or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Samsung stalls, accuses Apple of doctoring evidence in US iPhone, iPad copying case
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Samsung stalls, accuses Apple of doctoring evidence in US iPhone, iPad copying case - Page 4

post #121 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

So if I was walking down the street and randomly punched you in the face, you would be the aggressor because the reason I did it was because I "knew" you were going to attack me?

Time to drop your flawed line.

umm...no. It's not my flawed line. It's FOSSPatents.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #122 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr View Post

I could say more about your argument regarding battery life, but I realize that if you are willing to pull the image stunt above, then I am wasting my time. You are a fraud to me.

No you can't say more if you come down to this personal attack. The 4G option which can be always turned off (or dynamically managed) is better then no 4G option - You can't argue with that. "You are being disingenuous in this debate. You are a fraud to me."


Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr View Post

You also mention that the "grid layout" of icons has been used before, but nothing about the number of rows/columns.

So you are saying Apple has exclusive right for the number of rows/columns.
"I am wasting my time. You are a fraud to me."

Mac IIcx, Mac Quadra 800, Mac Performa 5200, Power Mac 8600, LaserWriter, iPhone 3G, iPad 3G, iPhone 4S | MacBook Pro, 27" iMac, iPad 3 LTE

Reply

Mac IIcx, Mac Quadra 800, Mac Performa 5200, Power Mac 8600, LaserWriter, iPhone 3G, iPad 3G, iPhone 4S | MacBook Pro, 27" iMac, iPad 3 LTE

Reply
post #123 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

umm...no. It's not my flawed line. It's FOSSPatents.

...that you chose to post here, forming part of YOUR contention, that by defending themselves with countersuits against Motorola that Apple is the aggressor.

Motorola has more pressing concerns some of Microsoft's suits against them start this week.

Google's attempt to muzzle one of Microsoft's key witnesses on the basis he might reveal "highly proprietary" parts of Android's code that is "not even shared with OEM's" has been thrown out.
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #124 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

No, it's cool, I get it. Desperately insecure about your choices, so much so that you have to actively seek out those that might chose differently so you can dance and yell.

But it's OK. Soon, your testicles will drop, and you'll get a place of your own, and you'll feel good enough about yourself to just do what you want without having to make sure everyone is watching.

Yeah, I'm ignoring that one. Repeats the same old fandroid trolling points. I'm starting to think some of these trolls are dumb enough to actually believe what they say.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #125 of 142
deleted
post #126 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

...that you chose to post here, forming part of YOUR contention, that by defending themselves with countersuits against Motorola that Apple is the aggressor.

Motorola has more pressing concerns some of Microsoft's suits against them start this week.

Google's attempt to muzzle one of Microsoft's key witnesses on the basis he might reveal "highly proprietary" parts of Android's code that is "not even shared with OEM's" has been thrown out.

Ah, I see you do read and trust some of the FOSSPatents blog.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #127 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

It seems like more and more Apple is a design company and Samsung is a technology company.

Apple barks about the design aspect of things, where as Samsung barks about the technology aspect of things.

Apple is run by idealist designers, Samsung is run by precise engineers.

You mean copy paste engineers . Seems that Samsung didnt have enough business people on board who know what copying a trade-dress means. Now thats a whole other thing than patents....

I wish people would understand that this whole thing between android and ios devices is not just black and white. One manufacurer is violating trade-dress and patents, another is just violating patents.

Samsung for one had produced devices that clearly can be seen astetically violating the trade dress of apple devices.
Then on top of that they have copied the scrolling etc pretty closely and that one apple is targeting via patent dispute.

HTC has not copied apples trade dress like Samsung has. but consider this: other slates look exactly like the ipad BECAUSE Samsung bended the line for trade-dress violation for so long, before apple sued. Its kind of a boldness syndrome there if somebody does something balsy then im also doing it, hes still al right, nothing happened.
post #128 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

I see three:

I gave you the reference for a picture posted by Mercury earlier in the thread, and it showed only one button. You supplied your own picture, which has three. Fine. There are a lot of different Samsung phones, with a varying number of buttons and other relevant features. Let's not quibble over each, or we will get nowhere. The bottom line is that Samsung has released a number of phones that have a curiously LARGE number of correspondences to Apple's iPhone, in both hardware and software design. Just two examples from your picture: look at the four permanent icons in the "dock" at the bottom (just like Apple) and note the striking similarity between Samsung's phone app icon and Apple's. Hence the trade dress (i.e. not patent) suit. Mercury keeps changing his story (will he, or will he not, be getting the Samsung Galaxy S II?) and his images (does the Samsung unit he wants to reference for the sake of the discussion have one button or four?).

Mercury also shows a willingness to change MY words as well. For example, in his previous response to me, he lifted out of context just the first part of a sentence in which I described a list of observations. These observations, taken in total, show that it is highly unlikely that Samsung did not blatantly copy the iPhone user interface. Lifting a partial quote is OK, provided you make clear that there was something left out (using ellipses, for instance). And you are never allowed to change anything, including punctuation. But when Mercury lifted my partial sentence, he not only failed to convey that this was just a sentence fragment, he also changed the comma into a period to imply that this was the end of my sentence (and my argument). Then he blasted me for a weak argument and included one of those ridiculous laughing heads. Note that he was laughing at a strawman argument of his own creation. I laugh at it too. But that was not MY argument. As I said above, my argument is based on the list of observations in total. Truncating my list and focusing on only one (or even two) items makes a different argument.

As I said in an earlier post, Mercury has been revealed a fraud. If the images didn't prove it earlier, then this blatant editing of my quote to alter my message clinches it.

Thompson
post #129 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr View Post

I gave you the reference for a picture posted by Mercury earlier in the thread, and it showed only one button. You supplied your own picture, which has three. Fine. There are a lot of different Samsung phones, with a varying number of buttons and other relevant features. Let's not quibble over each, or we will get nowhere. The bottom line is that Samsung has released a number of phones that have a curiously LARGE number of correspondences to Apple's iPhone, in both hardware and software design. Just two examples from your picture: look at the four permanent icons in the "dock" at the bottom (just like Apple) and note the striking similarity between Samsung's phone app icon and Apple's. Hence the trade dress (i.e. not patent) suit. Mercury keeps changing his story (will he, or will he not, be getting the Samsung Galaxy S II?) and his images (does the Samsung unit he wants to reference for the sake of the discussion have one button or four?).

Mercury also shows a willingness to change MY words as well. For example, in his previous response to me, he lifted out of context just the first part of a sentence in which I described a list of observations. These observations, taken in total, show that it is highly unlikely that Samsung did not blatantly copy the iPhone user interface. Lifting a partial quote is OK, provided you make clear that there was something left out (using ellipses, for instance). And you are never allowed to change anything, including punctuation. But when Mercury lifted my partial sentence, he not only failed to convey that this was just a sentence fragment, he also changed the comma into a period to imply that this was the end of my sentence (and my argument). Then he blasted me for a weak argument and included one of those ridiculous laughing heads. Note that he was laughing at a strawman argument of his own creation. I laugh at it too. But that was not MY argument. As I said above, my argument is based on the list of observations in total. Truncating my list and focusing on only one (or even two) items makes a different argument.

As I said in an earlier post, Mercury has been revealed a fraud. If the images didn't prove it earlier, then this blatant editing of my quote to alter my message clinches it.

Thompson

I am sure that Apple knowingly included this side by side photo to show that S2 is copy of Iphone. If they brought default home screens with real size comparison, there would not have been an issue. The reason why they did this? Maybe that they knew they did not have a case, otherwise.

You argued about 4 permenant icons in the photo. But what are those striking similiarities? I see that there are 4 and they are icons but thats it, they are different. Are you saying that the telephone symbol is owned by Apple?

Galaxy Tab 10.1 image manipulation by Apple in German case is more serious. Images has been altered just to look like Ipad. If Apple brought those with default home screen with real size comaparison, there might have not been an issue in court proceeding.

Look at the following link and tell me what do you think.

http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/09/s...-movies-music/

I think Apple copied Samsung not the other way around.
post #130 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb View Post

I am sure that Apple knowingly included this side by side photo to show that S2 is copy of Iphone.

Which side by side photo? The one at the top of the article we're responding to? Like this one...

http://photos.appleinsider.com/samsu...ple.081911.jpg


Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb View Post

If they brought default home screens with real size comparison, there would not have been an issue. The reason why they did this? Maybe that they knew they did not have a case, otherwise.

Look at that photo again, especially the comparisons with iPhone and iPad today. You insist there would be no issue?

Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb View Post

You argued about 4 permenant icons in the photo. But what are those striking similiarities?

(1) That there is a grid of icons like Apple's. (No big deal if that were the only similarity.)
(2) That there are little dot indicators of which "page" of icons you are on, like Apple's. (Bully for Samsung: they moved it from bottom to top.)
(3) That there even IS a dock of 4 semi-permanent icons (i.e. that don't change when the page is changed).
(4) That it sits right there below the grid upon a grayish band, and...

Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb View Post

I see that there are 4 and they are icons but thats it, they are different. Are you saying that the telephone symbol is owned by Apple?

(5) no, I'm saying that I find it peculiar that Samsung chose to put a white phone handset on a green background tilted at almost the same angle as Apple's. Look at that photo again. WTF?


Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb View Post

Galaxy Tab 10.1 image manipulation by Apple in German case is more serious. Images has been altered just to look like Ipad. If Apple brought those with default home screen with real size comaparison, there might have not been an issue in court proceeding.

Whatever, dude. I'm sure that the courts have fully functional units right in their hands to deliberate over. This crap about image manipulation is not going to matter at the end of the day one way or the other.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb View Post

Look at the following link and tell me what do you think.

http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/09/s...-movies-music/

I think Apple copied Samsung not the other way around.

Your point being that it came out in 2006? So I must ask, when you turn this thing on, does it look like an iPhone? If so, then you made your point.

Apple began work on the design of iPad (and then iPhone) well before 2006. And besides, this is about a lot more than the shape of the black rectangle. Please see the other elements I listed for you above.


Thompson
post #131 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr View Post

Which side by side photo? The one at the top of the article we're responding to? Like this one...

http://photos.appleinsider.com/samsu...ple.081911.jpg




Look at that photo again, especially the comparisons with iPhone and iPad today. You insist there would be no issue?



(1) That there is a grid of icons like Apple's. (No big deal if that were the only similarity.)
(2) That there are little dot indicators of which "page" of icons you are on, like Apple's. (Bully for Samsung: they moved it from bottom to top.)
(3) That there even IS a dock of 4 semi-permanent icons (i.e. that don't change when the page is changed).
(4) That it sits right there below the grid upon a grayish band, and...



(5) no, I'm saying that I find it peculiar that Samsung chose to put a white phone handset on a green background tilted at almost the same angle as Apple's. Look at that photo again. WTF?




Whatever, dude. I'm sure that the courts have fully functional units right in their hands to deliberate over. This crap about image manipulation is not going to matter at the end of the day one way or the other.



Your point being that it came out in 2006? So I must ask, when you turn this thing on, does it look like an iPhone? If so, then you made your point.

Apple began work on the design of iPad (and then iPhone) well before 2006. And besides, this is about a lot more than the shape of the black rectangle. Please see the other elements I listed for you above.


Thompson

No I mean I was talking about the images submited in the recent two courts in EU. I was saying manipulating images by Apple in courts were wrong.

I still fail to find striking similarities you are talking about. Compare those two for the default home screens, not the S2 images Apple presented. They are different although I understand that there are tiny similarities.

I own a Ipad 2. Before I bought it I compared with Galaxy Tab 10.1. Look! they are really different.

The image manipulations in the court cases prove that Apple does not have a strong case, IMO.
post #132 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb View Post

No I mean I was talking about the images submited in the recent two courts in EU. I was saying manipulating images by Apple in courts were wrong.

All images supplied by Apple aside, the courts have access to the actual devices, and the images supplied here on this thread are convincing enough.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb View Post

I still fail to find striking similarities you are talking about.

If you are talking about the images I supplied above, then you must be blind. If you are talking about the "home screens" then...

Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb View Post

Compare those two for the default home screens...

WHY?!?!?

It doesn't matter whether this is Samsung's "home screen", "work screen", "left screen", or "right screen". There is no denying that numerous design elements were copied from Apple's homescreen to be utilized somewhere in Samsung's interface, right down to the color and content of some of the icons, which is outrageous. This is completely bogus.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb View Post

The image manipulations in the court cases prove that Apple does not have a strong case, IMO.

Horse manure. The images we all see here (no manipulation) and the devices in the hands of the courts, show anyone who is not blind that Samsung copied as many elements from the iPhone that they thought they might get away with. And they still might.

Thompson
post #133 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

I see three

There is one, what you see on either side of the single button is a flat panel with touch controls which only light up when the screen is active.
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #134 of 142
deleted
post #135 of 142
Horse manure. The images we all see here (no manipulation) and the devices in the hands of the courts, show anyone who is not blind that Samsung copied as many elements from the iPhone that they thought they might get away with. And they still might.

Thompson[/QUOTE]

What were Apple products like before IPad and IPhone? Do you think Apple did not copy (by your meaning of copy) from other innovating companies like Samsung? I think that Apple copied the Samsung digital photo frame in IPad.

The fact is that Apple manipulated images in current two court cases, which proves Apple sees they do not have a case. Why would you?
post #136 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb View Post

Horse manure. The images we all see here (no manipulation) and the devices in the hands of the courts, show anyone who is not blind that Samsung copied as many elements from the iPhone that they thought they might get away with. And they still might.

Thompson

What were Apple products like before IPad and IPhone? Do you think Apple did not copy (by your meaning of copy) from other innovating companies like Samsung? I think that Apple copied the Samsung digital photo frame in IPad.

The fact is that Apple manipulated images in current two court cases, which proves Apple sees they do not have a case. Why would you?[/QUOTE]
post #137 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb View Post

the above quoting mishaps

You can just edit posts in the future.

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #138 of 142
Just a personal observation.

Rather than Apple's attack sending Samsung scurrying for the nearest corner, it's instead seemed to re-energize them. They don't appear at all cowered by Apple. To the contrary they've instead "out-Appled" Apple in some of the new devices. Notebooks thinner than Apple can offer, with better hardware specs. A slate with more features, higher-end hardware, a comparable price and even thinner than Apple's iPad2. Smartphones? They've again exceeded expectations with the Galaxy II's. Much thinner than the iPhone4, better hardware. . . well you see the pattern. And now Sammy's rumored to be taking HP's laptop business into the fold, giving them a big market bump.

I'm reasonably certain that this isn't the response that Apple expected when they started the skirmish with Samsung.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #139 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb View Post

What were Apple products like before IPad and IPhone? Do you think Apple did not copy (by your meaning of copy) from other innovating companies like Samsung? I think that Apple copied the Samsung digital photo frame in IPad.

The fact is that Apple manipulated images in current two court cases, which proves Apple sees they do not have a case. Why would you?

If you turn on these three things:

(1) Samsung's Digital Photo Frame,
(2) Samsung's Galaxy Tab,
(3) Apple's iPad,

I think you should be able to see how much #2 copies #3, and that #1 doesn't do much but hang on a wall and change images periodically.

You are a moron.

Thompson
post #140 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Just a personal observation...

Your observation makes the same mistake others make: checking off "feature lists" as pure numbers, and not considering utility, etc. Samsung's tech is nowhere near as useful as Apple's, although they certainly work their butts off to make it look nearly the same. To have your battery life work out on their 4G gear, you have to be not using 4G a significant amount of the time, which pretty much defeats the purpose for getting that particular gear, wouldn't you say?


Thompson
post #141 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr View Post

To have your battery life work out on their 4G gear, you have to be not using 4G a significant amount of the time, which pretty much defeats the purpose for getting that particular gear, wouldn't you say?

You will change your opinion quickly when Apple releases 4G iPhone. You will buy iPhone 4G and you will be "disingenuous" once again.

Mac IIcx, Mac Quadra 800, Mac Performa 5200, Power Mac 8600, LaserWriter, iPhone 3G, iPad 3G, iPhone 4S | MacBook Pro, 27" iMac, iPad 3 LTE

Reply

Mac IIcx, Mac Quadra 800, Mac Performa 5200, Power Mac 8600, LaserWriter, iPhone 3G, iPad 3G, iPhone 4S | MacBook Pro, 27" iMac, iPad 3 LTE

Reply
post #142 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr View Post

(1) That there is a grid of icons like Apple's. (No big deal if that were the only similarity.)
(2) That there are little dot indicators of which "page" of icons you are on, like Apple's. (Bully for Samsung: they moved it from bottom to top.)
(3) That there even IS a dock of 4 semi-permanent icons (i.e. that don't change when the page is changed).
(4) That it sits right there below the grid upon a grayish band, and...
(5) no, I'm saying that I find it peculiar that Samsung chose to put a white phone handset on a green background tilted at almost the same angle as Apple's. Look at that photo again. WTF?

Whatever, dude. I'm sure that the courts have fully functional units right in their hands to deliberate over.

Geez, still comparing grids.

Speaking of courts, we all know now that (quote from the article below) "All the design-related stuff has been thrown out by the judge, meaning he does not agree with Apple that Samsung copied Apple". Case closed. You are WRONG.

http://www.osnews.com/story/25098/Ap...gainst_Samsung

Mac IIcx, Mac Quadra 800, Mac Performa 5200, Power Mac 8600, LaserWriter, iPhone 3G, iPad 3G, iPhone 4S | MacBook Pro, 27" iMac, iPad 3 LTE

Reply

Mac IIcx, Mac Quadra 800, Mac Performa 5200, Power Mac 8600, LaserWriter, iPhone 3G, iPad 3G, iPhone 4S | MacBook Pro, 27" iMac, iPad 3 LTE

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
  • Samsung stalls, accuses Apple of doctoring evidence in US iPhone, iPad copying case
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Samsung stalls, accuses Apple of doctoring evidence in US iPhone, iPad copying case