Scott Forstall describes iOS development, challenges in Samsung trial - Page 2

Gosh, it only left 38 million pages of evidence to sift thru. Perhaps in the month that the trial is scheduled for they can get to a good percentage of it.

Samsung was waiting for the next version of Windows CE and developing the BlackJack 3 or 4.

If Android had not come along, Samsung wouldn't have their current share of the smartphone market.

Samsung didn't really innovate bc they had to use someone else's OS, they could not make a good one by themselves. It's like all the PC OEMSs running Windows.

If Android wouldn't have come along, the market would be dominated by iOS, RIM, Symbian, and webOS.

webOS is dead bc the market got flooded with many cheap android phones. Maybe things would be different if HP licensed webOS to all the OEMs that ended up building android phones?

Huh? Because Apple claimed prior art means that Samsung cannot use its own design on a future device? The SGS 2 looks like an evolved F700. Another that confuses me is the SGS 2 in question was never sold in the US, the design was changed and each carrier except VZW all got a unique looking SGS 2.

 

Even without Android, RIM and Symbian will never dominate the market. Just saying. :)

without Android, iOS will be the undisputed king of Smartphones by now, and everyone will have to look at an iPhone if they want a smartphone.

WebOS is dead because of the uninspired hardware they put it on.

I don't believe that, and is that really a world you would wanna live in? You guys are also forgetting Bada, Samsung has explored options other than Android.

And is failing miserably, that is why they couldn't leave Android. Not to mention they molded BADA to imitate Android. BTW, if Apple proves Samsung copied Apple using Android, we may see trials against BADA next. lol

 

Hey, if my features work well with the next guy, where all those advertisements about easy connections, happy people sharing easily, or phones working with each other seamlessly will only work in apple filled world then why not? I would definitely like that. Now if Android will be the defining factor in making that happen, why not as well?

I never said any such thing. I said that Samsung could not use the F700 as prior art against Apple - since it was already disclosed.

Because would you like it if Samsung didn't allow their patents to be frand and they were the only ones allowed to make cell phones until those patents expired?

There's another false dichotomy.

If Samsung did not allow its patents to be FRAND, carriers would have found another way to make the technology work. There's rarely only one way to do things.

Deleted

Then why are they frand? When Motorola had the patent for the "mobile phone", how does one get around that without licensing it? Sometimes there just isn't a workaround.

If they admitted there was prior art then why can't Samsung say that? It's obvious that the SGS 2 is a variant of the F700. Now I'll readily admit that Touch Wiz is a close copy of what iOS looks like. There are so many ways to skin Android, HTC does a good job and many amateur devs have also done really good things with it. Samsung definitely took more than one page of Apple's book there.
Edited by dasanman69 - 8/5/12 at 5:14pm

Siri team is the largest within Apple? That's hard to fathom.

Surely what he was saying was that the existing F700 design was disclosed in Apple's patent application, so that the F700 design cannot be used to try to invalidate the Apple patent that was granted, presumably on the basis that it was sufficiently different from the F700.

That the SII may be a variant of the F700 is a separate issue. However, that cannot make it immune from infringing on the subsequent iPhone design patent if the variations are enough to take it too close to the iPhone design.

I understand what you're getting at, but should that exclude Samsung from showing it as a previous design?

No, I don't see why it should. It just isn't ammunition against the existence of Apple's design patent.

All these people referencing the F700 should be aware that this is a knock-off of the Nokia line (trying to look like the communicator). So, Samsung is so innovative at this time that it's phones are copies of RIM or Nokia. Fast follower indeed.

So you are saying that iPhone "round corners touchscreen smartphone" design patent is not invalidated by existence of F700, but by the existence of the Nokia communicator and possibly RIM ?

Seems Samsung strategy is to force Apple to reveal as much as possible about its process and drive the price of the entire suit for Apple, even if Apple wins eventually. They might think long and hard before they decide to go to the court again. Sounds like a good strategy by Samsung.

Nice try, but that's not what appears to be at all.

First, the amount of money being spent isn't going to have any significant impact on Apple. Their cash horde is growing by billions of dollars per year - even with these legal expenses.

Second, Apple doesn't need to win all of the cases - even most of them. Even winning a few cases is advantageous for Apple.

The biggest factor you're ignoring, though, is that you're looking at the skirmishes and ignoring the strategies. Apple's strategy is to stop people from making blatant copies of their products. Samsung's strategy appeared to be to make their products look so much like Apple products that consumers would choose the Samsung product. If you look at the latest generation of Samsung products, they're moving away from the 'blatant copy' strategy, so Apple won their main objective.

That sounds brainless to me. Truly.

mad props to Steve Forstall... and major respect for him... (Sorry, but he is still not CEO material for Apple... We need him in the IOS/OSX division!)

.
by thinking, not copying

You obviously did zero thinking for that answer.

Where did you read that? They initially claimed it as an infringing device, yet later removed it from the list.