or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Australian Apple lawsuit halts sales of Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Australian Apple lawsuit halts sales of Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 - Page 3

post #81 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

BS. Some of the claimed infringements are inherent in Android itself.

Apple is trying to set a precedent with Samsung before going after the other companies.

THAT, my friend, is monopolistic tactic and hampering competition.

Apple's claims against Samsung are focused on trade dress and not android. You must be thinking of the HTC case which involves patented technology and can/will definitely affect android.

Either way, neither is a monopolistic tactic (since you first have to be a monopoly which Apple is not) and doesn't hinder competition since infringing on another person or company's work isn't actually competitive.
2010 mac mini/iPad OG/iPhone 4/appletv OG/appletv 2/ BT trackpad and keyboard/time capsule/ Wii
Reply
2010 mac mini/iPad OG/iPhone 4/appletv OG/appletv 2/ BT trackpad and keyboard/time capsule/ Wii
Reply
post #82 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by tjw View Post

guys - why do you think this is funny? This is scary monopolistic behaviour.

Is everyone on this board seriously that stupid that they don't want any choice in electronics apart from apple?

It's not scary to me, and if it's "monopolistic behaviour" then that term means something to you that it doesn't mean to anyone else.
post #83 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

Haha - yeh - of course as a samsung paid shill you hate any sony products. Can't bear that they still out design Samsung eh?

Quote:
Originally Posted by 513 View Post

Ha ha ha ha
But Lenovo tabs also look like the iPad (except the first one), and what about the HP TouchPad ? Put some glasses.
Yeah, sure, they look EXACTLY the same



Delusional I tell you delusional.

It's just human nature.

People memorize (in extreme detail) information that supports their claims but "forget" or dont bother to know information that CONTRADICTS their beliefs or views.

Psychology 101.

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply
post #84 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

Look who is talking? You get paid to cheer for Apple yourself.

I frequently have negative things to say against Apple, for example I've very down on their software patents such as the '647 patents. You however never have a bad thing to say for Samsung, because you are paid to only say good things.
post #85 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by freckledbruh View Post

Apple's claims against Samsung are focused on trade dress and not android. You must be thinking of the HTC case which involves patented technology and can/will definitely affect android.

Either way, neither is a monopolistic tactic (since you first have to be a monopoly which Apple is not) and doesn't hinder competition since infringing on another person or company's work isn't actually competitive.

Your telling me that an over 90% market share of the tablet market isnt "monopolistic"? And the legal tactics currently being used to further those market share numbers isnt "monopolistic" either? I came to the right website.

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply
post #86 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by 513 View Post

Yeah, sure, they look EXACTLY the same

Possibly you're being intentionally dense here but the volume rocker patent isn't design, it's utility. ie. they're not complaining that the rocker is the same on the outside, they're complaining it's the same on the inside.
post #87 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

Your telling me that an over 90% market share of the tablet market isnt "monopolistic"? And the legal tactics currently being used to further those market share numbers isnt "monopolistic" either?

Wait - are you admitting that Samsung's sell through is only 25%? Because it looks to me like you just did Better hope your bosses don't notice.
post #88 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

I frequently have negative things to say against Apple, for example I've very down on their software patents such as the '647 patents. You however never have a bad thing to say for Samsung, because you are paid to only say good things.

Your thinking like a true Asian.

Pay = write good reviews.

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply
post #89 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

Look who is talking? You get paid to cheer for Apple yourself.

I honestly don't know about Samsung, but anyone who seriously believes that Apple actually pays people to cheer them on in sites like AppleInsider is probably borderline delusional.
post #90 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by tjw View Post

Yes, they have that choice. But they can't buy the product which is arguably the next best after the iPad 2.

Arguably yes, but also arguably not.

IMO the list would go:

1) iPad
2) TouchPad
3) Xoom
4) all the rest.

(and by the time you even get to the Xoom, your already in the realm of the craptastic).
post #91 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

Wait - are you admitting that Samsung's sell through is only 25%? Because it looks to me like you just did Better hope your bosses don't notice.

Wait, so does that mean that your market share of 90% is indeed monopolistic? Better tell YOUR boss to hide that information.

PS. You cant do math. Atypical of an Asian.

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply
post #92 of 155
Are you guys crazy or what, it's getting funny how obsessed you are.

Do you realize we are talking about the mechanism of a volume rocker, right ?
post #93 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

I honestly don't know about Samsung, but anyone who seriously believes that Apple actually pays people to cheer them on in sites like AppleInsider is probably borderline delusional.

You've got one in here: cloudgazer. The ID tells it all.



And why the double standard?

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply
post #94 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by tjw View Post

guys - why do you think this is funny? This is scary monopolistic behaviour.

Is everyone on this board seriously that stupid that they don't want any choice in electronics apart from apple?

Not if it's from a company who blatantly copies Apple's work. Let them produce their own product and I'll be happy to consider them.
post #95 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

Wait, so does that mean that your market share of 90% is indeed monopolistic? Better tell YOUR boss to hide that information.

PS. You cant do math. Atypical of an Asian.

Apple may very well have a current monopoly on media tablets, though it's unlikely that any trust busters would care, since it's such a new category.

However if you agree that they have a monopoly then you agree that Samsung is an abject failure in tablets and their shipment figures in no way relate to sales. Nice - I'll be sure to quote that one next time you try to support a 'iPad down to 60% share' article as you recently did and inevitably will again.

Maybe samsung should try hiring a better quality shill, perhaps headhunt one from sony?
post #96 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by 513 View Post

Are you guys crazy or what, it's getting funny how obsessed you are.

Do you realize we are talking about the mechanism of a volume rocker, right ?

Product innovation and design are made up of tiny little details. Apple gets that, which is why it makes such good products - even samsung gets that which is why it copies Apple. You clearly don't get that.
post #97 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by 513 View Post

Ha ha ha ha
But Lenovo tabs also look like the iPad (except the first one), and what about the HP TouchPad ? Put some glasses.
Yeah, sure, they look EXACTLY the same

You're kind of missing the point here.

It's not that this or that particular feature or knob "looks exactly like" the iPad one, it's about how overall, Samsung has generally copied the design. It's not about comparing one particular product to the iPad, it's their whole range.

It's also not about saying Samsung does it and no one else does. Apple is arguing that lots of people are copying, but they are going after Samsung as the most egregious example of this.

If you look at Samsung's entire product line instead of picking and choosing, you can easily see that the earlier products were almost exactly similar. They were the first ones to copy the single home button, the chrome ring trim, the curved back, and the home screen layout and icons.

Sure they've moved away from these designs since they caught wind of the lawsuit, and sure there are other companies and products around today that infringe as much or even more. Apple has to start somewhere though.

They picked their biggest competitor and the one that was (at the time), copying them the most. Where else would they start?
post #98 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Firefly7475 View Post

Wow.

The most interesting part.

"Should Apple lose its patent infringement lawsuit, it agreed to pay Samsung damages, which werent specified."

How do you put a dollar amount on missing out on the critical launch of a brand new market?

Lawyers from both sides could be arguing this bloody case for a decade.

The damage amount appears to have been pre-negotiated. I doubt Samsung could make a realistic projection of more then 25,000 sales in Australia.
post #99 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

Your thinking like a true Asian.

Pay = write good reviews.

Whatever makes you think I'm asian? I'm anglo-italian. I'm not offended mind, asians have made great contributions in many areas of mathematics and physics. But I think you're a little confused.
post #100 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

Your telling me that an over 90% market share of the tablet market isnt "monopolistic"? And the legal tactics currently being used to further those market share numbers isnt "monopolistic" either? I came to the right website.

Why yes. Yes I am. Although there were tablets being sold before, what Apple has created is slightly different and at the beginning was called a "media tablet" by analysts. Since that particular market is less than two years old and Apple was first to market, then of course they would capture that % of the market. What would make it a monopoly would be if they maintained that initial % of market for 5+ years. So in 2016, if Apple still has 90% of the market, feel free to call them a monopoly.

As for legal tactics, monopolies can't even use courts as an advantage because they automatically are at a disadvantage with regards to the law. A regular company has more rights than a company with a monopoly. Look at Microsoft. Had Microsoft gone to court demanding that OEM's not include Netscape in their computers, not only would they have been laughed out of court but also fined.

As someone mentioned before, a monopolistic tactic would be for Apple to refuse to allow devs to make apps for other devices or something similar.
2010 mac mini/iPad OG/iPhone 4/appletv OG/appletv 2/ BT trackpad and keyboard/time capsule/ Wii
Reply
2010 mac mini/iPad OG/iPhone 4/appletv OG/appletv 2/ BT trackpad and keyboard/time capsule/ Wii
Reply
post #101 of 155
Yeah sure, you got it, you are so superior, that's why you are buying Apple products.

I will leave you, dreaming all night about the superior design of a volume rocker.
post #102 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post

Not if it's from a company who blatantly copies Apple's work. Let them produce their own product and I'll be happy to consider them.

Indeed, competition from copycats does not drive innovation, but it does make it harder for innovative new comers to enter the market.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

Your telling me that an over 90% market share of the tablet market isnt "monopolistic"? And the legal tactics currently being used to further those market share numbers isnt "monopolistic" either? I came to the right website.

Success != Monopoly

The real test here would be acting in an anti-competitive way (Like MS not allowing VARs to sell machines with alternate OS). Defending intellectual property is not anti-competitive behavior, no matter how much Google and HTC want to pretend like it is. If they truly believe that, they should both release all of their patents to the public domain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by freckledbruh View Post

...
As for legal tactics, monopolies can't even use courts as an advantage because they automatically are at a disadvantage with regards to the law. A regular company has more rights than a company with a monopoly. Look at Microsoft. Had Microsoft gone to court demanding that OEM's not include Netscape in their computers, not only would they have been laughed out of court but also fined.

As someone mentioned before, a monopolistic tactic would be for Apple to refuse to allow devs to make apps for other devices or something similar.

I think the thing that could cause them problems eventually is pricing requirements on electronic books, it may not since I doubt iBooks will ever have a dominant position in that market. If they were to completely shut out alternative reader software on the iPad however, it would get messy.
post #103 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

asians have made great contributions in many areas of mathematics and physics.

Pshh. All they have "contributed" are copies and more copies.

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply
post #104 of 155
Quote:
I think the thing that could cause them problems eventually is pricing requirements on electronic books, it may not since I doubt iBooks will ever have a dominant position in that market. If they were to completely shut out alternative reader software on the iPad however, it would get messy.

The app store is a private entity like any other brick & mortar shop. Banning or a lack of software in the app store could not fall under any definitions of a monopoly. If Wal-Mart decided it wanted to only sell their own brand of toilet paper and kick out Charmin, it would not make Wal-Mart a monopoly.
2010 mac mini/iPad OG/iPhone 4/appletv OG/appletv 2/ BT trackpad and keyboard/time capsule/ Wii
Reply
2010 mac mini/iPad OG/iPhone 4/appletv OG/appletv 2/ BT trackpad and keyboard/time capsule/ Wii
Reply
post #105 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

You've got one in here: cloudgazer. The ID tells it all.



And why the double standard?

Give it a rest. You've got the relentlessness unto incoherence of either a zealot or an employee. Cloudgazer comes across like a thoughtful human being, and as he says his thoughts not infrequently lead him to disagree with both Apple and the reflexively Apple supporting.

"I know you are but what am I" isn't throwing anyone off the scent.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #106 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Good on yer Ozzies!

As an Aussie I am disgusted by this and I would not be the only one...
post #107 of 155
deleted
post #108 of 155
deleted
post #109 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

That's a pretty harsh indictment against so many of the regulars here: hardly a day goes by without someone accusing someone else of being a paid troll.

lulz

I wish I were paid to post instead of doing actual work. Heck, emoticons would be my tool of choice since it requires less thought.
2010 mac mini/iPad OG/iPhone 4/appletv OG/appletv 2/ BT trackpad and keyboard/time capsule/ Wii
Reply
2010 mac mini/iPad OG/iPhone 4/appletv OG/appletv 2/ BT trackpad and keyboard/time capsule/ Wii
Reply
post #110 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

That's a pretty harsh indictment against so many of the regulars here: hardly a day goes by without someone accusing someone else of being a paid troll.

lulz

True, and I think it's normally not justified, but in Galbi's case I've broken my rule and called it, because it's just hard to believe that anybody could be so devoted to Samsung without a financial angle. I can understand apple fanboys and fandroids. If I close one eye and tilt my head I can almost understand MS fanboys. But sorry, not samsung.

He doesn't even stay to argue his bizarre statements 90% of the time, he just posts some clearly erroneous rubbish and then leaves.
post #111 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by freckledbruh View Post

The app store is a private entity like any other brick & mortar shop. Banning or a lack of software in the app store could not fall under any definitions of a monopoly. If Wal-Mart decided it wanted to only sell their own brand of toilet paper and kick out Charmin, it would not make Wal-Mart a monopoly.

It's a little different since the App store is the only source of Apps for iPads and iPhones, whereas you could go to a different big-box store for your toilet paper. It's more akin to the situation in the game console market where you cannot publish for WIi or PS or XBox without paying the platform owner and potentially gaining approval.

In the event that Apple were found to hold a monopoly on smartphones or tablet computers the App Store approval process would likely come under serious scrutiny, but we're a long old ways from that.
post #112 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

It could look like

or any of the Lenovo offerings



There's a lot of detailed design in how the enclosure looks. The shape of the edges, corners, back etc. How wide are the margins, are they symmetric or asymmetric? What do the connectors look like even. Samsung did their utmost with all of those design decisions to make a device that resembled the iPad-2 as closely as they could - they even went from using a micro USB connector to an iPod-style proprietary connector.

Apple is even accusing them of copying the multi-fulcrum volume rocker which seems completely unnecessary - why couldn't they just have used two buttons or an old style rocker? Obviously because that wouldn't be sufficiently similar to an iPad.




IMO, they all look so similar that the differences are insignificant.
post #113 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

It's a little different since the App store is the only source of Apps for iPads and iPhones, whereas you could go to a different big-box store for your toilet paper. It's more akin to the situation in the game console market where you cannot publish for WIi or PS or XBox without paying the platform owner and potentially gaining approval.

In the event that Apple were found to hold a monopoly on smartphones or tablet computers the App Store approval process would likely come under serious scrutiny, but we're a long old ways from that.

I disagree with your first paragraph because the console example is the same as my Wal-Mart example. Yeah, you can't get the app in the particular store but you can choose another product, another store (cydia since jailbreaking cannot be considered illegal) or open a developer account and create your own.

I agree with your second paragraph in the sense that a dev could accuse Apple of not approving his/her app because Apple knew that they were also planning to develop for a competing platform or that Apple is playing favorites with another developer because that particular developer promised exclusivity. Even if it wasn't true, Apple would have to be much more transparent in their app approval process.
2010 mac mini/iPad OG/iPhone 4/appletv OG/appletv 2/ BT trackpad and keyboard/time capsule/ Wii
Reply
2010 mac mini/iPad OG/iPhone 4/appletv OG/appletv 2/ BT trackpad and keyboard/time capsule/ Wii
Reply
post #114 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

You've got one in here: cloudgazer. The ID tells it all.

Let me spell this out: I d-i-d n-o-t m-e-a-n cloudgazer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

And why the double standard?

What 'double standard'? I said I have no clue about Samsung. I could care less about that company. I was talking about Apple.
post #115 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

..... he just posts some clearly erroneous rubbish and then leaves.

The seagull theory of posting.
post #116 of 155
Apple knows 1) it will win, or 2) it can settle with Samsung.

QUOTE=cloudgazer;1912544]I think that's a pretty clear indication of how sure Apple are that they'll win the suit.[/QUOTE]
post #117 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by sroussey View Post

Oh, Apple steals stuff all the time.

And what do you think they have stolen?
Were there valid patents Involved?
Or do you just mean that somebody tried to make something but it was a flop, and then Apple came along and innovated HW, SW, interface, form factor, function, engineering, (all with patent protection) used innovative pricing, and marketing and kicked the first company's ass? That kind of stealing?
post #118 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

I honestly don't know about Samsung, but anyone who seriously believes that Apple actually pays people to cheer them on in sites like AppleInsider is probably borderline delusional.

I can't see why apple wouldn't use this marketing strategy, given that they have an image which would benefit quite a lot from such marketing. It's one of the best ways to bind costumers to your company.


Quote:
Originally Posted by freckledbruh View Post

As for legal tactics, monopolies can't even use courts as an advantage because they automatically are at a disadvantage with regards to the law. A regular company has more rights than a company with a monopoly. Look at Microsoft. Had Microsoft gone to court demanding that OEM's not include Netscape in their computers, not only would they have been laughed out of court but also fined.

In the end they still found other ways to force netscape out of their computers.


To add to the discussion on monopolies and such:

If the courts believe Apple to be close to reaching a monopoly, the judges - even though apple may be right on their patent cases - may judge in favor (not meaning a "win") of Samsung, to keep the market in place.
post #119 of 155
Quote:
In the end they still found other ways to force netscape out of their computers.

Well that was my whole point. Monopolies don't use courts to snuff out competition so the accusation that this is "monopolistic tactics" is silly and misinformed.
2010 mac mini/iPad OG/iPhone 4/appletv OG/appletv 2/ BT trackpad and keyboard/time capsule/ Wii
Reply
2010 mac mini/iPad OG/iPhone 4/appletv OG/appletv 2/ BT trackpad and keyboard/time capsule/ Wii
Reply
post #120 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stupidhero View Post

If the courts believe Apple to be close to reaching a monopoly, the judges - even though apple may be right on their patent cases - may judge in favor (not meaning a "win") of Samsung, to keep the market in place.

Actually this is not the case, patent law doesn't contain any anti-trust provision. In the event that Apple is ever found to hold a monopoly the judgement might be restricted to damages and royalties, and might require Apple to license patents under 'reasonable' terms. But short of a formal anti-trust action, which requires more than merely possessing a monopoly, Apple wouldn't be denied the right to profit from their IP.

Quote:
I can't see why apple wouldn't use this marketing strategy, given that they have an image which would benefit quite a lot from such marketing. It's one of the best ways to bind costumers to your company.

For all that Apple is amazingly good at marketing, it really isn't big on PR, especially that kind of slippery PR that entails paid shills or illicit wiki edits. Remember this?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology...l-reply-latest
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Australian Apple lawsuit halts sales of Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1