AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Samsung sues Apple over 4 new patents, but backs off iPhone 4S complaint
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Samsung sues Apple over 4 new patents, but backs off iPhone 4S complaint - Page 2

post #41 of 76
12/16/11 at 6:48pm
I thnk the smiley patent is for converting the into an actual smiley pic. Also come on apple has very generic patents also like a rectangle phone with one button on the face.
Reply
Reply
post #42 of 76
12/16/11 at 8:39pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by majortom1981 View Post

I thnk the smiley patent is for converting the into an actual smiley pic. Also come on apple has very generic patents also like a rectangle phone with one button on the face.

So how come Apple took FORTY PAGES to describe a "black rectangle" in the German court case that got the Galaxy Tab banned on SIX points where it had infringed the patent.

"Apple patented a black rectangle" is pure bulls@$t and anyone with half a brain knows that.

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply
post #43 of 76
12/16/11 at 9:59pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

So how come Apple took FORTY PAGES to describe a "black rectangle" in the German court case that got the Galaxy Tab banned on SIX points where it had infringed the patent.

"Apple patented a black rectangle" is pure bulls@$t and anyone with half a brain knows that.

The more detailed six point list is just describing a rounded rectangle. Still ridiculous IMO.
Reply
Reply
post #44 of 76
12/17/11 at 6:44am
Quote:
Originally Posted by majortom1981 View Post

I thnk the smiley patent is for converting the into an actual smiley pic. Also come on apple has very generic patents also like a rectangle phone with one button on the face.

When I send a text from my iPhone to my wife's iPhone, ': )' doesn't automatically become a . The same for emails from iPhone to iPhone.

What Apple device does this so that it's infringing upon Samsung's patent?
Reply
Reply
post #45 of 76
12/17/11 at 8:31am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


Methinks that photo has been 'shopped. Tim's natural smile is either perfectly horizontal or upside down.
Reply
Reply
post #46 of 76
12/17/11 at 8:50am
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

Methinks that photo has been 'shopped. Tim's natural smile is either perfectly horizontal or upside down.



Tallest Skil & Relic
"…AI is a private forum…" "Well, in that case, it's naked time…"
Reply
Tallest Skil & Relic
"…AI is a private forum…" "Well, in that case, it's naked time…"
Reply
post #47 of 76
12/17/11 at 11:29am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post

Apple's lawyer should reply to the fourth charge regarding the emoticon suit with ":-(" and "III" (read between the lines)...
/
/
/

Hmmm.... Somehow, iIi see more appropriate.
Reply
Reply
post #48 of 76
12/17/11 at 1:16pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by F1Ferrari View Post

When I send a text from my iPhone to my wife's iPhone, ': )' doesn't automatically become a . The same for emails from iPhone to iPhone.

What Apple device does this so that it's infringing upon Samsung's patent?

It doesn't do it on an iPad either.

This should be interesting, it takes a few seconds to show that iOS devices don't use this method.

They do use emoji which is part of the Japanese keyboard but that seems to use a different method.

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply
post #49 of 76
12/17/11 at 8:21pm
Does Samsung have any patent at all? We all know Apple invented everything in the mobile phone market. All the others are mere copycats with not enough brains to create anything.
Reply
Reply
post #50 of 76
12/17/11 at 8:26pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blitz1 View Post

Does Samsung have any patent at all? We all know Apple invented everything in the mobile phone market. All the others are mere copycats with not enough brains to create anything.

I hope your not serious.

Quote:

Top 10 U.S. Patent Winners of 2010:

1) IBM 5,896
2) Samsung 4,551
3) Microsoft 3,094
4) Canon 2,552
5) Panasonic 2,482
6) Toshiba Corp. 2,246
7) Sony Corp. 2,150
8) Intel Corp. 1,653
9) LG Electronics Inc. 1,490
10) Hewlett-Packard Co. 1,480

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-0...s-in-2010.html

Do I see Apple on that list? Nope.

That is to all those on here who say "Samsung dont innovate" there is your proof that they do.


In fact, Samsung has been on the top 10 list for the past 13 years (except for 2002)


Quote:
2010

5866 patents to IBM, headquartered in Armonk, New York
4518 patents to Samsung Electronics Co., headquartered in Daegu, Korea
3086 patents to Microsoft Corporation, headquartered in Redmond,_Washington,
2551 patents to Canon Kabushiki Kaisha, headquartered in Tokyo, Japan
2443 patents to Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd., headquartered in Kadoma, Osaka, Japan
2212 patents to Toshiba Corporation, headquartered in Tokyo, Japan
2130 patents to Sony Corporation, headquartered in Tokyo, Japan
1652 patents to Intel Corporation, headquartered in Santa Clara, California
1488 patents to LG ELECTRONICS INC., headquartered in Seoul, Korea
1480 patents to Hewlett-Packard, headquartered in Palo Alto, California

2009

4887 patents to IBM, headquartered in Armonk, New York
3592 patents to Samsung Electronics Co., headquartered in Daegu, Korea
2901 patents to Microsoft Corporation, headquartered in Redmond,_Washington,
2200 patents to Canon Kabushiki Kaisha, headquartered in Tokyo, Japan
1759 patents to Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd., headquartered in Kadoma, Osaka, Japan
1669 patents to Toshiba Corporation, headquartered in Tokyo, Japan
1656 patents to Sony Corporation, headquartered in Tokyo, Japan
1534 patents to Intel Corporation, headquartered in Santa Clara, California
1328 patents to SEIKO EPSON CORPORATION
1269 patents to Hewlett-Packard, headquartered in Palo Alto, California

2008

4169 patents to IBM, headquartered in Armonk, New York
3502 patents to Samsung Electronics Co., headquartered in Daegu, Korea
2107 patents to Canon Kabushiki Kaisha, headquartered in Tokyo, Japan
2026 patents to Microsoft Corporation
1772 patents to Intel Corporation, headquartered in Santa Clara, California
1575 patents to Toshiba Corporation, headquartered in Tokyo
1475 patents to Fujitsu Limited, headquartered in Tokyo
1469 patents to Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd., headquartered in Kadoma, Osaka, Japan
1461 patents to Sony Corporation
1422 patents to Hewlett-Packard, headquartered in Palo Alto, California

2007

3125 patents to IBM, headquartered in Armonk, New York, USA
2723 patents to Samsung Electronics Co., headquartered in Daegu, Korea
1983 patents to Canon Kabushiki Kaisha, headquartered in Tokyo, Japan
1910 patents to Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd., headquartered in Kadoma, Osaka, Japan
1864 patents to Intel Corporation, headquartered in Santa Clara, California
1637 patents to Microsoft Corporation
1519 patents to Toshiba Corporation, headquartered in Tokyo
1476 patents to Micron Technology, headquartered in Boise, Idaho
1466 patents to Hewlett-Packard, headquartered in Palo Alto, California
1455 patents to Sony Corporation

2006

3621 patents to IBM, headquartered in Armonk, New York
2451 patents to Samsung Electronics Co., headquartered in Daegu, Korea
2366 patents to Canon Kabushiki Kaisha, headquartered in Tokyo, Japan
2229 patents to Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd., headquartered in Kadoma, Osaka, Japan
2099 patents to Hewlett-Packard, headquartered in Palo Alto, California
1959 patents to Intel Corporation, headquartered in Santa Clara, California
1771 patents to Sony Corporation
1732 patents to Hitachi, Ltd., headquartered in Tokyo
1672 patents to Toshiba Corporation, headquartered in Tokyo
1610 patents to Micron Technology, headquartered in Boise, Idaho, USA

2005

2941 patents to IBM, headquartered in Armonk, New York, USA
1828 patents to Canon Kabushiki Kaisha, headquartered in Tokyo, Japan
1797 patents to Hewlett-Packard, headquartered in Palo Alto, California, USA
1688 patents to Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd., headquartered in Kadoma, Osaka, Japan
1641 patents to Samsung Electronics Co., headquartered in Daegu, Korea
1561 patents to Micron Technology, headquartered in Boise, Idaho
1549 patents to Intel Corporation, headquartered in Santa Clara, California
1271 patents to Hitachi, Ltd., headquartered in Tokyo
1258 patents to Toshiba Corporation, headquartered in Tokyo
1154 patents to Fujitsu Limited, headquartered in Tokyo

2004

3248 patents to IBM
1934 patents to Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd.
1805 patents to Canon Kabushiki Kaisha
1775 patents to Hewlett-Packard
1760 patents to Micron Technology
1604 patents to Samsung Electronics Co.
1601 patents to Intel Corporation
1514 patents to Hitachi, Ltd.
1310 patents to Toshiba Corporation
1305 patents to Sony Corporation

2003

3415 patents to IBM
1992 patents to Canon Kabushiki Kaisha
1893 patents to Hitachi, Ltd.
1786 patents to Matsushita Electric Industrial Co.
1759 patents to Hewlett-Packard
1707 patents to Micron Technology
1592 patents to Intel Corporation
1353 patents to Royal Philips Electronics
1313 patents to Samsung Electronics Co.
1311 patents to Sony Corporation

2002

IBM
Canon Kabushiki Kaisha
Micron Technology
NEC Corporation
Hitachi, Ltd.
Matsushita Electric Industrial Co.
Sony Corporation
General Electric Company
Hewlett-Packard
Mitsubishi Denki K.K.

2001

IBM
NEC Corporation
Canon Kabushiki Kaisha
Micron Technology
Samsung Electronics
Matsushita Electric Industrial Co.
Sony Corporation
Hitachi, Ltd.
Mitsubishi Denki K.K
Fujitsu, headquartered in Tokyo

2000

IBM
NEC Corporation
Canon Kabushiki Kaisha
Samsung Electronics
Lucent Technologies
Sony Corporation
Micron Technology
Toshiba
Motorola
Fujitsu

1999

IBM
NEC Corporation
Canon Kabushiki Kaisha
Samsung Electronics
Sony Corporation
Toshiba
Fujitsu
Motorola
Lucent Technologies
Mitsubishi Denki K.K.

1998

IBM
Canon Kabushiki Kaisha
NEC Corporation
Motorola
Sony Corporation
Samsung Electronics
Fujitsu
Toshiba
Eastman Kodak Co.
Hitachi, Ltd.


I dont see Apple on ANY of that list.

"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 #51 of 76
12/17/11 at 8:41pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

I hope your not serious.



http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-0...s-in-2010.html

Do I see Apple on that list? Nope.

That is to all those on here who say "Samsung dont innovate" there is your proof that they do.


In fact, Samsung has been on the top 10 list for the past 13 years (except for 2002)




I dont see Apple on ANY of that list.

How many of these are for rounded rectangles?
Reply
Reply
post #52 of 76
12/17/11 at 10:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blitz1 View Post

Does Samsung have any patent at all? We all know Apple invented everything in the mobile phone market. All the others are mere copycats with not enough brains to create anything.

Samsung? Who is that again?

Reply
Reply
post #53 of 76
12/17/11 at 11:05pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

I hope your not serious.



http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-0...s-in-2010.html

Do I see Apple on that list? Nope.

That is to all those on here who say "Samsung dont innovate" there is your proof that they do.


In fact, Samsung has been on the top 10 list for the past 13 years (except for 2002)




I dont see Apple on ANY of that list.

Frankly, I don't care.
It's not about the quantity, it's the quality and the pertinence that matters.
Who cares about IP, CDMA, GPRS, LTE, ... when we all know that it's the curve in the rounded corner that really matters, or the fact that the display is actually centered on the iPad. These are the stuff that people care about, not the antenna workings, not the encryption technology of the transmitted data, ...
Please keep your eye on the ball iso talking BS.
Reply
Reply
post #54 of 76
12/17/11 at 11:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blitz1 View Post

Frankly, I don't care.
It's not about the quantity, it's the quality and the pertinence that matters.
Who cares about IP, CDMA, GPRS, LTE, ... when we all know that it's the curve in the rounded corner that really matters, or the fact that the display is actually centered on the iPad. These are the stuff that people care about, not the antenna workings, not the encryption technology of the transmitted data, ...
Please keep your eye on the ball iso talking BS.

You left out the bits about washing machine detergent dispensing, microwave oven platter spinning, refrigerator door opening, proprietary home theatre system plugs, shipbuilding, heavy engineering or any of the myriad of other things Samsung is involved in.

Which brings us to the point, how many of that long list of Samsung's patents are actually pertinent to mobile phones, tablets, PC's or other areas that Apple is involved in.

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply
post #55 of 76
12/18/11 at 2:59am
Oh hell, IF we must measure great products but the number of patents issue per year....I hope that is a joke. All the great inventors are only known for a few great inventions not a gazillion half-baked patents that only sounds good on paper.
Reply
Reply
post #56 of 76
12/18/11 at 4:12am
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

You left out the bits about washing machine detergent dispensing, microwave oven platter spinning, refrigerator door opening, proprietary home theatre system plugs, shipbuilding, heavy engineering or any of the myriad of other things Samsung is involved in.

Which brings us to the point, how many of that long list of Samsung's patents are actually pertinent to mobile phones, tablets, PC's or other areas that Apple is involved in.

I don't think any of us know. What should be clear is that Samsung appears to innovate in areas where they believe they can invent/create new features and products or improve existing ones, using them to gain a market advantage with their patented ideas. With some of their unique mobile developments being adopted as industry standards in year's past they apparently were "innovators" in mobile at some point. Perhaps it has their attention again.

melior diabolus quem scies

"No theatrics and no more personal attacks, just stick to the logic and tell me why I don't have any argument ~ Jragosta/2012

Reply

melior diabolus quem scies

"No theatrics and no more personal attacks, just stick to the logic and tell me why I don't have any argument ~ Jragosta/2012

Reply
post #57 of 76
12/18/11 at 6:19am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Techboy View Post

Oh hell, IF we must measure great products but the number of patents issue per year....I hope that is a joke. All the great inventors are only known for a few great inventions not a gazillion half-baked patents that only sounds good on paper.

Ever heard of Da Vinci?
Reply
Reply
post #58 of 76
12/18/11 at 6:20am
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

You left out the bits about washing machine detergent dispensing, microwave oven platter spinning, refrigerator door opening, proprietary home theatre system plugs, shipbuilding, heavy engineering or any of the myriad of other things Samsung is involved in.

Which brings us to the point, how many of that long list of Samsung's patents are actually pertinent to mobile phones, tablets, PC's or other areas that Apple is involved in.

Well, apparently at least a handful that Apple has either infringed or might have infringed.
Reply
Reply
post #59 of 76
12/18/11 at 8:14am
Analysis: Legal patent system train has complete derailed.....

Who in their right mind would ever grant these type of stupid patents????
Reply
Reply
post #60 of 76
12/18/11 at 9:41am
Quote:
Originally Posted by sranger View Post

Analysis: Legal patent system train has complete derailed.....

Who in their right mind would ever grant these type of stupid patents????

Well, it seems that even rounded rectangles can get patented.
Reply
Reply
post #61 of 76
12/18/11 at 10:16am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blitz1 View Post

Well, it seems that even rounded rectangles can get patented.

Even though I mock the rectangle thingie from time to time, reality is that the Apple's patents are not premised on rounded rectangles per se. There is more to the design patents than just that.
Reply
Reply
post #62 of 76
12/18/11 at 10:46am
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

Even though I mock the rectangle thingie from time to time, reality is that the Apple's patents are not premised on rounded rectangles per se. There is more to the design patents than just that.

Indeed! The display is centered!
Reply
Reply
post #63 of 76
12/18/11 at 11:43am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blitz1 View Post

Indeed! The display is centered!

There's also the thin form factor.
Reply
Reply
post #64 of 76
12/18/11 at 12:05pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

There's also the thin form factor.

Don't forget the black bezel.

Apple researched every single color in the rainbow, exhaustively and extensively, and based upon that, they innovated and invented the black bezel.

Then they patented the hell out of it.

Now, Samsung comes along and just copies everything Apple does, "even as" they should instead be grateful that Apple is their bestest customer.







/s
Reply
Reply
post #65 of 76
12/18/11 at 12:16pm
They WERE a key source for the Production of iPhones.

Now they are in a lawsuit case with their own CUSTOMER.

Whether or not Apple stops Samsung -- Samsung has already lost with this deal, because they MAKE MORE as manufacturers of other people's ideas than they ever will with this me-to Android phone.


>> How many POTENTIAL customers of Samsung have decided to go with a company that perhaps doesn't have a competitive product in the offing? Samsung is a huge, semi-governmental entity, and it's marketing is stepping on it's manufacturing.

It's like if IBM opened a restaurant, and gave food poisoning to a whole bunch of Bankers, and that restaurant said; "Screw you guys if you eat with your feet!" Wouldn't the loss in mainframes to Banks kind of overshadow the loss of restaurant eaters?

So, Samsung has a LOSE/LOSE situation, and if they lose the lawsuit, that will be LOSE/LOSE/LOSE.
Reply
Reply
post #66 of 76
12/18/11 at 12:18pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blitz1 View Post

Indeed! The display is centered!

Blitz, try to keep up with what is at issue.

There seems to be more noise than signal to your broadcast.
Reply
Reply
post #67 of 76
12/18/11 at 12:23pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Techboy View Post

Oh hell, IF we must measure great products but the number of patents issue per year....I hope that is a joke. All the great inventors are only known for a few great inventions not a gazillion half-baked patents that only sounds good on paper.

These Samsung patents don't even sound good on paper;
Method for turning tex into speech? Somehow different than the text to speech on the Mac for a decade?

They are patenting ideas here -- not methods. And all the prior art to function and interface happened on the iPhone. Samsung makes a phone while producing iPhones -- doesn't that also give them Privileged insider information and raise the bar a bit on their side?

Apple could, however, come out and make inferior Washing Machines -- it's not like they have insider information on Samsung. Hopefully, they can avoid that unique method for "applying water with pressure to soiled dishes."
Reply
Reply
post #68 of 76
12/18/11 at 12:52pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blitz1 View Post

Indeed! The display is centered!

Technically Apple's design patents are not for a two dimensional rectangle but for a three dimensional iPad.

No matter how many times it is mindlessly repeated, APPLE DID NOT PATENT A RECTANGLE.

Endlessly repeating nonsense does not make it true.

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply
post #69 of 76
12/18/11 at 1:02pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blitz1 View Post

Does Samsung have any patent at all? We all know Apple invented everything in the mobile phone market. All the others are mere copycats with not enough brains to create anything.

I don't know, hey let's ask British Telecom.

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply
post #70 of 76
12/18/11 at 1:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Technically Apple's design patents are not for a two dimensional rectangle but for a three dimensional iPad.

No matter how many times it is mindlessly repeated, APPLE DID NOT PATENT A RECTANGLE.

Endlessly repeating nonsense does not make it true.

Just a question...why didn't they use the actual iPad design against the Tab?
Reply
Reply
post #71 of 76
12/18/11 at 1:24pm
  • hmm
  • Keylogger
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash_beezy View Post

But samsung stuff go great with apple products!


http://www.anandtech.com/show/1199/4

Noted there long enough before Apple debuted the Cinema display lines in that styling. Samsung doesn't necessarily make bezels for them either.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Londor View Post

Apple does not have a design patent for rectangular tablets. They have a design patent for the iPad. You can easily make a rectangular tablet that doesn't look like an iPad.

Samsung just needs to design their own products instead of blatantly copying Apple's ones.

They've copied each other many times, although it's probably been more Samsung copying Apple in aesthetics. In terms of internals used, they're commoditized parts. Anyway there has been plenty of prior art on the ipad design, Design patents anyway do not cover fit and finish. They basically cover decoration. It was noted in one of the patent cases too. The article is on this site somewhere. Apple's designs always go for simplicity, and the patents have been too ambiguous. Recall where they lost to that Spanish company that they sued a few months back? They will pretty much sue "anyone" who puts out a rectangular tablet of comparable density, and people saw the ipad first with it being all over the media. At this point they don't have to be copies for people to start to judge whether or not they are copies.

It's just moved on from the Windows vs. Mac thing on the desktop into phones and tablets. It will another thing at some point.
Reply
Reply
post #72 of 76
12/18/11 at 6:59pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

http://www.anandtech.com/show/1199/4

Noted there long enough before Apple debuted the Cinema display lines in that styling. Samsung doesn't necessarily make bezels for them either.



They've copied each other many times, although it's probably been more Samsung copying Apple in aesthetics. In terms of internals used, they're commoditized parts. Anyway there has been plenty of prior art on the ipad design, Design patents anyway do not cover fit and finish. They basically cover decoration. It was noted in one of the patent cases too. The article is on this site somewhere. Apple's designs always go for simplicity, and the patents have been too ambiguous. Recall where they lost to that Spanish company that they sued a few months back? They will pretty much sue "anyone" who puts out a rectangular tablet of comparable density, and people saw the ipad first with it being all over the media. At this point they don't have to be copies for people to start to judge whether or not they are copies.

It's just moved on from the Windows vs. Mac thing on the desktop into phones and tablets. It will another thing at some point.

Prior art that Samsung could have used when they launched the Galaxy Tab 10.1v, but they didn't they revised and pulled it as soon as Apple released the iPad 2.

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply
post #73 of 76
12/19/11 at 7:39am
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Technically Apple's design patents are not for a two dimensional rectangle but for a three dimensional iPad.

No matter how many times it is mindlessly repeated, APPLE DID NOT PATENT A RECTANGLE.

Endlessly repeating nonsense does not make it true.

My fault entirely: they patented a THIN, ROUND CORNER rectangle
Reply
Reply
post #74 of 76
12/19/11 at 9:04am
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Technically Apple's design patents are not for a two dimensional rectangle but for a three dimensional iPad.

No matter how many times it is mindlessly repeated, APPLE DID NOT PATENT A RECTANGLE.

Endlessly repeating nonsense does not make it true.

Technically, you're right, as I've mentioned above.

But here's an excerpt from Apple's description of design alternatives *recommended* to Samsung:

"40. For the iPhone design, alternative smartphone designs include: front surfaces that are not black (Exs. 2-4) or clear (Exs. 4-6); front surfaces that are not rectangular (Exs.7-10), not flat (Exs. 11-13), and without rounded corners (Exs. 9, 14, 15); display screens that are more square than rectangular or not rectangular at all (Exs. 8, 16, 17); display screens that are not centered on the front surface of the phone (Exs. 18-20, 37) and that have substantial lateral
borders (Exs. 21-22); speaker openings that are not horizontal slots with rounded ends (Exs. 12, 15, 23, 24, 37) and that are not centered above the display screen (Exs. 12, 25, 26); front surfaces that contain substantial adornment (Exs. 9, 15, 19); and phones without bezels at all (Exs. 11, 13, 18) or very different looking bezels that are not thin, uniform, and with an inwardly sloping profile (Ex. 21).

41. For the D’889 tablet design, alternate tablet computer designs include: overall shapes that are not rectangular with four flat sides (Exs. 27-29) or that do not have four rounded corners (Exs. 28, 30-32); front surfaces that are not completely flat or clear (Exs. 27, 28, 33, 34) and that have substantial adornment (Exs. 28, 35); thick frames rather than a thin rim around the front surface (Exs. 28, 34-36); and profiles that are not thin relative to the D’889 or that have a
cluttered appearance (Exs. 28, 33, 38)."

So, the best (only?) way for Samsung to square this with Apple is to stay away from rounded rectangles. If you look at Jobs' history, he did seem to believe he introduced rounded rectangles to the computer industry, including software (i.e. GUI elements) and hardware.
Reply
Reply
post #75 of 76
12/19/11 at 10:57am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fake_William_Shatner View Post

It's like if IBM opened a restaurant, and gave food poisoning to a whole bunch of Bankers, and that restaurant said; "Screw you guys if you eat with your feet!" Wouldn't the loss in mainframes to Banks kind of overshadow the loss of restaurant eaters?

That's a terrible analogy. Furthermore, who eats restaurants?
Reply
Reply
post #76 of 76
12/20/11 at 9:16pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

That's a terrible analogy. Furthermore, who eats restaurants?

Maybe the analogy makes sense when you're buzzed........ nope, still doesn't make sense.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Samsung sues Apple over 4 new patents, but backs off iPhone 4S complaint
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Samsung sues Apple over 4 new patents, but backs off iPhone 4S complaint