or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple wins injunction against Samsung Galaxy Nexus smartphone
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple wins injunction against Samsung Galaxy Nexus smartphone - Page 8

post #281 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

Is that English plain enough for you? You can read more here

Depends on your definition. 😐

“The only thing more insecure than Android is its userbase.” – Can’t Remember

Reply

“The only thing more insecure than Android is its userbase.” – Can’t Remember

Reply
post #282 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Depends on your definition. 😐

The redesigned version was allowed to be sold in Germany. I believe they had the new model ready since they it one week later. Now what's your definition?
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #283 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

I believe they had the new model ready since they it one week later.

Wonder what that says, you know?

“The only thing more insecure than Android is its userbase.” – Can’t Remember

Reply

“The only thing more insecure than Android is its userbase.” – Can’t Remember

Reply
post #284 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


Posner's position that patent exclusivity shouldn't be enforceable. 

 

 

That is NOT Posner's position. You misunderstood his point. 

 

Quote what he said that geve you the mistaken impression, and  I'll explain it to you.

post #285 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Wonder what that says, you know?

That they were ready for the worst case scenario.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #286 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerrySwitched26 View Post


That is NOT Posner's position. You misunderstood his point. 

Quote what he said that geve you the mistaken impression, and  I'll explain it to you.

Sure:
http://www.fosspatents.com/2012/06/judge-posners-dismissal-of-two-way.html
Quote:
At the hearing, Judge Posner reportedly said that it would be mistaken to think that "just because someone has a patent, he has a deep moral right to exclude everyone else [from practicing the claimed invention]".

Now, you explain to me how that says anything other than that Posner doesn't think patents should give exclusivity. And explain how that position can be reconciled with a very clear statement in the Constitution that patents DO give exclusivity.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #287 of 368

That's what I was going to attempt to do, but obviously wasting time to try and do so for the good Dr. Someone else may think you'll try to understand and explain it to you. Good luck to them.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #288 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun, UK View Post

 

That's my point, to a greater or lesser extent most products are copies of something else. Nothing is truly original.

 

If you're going to get personal then maybe I should mention how Apple has copied the designs of DIETER RAMS over many years.

 

Rip off or inspiration?

 

I can't be bothered to copy the pics across so you can look at the similarities for yourself at http://gizmodo.com/343641/1960s-braun-products-hold-the-secrets-to-apples-future

 

LOL, you are grasping at straws. First Palm's grid of icons, now Dieter Rams. "Quick, lemme find examples of Apple copying design. Google search later...Oooo...gold mine! Dieter Rams! Let me post that on AppleInsider... I win!!!"

 

To say that Apple "ripped off" Dieter Rams is like saying Mozart "ripped off" Classical Music. Rams is the father of an industrial design movement that Jonathan Ive (and Dieter Rams) acknowledge that Apple follows today. You don't "rip off" a design movement; you belong to it. And for the record, Rams loves that Apple is following his design philosophy.

 

Samsung hasn't done what Apple has done. They haven't embraced Dieter Rams' functionalist industrial design principles. They aren't inspired by Braun products of the 60s. It's very obvious: they saw the iPhone and iPad selling like kimchi and decided their future phones and tablets should look like that, to the point that Samsung's own lawyers couldn't tell them apart from Apple's. This is common sense. Stop fighting it with nonsense posts.

"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 #289 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


Sure:
http://www.fosspatents.com/2012/06/judge-posners-dismissal-of-two-way.html
Now, you explain to me how that says anything other than that Posner doesn't think patents should give exclusivity. And explain how that position can be reconciled with a very clear statement in the Constitution that patents DO give exclusivity.

 

Wow you are really stretching here aren't you? Surely you understand the distinction between owning something and using something? Only I have the deed to my car, but I can let you drive it for a fee if you like. Similarly, the constitution says authors/creators own the exclusive rights to their writings and discoveries, but it never says that others can't make use of those patents/copyrights/trademarks under certain conditions, like the Fair Use Clause, or subject to royalties.

post #290 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by johndoe98 View Post

 

Wow you are really stretching here aren't you? Surely you understand the distinction between owning something and using something? Only I have the deed to my car, but I can let you drive it for a fee if you like. Similarly, the constitution says authors/creators own the exclusive rights to their writings and discoveries, but it never says that others can't make use of those patents/copyrights/trademarks under certain conditions, like the Fair Use Clause, or subject to royalties.

 

 

The fair use doctrine (not clause, btw) is a good example showing that while authors and inventors have many exclusive  rights, the right to exclude is not absolute.  Similar distinctions  exist in the area of mandatory licensing, the first sale doctrine, and the distinction between the rights of authors in  published as opposed to  unpublished works.


Edited by JerrySwitched26 - 7/1/12 at 2:02pm
post #291 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerrySwitched26 View Post


The fair use doctrine (not clause, btw) is a good example showing that while authors and inventors have many exclusive  rights, the right to exclude is not absolute.  Similar distinctions  exist in the area of mandatory licensing, the first sale doctrine, and the distinction between the rights of authors in  published as opposed to  unpublished works.

Please show me a case where fair use applies to patents. Hint: it doesn't. It applies to copyrights.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JerrySwitched26 View Post

 He said that there is no "deep moral right".  "At the hearing, Judge Posner reportedly said that it would be mistaken to think that "just because someone has a patent, he has a deep moral right to exclude everyone else [from practicing the claimed invention]".


He did  not say that they have no right of any sort, as you seem to believe.  He said instead that they have no deep moral right.

The distinction is between a malum in se violation of law and a malum prohibitum violation.  That is a major distinction in the law that you don't understand.

Malum in se means that the act is wrong morally, in and of itself, such as murder.  Malum prohibitum means that the act is wrong because there is a statute in place.  Patent and copyright violations, for example, are classic malum prohibitum violations.

I suspected that that was the root of your understanding.  Does that help, Dr. Scientist?

None of which changes anything. Simply:

1. The Constitution is very clear. An individual is supposed to have exclusive rights to their inventions for a period of time.
2. Posner says that a person should NOT have exclusive rights to their inventions.
3. Ergo, Posner is disagreeing with the Constitution.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #292 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

You say this all the time, and every time we tell you that Samsung's own lawyers must be idiots.

 

You simply don't want to understand what I'm saying. There are lots of tablets that look like the iPad, including the Samsung tablets.

 

THAT IS NOT THE POINT.

 

The point is would a reasonable person be confused into buying a Samsung tablet when they wanted to buy an iPad.

 

I maintain that you would have to be a complete moron to do that given that every tablet I've seen is clearly branded on the front and/or back of the product.

 

I don't care if the Samsung looks like the iPad. I really don't care. I hope Apple lose this case and all the other cases because I don't want to see an iPad monopoly. Competition breads innovation and keeps prices down.

 

I don't expect to have an objective discussion as there are just too many blinkered people on here.

post #293 of 368

No matter what you bunch of sycophants think, I hope Apple loses this case when it comes to court and we finally get some real competition in the tablet market.

post #294 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

Soli I stole your pic, so sue me lol

I have no idea what you are talking about.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

No, they didn't. You can't look at that and tell me that's anything but "subjectively different enough", not actually different.

They did change enough to make it instantly recognizable as a Samsung tablet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun, UK View Post

No matter what you bunch of sycophants think, I hope Apple loses this case when it comes to court and we finally get some real competition in the tablet market.

You're getting awfully close to crossing a line, if you haven't already. You might want to cool it on the name calling.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #295 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun, UK View Post

 

Competition breads innovation and keeps prices down.

 

I don't expect to have an objective discussion as there are just too many blinkered people on here.

 

Competition might engender price wars but rarely *breeds* sustainable innovation.

 

Look at the PC industry. Dell, HP and Lenovo (IBM) have been competing for decades now. How much innovation has resulted? Generation after generation of PCs and servers simply adopted the latest processors from Intel and latest version of Windows from Microsoft. When Linux gained some momentum, then these companies started offering Linux servers. Competition amongst them did not drive any of them to innovate.

 

Look at the auto industry. Again, same pattern.

 

In both cases, innovation has mostly come from "outside".

 

This is what makes Apple unique - an established company that has enough of an innovative spirit to upend the industry, including its own business. Look at how it killed off the iPod Mini. Can anyone come up with an example of a company killing off its most successful product in a given category, when there was no viable competition?

 

Has competition compelled HP, Dell, Asus or anyone to come up with the equivalent of MacBook Air, unibody design or the iPad?

 

So no, competition does not usually breed true innovation. Not the revolutionary, sustainable kind. Instead, competition often kills off weaker players and eventually leads to a static ecosystem in which pricing becomes the primary battleground, while products undergo only incremental, organic improvement rather than major leaps in innovation.


Edited by ankleskater - 7/2/12 at 6:14am
post #296 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun, UK View Post

No matter what you bunch of sycophants think, I hope Apple loses this case when it comes to court and we finally get some real competition in the tablet market.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

You're getting awfully close to crossing a line, if you haven't already. You might want to cool it on the name calling.

 

Agree. If, Shaun, you find folks here so objectionable, why dwell here? And you are not using the word sycophant in its correct context.

post #297 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerrySwitched26 View Post


Again you misunderstand.  I never claimed that fair use is any part of patent law.

What you said was:
"The fair use doctrine (not clause, btw) is a good example showing that while authors and inventors have many exclusive rights, the right to exclude is not absolute."

Now, authors are covered by copyrights and inventors are covered by patents. So you clearly were saying that fair use applied to patents.

But, then, you and logic apparently don't even have a nodding acquaintance.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #298 of 368

I agree with most people here that Samsung copied design elements of the iPhone and the iPad for its own products. I disagree with you in that I think that the copied design elements should not be patentable. A design patent should cover combinations of elements that are not obvious. So I think the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 should not be banned from being sold in the US but I do believe that iPad clones like this should be.Chinese-ipad-Clone-01.jpg

post #299 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater View Post


Huh?

 

I am specifically disagreeing with your statement that "innovation is not about invention, it is about the ability to make an invention ubiquitous through some extra non-inventive twists."

 

But never mind, I think you just want to appear to be winning a point. That's not so important, IMO. Hopefully, whether you admit to it or not, you now understand how innovation and inventiveness are similar and different. ;)

 

what part of 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater View Post

If you put original or inventive methods or processes into practice, you are being innovative. If you create a novel widget or process, you are being inventive.

 

is different than

 

 


Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiro View Post

 

The difference is innovation is not about invention, it is about the ability to make an invention ubiquitous through some extra non-inventive twists.  

 

"make an invention ubiquitous through some extra non-inventive twists" seems an awful lot like "put original or inventive methods or processes into practice"

 

 

So I used different words than followed up with, they mean essentially the same thing.  About the only room for interpretation is that my made ubiquitous requires your put into practice to be widely successful, not simply done to any degree.  

 

Can you just dispense with the violent part of violent agreement now? 

 

.
Reply
.
Reply
post #300 of 368
post #301 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun, UK View Post

No matter what you bunch of sycophants think, I hope Apple loses this case when it comes to court and we finally get some real competition in the tablet market.

Do you know what a real competition looks like? Flooding market with cheap knock offs is not a real competition, it hurts the competition. Only sycophants think IP theft is good for competition.

Fun and relaxing way to prepare Japanese Language Proficiency Test (JLPT) test with Juku Apps
Reply
Fun and relaxing way to prepare Japanese Language Proficiency Test (JLPT) test with Juku Apps
Reply
post #302 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


What you said was:
"The fair use doctrine (not clause, btw) is a good example showing that while authors and inventors have many exclusive rights, the right to exclude is not absolute."
Now, authors are covered by copyrights and inventors are covered by patents. So you clearly were saying that fair use applied to patents.
But, then, you and logic apparently don't even have a nodding acquaintance.

Even assuming that I misspoke, do you care to address the main points, which concern Posner?  Or are you conceding on that one?

post #303 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerrySwitched26 View Post

Even assuming that I misspoke, do you care to address the main points, which concern Posner?  Or are you conceding on that one?

IOW, you were completely wrong.

No, I'm not going to address the points because you've demonstrated that the points you make are constantly wrong and mostly ridiculous.

I gave only a single quote. Posner has repeatedly stated his objection to patent exclusivity - which makes his decisions ripe for being overturned.

Nonetheless, it's irrelevant. In case you hadn't notice, Posner had nothing to do with this thread. This thread is about KOH granting an injunction against the Nexus.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #304 of 368

Thanks for the link. Nice to see a plain-English explanation of the claims from those patents, especially from someone at least minimally qualified to understand them. If you assume the explanations are accurate there's a high-likelihood of these being stricken on re-exam. Heck, a huge percentage of patents used in litigation are invalidated in part or whole anyway. Doesn't really help the current situation of course if the patents are later found invalid in some way. The damage will be done long before that.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #305 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun, UK View Post

Nothing is ever truly original. Inspiration comes in my ways. Palm OS versus Apple iOS. Interesting.

 

Palm OS.jpgApple iOS.jpg

vs Newton OS (for all intents and purposes, co-released with the original Palm Pilot OS):

[with ninja props to @SolipsismX for picking the same graphic!]

 

newton_os_2.0_all_icons.png

 

And grid organized icons from Macintosh OS 1.0 circa 1984

 

s10.jpg

 

We can go back to Doug Englebart and 1968 from there with visits to PARC extending Englebart's work (but deciding it wasn't worth the business to field-- oops!)

.
Reply
.
Reply
post #306 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun, UK View Post

 

That's my point, to a greater or lesser extent most products are copies of something else. Nothing is truly original.

 

If you're going to get personal then maybe I should mention how Apple has copied the designs of DIETER RAMS over many years.

 

Rip off or inspiration?

 

I can't be bothered to copy the pics across so you can look at the similarities for yourself at http://gizmodo.com/343641/1960s-braun-products-hold-the-secrets-to-apples-future

 

There was another thread where you trotted out he same images and got soundly overruled there too.   There are plain differences between static copying and design school inspiration.  The fact you can't admit those in your attempts to twist arguments is sad because it only shows blind adherence to a pathetic dogma.

.
Reply
.
Reply
post #307 of 368
This video isn't related to anything but it's about invention and sometimes posters make comments that seem like they are out of a Mitchell & Webb skit...

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #308 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiro View Post

 

"make an invention ubiquitous through some extra non-inventive twists" seems an awful lot like "put original or inventive methods or processes into practice"

 

 

So I used different words than followed up with, they mean essentially the same thing.  About the only room for interpretation is that my made ubiquitous requires your put into practice to be widely successful, not simply done to any degree.  

 

Can you just dispense with the violent part of violent agreement now? 

 


Awful lot alike? Not the same thing at all!

 

Innovation is NOT "about the ability to make an invention ubiquitous through some extra non-inventive twists".  It is NOT an ability. It is NOT about ubiquity. It is NOT about "extra non-inventive twists".

 

Since this is the 3rd time I am saying this, I am giving up on you. Don't want to turn into one of those here who just repeat themselves over and over. I am simply not that dedicated to helping others.

post #309 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun, UK View Post

You simply don't want to understand what I'm saying. There are lots of tablets that look like the iPad, including the Samsung tablets. THAT IS NOT THE POINT.

IP theft isn't the point? Then why're they suing?
Quote:
The point is would a reasonable person be confused into buying a Samsung tablet when they wanted to buy an iPad.

That falls under the question of damages. That's secondary to the main objective.
Quote:
I maintain that you would have to be a complete moron to do that given that every tablet I've seen is clearly branded on the front and/or back of the product.

Samsung's. Lawyers. And yes, I just repeated it since the point you think you're making is moot, meaning we're back to our original argument.
Quote:
I don't care if the Samsung looks like the iPad. I really don't care.

To partially quote someone,
Quote:
THAT IS… …THE POINT.
Quote:
I hope Apple lose this case and all the other cases because I don't want to see an iPad monopoly.

I hope you don't honestly think this is their intention.
Quote:
Competition breads innovation and keeps prices down.

I hope you don't honestly think what we have right now is competition.

[QUOTE}I don't expect to have an objective discussion as there are just too many blinkered people on here.[/quote]

As an example, where would you go to have an objective discussion?

“The only thing more insecure than Android is its userbase.” – Can’t Remember

Reply

“The only thing more insecure than Android is its userbase.” – Can’t Remember

Reply
post #310 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

As an example, where would you go to have an objective discussion?

MacRumors? 😷

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #311 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


MacRumors? 😷

I'd never paid much mind to MacRumors, but since you mentioned it I paid a quick visit. They have a comment thread on the exact same article as posted here. Almost 1000 comments, both sides of the aisle, and largely free of ad-homs from a quick peruse. Interesting.

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1396398


Edited by Gatorguy - 7/1/12 at 6:33pm
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #312 of 368

Still no NYTimes reporting on this whole affair.

post #313 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by iSheldon View Post

Still no NYTimes reporting on this whole affair.

They're waiting for Apple to [improve something in their industry, workflow, or environment] so they can push out their already written story about how Apple is [doing the exact opposite].

“The only thing more insecure than Android is its userbase.” – Can’t Remember

Reply

“The only thing more insecure than Android is its userbase.” – Can’t Remember

Reply
post #314 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by iSheldon View Post

Still no NYTimes reporting on this whole affair.

 

The NY Times is just another news outlet. They are grubbing for page views. If there's a news item that won't generate a large number of page views, they really aren't compelled to publish it.

 

I point this out since you repeatedly asked the same question "why am I not seeing this at NYTimes?"

 

Publication by the NY Times does not reflect a particular news item's validity, nor does NY Times publication give validity to any given news item.

 

Journalism died in the Nineties.

post #315 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

I'd never paid much mind to MacRumors, but since you mentioned it I paid a quick visit. They have a comment thread on the exact same article as posted here. Almost 1000 comments, both sides of the aisle, and largely free of ad-homs from a quick peruse. Interesting.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1396398

That forum is the worse. It's equivalent to Digg or Gizmodo forums.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #316 of 368

SolipsismX is correct if you are looking at reader involvement.

 

Comment quantity is not proportionally correlated with comment quality, especially at a Q&A forum like MacRumors which does not employ a community-based comment ranking system. It uses human forum moderation which scales poorly. (Yes, I know that many of the MR forum moderators participate here).

 

This is related to iSheldon's comment about the lack of commentary by the NY Times about a special news item. Coverage does not necessarily equate to quality, especially in 2012 when page views are king.

post #317 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post

especially at a Q&A forum like MacRumors which does not employ a community-based comment ranking system.

They do, and have for a year or so, I think. Every post has an up/down feedback thing. We actually don't here. We have the stupid little thumb, but I'd personally like that gone entirely instead of a "down" option added.

“The only thing more insecure than Android is its userbase.” – Can’t Remember

Reply

“The only thing more insecure than Android is its userbase.” – Can’t Remember

Reply
post #318 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hellacool View Post


Why do people equate writing checks as innovation? Apple didn't invent Siri, develop or have anything to do with it. They wrote a check for it. Smart, very, innovative, not very.

So your ignorance about product development is somehow a detriment to Apple. Cool.

post #319 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Thanks for the link. Nice to see a plain-English explanation of the claims from those patents, especially from someone at least minimally qualified to understand them. If you assume the explanations are accurate there's a high-likelihood of these being stricken on re-exam. Heck, a huge percentage of patents used in litigation are invalidated in part or whole anyway. Doesn't really help the current situation of course if the patents are later found invalid in some way. The damage will be done long before that.

Yep. That's just the kind of site you would like.

Sorry, but when someone starts out by saying the following, their 'expert' opinion on patents isn't worth much:
Quote:
However, if you go and read the full patents you will find that the ideas are wrapped up in a legal and technical language that makes each one sound like rocket science.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #320 of 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

I dont think his trying to say that Apple stole the design from Samsung. Merely that Samsung did have devices with that form factor before the iPad came out.


Form factor, as in size and aspect ratio? I don't think any design patent covers that.

The one I'm aware of, a Samsung picture frame, the illusion of a similar form factor falls apart when you see it from behind or from the edge.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple wins injunction against Samsung Galaxy Nexus smartphone