or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Apple wins permanent ban on Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Germany
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple wins permanent ban on Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Germany - Page 5

post #161 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

Why would a picture frame be running windows vista?

Then again, it's a DED photoshop job, so it's possible he just added that.

Lol! Yeah, I don't remember that . . . Menu? Desktop? My client had it hung on a wall running a slideshow of dog pics.

Quote:
I OWN a galaxy tab. (the gray one) there is defiantly a texture on it (it looks a bit like burnished metal) It's not a huge texture, but you can feel it.

OK, maybe is should have said: "A hell of a lot more texturized"
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 #162 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by sciwiz View Post

Apparently the judge issued this ruling based on the drawings in the design patent and not the actual device.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-0...-10-1-ban.html


That's sort of scary actually; I own several SLR's (digital and film), and they almost all fall into the same design characteristics: black, pentaprism or pentamirror, hand grip on the right...only differences are the lens mounts and hardware/firmware. It's a natural design, but everyone uses their lens and features to differentiate themselves.

Same goes for LCD TV's - they all look basically the same, but no one is suing each other. The differences lay in the features and price.
post #163 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by freckledbruh View Post

Lol! Yeah, I don't remember that . . . Menu? Desktop? My client had it hung on a wall running a slideshow of dog pics.

For a 2006 digital picture frame, it was really pretty capable. An 800x400 display, 32MB of internal memory, SD, CF and USB support for memory expansion, and Ethernet for networking. Formats supported include JPEG, MP3, and MPEG-4.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #164 of 246
Quote:
Same goes for LCD TV's - they all look basically the same, but no one is suing each other. The differences lay in the features and price.

I purchased two flat screen TV's last year in a one month period. All of them had some kind of visual/design difference. Speaker positions, placement of ports, logo visibility, etc. I ended up purchasing the same brand for each but in different sizes because I liked it look and the menu UI.
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 #165 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

Personally, I think Apple would be smarter to take a Microsoft approach by forcing a license out of companies like Samsung. Instead, I think it is trying to shut them down. The benefits of the license are 1) money on every device sold, which in turn makes Android less desirable, and 2) it would allow Apple to resolve outstanding patent issues in its favor.

Fortunately you are not running apple! Why in the world would you license someone to copy the best selling, and most profitable, electronic products in the world?
post #166 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by freckledbruh View Post

I purchased two flat screen TV's last year in a one month period. All of them had some kind of visual/design difference. Speaker positions, placement of ports, logo visibility, etc. I ended up purchasing the same brand for each but in different sizes because I liked it look and the menu UI.

Yeah, but if you look at the Apple drawing that the German judge used, it's a very generic tablet design. Almost all LCD's I've seen and used are flat screens surrounded by a black bezel, speakers on the bottom or side, buttons on the top or side. know my Sony Bravia doesn't look like a Panasonic or Samsung TV, but they all basically have a screen surrounded by a black bezel. They vary in the lighting, panel type, thickness, and software.

The Tab has a different texture on the back compared to the iPad, and IIRC, the buttons are in different positions, and Honeycomb looks nothing like iOS, but the German judge didn't even look at either product, they based their ruling on a drawing.
post #167 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by addicted44 View Post

If it was such a generic design, why did it take Samsung many many years, and several other design choices before they developed this? Was it just a coincidence that tablets started looking exactly like the iPad immediately after the iPad was shown to be successful?

Now, I am not entirely sure about the whole "Design Rights" idea, but can they at least try to pretend to not ape Apple?

Blah.... I always thought it was funnier when it was called "chimping".
post #168 of 246
post #169 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

The problem is, however, with a design patent so vague, so minimal...who CAN'T be sued? HTC Flyer? Hell, I'm sure even Sony's wedge tablet can be sued somehow.

You know the article you are posting in response to?

If you bothered to read it and comprehend it, you'd realise your bullish*t won't fly, not even with the judge, making the decision who is quoted in the third paragraph, which I'll post here because you obviously missed it:-

"The court is of the opinion that Apple's minimalistic design isn't the only technical solution to make a tablet computer, other designs are possible," Presiding Judge Johanna Brueckner-Hoffman said in the verdict.

OTHER DESIGNS ARE POSSIBLE
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #170 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

You know the article you are posting in response to?

If you bothered to read it and comprehend it, you'd realise your bullish*t won't fly, not even with the judge, making the decision who is quoted in the third paragraph, which I'll post here because you obviously missed it:-

"The court is of the opinion that Apple's minimalistic design isn't the only technical solution to make a tablet computer, other designs are possible," Presiding Judge Johanna Brueckner-Hoffman said in the verdict.

OTHER DESIGNS ARE POSSIBLE

Guess what Hill60. . .
Apple has received design patents on most other possible slate designs as well. Wedge shape, narrow bezel? Nope, belongs to Apple. Widen the bezel then. Sorry, belongs to Apple. No Bezel? Apple again. Recessed screen? Yup, Apple too. Narrower bezel, more squared off corners? Still Apple. Offset the screen towards the top, bezel at the bottom. Might as well quit trying, that design is claimed by Apple too. I've put all the reference numbers in my last post if anyone doubts this.

This is where the lengths that Apple has gone to assure themselves of no competition becomes obvious to me. None of the other tablet/slate designs are used by Apple. Most were filed back in 2008, around the time the iPad was finalized. To go before that same German judge to get one of the unused designs they laid claim to enforced they don't have to show they ever made a product that resembles it. They only need to submit evidence that the line drawings in the patent resemble a competitors product. .

Hmmm. . .If they never built a device that resembles the line drawings in a design patent, why did Apple claim the design anyway? IMHO, this is the likely answer, at least in part.

Any manufacturer who is considering the build of a slate/tablet computer is going to have to consider the possibility that Apple will drag out one of it's numerous registered designs to claim infringement. Is it really worth investing in the tablet market when the market leader has a demonstrated penchant for lawsuits and pockets so deep that losing won't matter and isn't the point anyway. By the time the suit is over the damage is done and the iPad is the last man standing. Potentially pay out a few million in damages? Big deal with billions to be made selling the iPad with no competition.

Is it worth a company-wide commitment to produce a great quality innovative slate with the fear hanging in the air that the ownership of a simple vague pencil drawing of an un-produced product is proven capable of banning you from the market?

A competing device does not have to resemble the iPad at all. It just needs to resemble some set of line drawings that Apple lays claim to for it to be subject to a sales injunction. No one knows if Apple will go that far. Perhaps they might or perhaps not but they've laid claim to the right, and that's where the anti-competitive danger is.

Apple didn't write the law, but this was never the law's intent either.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #171 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post

Apple only used that community design against Samsung. They don't seem to think it applies for their other lawsuits against Motorola and HTC. There is no reason to believe the Apple want to have a monopoly on rectangular tablets with touch screen.

Except that if this stands, there's absolutely nothing stopping from Apple doing so....just the knowledge that over-reaching could have far ranging political consequences (ie. reform not in their favour).

Keep in mind this also prevents any homegrown manufacturers from making tablets. Indeed, one of the companies appealing along with Samsung is a small German manufacturer.
post #172 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by freckledbruh View Post

I have read some of those threads and while others may grumble, I don't. If there is prior art or the patent is invalidated, great. If not, too bad so sad pay the dude.

Perhaps that's where we differ. I don't like stupid lawsuits. From or against Apple.

Quote:
Originally Posted by freckledbruh View Post

You are taking one component (camera) out of the whole. Samsung didn't just use a lower spec camera to make it thinner. It changed the back significantly to look more like an Apple product.

Even if they did though, these are different product categories. For example, should Apple get sued by Leica for admittedly making the iPhone 4 look like one of their old cameras? (a design which I love by the way) And again, this wasn't even a trade dress lawsuit which could (though it's still a long shot because of different product categories and timelines) make this relevant.

Quote:
Originally Posted by freckledbruh View Post

As for the several posts of "what does this have to do with the case? patenting a rectangle is WRONG!" Several people have already expressed that if Samsung hadn't chosen to blatently mimic Apple's designs, this case most likely would have never happened. Don't like the ruling and the community design in question? Become a German citizen and write your local politician.

I have German relatives who I should prompt to write on my befalf! :-)

In any case, this is a rather unfair line for a discussion forum. The whole point of forums like this is so we can discuss events like this. Are you as dismissive of people everywhere if you just don't agree with them?
post #173 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by jhende7 View Post

Finally, common sense prevails.

The funniest part was all the fandriods saying "well there's only so many ways you can make a tablet, it's just a piece of glass with a bezel"

But the problem with that argument is that if these designs are so obvious, why didn't Samsung do it before Apple?

Everything Apple does seems "obvious" and "generic" to Apple competitors, after Apple releases it and sells millions of units....but if it really was, they would have been the first to market and not the ones trying to play catch up.

The Beatles' music is like this. Hella easy to play and learn but that's not the point. They were the first to make it. Anyone can replicate it but it will always only be a copy. The genius was in its creation not how difficult it was to create. Btw, while most people identify with John, Paul was/is the true genius.
post #174 of 246
Quote:
In any case, this is a rather unfair line for a discussion forum. The whole point of forums like this is so we can discuss events like this. Are you as dismissive of people everywhere if you just don't agree with them?

Of course not, but I expect at the very least SOME variety in argument. When some have given reasons of why this case was brought about, the response has pretty much consistently been, "That neither here nor there. It's wrong! It's a rectangle!". Well, OK, but Apple went about this through legal means so saying it's wrong over and over doesn't matter unless you (general you not you in particular) are going to try and change it or even discuss how you'd change it.

Either way, I'm not feeling sorry for a multi-billion dollar corporation that screwed over one of it's largest vendors just because it hasn't invested in industrial design nor have it's own design language (Samsung is notorious for ripping others' designs and not just Apple's).
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 #175 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Guess what Hill60. . .
Apple has received design patents on most other possible slate designs as well. Wedge shape, narrow bezel? Nope, belongs to Apple. Widen the bezel then. Sorry, belongs to Apple. No Bezel? Apple again. Recessed screen? Yup, Apple too. Narrower bezel, more squared off corners? Still Apple. Offset the screen towards the top, bezel at the bottom. Might as well quit trying, that design is claimed by Apple too. I've put all the reference numbers in my last post if anyone doubts this.

This is where the lengths that Apple has gone to assure themselves of no competition becomes obvious to me. None of the other tablet/slate designs are used by Apple. Most were filed back in 2008, around the time the iPad was finalized. To go before that same German judge to get one of the unused designs they laid claim to enforced they don't have to show they ever made a product that resembles it. They only need to submit evidence that the line drawings in the patent resemble a competitors product. .

Hmmm. . .If they never built a device that resembles the line drawings in a design patent, why did Apple claim the design anyway? IMHO, this is the likely answer, at least in part.

Any manufacturer who is considering the build of a slate/tablet computer is going to have to consider the possibility that Apple will drag out one of it's numerous registered designs to claim infringement. Is it really worth investing in the tablet market when the market leader has a demonstrated penchant for lawsuits and pockets so deep that losing won't matter and isn't the point anyway. By the time the suit is over the damage is done and the iPad is the last man standing. Potentially pay out a few million in damages? Big deal with billions to be made selling the iPad with no competition.

Is it worth a company-wide commitment to produce a great quality innovative slate with the fear hanging in the air that the ownership of a simple vague pencil drawing of an un-produced product is proven capable of banning you from the market?

A competing device does not have to resemble the iPad at all. It just needs to resemble some set of line drawings that Apple lays claim to for it to be subject to a sales injunction. No one knows if Apple will go that far. Perhaps they might or perhaps not but they've laid claim to the right, and that's where the anti-competitive danger is.

Apple didn't write the law, but this was never the law's intent either.

I found a snippet of an interesting article at Ars Technica:

Quote:
Apple would love us to believe it's all "Eureka." But Apple produces 10 pixel-perfect prototypes for each feature. They compete — and are winnowed down to three, then one, resulting in a highly evolved winner. Because Apple knows the more you compete inside, the less you'll have to compete outside.

If Apple makes 10 competing prototypes which compete against each other to be the final released product, I can see why Apple would register each one hence the number of community designs (if what you state is correct). That also doesn't mean that the other 9 prototypes are completely left to die since they can be refined and modified for a different release (think iPod line). I can't fault Apple for actually investing in industrial design but I CAN fault other companies who do not and then cry "Unfair!"
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 #176 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by success View Post

The Beatles' music is like this. Hella easy to play and learn but that's not the point. They were the first to make it. Anyone can replicate it but it will always only be a copy. The genius was in its creation not how difficult it was to create. Btw, while most people identify with John, Paul was/is the true genius.

Name one song Paul wrote post Beatles that is better than Imagine.
post #177 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doctor David View Post

Name one song Paul wrote post Beatles that is better than Imagine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wonderful_Christmastime


Seriously though, I'm astounded that The Beatles '1' album is still #1 on iTS list of albums.

http://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/M...&id=1&popId=11
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #178 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Guess what Hill60. . . /snip

hmmm....

Who to believe?

The words of the judge making a ruling on which this article is based or random Internet guy's rant full of wishful thinking.

OTHER DESIGNS ARE POSSIBLE
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #179 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wonderful_Christmastime


Seriously though, I'm astounded that The Beatles '1' album is still #1 on iTS list of albums.
http://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/M...&id=1&popId=11

You sunk my battleship. Way to go.

Your second link and the sales it reflects all these decades later show what a dynamic duo they were. Maybe better than Batman and Robin. Maybe.
I've always thought George Harrison was the most well rounded Beatle as an individual.
post #180 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

hmmm....

Who to believe?

The words of the judge making a ruling on which this article is based or random Internet guy's rant full of wishful thinking.

OTHER DESIGNS ARE POSSIBLE

It's interesting to me that through most of anthropology — which includes the category within it known as archeology — has determined migrations of humans via their technology. It's the one thing that could easily be dated and followed with fair accuracy, but since DNA has come into the mix we're seeing that populations and technology are not alway in the same migration patterns. We see that as people come across each other the better technology is picked up by new groups of people either through direct teachings or, more likely, copying. Once you know Acheulean (Mode II) is superior tech it would hard to keep producing Oldowan (Mode 1). Unfortunately for Samsung rocks aren't a major resource they can exploit.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #181 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

It's interesting to me that through most of anthropology which includes the category within it known as archeology has determined migrations of humans via their technology. It's the one thing that could easily be dated and followed with fair accuracy, but since DNA has come into the mix we're seeing that populations and technology are not alway in the same migration patterns. We see that as people come across each other the better technology is picked up by new groups of people either through direct teachings or, more likely, copying. Once you know Acheulean (Mode II) is superior tech it would hard to keep producing Oldowan (Mode 1). Unfortunately for Samsung rocks aren't a major resource they can exploit.

hmmm, so in other words advancement in society comes from standing on the shoulders of giants...ad infinitum?
post #182 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

hmmm....

Who to believe?

The words of the judge making a ruling on which this article is based or random Internet guy's rant full of wishful thinking.

OTHER DESIGNS ARE POSSIBLE

and yes other designs are possible, no one is denying that...in fact if you would actually read the most vocal of those who disagree with the ruling you will find that they (me included) feel that Samsung is copying (not as direct as you say with the Tab 10.1) and should be held accountable for it...TouchWiz is blatant...some iterations of the Galaxy S series are direct, blatant and quite frankly poorly done copies of the 3GS (T-mobile's version)

The issue that arises from THIS injunction based on any design patent that broad (and unlike the actual iPad 2) is that it can be used against almost anyone as Apple had patented many drawings that severely limit the way a competitor can design a tablet that doesn't, A) look absolutely shitty, and B) violate some broad patent.

I don't care about this 1 thing against Samsung...fuck Samsung...I care about what this says about the future of tech in general.

I'm a techie...what are you?
post #183 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

The issue that arises from THIS injunction based on any design patent that broad (and unlike the actual iPad 2) is that it can be used against almost anyone as Apple had patented many drawings that severely limit the way a competitor can design a tablet that doesn't, A) look absolutely shitty, and B) violate some broad patent.

As someone has already stated, if Apple goes after innovative and unique designs like the Asus Transformer then your complaint will become valid. Until then it's just anti-Apple rhetoric even if it's thinly veiled to suggest your dislike for Samsung.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #184 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

As someone has already stated, if Apple goes after innovative and unique designs like the Asus Transformer then your complaint will become valid. Until then it's just anti-Apple rhetoric even if it's thinly veiled to suggest your dislike for Samsung.

ummmm....the transformer can be sued too. if the Xoom can the transformer can.
post #185 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

ummmm....the transformer can be sued too. if the Xoom can the transformer can.

Operative word being "can". It hasn't happened yet.
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 #186 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by freckledbruh View Post

Operative word being "can". It hasn't happened yet.

the fact that it can is a pretty damn big deal.
post #187 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

the fact that it can is a pretty damn big deal.

Your argument fails beause anything and anyone "can" be sued. If Apple goes after all devices that are rectangles with rounded corners (like pretty much every smartphone before and after the iPhone) then your argument about this being all about a weak "look and feel" patent then I'll agree it's going way too far, as I'm sure everyone else you think is an "Apple apologist."
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #188 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

hmmm....

Who to believe?

The words of the judge making a ruling on which this article is based or random Internet guy's rant full of wishful thinking.

OTHER DESIGNS ARE POSSIBLE

Wishful thinking? As tho anyone would want this scenario?

Even if the judge was aware that Apple had a dozen other registered design patents for tablets, and there's no reason to think she was, those other designs weren't use in this or any other lawsuit. . . yet.

If you didn't bother to take the time to look at the Design Patents I gave you, fine. That doesn't make them imaginary.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #189 of 246
I am so happy that the courts in Germany did not look at the validity of the flawed and alter evidence Apple provided them. I will have to remember if I am ever in court in Germany to submit accidentally on purpose flawed evidence to help my case.
post #190 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRIS42060 View Post

I am so happy that the courts in Germany did not look at the validity of the flawed and alter evidence Apple provided them. I will have to remember if I am ever in court in Germany to submit accidentally on purpose flawed evidence to help my case.

Hey, troll.

And if you're not, please read about why you're so wrong it hurts laughing just reading what you've said.
post #191 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

that's...a duh moment and doesn't show copying...it shows adapting to the market...nothing wrong with that.





I for one don't think it looks like an iPad 2 beyond the minimalistic design. My beef with Samsung is mainly for TouchWiz's blatant rip of iOS for phones (the tablets are decidedly different)

This injunction is BS IMO because it grants a company a monopoly on this:


This is exactly why the entire system of patents is sad in general. Apple drew a rectangle and patented it. That is innovation right there. Apple would rather sue their competition than make a product to compete with them. It is sad really that the Apple think tanks have dried up and they replaced them with a building of lawyers. I wonder if anyone patented a circle yet? I will try and sue everyone who makes CDs, DVDs, Blu-Ray discs, LPs. I might be on to somthing.

I am sure Asus will be next in Apple's site. They are plannning on adding a Tegra 3 quad-core processor to the Transformer 2. If they couple that with Android ICS and 4G LTE capability I can imagine that will blow the iPad 3 out of the water. Apple will find one of their ridiculously broad patents to sue them under I am sure.

Just imagine if patents were around when fire was "discovered" some patent trolling company like Apple would patent it, and sued anyone else that used fire. Think of the sad state our world would be in if something as simple as fire had a patent. Now that we are able to patent shapes I am sure we will see how sad things will truly get in the future.
post #192 of 246
Quote:
I am sure Asus will be next in Apple's site. They are plannning on adding a Tegra 3 quad-core processor to the Transformer 2. If they couple that with Android ICS and 4G LTE capability I can imagine that will blow the iPad 3 out of the water.

Do you honestly think the normal, work-a-day consumer cares about any of that? I certainly don't.
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 #193 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by freckledbruh View Post

Do you honestly think the normal, work-a-day consumer cares about any of that? I certainly don't.

Just like it was unthinkable the iPad 2 could compete with any Tegra 2-based tablet.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #194 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRIS42060 View Post

If they couple that with Android ICS and 4G LTE capability I can imagine that will blow the iPad 3 out of the water.

Except no one gives a frick. Because people want iPads. For the experience.

The rest of your post is drivel.
post #195 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

ummmm....the transformer can be sued too. if the Xoom can the transformer can.

Apple apparently made 16 claims of infringement against Samsung and these may not apply to other tablet manufacturers. The first tablet to take aim at would be the Advent Vega for design infringement:



However, there's no point in creating a lawsuit if those tablets will fail all by themselves. And they will fail all by themselves.

Samsung got Apple's attention by copying them closely and selling quite well, which implies significant lost sales.

IMO, this case shows that a truly innovative company has been protected from a blatantly plagiarising company and this is what the patent system was designed to do. For once it's actually working. Samsung is free to follow the examples of Blackberry and Asus in creating their own strategies for this market.
post #196 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRIS42060 View Post

This is exactly why the entire system of patents is sad in general. Apple drew a rectangle and patented it. That is innovation right there. Apple would rather sue their competition than make a product to compete with them. It is sad really that the Apple think tanks have dried up and they replaced them with a building of lawyers. I wonder if anyone patented a circle yet? I will try and sue everyone who makes CDs, DVDs, Blu-Ray discs, LPs. I might be on to somthing.

I am sure Asus will be next in Apple's site. They are plannning on adding a Tegra 3 quad-core processor to the Transformer 2. If they couple that with Android ICS and 4G LTE capability I can imagine that will blow the iPad 3 out of the water. Apple will find one of their ridiculously broad patents to sue them under I am sure.

Just imagine if patents were around when fire was "discovered" some patent trolling company like Apple would patent it, and sued anyone else that used fire. Think of the sad state our world would be in if something as simple as fire had a patent. Now that we are able to patent shapes I am sure we will see how sad things will truly get in the future.

well CDs, DVDs, Blu-Ray, etc are all media formats (or whatever, as I think mp3 is a format but not sure what the hardware is called) but I get your point...

ICS + Tegra whatever will NEVER blow an iPad out of the water...ever...the iPad will be the leader in tablets for the foreseeable future. AN Android device will never beat an Apple device as things stand now...

But yea...a rectangle...A rectangle that based on the design could be a design for the few rectangular resistive tablets before the iPad.

Sad really.
post #197 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

Apple apparently made 16 claims of infringement against Samsung and these may not apply to other tablet manufacturers. The first tablet to take aim at would be the Advent Vega for design infringement:



However, there's no point in creating a lawsuit if those tablets will fail all by themselves. And they will fail all by themselves.

Samsung got Apple's attention by copying them closely and selling quite well, which implies significant lost sales.

IMO, this case shows that a truly innovative company has been protected from a blatantly plagiarising company and this is what the patent system was designed to do. For once it's actually working. Samsung is free to follow the examples of Blackberry and Asus in creating their own strategies for this market.

yea okay.

Galaxy S phones...blatant...Galaxy Tabs? I mean we KNOW they are rips, but they aren't blatant like some (most?) variations of the Galaxy S
post #198 of 246
question...

does this:



look like an iPad?
post #199 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Wishful thinking? As tho anyone would want this scenario?

Even if the judge was aware that Apple had a dozen other registered design patents for tablets, and there's no reason to think she was, those other designs weren't use in this or any other lawsuit. . . yet.

If you didn't bother to take the time to look at the Design Patents I gave you, fine. That doesn't make them imaginary.

hey, where do I look up the patent numbers?
post #200 of 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

question...

does this:



look like an iPad?

That's the point I tried to drive home earlier. The Tab didn't get a marketplace ban because it was too similar to the iPad. The problem was it was too close to the drawings claimed in the referenced Design Patent. Apple's claim that it's iPad was similar to the drawings had nothing to do with the judge's decision. The infringement was based only on the drawings.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Apple wins permanent ban on Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Germany