release. Previous computer touch screens (mass market and NOT phone) were single touch.
The design of iPad follows the iPhone theme, scaled up.
It is not the "patenting" of round corners, or the UI, or the thinness.. It is the copying of a whole package.
Changing a screen size doesn't materially alter the package.
The car analog is valid in so far as a car has (normally 4 wheels) a hood and a trunk. The car designers make an effort to differentiate their wares from their competitors. They use more than a coat of paint.
Sadly Samsung appeared to apply a coat of paint to an iPad. There is little/nothing that says "I'm a Samsung" about the G. Tab.
... except where it says 'Samsung', both on the bottom of the front, and in big f**kin' letters across the back?
... except it uses the Samsung TouchWiz interface?
... except it's called the Samsung Galaxy Tab, meaning it's a device in the Samsung 'Galaxy' line of Android devices, and is a tablet device?
This post has been deleted by its author
Tegra 2 pads are basically all the same, barring the odd keyboard or SD card slot. The Samsung one is just the latest in a long line (That's coming to an end once the Tegra 3's become available in a month or three and everything gets upgraded to be thinner, lighter, faster, etc.)
It seems odd to go after a relative latecomer, after a single product amongst dozens.. by the time they've had any effect the next gen ones will be out and they'll have to start all over again.
Latecomer Samsung may be to tablets, but Apple are picking on Samsung because they're selling the most "Android stuff" and thus pose the biggest threat to their iPad/iPhone business. Notice how as well as the tablet, Apple is also targeting the phenomenally successful Galaxy S line of phones in other lawsuits.
No, I get the impression that Apple are quite scared really and are trying anything they can to get one over on the competition. And with the next version of Android due before the end of the year things are only going to get worse for them if that's the way they continue to behave.
The public don't understand patents unless they are for something really revolutionary. When it comes to nit picking they think it is nonesense. What they do understand is choice and cost. Trying to prevent people buying an android tablet because it looks a bit like an iPad will get a lot of people annoyed, even very annoyed. This could be a PR disaster. So how worried must Apple be? Or how arrogant have they become?
A design doesn't need to be revolutionary to be patented. It is required to be new and non-obvious.
Patent Offices grant patents based on this criteria. Sadly they also grant broad brush patents that stop development of related equipments.
A few suggested changes :
Patents should be required to be Specific, novel, non-obvious and TIME BOUND. Time bound in that if the patent design is not used to make a marketed product within a reasonable limit it is lapsed and becomes public domain.
The Apple v Samsung spitting match is not about patents. It is about the look and feel of the tablet devices. It is more akin to copyright.
This sort of chickenshit anti-competitive bollocks is the EXACT reason I stayed away from Microsoft products for a long time.
Unlike Microsoft ca. 1994, I truly think your product can compete on merit. I've seen it and I like it. Microsoft had good reason to fear competition because their products at the time were steaming piles. The iPad isn't.
I used to like Apple. Now, not so much. Thank you for reminding me that corporations might sometimes deserve my business, but they NEVER deserve my loyalty.
I had the misfortune to have a crappy Dell Venue Pro Windows 7 phone and it sucked. Big time. It looked and on paper was great. I had it for 3 months and the Bluetooth audio was distorted, it suffered with death-grip, it would make calls all by itself and make using the screen extra difficult once it realised that you were driving. My old Nokia 7130 ended up replacing it for use in the car. The rendering of Youtube videos was crap and there was so much wrong with the thing.
It was an iPhone wannabe with the speaker at the bottom of the phone and the two ports, glass screen and the "sent from my Windows 7 phone" sig which I thought was really naff.
Dell tried to woo customers from Apple to their crap phone by trying to offer a similar experience - but it didn't work. On the flip-side, I have an iPhone 4 and it does everything is is supposed to do. Flawlessly. I can get apps for it for ham radio to do things like track satellites and give me my location square (look up Maidenhead locator) and there are apps to encode and decode digital data communication modes. Nothing for the Windows platform.
Apple are protecting an ecosystem that they have produced and there is shit on the market to try to steal their share. I can understand them protecting their market against crap wanabee's.
BTW - The iPhone is the only piece of Apple stuff I have - Other stuff is either Sony or HP mainly running Ubuntu.
...but other than mentioning Apple I'm afraid I'm at a loss to see where it's relevant to the article. You didn't like a Windows 7 phone and bought an iPhone 4 instead, which you like. That's great! I'm delighted for you.
What has it to do with Apple borging all rounded-cornered rectangles, though?
I have not only boutht Apple kit including iPhone, MacBooks and iMacs in the past - I have also recommended them to friends and customers. However, this behaviour is just not acceptable.
I hereby officially declare, that I will not only never buy anything produced by Apple again, but I will also tell anyone asking me (and a lot of people are) not to buy any Apple gear. That includes corporate customers.
I've taken the same decision to avoid Apple products a while ago, when I noticed that they had become the new Microsoft.
In principle avoiding giving any more of our hard earned cash to Apple seems simple. Just don't buy an iPhone, Macbook or Apple TV. However even if you buy the "Acme Internet Access Tray Model 2" you cannot guarantee that you won't still be giving money to Apple.
Apple has a huge patent portfolio relating to mobile and computing devices. Chances are that almost any wireless or touchscreen mobile device manufacturer will be paying a few cents (somewhere along the line), on each unit sold to their customers, to our friends at Apple (or MS or Google-Motorola for that matter). Hence our desire to never give Mr Jobs and his friends some of our money ever again, is a dream that is unlikely to be fullfilled.
If that is what you want, you will have to accept that you must stop buying all internet enabled devices until you can be certain exactly who gets a slice of the purchase price.
The people who will buy ithings are not going to be put-off by the legal handwringing.
The people who won't buy ithings, or cannot afford to buy them, or will not buy them anyway are not going to pay any attention to the legal handwringing either.
If I had the dosh I'd buy one (ipad).....because the iphone I have has worked for 2 years with no problems....which is better than noksamhtcsonmot have ever done....
Maybe apple just don't want the sampad to be associated with the ipad in the case of the sampad being an unreliable bag of brown stuff ?
How in the hell did you come up with THAT argument? Apple is trying to sue the Samsung tablet out of existence because they're afraid it will suck? You need to step away from your Apple devices while posting on this thread. The reality distortion field is obviously messing with your logic parsing abilities.
If the Galaxy tab were to suck, it would be more reason why people should ONLY buy iPads. It wouldn't scare people away from the iPad. By your logic, why isn't Apple suing the makers of the truly sucky tablets? Coby has a 7" and 10" Android tablets, and I can tell you from personal experience that they suck, despite the fact that they're supporting those famous rounded corners that magically make everything swazy. Why isn't Apple going after them?
Invert your argument, and you've got it right. Apple is going after the Galaxy tablets because they DON'T suck. Apple says screw the consumer, screw choice, screw the spirit of competition, lets just litigate them out of existence. When there's no viable alternative, surely everyone will love us!
We all know that tablets were available before the iPad was released.
Apple marketeers made the iPhone desirable to the spivs. The spivs hail Apple and because it's expensive, makes them feel special. The spivs now believe the hype spouted by the Apple marketeers.
Apple release iPad and the spivs believe that Apple invented tablet computing.
It's just spivs being spivs because the marketeers have elevated them to believing they are something more than just a spiv.
Anyone with 1 brain cell realises that Apple products are not and do not make you elite, but that they are technical illiterates and simply gullible.
When I first moved over to Apple, I used a Fujitsu Lifebook, running XP to the run a network. One day, an iMac turned up, and within a week, I was sold, I loved my new iMac (although I kept the lifebook for out of the office jobs)
I brought a MacBook for home use - it wasn't much more than the Samsung I was considering, and it had a multi-touch trackpad. I was flabbergasted.
Not so much anymore.
I want my old Apple company back. The one that didn't suck.
Even in the pre-Apple days when working at Atari he would pull stunts like cheating his best friend out of bonus awards paid for code optimisation (by neglecting to mention Woz had actually been the one that did most of the work when he submitted the code).
The only difference now is he is a big turd with a lot of tame lawyers making up his own personal bully-mob.
apple can "expect" all they want but there is no legal basis for this, until there is a valid ruling banning the sale then samsung and their dealers can do what they want, this would only apply when and if a valid injunction is awarded. the dutch application hasn't been heard yet and the german one suspended so this only applies to germany at the mo
i think the courts won't react well to apple posturing and telling the courts what to do and they'll be thrown out on their ears
Design is often protected under law, to the extent that, if consumers could easily confuse the two items, then the copycat must cease and desist. And keep in mind that most consumers aren't tech-savvy in the least, anymore that we, as tech site readers, are fashion-conscious in the least.
There are lots of different products out there that look and handle similarly, not to mention modern cars that all seem to have the same features and do very much the same thing, namely transport people from place to place. I understand that the new-fangled television thing causes most receivers of pictures and sound to look very much alike also. I believe this situation is called........er........let me think now.......ah yes - COMPETITION! Seems Apple can't hack it (pun intended). I would love to see Apple really slapped for this one. Arrogance is not the word.
This post has been deleted by its author
Hadn't heard much about this Samsung tablet before, but now I really want to see what is so good that Apple don't want it. It must be really good.
Semi-serious note: Patent wars are not good for us as consumers, not in the long run. Can anything be done to stop these juggernauts lining the pockets of already overly wealthy company law layers?
(For you young uns) dispite the "I" prefix it was released by compaq about a year before Apple released their first "I" item if memory serves me...
Wonder why Samsung havent just gone for prior art, Im sure my old one had rounded edges.... also had wifi and the ability to surf the web and was touch screen....
They even managed to put a workable phone in some versions. (I'll let you decide which im talking about ;) )
seriously Apple... just **** off.
If your products are as great as your army of fan boys constantly bang on about, the competition however good is a none issue.
Although I'm a Apple hardware free zone currently, I've always been open to the idea - but with arguments like this and the whole Adobe Flash joke... screw you jobs.
Apple are by no means alone in been complete asses of the multinational world - they just seem to be taking it to a whole new level.
Don't get me wrong, but apple do have a solid case for samsung copying the appearance of the bottom row of 4 icons that is part of samsungs custom skin on their android phones. Samsung should be ordered to issue a mandatory update that replaces this with a unique design within say the next 4 weeks or face a fine. As for all of apple's the other complaints, what a load of dross! They should be thrown out and apple fined for wasting the court's time. In the meantime samsung a raking in hugeamounts of free publicity and you can bet their sales have gone through the roof. Major back fire for saint jobs of cupertino there i would say.
> "And there I was thinking that the whole point of a free market was self-optimization through competition."
An uncontrolled free market _always_ tends towards monoply and restrictive trade practices.
The USA, for all their crowing about free markets, have intervened many times over the last 150 years to curb this tendency.
This madness will lead to another "Great Correction", the only question is when it'll occur.