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' - Page 7

post #241 of 390
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post
* Did I take it too far with the pun?

 

To be Frank, I'm just Göring to sit over here and Goebbel down some Dönitz before this conversation gets truly Mengeled. Don't want to get caught up in a heilstorm of ideologies.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #242 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

To be Frank, I'm just Göring to sit over here and Goebbel down some Dönitz before this conversation gets truly Mengeled. Don't want to get caught up in a heilstorm of ideologies.


Auschwitz, now you've done it!

"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 #243 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

?? The judge is from South Korea, or does he have a picture of South Korea behind him?

I don't know, perhaps you could ask one of the South Korean tourists in the Quinn Emanuel tour group.

http://www.fosspatents.com/2012/08/samsungs-lawyers-breached-rules-again.html?m=1
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #244 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

?? The judge is from South Korea, or does he have a picture of South Korea behind him?

The judge is a woman.

"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 #245 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

PPS: Any site that requires Adobe Flash I'm referring to as being Flashist. I suppose that mean I'm evoking Godwin's Rule but perhaps we need to make the world notice which sites only support Flashism.
Wouldn't that...in effect...make you a Flashist dictator?

We've always been at war with Eastasia...

Reply

We've always been at war with Eastasia...

Reply
post #246 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by diplication View Post

Wouldn't that...in effect...make you a Flashist dictator?

Gotta give you an Olympics edition "high five" for that one.

"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 #247 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Auschwitz, now you've done it!

Das butt!
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #248 of 390

Not to mention, in the shortly becoming a war zone the 4G LTE patents and technology, Apple is very much defenseless there, and it can only hope for FRAND as its cover.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LuxoM3 View Post

I have a feeling Apple isn't in HDTVs yet because all the people who they are suing right now, have those HDTV patents!

 

 

 

 
 
post #249 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcrs View Post

Not to mention, in the shortly becoming a war zone the 4G LTE patents and technology, Apple is very much defenseless there, and it can only hope for FRAND as its cover.

1) Apple bought Nortel patents for the 4G LTE.

2) Your foolish claim ignores Qualcomm, a company that probably holds the most and certainly the best 4G LTE tech patents and makes their money by selling components to vendors who them in their devices. Why exactly will Qualcomm stop selling to Apple especially after their relationship goes back a very long time and Qualcomm has been making specific chip models just for Apple?

"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 #250 of 390

This rectangles argument that Samsung seems to give major insight into why Samsung copied Apple. It's because they felt they had the right to. Because all they were copying were rectangles, you can't patent rectangles. Probably the same reason they made their headphones white. You can't patent that either. But the problem is they kept making all their design choices like that and before long their entire product line up looked like cheap copies of Apple's devices. If it were just the shape of the device or the layout of the icons on the screen, Apple would have a tough case to make, but Samsung copied everything down to the style of the accessories that they sell for the device.

post #251 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by uguysrnuts View Post


'wouldn't be surprised if they are actually owned by his neighbor.

 

Or owned by anybody other than him.

 

He criticizes Apple so much that I find it hard to believe that he has ever owned a single Apple product.

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." Douglas Adams

Reply

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." Douglas Adams

Reply
post #252 of 390

You make it way too easy. 

 

The now bankrupt Nortel's 4G LTE patent portfolio amounts to a measly 150 patents which is now own by Apple-Microsoft-Sony-RIM consortium, representing about a tiny 1.8% of seminal 4G LTE patent portfolio. As I have said in my earlier posts with regard to 4G LTE patents, Android partners own about 30+% of 4G LTE portfolio. Qualcomm has about 700+ or so 4G LTE patents. Meanwhile, the "copycat and "not innovative" Samsung has almost 1200 patents in 4G LTE. Apple will definitely use Qualcomm chips because there is no other way to defend itself when the 4G LTE patent war starts at some point the future. That is Apple approach at this point, "to duck and cover." Unless, of course, Apple suddenly bought Nokia, but even this will not help much of its pickled situation. It sort of explains Apple idiotic moves in both Australian and Europe where they sold Ipad3 with wrong 4G LTE chip there? They will be eaten alive by oversea's 4G LTE patent holders if it makes a "wrong move", which literally means installing the "right" chip. If you see the list of ownerships of all 4G LTE patents, only about 30% of the patents come from the US and Canadian companies. 

 

source: http://www.i-runway.com/iRunway_4G_LTE_Patent_Analysis.html

Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


1) Apple bought Nortel patents for the 4G LTE.
2) Your foolish claim ignores Qualcomm, a company that probably holds the most and certainly the best 4G LTE tech patents and makes their money by selling components to vendors who them in their devices. Why exactly will Qualcomm stop selling to Apple especially after their relationship goes back a very long time and Qualcomm has been making specific chip models just for Apple?
post #253 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcrs View Post

You make it way too easy. 

The now bankrupt Nortel's 4G LTE patent portfolio amounts to a measly 150 patents which is now own by Apple-Microsoft-Sony-RIM consortium, representing about a tiny 1.8% of seminal 4G LTE patent portfolio. As I have said in my earlier posts with regard to 4G LTE patents, Android partners own about 30+% of 4G LTE portfolio. Qualcomm has about 700+ or so 4G LTE patents. Meanwhile, the "copycat and "not innovative" Samsung has almost 1200 patents in 4G LTE. Apple will definitely use Qualcomm chips because there is no other way to defend itself when the 4G LTE patent war starts at some point the future. That is Apple approach at this point, "to duck and cover." Unless, of course, Apple suddenly bought Nokia, but even this will not help much of its pickled situation. It sort of explains Apple idiotic moves in both Australian and Europe where they sold Ipad3 with wrong 4G LTE chip there? They will be eaten alive by oversea's 4G LTE patent holders. If you see the list of ownerships of all 4G LTE patents, only about 30% of the patents come from the US and Canadian companies. 

source: http://www.i-runway.com/iRunway_4G_LTE_Patent_Analysis.html

1) You say they are going to " duck and cover" and yet they've already released the iPad with 4G LTE and are likely to do so with this year's iPhone. Not exactly ducking nor covering.

2) You're going with Apple didn't know what what 4G LTE was when they released the iPad (3) in Australia? They used the "wrong chip"? Perhaps you should educate yourself on the technology because the 4G LTE baseband processor in the iPad (3) works perfectly fine in Australia. What the iPad (3) doesn't have is the operating band for 4G LTE in Australia and most other countries. It has 3 which appear to be the limit of that baseband.

3) What the frak does being US or Canada-owned have to do with Apple being able to use license tech in a global economy. Guess where ARM is located?

"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 #254 of 390

FWIW.

post #255 of 390

It points to the momentum shift from North America to elsewhere in patents that matters to people, i.e. HDTV, 4G LTE, etc... So people overseas don't patent rectangles because they've been living with rectangles since eons ago. The two ancient civilizations in the world , the Korean and Chinese civilizations, have enjoyed living with rectangular, circular and triangular objects since thousands of years before Christ was even born. In addition, people all over love to use rectangular objects with sharp edges because they enjoy to hurt their arms, bodies and legs when they use them. After all, in all of us, apparently, deep inside all of us, we have that hidden masochistic side awaiting to be discovered.

 

And, to make you happier, I will fix my original statement:

It sort of explains Apple idiotic moves in both Australian and Europe where they sold Ipad3 with wrong 4G LTE band there?

And, of course, ala fanboism, you BELIEVE Apple's explanation of what's going on. 

 

In any case, Apple is still behaving rather idiotic. Apple is selling IPAD3 without studying its market? Hmmm,. It feels very un-Apple like. But wait, what if Apple can get away with it. It can rely on fanboism. Fanbois are like those people with "hidden masochistic" tendencies. They will either let it slide or start blaming themselves for living in the wrong countries. But, Apple offer refunds for those who are not happy with their Ipad3 in those countries, but not before being threatened with class lawsuits. It is like that "never happened" DEATH GRIP issue. The funny thing is Apple offered 12 bucks for every Iphone owners with this specific issue, but, again, only after it was settled out of court in late February 2012.

 

The late SJ famously commented on this incident: "Gripping any phone will result in some attenuation of its antenna performance, with certain places being worse than others depending on the placement of the antennas. This is a fact of life for every wireless phone. If you ever experience this on your iPhone 4, avoid gripping it in the lower left corner in a way that covers both sides of the black strip in the metal band, or simply use one of many available cases." I wonder if Apple has already been granted a patent by USPTO for "THE CORRECT GRIP" complete with its schematics. As far as I know, there is no "prior art" for this idiocy.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post
3) What the frak does being US or Canada-owned have to do with Apple being able to use license tech in a global economy. Guess where ARM is located?

Edited by mcrs - 8/4/12 at 11:15pm
post #256 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 man likes to cry about things. Let's comfort him.

post #257 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcrs View Post

It points to the momentum shift from North America to elsewhere in patents that matters to people, i.e. HDTV, 4G LTE, etc... So people overseas don't patent rectangles because they've been living with rectangles since eons ago. The two ancient civilizations in the world , the Korean and Chinese civilizations, have enjoyed living with rectangular, circular and triangular objects since thousands of years before Christ was even born. In addition, people all over love to use rectangular objects with sharp edges because they enjoy to hurt their arms, bodies and legs when they use them. After all, in all of us, apparently, deep inside all of us, we have that hidden masochistic side awaiting to be discovered.

 

And, to make you happier, I will fix my original statement:

It sort of explains Apple idiotic moves in both Australian and Europe where they sold Ipad3 with wrong 4G LTE band there?

And, of course, ala fanboism, you BELIEVE Apple's explanation of what's going on. 

 

In any case, Apple is still behaving rather idiotic. Apple is selling IPAD3 without studying its market? Hmmm,. It feels very un-Apple like. But wait, what if Apple can get away with it. It can rely on fanboism. Fanbois are like those people with "hidden masochistic" tendencies. They will either let it slide or start blaming themselves for living in the wrong countries. But, Apple offer refunds for those who are not happy with their Ipad3 in those countries, but not before being threatened with class lawsuits. It is like that "never happened" DEATH GRIP issue. The funny thing is Apple offered 12 bucks for every Iphone owners with this specific issue, but, again, only after it was settled out of court in late February 2012.

 

The late SJ famously commented on this incident: "Gripping any phone will result in some attenuation of its antenna performance, with certain places being worse than others depending on the placement of the antennas. This is a fact of life for every wireless phone. If you ever experience this on your iPhone 4, avoid gripping it in the lower left corner in a way that covers both sides of the black strip in the metal band, or simply use one of many available cases." I wonder if Apple has already been granted a patent by USPTO for "THE CORRECT GRIP" complete with its schematics. As far as I know, there is no "prior art" for this idiocy.

 

Wow someone needs a midol 

iMac 2007, Macbook pro 2008, Mac Mini 2011
Reply
iMac 2007, Macbook pro 2008, Mac Mini 2011
Reply
post #258 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

I don't know, perhaps you could ask one of the South Korean tourists in the Quinn Emanuel tour group.
http://www.fosspatents.com/2012/08/samsungs-lawyers-breached-rules-again.html?m=1

Oh, you are referring to the nationality of the judge, why couldn't you just say that to start with. She is American, she was born in the USA. I feel your concerns are with her parents, or grandparents.
post #259 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

The judge is a woman.

Thanks, doesn't fully clear up what they were going on about
post #260 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


Even in this court case there was an issue with Samsung's lawyers knowing which device was which. That said, I'm not sure of the context; it might have been between different Samsung devices. Hopefully someone will put the following remarks into focus for me.
"Samsung got its own phones confused when cross-examining Schiller, handing him the wrong one. Schiller comments, "Well, they're confusing"."

Samsung's counsel was naming and then showing several phones to Schiller and asking if they resembled iPhones. After a couple of them had been presented he named another but showed Schiller a different Samsung device than the one he had named. So different Samsung phones. It was funny tho put in context.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #261 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcrs View Post

You make it way too easy. 

 

The now bankrupt Nortel's 4G LTE patent portfolio amounts to a measly 150 patents which is now own by Apple-Microsoft-Sony-RIM consortium, representing about a tiny 1.8% of seminal 4G LTE patent portfolio. As I have said in my earlier posts with regard to 4G LTE patents, Android partners own about 30+% of 4G LTE portfolio. Qualcomm has about 700+ or so 4G LTE patents. Meanwhile, the "copycat and "not innovative" Samsung has almost 1200 patents in 4G LTE. Apple will definitely use Qualcomm chips because there is no other way to defend itself when the 4G LTE patent war starts at some point the future. That is Apple approach at this point, "to duck and cover." Unless, of course, Apple suddenly bought Nokia, but even this will not help much of its pickled situation. It sort of explains Apple idiotic moves in both Australian and Europe where they sold Ipad3 with wrong 4G LTE chip there? They will be eaten alive by oversea's 4G LTE patent holders if it makes a "wrong move", which literally means installing the "right" chip. If you see the list of ownerships of all 4G LTE patents, only about 30% of the patents come from the US and Canadian companies. 

 

source: http://www.i-runway.com/iRunway_4G_LTE_Patent_Analysis.html

 

To quote Google's patent trolling surrogate "It only takes one bullet to kill."

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #262 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

 

To quote Google's patent trolling surrogate "It only takes one bullet to kill."

I thought it was your opinion that practicing companies like Apple, Moto, Sony, etc couldn't be considered trolls? Am I mistaken?

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #263 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

I thought it was your opinion that practicing companies like Apple, Moto, Sony, etc couldn't be considered trolls? Am I mistaken?

 

My opinion is that Google have become a bunch of sleaze bags since figuring out that they can make money out of selling information about people attracted to their honeypots to advertisers.

 

I actively promoted them when they came out of Stanford in the mid nineties, unfortunately they became corrupted by greed.

 

Google's abuse of standards essential patents using Motorola is the lowest form of patent trolling.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #264 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcrs View Post

It points to the momentum shift from North America to elsewhere in patents that matters to people, i.e. HDTV, 4G LTE, etc... So people overseas don't patent rectangles because they've been living with rectangles since eons ago.

But since you can't patent rectangles in the U.S., either, that's a silly point.

You CAN get a design patent for a specific design that might contain a rectangle, but that's true around the world, as well (at least in countries that have design patents).

I really wish we could find some brighter trolls.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcrs View Post

IThe late SJ famously commented on this incident: "Gripping any phone will result in some attenuation of its antenna performance, with certain places being worse than others depending on the placement of the antennas. This is a fact of life for every wireless phone. If you ever experience this on your iPhone 4, avoid gripping it in the lower left corner in a way that covers both sides of the black strip in the metal band, or simply use one of many available cases." I wonder if Apple has already been granted a patent by USPTO for "THE CORRECT GRIP" complete with its schematics. As far as I know, there is no "prior art" for this idiocy.

Idiocy? What's wrong with Jobs' statement? It has been confirmed repeatedly by independent labs around the world. ANY phone has its signal attenuated when you grip it and the amount of attenuation varies.

Again, it's a shame we can't have brighter trolls.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

Forget the galaxy S (I think Samsung is guilty there) but do people here REALLY think the Galaxy Tab 10.1 looks like an iPad? Not even the OS is similar in almost any way...
I genuinely want to know...

Then ask the Samsung attorneys who couldn't tell the difference in a court room (I wonder if that will be admissible in this trial).

Or, ask Samsung for the documents they filed in court that said that the #1 reason for returns at Best Buy were because the customer thought they were buying an iPad and found out when they got home that it wasn't.

Arguing that they don't look similar enough to confuse is disingenuous, at best, and outright trolling at worst.
"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 #265 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

 

My opinion is that Google have become a bunch of sleaze bags since figuring out that they can make money out of selling information about people attracted to their honeypots to advertisers.

 

I actively promoted them when they came out of Stanford in the mid nineties, unfortunately they became corrupted by greed.

 

Google's abuse of standards essential patents using Motorola is the lowest form of patent trolling.

Wasn't their original goal to make money from advertising back when you "actively promoted them"? 

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #266 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post


I also doubt they are paid for posting here, but why did you assume that you are in that supposed category?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post


I've been accused before.

 

Not by me, although, it's not the first time you've gotten all defensive when I've mentioned shills. I've always just thought that you don't think or write clearly enough for someone to pay you to do this.

post #267 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


Not by me, although, it's not the first time you've gotten all defensive when I've mentioned shills. I've always just thought that you don't think or write clearly enough for someone to pay you to do this.

Yep. If these trolls are shills, their employers aren't getting their money's worth.
"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 #268 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

 

My opinion is that Google have become a bunch of sleaze bags since figuring out that they can make money out of selling information about people attracted to their honeypots to advertisers.

 

I actively promoted them when they came out of Stanford in the mid nineties, unfortunately they became corrupted by greed.

 

Google's abuse of standards essential patents using Motorola is the lowest form of patent trolling.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Wasn't their original goal to make money from advertising back when you "actively promoted them"? 

 

Advertising isn't the same as violating individual privacy to build profiles sold to advertisers. It's interesting that you can't make that distinction, though.

post #269 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


But since you can't patent rectangles in the U.S., either, that's a silly point.
You CAN get a design patent for a specific design that might contain a rectangle, but that's true around the world, as well (at least in countries that have design patents).

I agree with you Jr. You can't patent a rectangle.

 

So as to put all that silly talk to rest, and since you understand it so well, could you explain in words to those less knowledgeable what Apple is claiming ownership of with this patent they're asserting against Samsung smartphones?

http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/gadgetlab/2012/07/087patent.pdf

 

Forum members have a lot of respect for what you have to say, so your explanation of what Apple has patented would go a long ways towards putting all this talk about rounded rectangles to bed.

 

Of note to others who follow the patent link, anything Apple has shown with dotted lines is not part of their patent claims and for "illustrative purposes only". They're not claiming the protected design applies to anything other than a one-dimension view as far as I can tell, but Jragosta can probably explain better than I can.


Edited by Gatorguy - 8/5/12 at 6:58am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #270 of 390
Samsung doesn't copy Apple..really they don't.

apple_v_samsung_evidence.png
post #271 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

I agree with you Jr. You can't patent a rectangle.

 

So as to put all that silly talk to rest, and since you understand it so well, could you explain in words to those less knowledgeable what Apple is claiming ownership of with this patent they're asserting against Samsung smartphones?

http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/gadgetlab/2012/07/087patent.pdf

 

Forum members have a lot of respect for what you have to say, so your explanation of what Apple has patented would go a long ways towards putting all this talk about rounded rectangles to bed.

 

The simple answer is that the design patent describes a 3-dimensional object, thus, it clearly isn't a rectangle. But, it's obvious to anyone who actually looks at the patent for 30 seconds that there is much, much more to it than just a cuboid. But, then, you and Samsung's lawyers know that. You are, as usual, being disingenuous. I guess you were, also as usual, hoping no one would actually follow your link. I don't think you've ever posted a link that actually supports your assertions.

post #272 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcrs View Post

It points to the momentum shift from North America to elsewhere in patents that matters to people, i.e. HDTV, 4G LTE, etc... So people overseas don't patent rectangles because they've been living with rectangles since eons ago. The two ancient civilizations in the world , the Korean and Chinese civilizations, have enjoyed living with rectangular, circular and triangular objects since thousands of years before Christ was even born. In addition, people all over love to use rectangular objects with sharp edges because they enjoy to hurt their arms, bodies and legs when they use them. After all, in all of us, apparently, deep inside all of us, we have that hidden masochistic side awaiting to be discovered.

And, to make you happier, I will fix my original statement:
It sort of explains Apple idiotic moves in both Australian and Europe where they sold Ipad3 with wrong 4G LTE band there?
And, of course, ala fanboism, you BELIEVE Apple's explanation of what's going on. 

In any case, Apple is still behaving rather idiotic. Apple is selling IPAD3 without studying its market? Hmmm,. It feels very un-Apple like. But wait, what if Apple can get away with it. It can rely on fanboism. Fanbois are like those people with "hidden masochistic" tendencies. They will either let it slide or start blaming themselves for living in the wrong countries. But, Apple offer refunds for those who are not happy with their Ipad3 in those countries, but not before being threatened with class lawsuits. It is like that "never happened" DEATH GRIP issue. The funny thing is Apple offered 12 bucks for every Iphone owners with this specific issue, but, again, only after it was settled out of court in late February 2012.

The late SJ famously commented on this incident: "Gripping any phone will result in some attenuation of its antenna performance, with certain places being worse than others depending on the placement of the antennas. This is a fact of life for every wireless phone. If you ever experience this on your iPhone 4, avoid gripping it in the lower left corner in a way that covers both sides of the black strip in the metal band, or simply use one of many available cases." I wonder if Apple has already been granted a patent by USPTO for "THE CORRECT GRIP" complete with its schematics. As far as I know, there is no "prior art" for this idiocy.


So many idiotic comments in a single post that you must be trolling. I'll split the difference and note Apple never advertised 4G LTE as working in Australia so there was no wrong operating bands being used (which is difference from your original comment) and go ahead and follow the more intelligent posters on this forum by putting you on my ignore list.

"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 #273 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Samsung doesn't copy Apple..really they don't.
apple_v_samsung_evidence.png

Wow. That alone should make the case a slam dunk. Samsung makes prototypes and then decides to modify the prototypes because they're not close enough to Apple's product.

It's really amazing how many people will still insist that Samsung wasn't copying Apple and all cell phones must have shaded icons and 'fluid rounded corners' on the icons. Samsung didn't, copy, it's just natural (other than, of course, the fact that their original prototype didn't have those things.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

I agree with you Jr. You can't patent a rectangle.

So as to put all that silly talk to rest, and since you understand it so well, could you explain in words to those less knowledgeable what Apple is claiming ownership of with this patent they're asserting against Samsung smartphones?

http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/gadgetlab/2012/07/087patent.pdf



 



Forum members have a lot of respect for what you have to say, so your explanation of what Apple has patented would go a long ways towards putting all this talk about rounded rectangles to bed.

Of note to others who follow the patent link, anything shown with dotted lines is not part of the patent claims, so it's not describing a 3-dimensional object.

The link you provided has 48 figures and a bunch of text. If you can't figure it out, you need help beyond what anyone can provide here.

As for it not being a 3 dimensional object, you couldn't be more wrong. EVERY object on the planet is three dimensional. Obviously, they're describing a three dimensional object.
"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 #274 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Samsung doesn't copy Apple..really they don't.

apple_v_samsung_evidence.png

If the document is authentic then it does look like bad news for Samsung's defense. Trying to counter that kind of solid evidence with "Apple was inspired by Sony" or "Apple are now thinking of entering the 7" tablet market" seems unlikely to cut it, even with an average jury.
post #275 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post
The link you provided has 48 figures and a bunch of text. If you can't figure it out, you need help beyond what anyone can provide here.
As for it not being a 3 dimensional object, you couldn't be more wrong. EVERY object on the planet is three dimensional. Obviously, they're describing a three dimensional object.

As I said in my earlier post, it's very clear to you what Apple is claiming, unlike many of us. Since your understanding of it is much better than most, please do the forum members (and not me) a favor and continue to explain what Apple is really claiming so that any possible validity to those "Apple patented a rounded rectangle" stories can be put to rest once and for all. I agree there's more to it than those two elements IMO.

 

You have an opportunity to share your understanding of it so the rest of us can understand too. Simply telling others they're wrong about "rounded rectangles" doesn't mean much if you can't explain why they're wrong. I'm confident you can.


Edited by Gatorguy - 8/5/12 at 7:21am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #276 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Wow. That alone should make the case a slam dunk. Samsung makes prototypes and then decides to modify the prototypes because they're not close enough to Apple's product.

That isn't how I read that image. I'd argue 1( their comparison to the 3D effect and icon edge was that it had to be more like Apple's but that it wasn't nearly as good as Apple's because it lacked fluidity. This is the comparative evaluation that one Apple exec talked about on the stand, and 2) their mention of the icons was to show that it was too close to the iPhone, meaning they should be made more unique as to not be confusing. That said, this is very damaging but whoever made this image was clearly trying to show where they could improve on the UI and one of those ways to not make it so iOS-like.

"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 #277 of 390
I am not someone that blindly defends Apple and condemns Android. In general, I would defend Android itself from various accusations. That said, I think Samsung has knowingly and intentionally designed their products and UI to look  like the iPhone and it would confuse all but the most trained eye.  They customized Android to be more like iOS- and I feel very different about that.

All major tech companies patent things that are obvious and should never have been awarded a patent, but that is an entirely different issue. The issue at question here is whether Samsung knowingly stole design elements and infringed Apple patents. Apple will use patents to prove that case, some I probably disagree with, but that's really irrelevant to whether Apple will win or loose.   I am sure Samsung tried to have some of the patents invalidated, but courts are pretty conservative with patents.  That is exactly why there are so many calls for patent reform.  Until that happens, Samsung and others must operate within the law, whether they agree with it or not. 

That said, with the level or disregard to intellectual property Samsung has shown, I doubt patent reform would prevent them from loosing this case.  Patent reform would change patent standards, not eliminate patents entirely. Apple is painting a pretty clear picture that the entire strategy was to copy the iPhone, and much of that evidence is from internal memos and emails. That is bad news for Samsung. 
post #278 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Wow. That alone should make the case a slam dunk. Samsung makes prototypes and then decides to modify the prototypes because they're not close enough to Apple's product.

That isn't how I read that image. I'd argue 1( their comparison to the 3D effect and icon edge was that it had to be more like Apple's but that it wasn't nearly as good as Apple's because it lacked fluidity. This is the comparative evaluation that one Apple exec talked about on the stand, and 2) their mention of the icons was to show that it was too close to the iPhone, meaning they should be made more unique as to not be confusing. That said, this is very damaging but whoever made this image was clearly trying to show where they could improve on the UI and one of those ways to not make it so iOS-like.

I'd agree, based on the 3rd direction listed, but the first two directions seem quite clearly intended to make it more similar to iOS. It suggests that there is a lack coherent direction and internal design inspiration at Samsung.
post #279 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by rednival View Post
All major tech companies patent things that are obvious and should never have been awarded a patent, but that is an entirely different issue. The issue at question here is whether Samsung knowingly stole design elements

I agree in general, and believe they borrowed just a bit too heavily in their original S series phones a few years back. I also think they've realized it's not worth it either, with making more unique design choices not all that expensive nor difficult compared to litigation.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #280 of 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

I'd agree, based on the 3rd direction listed, but the first two directions seem quite clearly intended to make it more similar to iOS. It suggests that there is a lack coherent direction and internal design inspiration at Samsung.

I can see that argument but I read it as an acknowledgement that it's not nearly as attractive as Apple's icons and they list two distinct reasons why. I'd argue that a more pleasant look and feel was what needed to be "copied", not simply making it look as close to iOS icons as possible. I me that is a distinct different in the focus of whoever made this comparison. That said, it does show that Samsung copied too many things too closet an then didn't change them when they were pointed out.

"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
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'