or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Side-by-side iPhone, Galaxy S comparison revealed in internal Samsung 'evaluation report'
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Side-by-side iPhone, Galaxy S comparison revealed in internal Samsung 'evaluation report'

post #1 of 390
Thread Starter 
In an effort to prove a willful infringement on its design patents, Apple on Friday presented internal Samsung documents in court containing side-by-side comparisons of the iPhone and what would eventually become the Galaxy S smartphone.

A number of documents came out in the Apple v. Samsung trial during the questioning of Samsung chief strategy officer Justin Denison, who was called upon by Apple to testify on behalf of the Samsung Electronics Corp., Samsung Electronics America, and Samsung Telecommunications America. According to CNet, Apple attorney William Lee presented Denison as someone with comprehensive knowledge of Samsung's product development strategies.

During Denison's initial testimony, Lee got straight to the point and asked if Samsung had ever tried to copy Apple's designs. Denison unsurprisingly claimed the company did not. Lee then presented to the Court internal Samsung documents, some of which were titled "Beat Apple response," "Recent Apple analysis project" and "iPhone 5 counter strategy."

Perhaps the most significant exhibit was a document dated March 2, 2010 titled "Relative evaluation report on S1, iPhone" which contained side-by-side pictures of the iPhone's interface and that of the Galaxy S. Samsung reportedly called for suggestions or "improvements" in highlighted areas where specific software assets differed between the two devices. An example suggestion was to change the appearance of Galaxy S UI iconography.

Justin Denison
Samsung Chief Strategy Officer Justin Denison. | Source: Samsung


In Samsung's cross-examination, Denison argued Apple's designs were borne out of necessity rather than being innovative, reiterating the company's stance that the iPhone and iPad patents are not unique because they describe "rectangles." Kevin Packingham, Samsung's chief product officer, said much the same recently, stating that he finds it "unreasonable that we?re fighting over rectangles, that that?s being considered as an infringement."

Denison points out that a device with rounded-corners is simply logical, noting that "if you drop it, it's much more likely not to crack if it's rounded."

The Denison testimony, which followed those of Apple marketing executive Phil Schiller and iOS chief Scott Forstall, wrapped up Friday's court proceedings. Apple v. Samsung is scheduled to reconvene on Monday with Apple witness Wookyun Kho, a Samsung engineer who will likely answer questions pertaining to certain proprietary UI elements like the company's "blue glow" overscroll feature.
post #2 of 390
Busted.

"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 #3 of 390
As ALL companies likely 'size up' their wares against the competition, and then seek to improve upon said competition's efforts.

Apple has made a complete industry out of doing exactly this... Inventing Nothing but Improving Upon What Others Already Created.
"Why iPhone"... Hmmm?
Reply
"Why iPhone"... Hmmm?
Reply
post #4 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post

As ALL companies likely 'size up' their wares against the competition, and then seek to improve upon said competition's efforts.
Apple has made a complete industry out of doing exactly this... Inventing Nothing but Improving Upon What Others Already Created.

 

Why the **** are you here if you don't think Apple as a company deserves a shred of credit and don't like any of their products? I'm serious. Why? Why waste your time on an Apple fan site?

post #5 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post

As ALL companies likely 'size up' their wares against the competition, and then seek to improve upon said competition's efforts.
Apple has made a complete industry out of doing exactly this... Inventing Nothing but Improving Upon What Others Already Created.

Sizing-up the competition is one thing.  Taking a product, rubber-stamping it and putting your own logo on it is something else.

Jeez... I want to think you're just trolling based on your history, but sometimes (and more-so than usual now) I really think you believe your own made-up propaganda as fact.  Get some help.. seriously.  


Edited by sflocal - 8/3/12 at 6:57pm
post #6 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post

As ALL companies likely 'size up' their wares against the competition, and then seek to improve upon said competition's efforts.
Apple has made a complete industry out of doing exactly this... Inventing Nothing but Improving Upon What Others Already Created.

To the extent that Apple's successes have given rise to complete industries based on copying them, yes. If you'd meant that, you'd have been making sense. But you didn't, and you weren't. Do not take pride in blindness.

post #7 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post

As ALL companies likely 'size up' their wares against the competition, and then seek to improve upon said competition's efforts.
Apple has made a complete industry out of doing exactly this... Inventing Nothing but Improving Upon What Others Already Created.

 

You know, I used to take your posts as something from somebody who was just unaware or ill-informed.

 

I have since realised that it's because you're just not as smart as my phone. When it's turned off.

 

Why don't you go find something you enjoy and complain about it elsewhere...

Pot is legal in North Korea.
That explains a considerable amount.

"The United States will respond proportionally at a place and time we choose..."
Reply
Pot is legal in North Korea.
That explains a considerable amount.

"The United States will respond proportionally at a place and time we choose..."
Reply
post #8 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronbo View Post

To the extent that Apple's successes have given rise to complete industries based on copying them, yes. If you'd meant that, you'd have been making sense. But you didn't, and you weren't. Do not take pride in blindness.

There is really only one thing worse than slavish copyists. Their slavish enablers.

There's a bunch of them here -- everyone knows who they are -- and they're incorrigibly relentless. Don't even bother responding.
post #9 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post
Perhaps the most significant exhibit was a document dated March 2, 2010 titled "Relative evaluation report on S1, iPhone" which contained side-by-side pictures of the iPhone's interface and that of the Galaxy S. Samsung reportedly called for suggestions or "improvements" in highlighted areas where specific software assets differed between the two devices. An example suggestion was to change the appearance of Galaxy S UI icons.

 

 

This is just wrong.

 

from the CNET article that is linked.

 

"Once of the examples was a suggestion to alter the look of on-screen iconography, the apps users see on screen."

 

Suggesting that they change what the icon's appearance vs suggesting that they change what apps the users see on screen are two different things. 

post #10 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by ufwa View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Perhaps the most significant exhibit was a document dated March 2, 2010 titled "Relative evaluation report on S1, iPhone" which contained side-by-side pictures of the iPhone's interface and that of the Galaxy S. Samsung reportedly called for suggestions or "improvements" in highlighted areas where specific software assets differed between the two devices. An example suggestion was to change the appearance of Galaxy S UI icons.


 

This is just wrong.

from the CNET article that is linked.

"Once of the examples was a suggestion to alter the look of on-screen iconography, the apps users see on screen."

Suggesting that they change what the icon's appearance vs suggesting that they change what apps the users see on screen are two different things. 

I think that it is just a badly written sentence, with the last clause trying to explain, rather unnecessarily I would have thought, which "on-screen iconography" it is referring to.
post #11 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post

As ALL companies likely 'size up' their wares against the competition, and then seek to improve upon said competition's efforts.
Apple has made a complete industry out of doing exactly this... Inventing Nothing but Improving Upon What Others Already Created.


how is sammy changing the icons to the same color and style of Apple's icons improving them? Why couldn't Sammy make their own icons or keep the default Android icons?

post #12 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4TheLoveOfTech View Post

So explain to me how Samsung doing a comparison to the competition is ANY different than the article before this one that says that Apple thought the 7" Tablet would be a good idea after looking at the Samsung 7" Tablet?

I think the difference is in the detail. Firstly, tablet size has never been an issue; Apple never complained that other companies produced 10" tablets. Secondly, if Apple substantially copied Samsung's design (disregarding whether Samsung's design may have been copied from Apple in the first place), then that would be an issue, but no evidence has been presented to that effect. Or are you suggesting that Samsung has patented the concept of a 7" tablet, irrespective of what it looks like?
post #13 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post


how is sammy changing the icons to the same color and style of Apple's icons improving them? Why couldn't Sammy make their own icons or keep the default Android icons?

All that was obvious, don't cha know. There is absolutely no other way to way to do anything except the way Apple does it... though surprisingly only right after Apple does it.

Seriously though, it's unbelievable people could actually defend this type of behavior for a company. Even if you like Samsung their fans should at least have the ability to be reasonably fair and honest. It's all sounding quite pathetic that what DaHarder once said was stupid, dumb, pointless, and guaranteed to fail he's now saying was natural, obvious, and self-evident.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #14 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


All that was obvious, don't cha know. There is absolutely no other way to way to do anything except the way Apple does it... though surprisingly only right after Apple does it.

The entire situation - in a nutshell.
post #15 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post

 

Why the **** are you here if you don't think Apple as a company deserves a shred of credit and don't like any of their products? I'm serious. Why? Why waste your time on an Apple fan site?

 

Just because I happen to own dozens upon dozens of Apple products doesn't mean that they do no wrong.... It's a Tech Company, Not A Cult.

 

700

"Why iPhone"... Hmmm?
Reply
"Why iPhone"... Hmmm?
Reply
post #16 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post

Why the **** are you here if you don't think Apple as a company deserves a shred of credit and don't like any of their products? I'm serious. Why? Why waste your time on an Apple fan site?

Just because I happen to own dozens upon dozens of Apple products doesn't mean that they do no wrong.... It's a Tech Company, Not A Cult.


Maybe you missed the point of the post. It's not that they do nothing wrong, it's that according to you they do nothing right. Can you point to a single positive post you have ever made about Apple or Apple products.
post #17 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

All that was obvious, don't cha know. There is absolutely no other way to way to do anything except the way Apple does it... though surprisingly only right after Apple does it.
Seriously though, it's unbelievable people could actually defend this type of behavior for a company. Even if you like Samsung their fans should at least have the ability to be reasonably fair and honest. It's all sounding quite pathetic that what DaHarder once said was stupid, dumb, pointless, and guaranteed to fail he's now saying was natural, obvious, and self-evident.

It's also unbelievable that they pay someone to be Chief Strategy Officer. After all, their strategy is simple:

Apple strategy:
Brainstorm
Choose the best ideas
Make a bunch of prototypes
Based on decades of experience in meeting customer needs and some of the best minds in the industry, choose the best prototype
Build it and sell it.

Samsung strategy:
Brainstorm
Choose the best ideas
Make a bunch of prototypes
Look in the trade magazines to see what Apple did and copy it.
Build it and sell it.

I sure hope they're not paying the Chief Strategy Officer very much to come up with that strategy.
"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 #18 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

Maybe you missed the point of the post. It's not that they do nothing wrong, it's that according to you they do nothing right. Can you point to a single positive post you have ever made about Apple or Apple products.

He really did jump from a base of "This is the dumbest thing ever" to "This is the only way ever" when it comes to Apple's products.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #19 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

Maybe you missed the point of the post. It's not that they do nothing wrong, it's that according to you they do nothing right. Can you point to a single positive post you have ever made about Apple or Apple products.

He really did jump from a base of "This is the dumbest thing ever" to "This is the only way ever" when it comes to Apple's products.

And along the way he bought truckloads of them for himself, his family and friends.
post #20 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

Maybe you missed the point of the post. It's not that they do nothing wrong, it's that according to you they do nothing right. Can you point to a single positive post you have ever made about Apple or Apple products.

Not True... and just because you appear to be highly 'selective' as to which posts you deem Apple-worthy is of no concern to me.

I support Apple, as well as any other company I choose, by buying/using their products... because that's all that really matters ;-)
"Why iPhone"... Hmmm?
Reply
"Why iPhone"... Hmmm?
Reply
post #21 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

It's also unbelievable that they pay someone to be Chief Strategy Officer. After all, their strategy is simple:
Apple strategy:
Brainstorm
Choose the best ideas
Make a bunch of prototypes
Based on decades of experience in meeting customer needs and some of the best minds in the industry, choose the best prototype
Build it and sell it.
Samsung strategy:
Brainstorm
Choose the best ideas
Make a bunch of prototypes
Look in the trade magazines to see what Apple did and copy it.
Build it and sell it.
I sure hope they're not paying the Chief Strategy Officer very much to come up with that strategy.

They really don't wbat is good. They corporate structure always seemed like it had passion for what it makes but this trial is just making it obvious. Apple made what appears to be dozens of prototypes and yet after years or work that started with a tablet they released a single smartphone. Samsung et al. really do seem to change one little thing or put one little idea into a design and then sell it, after which they then wait to see if it's popular or not.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #22 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

And along the way he bought truckloads of them for himself, his family and friends.

I always wondered what happened to that tractor-trailer full of RiM PlayBooks.


DaHarder, where were you on the night of December 17th, 2011?

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #23 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

I always wondered what happened to that tractor-trailer full of RiM PlayBooks.
DaHarder, where were you on the night of December 17th, 2011?

Minding My Own Business... Something you appear to be woefully incapable of doing.
"Why iPhone"... Hmmm?
Reply
"Why iPhone"... Hmmm?
Reply
post #24 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

Maybe you missed the point of the post. It's not that they do nothing wrong, it's that according to you they do nothing right. Can you point to a single positive post you have ever made about Apple or Apple products.

Not True... and just because you appear to be highly 'selective' as to which posts you deem Apple-worthy is of no concern to me.

I support Apple, as well as any other company I choose, by buying/using their products... because that's all that really matters ;-)

That's a splendidly evasive answer. Bravo.
post #25 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post

Why the **** are you here if you don't think Apple as a company deserves a shred of credit and don't like any of their products? I'm serious. Why? Why waste your time on an Apple fan site?

The ignore list works ... Well until folks quote, the dear nice person.
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
post #26 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

That's a splendidly evasive answer. Bravo.

If Android's UI was as smooth as DaHarder's evasiveness maybe the iPhone and iPad wouldn't be making about 90% of all the profit between the two of them.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #27 of 390
I'm getting so tired of the stupid comment about rectangles. I don't recall too many pre iPad or iPhone products being circular or triangular. All the crappy designs Samsung had before iPhones were rectangular! A crack berry is rectangular, an Etch A Sketch is rectangular. Do Apple care about those products?

If the moron were working for a car company and copied a well know market leader's SL500 design almost identically I bet he'd be saying to a judge "You can't patent a box with four wheels, we did nothing wrong, we designed it long before Mercedes. Besides, there is prior art in Jules Verne"
Edited by digitalclips - 8/3/12 at 8:00pm
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
post #28 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

That's a splendidly evasive answer. Bravo.

If Android's UI was as smooth as DaHarder's evasiveness maybe the iPhone and iPad wouldn't be making about 90% of all the profit between the two of them.

True. And I'm thinking there might be a spot for him on Samsung's legal team. They sure could use some of that smoothness, and how could his incisive arguments not impress the jury?
post #29 of 390

But Samsung does it around the dinner table.

post #30 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post

 

Why the **** are you here if you don't think Apple as a company deserves a shred of credit and don't like any of their products? I'm serious. Why? Why waste your time on an Apple fan site?

My 2 cents...

 

I like Apple products (can't stand the company)

 

I think they deserve some credit, but not 2.5 billion dollars of money they didn't earn. They are doing quite well with the 40(?) billion dollars they have stashed away, much of which they keep overseas to avoid paying taxes in the U.S.

 

I am not wasting my time. I often find useful information and even occasionally (getting rarer and rarer) have a reasonable discussion.

post #31 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by lamewing View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post

Why the **** are you here if you don't think Apple as a company deserves a shred of credit and don't like any of their products? I'm serious. Why? Why waste your time on an Apple fan site?
My 2 cents...

I like Apple products (can't stand the company)

I think they deserve some credit, but not 2.5 billion dollars of money they didn't earn. They are doing quite well with the 40(?) billion dollars they have stashed away, much of which they keep overseas to avoid paying taxes in the U.S.

I am not wasting my time. I often find useful information and even occasionally (getting rarer and rarer) have a reasonable discussion.

Just curious - why can't you stand the company? Presumably not just the tax thing.
post #32 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post

As ALL companies likely 'size up' their wares against the competition, and then seek to improve upon said competition's efforts.
Apple has made a complete industry out of doing exactly this... Inventing Nothing but Improving Upon What Others Already Created.

Sure, look at how to mimic the competition, then at trial say that it's not copying because that's the logical design anyway. Well then why didn't they come up with it on their own years before Apple got into the phone business? Simple - because they didn't have Apple to copy before the iPhone showed up. It's clearly just copying, no improvement to be seen if they're arguing that those icons and that phone shape was just obvious. But whaaaatever, let the jury make the call.

post #33 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post

As ALL companies likely 'size up' their wares against the competition, and then seek to improve upon said competition's efforts.
Apple has made a complete industry out of doing exactly this... Inventing Nothing but Improving Upon What Others Already Created.

So Henry Ford invented the assembly line and revolutionized the auto industry producing the Model-T.  And you are saying that Apple has basically done the same?  Why is that such a crime?  You sound like you don't like Apple and what they did for the Smart Phone.  Maybe you think we should all turn in our iPhones and go with Samsung because Apple copied others who couldn't get it right?  WTF is you beef dude?

 

One more thing.  Consider the Dyson Vacuum Cleaner.  IS he guilty of designing a better vacuum based off of the old designs.  No he is guilty of being sick and tired of sub par vacuums that are a pain in the ass so he did something about it.  So Orec (a vacuum manufacturer) should sue him or take him to court for basically making something that has existed for nearly a century.  Even though it existed for nearly a century doesn't make the Dyson Vacuum wrong.  It makes it good.  Every person has the right in this country to file for a patent on their invention and enjoy the spoils of the creative work they have achieved.  That makes it good for the inventor.  That way he can live a better life knowing that the competition can't copy him and destroy any such profit based on his genius and ingenuity.


Edited by tylerk36 - 8/3/12 at 8:16pm
An Apple man since 1977
Reply
An Apple man since 1977
Reply
post #34 of 390

Sounds like someone doesn't like to hear someone with a different opinion.  Keep drinking the koolaid buddy.

post #35 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


All that was obvious, don't cha know. There is absolutely no other way to way to do anything except the way Apple does it... though surprisingly only right after Apple does it.
Seriously though, it's unbelievable people could actually defend this type of behavior for a company. Even if you like Samsung their fans should at least have the ability to be reasonably fair and honest. It's all sounding quite pathetic that what DaHarder once said was stupid, dumb, pointless, and guaranteed to fail he's now saying was natural, obvious, and self-evident.

So what is Samsung to do? 

1. Don't use the bounce. OK.

2. Don't use the double tap. OK

3. Don't use a horizontal swipe to unlock. OK.

I think all of those things could be easily licensed easily enough.

 

So what should Apple do? 

1. Pay the licensing fees for the FRAND patents.

 

So, the only issue is trade and dress. Should Samsung not be allowed to make black or white tablets? Should Samsung not be able to make a tablet that is as thin or thinner than the competition? Should Samsung not be able to use a glass touchscreen? 

 

These are serious questions. At what point does Apple "own" the tablet design that uses black/white, rectangular shape, glass touchscreen panel, etc etc? Is Apple the ONLY company that can use this design. Must everyone else make an ugly looking tablet? I base the idea of attractiveness on what the customer expects. There are certain car designs elements that are expected in a sleek and sexy car. So if Toyota wants to make a sleek sports car must they avoid using smooth lines so as not to upset the other automobile manufacturers? 

 

At some point this crap has to end.

post #36 of 390

good point

post #37 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron Stone View Post

Sounds like someone doesn't like to hear someone with a different opinion.  Keep drinking the koolaid buddy.

You talking to DaHarder or someone else?
post #38 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

That's a splendidly evasive answer. Bravo.

I found his posts much easier to understand after enabling the block list.
Originally Posted by Granmastak: Labor unions managed to kill manufacturing a long time ago with their unreasonable demands. Now the people they were trying to protect, are out of a job.
Reply
Originally Posted by Granmastak: Labor unions managed to kill manufacturing a long time ago with their unreasonable demands. Now the people they were trying to protect, are out of a job.
Reply
post #39 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by lamewing View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

All that was obvious, don't cha know. There is absolutely no other way to way to do anything except the way Apple does it... though surprisingly only right after Apple does it.

Seriously though, it's unbelievable people could actually defend this type of behavior for a company. Even if you like Samsung their fans should at least have the ability to be reasonably fair and honest. It's all sounding quite pathetic that what DaHarder once said was stupid, dumb, pointless, and guaranteed to fail he's now saying was natural, obvious, and self-evident.
So what is Samsung to do? 
1. Don't use the bounce. OK.
2. Don't use the double tap. OK
3. Don't use a horizontal swipe to unlock. OK.
I think all of those things could be easily licensed easily enough.

So what should Apple do? 
1. Pay the licensing fees for the FRAND patents.

So, the only issue is trade and dress. Should Samsung not be allowed to make black or white tablets? Should Samsung not be able to make a tablet that is as thin or thinner than the competition? Should Samsung not be able to use a glass touchscreen? 

These are serious questions. At what point does Apple "own" the tablet design that uses black/white, rectangular shape, glass touchscreen panel, etc etc? Is Apple the ONLY company that can use this design. Must everyone else make an ugly looking tablet? I base the idea of attractiveness on what the customer expects. There are certain car designs elements that are expected in a sleek and sexy car. So if Toyota wants to make a sleek sports car must they avoid using smooth lines so as not to upset the other automobile manufacturers? 

At some point this crap has to end.

Those are all reasonable questions, but doesn't the issue come down to the sum of the parts? It's not a big deal, I think, if a company brings out a device that shares some characteristics with another company's designs, but when it adds up to the appearance of substantially trying to imitate, then it goes too far. And there are plenty of tablets out there that don't do that. Where to draw the line is going to be difficult, but these lawsuits will probably point the way.
post #40 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by uguysrnuts View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

That's a splendidly evasive answer. Bravo.

I found his posts much easier to understand after enabling the block list.

Seems like a cop out to me; aside from depriving yourself of the comedy value of those posters, I like to think that I am able to perform my own filtering on what I read and respond to. I'm deluding myself of course.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Side-by-side iPhone, Galaxy S comparison revealed in internal Samsung 'evaluation report'