or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple seeks ban on sale of 8 Samsung smartphones
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple seeks ban on sale of 8 Samsung smartphones

post #1 of 42
Thread Starter 
Though a jury found that a wide range of Samsung products infringe upon Apple's patented inventions, Apple has informed the court that it only seeks to ban the sale of eight Samsung devices.

Though the trial involved a total of nearly 30 Samsung devices, just eight were named by Apple in a court filing on Monday. The following are the devices for which Apple seeks a court-ordered injunction:
  • Galaxy S 4G
  • Galaxy S2 AT&T
  • Galaxy S2 Skyrocket
  • Galaxy S2 T-Mobile
  • Galaxy S2 Epic 4G
  • Galaxy S Showcase
  • Droid Charge
  • Galaxy Prevail

Cited in the filing as reasons for the injunction are a total of seven patents. Those inventions are the same ones that a jury determined last week have been infringed upon by Samsung's mobile devices.

In particular, the Galaxy S 4G has been found to have infringed on all seven patents cited by Apple: Design patents D'677 and D'3905; utility patents '915, '381 and '163; and two more trade dress patents.

Various forms of the Galaxy S2 were also found as infringing upon a number of design and utility patents, while the Galaxy S Showcase violates Apple's design and trade dress patents. The Droid Charge infringes on one design patent, while the Galaxy Prevail violates all three of Apple's utility patents in the case.

Injunction


The full list represents just eight out of the 28 infringing products that were included in the jury's decision handed down last week. The jury also determined that Samsung should pay Apple more than a billion dollars in damages.

Apple's filing made on Monday asks the court for a preliminary injunction barring sale of the eight infringing devices, pending a potential final injunction against the smartphones.
post #2 of 42

This is all really irrellavent. (I believe) The only device currently sold here is the SII's, and they aren't even that popular anymore.

 

 


Tim Cook using Galaxy Tabs as frisbees

 

Reply

 

 


Tim Cook using Galaxy Tabs as frisbees

 

Reply
post #3 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by logandigges View Post

This is all really irrellavent. (I believe) The only device currently sold here is the SII's, and they aren't even that popular anymore.

I was about to ask how many of the devices are actually still on sale.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #4 of 42

Does the latest Galaxy SIII infringe on any of the patents? If so does that mean Apple needs to file a new case?

post #5 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Though a jury found that a wide range of Samsung products infringe upon Apple's patented inventions, Apple has informed the court that it only seeks to ban the sale of eight Samsung devices.
Though the trial involved a total of nearly 30 Samsung devices, just eight were named by Apple in a court filing on Monday. The following are the devices for which Apple seeks a court-ordered injunction:
  • Galaxy S 4G
  • Galaxy S2 AT&T
  • Galaxy S2 Skyrocket
  • Galaxy S2 T-Mobile
  • Galaxy S2 Epic 4G
  • Galaxy S Showcase
  • Droid Charge
  • Galaxy Prevail

Cited in the filing as reasons for the injunction are a total of seven patents. Those inventions are the same ones that a jury determined last week have been infringed upon by Samsung's mobile devices.
In particular, the Galaxy S 4G has been found to have infringed on all seven patents cited by Apple: Design patents D'677 and D'3905; utility patents '915, '381 and '163; and two more trade dress patents.
Various forms of the Galaxy S2 were also found as infringing upon a number of design and utility patents, while the Galaxy S Showcase violates Apple's design and trade dress patents. The Droid Charge infringes on one design patent, while the Galaxy Prevail violates all three of Apple's utility patents in the case.
Injunction

The full list represents just eight out of the 28 infringing products that were included in the jury's decision handed down last week. The jury also determined that Samsung should pay Apple more than a billion dollars in damages.
Apple's filing made on Monday asks the court for a preliminary injunction barring sale of the eight infringing devices, pending a potential final injunction against the smartphones.

 

This article kind of implies that we are all well versed in the Alphabetic gobbeldy-gook that Samsung uses for naming it's devices.  A simple explanation as to which of these devices are current, when they were sold, where and when they were made etc., would shed enormous light on the article.  

 

Without that info this article is almost meaningless.  

You might just as well have said "some phones made by Samsung." 

post #6 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by simtub View Post

Does the latest Galaxy SIII infringe on any of the patents? If so does that mean Apple needs to file a new case?

 

Apple would need to bring up the Galaxy SIII in a separate case. However, they can ask they judge for an injunction separately if they believe that it infringes upon the patents, similar to how they asked prior to the existing case for the judge to issue an injunction (which she did only for the Nexus S).

post #7 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by logandigges View Post

This is all really irrellavent. (I believe) The only device currently sold here is the SII's, and they aren't even that popular anymore.

It's not at all irrelevant. Just because a bank robber robbed a bank last year, that doesn't mean that you won't go after them. It's a matter of principle.

 

I would say that it's more about damaging and hurting Samsung's reputation, and turning their brand name into crap. No brand wants to be associated with stealing, copying, thievery and a whole slew of banned products.

 

And slightly off topic, but I ended up with two brand new Samsung devices today! lol.gif

 

I went to exchange a couple of cable boxes which I had, and came home with two new Samsung boxes. I didn't have much of a choice in the matter.lol.gif

post #8 of 42

Which is the Samesung that looks just like an iPhone 4? I've seen it being used quite a lot and always have to do a double take and look really hard to see the difference.

 

If Apple gets the injunction Samesung should be forced to recall all the infringing products and force carriers to change the software.

post #9 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

It's not at all irrelevant. Just because a bank robber robbed a bank last year, that doesn't mean that you won't go after them. It's a matter of principle.

 

I would say that it's more about damaging and hurting Samsung's reputation, and turning their brand name into crap. No brand wants to be associated with stealing, copying, thievery and a whole slew of banned products.

And no other vendor wants a judge to tell them "Why didn't you pay attention to what happened to Samsung... don't waste my court's time!"

 

Importantly, it lays out the fact that Apple does in fact seek enforcement of it's patents.    When Apple approaches other vendors, there will be no, "But they are singling US out... They didn't stop Samsung!"  The case law and the enforcement make the next judge overseeing an injunction much more likely to grant the injunction, and less likely overturned prior to trial.

 

This is less thermonuclear and more Sherman's March to the Sea.  Apple will be burning towns and plantations to let the next City know resistence is futile.

post #10 of 42
The infringing product is the SII, you've seen it in Media Markt & Interdiscount for 350 CHF. Still a good deal, thank goodness we live in Switzerland where these corporate games aren't played as much. We can only sit, watch and shake our heads at the insanity.
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #11 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOtherGeoff View Post

And no other vendor wants a judge to tell them "Why didn't you pay attention to what happened to Samsung... don't waste my court's time!"

Importantly, it lays out the fact that Apple does in fact seek enforcement of it's patents.    When Apple approaches other vendors, there will be no, "But they are singling US out... They didn't stop Samsung!"  The case law and the enforcement make the next judge overseeing an injunction much more likely to grant the injunction, and less likely overturned prior to trial.

This is less thermonuclear and more Sherman's March to the Sea.  Apple will be burning towns and plantations to let the next City know resistence is futile.

Apple makes good products but when any company becomes to large they always go after the world market and take no prisoners.
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #12 of 42
Originally Posted by Relic View Post
Apple makes good products but when any company becomes to large they always go after the world market and take no prisoners.

 

Except they're nowhere near "too" large and your belief is unfounded.

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 #13 of 42

The PROPOSED INJUNCTIONS also serve as additional bargaining ammunition for Apple.

 

That is if Samsung is now prepared to sit down, and in good faith, negotiate a licensing fee with Apple.

post #14 of 42

"I would say that it's more about damaging and hurting Samsung's reputation, and turning their brand name into crap. No brand wants to be associated with stealing, copying, thievery and a whole slew of banned products."

 

Copying and thievery doesn't turn your brand into crap.  Producing crap turns your brand into crap.  This is why MS and BB are hardly blips on the smartphone market.
 

post #15 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuffyzDead View Post

The PROPOSED INJUNCTIONS also serve as additional bargaining ammunition for Apple.

 

That is if Samsung is now prepared to sit down, and in good faith, negotiate a licensing fee with Apple.

 

Not happening. Neither side ever wanted to negotiate, Apple wants Samsung out of the Android business period, while Samsung does this kind of infringement in every kind of electronics (seriously it's in the core of their business) so they'd never feel like they're guilty.

post #16 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by logandigges View Post

This is all really irrellavent. (I believe) The only device currently sold here is the SII's, and they aren't even that popular anymore.

 

It is VERY relevant. It sends a clear message, and gets Samsung (and others) thinking long and hard about their *future* products. 

 

Doesn't matter if this particular ban hardly affects Samsung. It's the symbolic first shot in what could be a future volley of very *materially real* injunctions against Samsung. 

 

Warning shot. That's all this is. In fact, it's almost kind. Apple's doing them a favour. 

post #17 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by logandigges View Post

This is all really irrellavent. (I believe) The only device currently sold here is the SII's, and they aren't even that popular anymore.

That's nonsense.

First, Samsung does still sell a lot of these phones. I would imagine that without an injunction, it's not hard to see them selling over a million S2s, for example (or half a billion dollars).

Second, this sets Apple up for its other lawsuits - including the one against Samsung for some of their newer phones.

Third, by taking all these phones off the market, Samsung will presumably have to reimburse resellers, costing them a significant amount of money.

Fourth, it sends a message that Apple is going to enforce the court decision as much as they can. That's an important message for the industry to understand.


What's the alternative? Completely ignore the court judgment and let Samsung continue to profit from their illegal actions? THAT would be absurd.
"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 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

This article kind of implies that we are all well versed in the Alphabetic gobbeldy-gook that Samsung uses for naming it's devices.  A simple explanation as to which of these devices are current, when they were sold, where and when they were made etc., would shed enormous light on the article.  

Without that info this article is almost meaningless.  
You might just as well have said "some phones made by Samsung." 

Well I think you can assume that these are the current still-selling models. An injunction for obsoleted models would be meaningless.
post #19 of 42
The Skyrocket?

What an infantile name.

I must say I've enjoyed the disappearance of many of the trolls on this forum in the last few days since the verdict was handed down.

I would be truly embarrassed to hold a Samsung handset out in public right now.
There's nothing your wife/girlfriend/partner wouldn't like more than your 6 Plus...
Reply
There's nothing your wife/girlfriend/partner wouldn't like more than your 6 Plus...
Reply
post #20 of 42
Originally Posted by GTR View Post
I must say I've enjoyed the disappearance of many of the trolls on this forum in the last few days since the verdict was handed down.

 

Woo!


I would be truly embarrassed to hold a Samsung handset out in public right now.

 

They're certainly too large to hide behind your hand as you hold them to your face! lol.gif

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 #21 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post

The Skyrocket?
What an infantile name.
I must say I've enjoyed the disappearance of many of the trolls on this forum in the last few days since the verdict was handed down.
I would be truly embarrassed to hold a Samsung handset out in public right now.


People that have pride in themselves do not care what products they use as long as they fit the bill.  May want to work on your self esteem a little, sad.

post #22 of 42
Just eight models of Samsung's phones? That's like eight rain drops in the ocean.

"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 #23 of 42

Banning these 8 products is meaningless, as Fortune noted. They are either obsolete or not the best selling phones. I guess Apple's real win comes from stamping the 'Copycat' image on Samsung's forehead. Apple should find a way to ban Samsung's popular products, like Galaxy S3 or Galaxy Note.

post #24 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hellacool View Post


People that have pride in themselves do not care what products they use as long as they fit the bill.  May want to work on your self esteem a little, sad.

I may want to work on my pride because I own one of the best, most reliable, coolest handsets in the world, that fits the bill with me, has the widest range of high quality apps, is backed up by the best customer service, is updated frequently, often freely, while still holding excellent re-sales value, and is synchronised with a bevy of other high quality devices in not only the tablet and laptop categories, but many others as well? A device produced by people who want to make the best products in the world, have a history of innovation, and aren't just in it for the 'bottom line'?

A device responsible for the creation of your handset of choice?

My self-esteem and pride, Hellacool, is just fine.

How's yours?

(You can copy my level of self-esteem if you would like to)
Edited by GTR - 8/27/12 at 2:27pm
There's nothing your wife/girlfriend/partner wouldn't like more than your 6 Plus...
Reply
There's nothing your wife/girlfriend/partner wouldn't like more than your 6 Plus...
Reply
post #25 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

I was about to ask how many of the devices are actually still on sale.

I don't believe they're manufacturing them anymore. What ever is still available is left over stock.
"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 #26 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

That's nonsense.
First, Samsung does still sell a lot of these phones. I would imagine that without an injunction, it's not hard to see them selling over a million S2s, for example (or half a billion dollars).
Second, this sets Apple up for its other lawsuits - including the one against Samsung for some of their newer phones.
Third, by taking all these phones off the market, Samsung will presumably have to reimburse resellers, costing them a significant amount of money.
Fourth, it sends a message that Apple is going to enforce the court decision as much as they can. That's an important message for the industry to understand.
What's the alternative? Completely ignore the court judgment and let Samsung continue to profit from their illegal actions? THAT would be absurd.

But remember an injunction is only as good as those willing or able to enforce it.
"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 #27 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by logandigges View Post

This is all really irrellavent. (I believe) The only device currently sold here is the SII's, and they aren't even that popular anymore.

Exactly. In the last two weeks I have seen 13 new Samsung Galaxy SIII at work and at my board game group. These are selling like hotcakes (prefer my iPhone 4 and Galaxy Nexus, but it is a nice phone). This ban really isn't going to amount to a hill of beans since almost all the phones that were deemed infringing on patents and trade dress are legacy devices. 

post #28 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by logandigges View Post

This is all really irrellavent. (I believe) The only device currently sold here is the SII's, and they aren't even that popular anymore.

 

It is VERY relevant. It sends a clear message, and gets Samsung (and others) thinking long and hard about their *future* products. 

 

Doesn't matter if this particular ban hardly affects Samsung. It's the symbolic first shot in what could be a future volley of very *materially real* injunctions against Samsung. 

 

Warning shot. That's all this is. In fact, it's almost kind. Apple's doing them a favour. 

 

The just concluded trial was like dropping a stone into a pond... now the ripples emanating from that spot will touch everything in their path...

"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 #29 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

It's not at all irrelevant. Just because a bank robber robbed a bank last year, that doesn't mean that you won't go after them. It's a matter of principle.

 

I would say that it's more about damaging and hurting Samsung's reputation, and turning their brand name into crap. No brand wants to be associated with stealing, copying, thievery and a whole slew of banned products.

 

And slightly off topic, but I ended up with two brand new Samsung devices today! lol.gif

 

I went to exchange a couple of cable boxes which I had, and came home with two new Samsung boxes. I didn't have much of a choice in the matter.lol.gif

He means the phone that could be banned is a legacy device and of little importance. It will be replace by newer devices that are not being banned. You really are drinking kool-aid if you think the average American consumer is going to give two licks about the supposed hit to Samsung's reputation. Samsung makes quality products, and that is all that matters. I have an iPhone 4, but I also own a Samsung Galaxy Nexus and a Samsung Focus. These lawsuits are not going to push people away from Samsung.

post #30 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic View Post

The infringing product is the SII, you've seen it in Media Markt & Interdiscount for 350 CHF. Still a good deal, thank goodness we live in Switzerland where these corporate games aren't played as much. We can only sit, watch and shake our heads at the insanity.

 

Haven't seen you for a while... Are you still in hospital, or at home?

 

The "games" are necessary to protect your IP.

"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 #31 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOtherGeoff View Post

And no other vendor wants a judge to tell them "Why didn't you pay attention to what happened to Samsung... don't waste my court's time!"

Importantly, it lays out the fact that Apple does in fact seek enforcement of it's patents.    When Apple approaches other vendors, there will be no, "But they are singling US out... They didn't stop Samsung!"  The case law and the enforcement make the next judge overseeing an injunction much more likely to grant the injunction, and less likely overturned prior to trial.

This is less thermonuclear and more Sherman's March to the Sea.  Apple will be burning towns and plantations to let the next City know resistence is futile.

Apple makes good products but when any company becomes to large they always go after the world market and take no prisoners.

 

Isn't that exactly what Sammy has accomplished by copying the IP of Apple and others?

 

I have seen no signs of Apple using its size to compete unfairly.

"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 #32 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic View Post

The infringing product is the SII, you've seen it in Media Markt & Interdiscount for 350 CHF. Still a good deal, thank goodness we live in Switzerland where these corporate games aren't played as much. We can only sit, watch and shake our heads at the insanity.

 

It is insanity that Samsung stole so much but I would hardly called Apple defending itself a "corporate game."

Please update the AppleInsider app to function in landscape mode.

Reply

Please update the AppleInsider app to function in landscape mode.

Reply
post #33 of 42
Originally Posted by igriv View Post
Obviously if Apple really wanted to hurt Samsung, they would go after the Galaxy IIIS (which infringes as much as anything else).

 

Obviously if you'd paid attention to the trial, you'd know it wasn't included therein.


They'll need another lawsuit to take down the Galaxy S III. 

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 #34 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by igriv View Post

A billion dollars is still a lot of money, even for Apple, but obviously the real win is being able to shake down the Android makers for royalties going forward (Apple already makes something like $20-30 for each Android phone sold, at least in the US, doubling that would (a) bring in revenue, and (b) really hurt Android's market share, since Android covers largely the low end of the smart phone market, so the extra cost will really hurt.)

Citation please for:

"Apple already makes something like $20-30 for each Android phone sold"
"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 #35 of 42

Galaxy SIII not there - just need to survive till Nov 12 when my contract is up >.>

post #36 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by igriv View Post

When I was in Germany a few months ago, I had to get a post-paid phone, and got a Samsung running Baidu (the OS Sammy developed in-house). A worse piece of garbage I have never seen, so they are wise to try to rip off other people's IP.

 

My dad had one of the first Samsung iPhone clones, free with contract from AT&T. I don't recall the exactly model but it ran an early version of Android 1.x and rather poorly I might add. The touchscreen quit working on the right half of the screen before the end of his 2 year contract. He ditched it for an iPhone 4S. He swore off Samsung phones. I also had an old Samsung flip phone on contract from Sprint years ago, and that POS stopped receiving calls by the end of 2-years (calls went immediately to voicemail). For this reason, I will never recommend Samsung.

"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 #37 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

My dad had one of the first Samsung iPhone clones, free with contract from AT&T. I don't recall the exactly model but it ran an early version of Android 1.x and rather poorly I might add. The touchscreen quit working on the right half of the screen before the end of his 2 year contract. He ditched it for an iPhone 4S. He swore off Samsung phones. I also had an old Samsung flip phone on contract from Sprint years ago, and that POS stopped receiving calls by the end of 2-years (calls went immediately to voicemail). For this reason, I will never recommend Samsung.

You do know that the screen on the iPhone 4S is made by Samsung?
"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 #38 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

You do know that the screen on the iPhone 4S is made by Samsung?

So?

Are you suggesting that the fact that Samsung can't make a decent cell phone is somehow tied to whether or not they can make a good cell phone screen?
"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 #39 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

So?
Are you suggesting that the fact that Samsung can't make a decent cell phone is somehow tied to whether or not they can make a good cell phone screen?

Not at all. The poster I was replying to suggested that Samsung screens are of inferior quality. Maybe he didn't know Samsung supplies Apple with screens. Samsung as of late has built nice looking devices but the quality isn't great yet Motorola builds quality devices that are ugly. Apple has proven that both can be done.
"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 #40 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

Not at all. The poster I was replying to suggested that Samsung screens are of inferior quality. Maybe he didn't know Samsung supplies Apple with screens. Samsung as of late has built nice looking devices but the quality isn't great yet Motorola builds quality devices that are ugly. Apple has proven that both can be done.

That's not really what he said. He cited a touchscreen problem as one of the issues but also cited a phone that stopped receiving calls. He also cited a phone that ran poorly with Android 1.x.

His argument seems to be that Samsung has a history of poorly performing devices - for a variety of different reasons - and is therefore not a very good phone supplier.
"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
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple seeks ban on sale of 8 Samsung smartphones