I cannot really acknowledge this as any kind of valid test. Of course we do not know the actual details, so any discussion questioning the validity of the test can be met with a different set of assumptions that changes the direction of discussion.
Still, from head on, as someone mentioned before, the aspect ratios are different. Add that all you have to do is look to see which one has a home button and which one does not. Of course lighting and other conditions can make the home button more or less difficult to see from ten feet away. But even that is not the crux of the issue with the judge using this as a definitive test.
I do not think that most common consumers can tell the difference between the tablets on the market. For that matter, consumers who have not done a lot of research, and are not steeped in a given industry cannot tell the difference between specialty products in general. If I had a Dodge Challenger and a Dodge Charger out in my front yard and brought my wife outside, put her at an angle where she could not read any brand badges or names, and asked her to tell me which was which, she could not do it. If I ran that test using a Dodge Challenger and a Chevy Camaro, same result. Or what if I had a Suzuki GSX-R1000 and a Yamaha R1 in my yard and asked passersby to tell me the difference, with no badging visible. A Droid Bionic and a Nokia N900? Two HDTVs from different manufacturer's? A Blackberry Playbook and the Dell Streak 7? No, consumers could not tell the difference between those two 7" tablets from 5 feet away. Mainly because, if they have looked at any tablet for any length of time, they have likely only looked at an iPad. As a matter of test validity, what makes ten feet the magical distance anyway? Is that how far away consumers stand when they are in a store trying to decide which tablet to buy? No. Is that the average distance that a user stands away when using a tablet? No.
Most consumers cannot tell the difference between most mobile tech devices from 5 feet away unless they can see the brand name or unless the device is one that they have owned before, or currently own. Again, unless it is a product category they have heavily researched, or unless they are part of the tech-geek community, which, of course, at that point, means that they are not the average consumer.
I field too many questions a day, both online and off, from the layman to believe that average consumer America, understands how to visually differentiate between one tablet and another from ten feet away. Sure, it can be argued that the lawyers should have been studied enough to be able to do so, but I do not think it is reasonable to demand that the average consumer should be able to do so from ten feet away. The earlier poster who feels that you should be able to differentiate the devices without being intricately familiar with the details I feel is being unreasonable, for a class of devices that is designed around having, for the most part, little to no fixtures on the chassis. let's even say that the devices were on, and there was a widget on the Galaxy Tab's screen. I would not expect the average consumer walking into a store to understand that that device was not an iPad from ten feet away without walking up to it and reading the details, unless it had Samsung branding emblazoned all around it, which of course, most tablet kiosks do. It sort of begs the question: if someone, if some company, Apple and others included, expect their devices to be recognizable within the constraints of this judge's test, why do there need to be six foot banners above every kiosk or section of an electronics store where these devices are on display? I think it is because it is recognized and understood that without being beat over the head with the brand name, most average consumers do not know the difference between these devices from a visual inspection only, even from less than 10 feet away.
The whole validity of this test, and the defense of it ass some kind of smoking gun that proves that the designs are too close, is questionable. In my own opinion, it is completely useless, because I would not expect most people, who do not frequent sites like this or other tech sites on a daily basis, to be able to pass this test. Again, this is just my opinion; I understand that there are a lot of others who feel differently and I respect those opinions. I own an iPad, and an iPhone, and have owned a MacBook and MacBook Pro. I believe in the value of Apple products and see them as useful, and believe in the advantages that my iPad has over other devices I have used and owned. But I do not believe this test exercises anything resembling a real-world consumer scenario
- Vr/JLM Jr.