Apple posts new notice saying Samsung didn't copy iPad on UK website - Page 4

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gatorguy 
 Any more it's almost like arguing between Ford and Chevrolet trucks. Almost. Still a ways to go for Android, but you get the basic point.

 

and yeah I know, Apple is more like a <insert favorite luxury car>

yeah chevy trucks rule but seriously there is no ford in the tablet market.

Originally Posted by Nathillien 
It's amusing to see how some diehard apple fans try to portrait Apple as the solely inventor while everyone else is just trying to ripoff Apple.

It's amusing to see how some trolls make up arguments to suit their fantasies.

Oh here, I shed a tear for poor Apple .

Seems slapppy gets around.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CGJ 

1) "So...where was she murdered?"

"St Thomas' Hospital, ma'am."

"Why was she there?"

"She was shot in the House of Commons."

2) *Hides my crossbow*

3) Interestingly enough, the death penalty for acts of High Treason was only banned in 1997. But it is still punishable with a life prison sentence (that's if the police manage to catch them alive, it's likely that anyone who tries to kill the Queen would most likely get killed by the crowd first :D). But either way, I'd pledge my loyalty to the Queen in the same way an American would pledge loyalty to the Stars and Stripes.

4) :D

Skipping to 6) Well...it depends on what is meant by 'ride a cow' :P

 

This is fun.

It was fun. Thank you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil 

 

I love how browser "benchmarks" are the only ones in which Apple isn't leagues faster than absolutely everything else on the market, and so the trolls latch onto them as though they mean anything at all. 

That's because sooo many people are browsing the web on their Android devices. Oh wait... Mobile Safari is the most popular web browser in use. Nevermind. /s

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gatorguy 

I don't know why these benchmarks matter anyway with them so close to each other. Is there seriously much difference in browsing speeds and responsiveness between the most recent iPhones and iPads and the most recent Android phones and tablets? Not that I'm aware of. Both OS's are speedy, both platforms have features unique to them, both have good hardware.and the latest devices from both get high marks from professional blogs and reviewers. Any more it's almost like arguing between Ford and Chevrolet trucks. Almost. Still a ways to go for Android, but you get the basic point.

 

and yeah I know, Apple is more like a <insert favorite luxury car>

They're not that close. Some tests produce similar results (for example, many tablets can max out at 60FPS so a bunch of devices will all score the same) while other tests show large differences. When you take resolution out of the equation and look at raw processing power the A6X kills everything out there in GPU.

The Exynos 5 is still faster in synthetic CPU getting a Geekbench score of 2350-ish compared to the A6X's 1750-ish. Yet when it comes down to application performance the A6X still beats the Exynos 5.

This is not like arguing Ford vs Chevy. That implies both are equal and people are trying to make minor differences seem more important than they are. These benchmark tests reveal some interesting items:

- Android is poorly optimized/iOS is highly optimized. When an Exynos 5 has a CPU that's over 30% faster than the A6X, yet still lags behind in application performance, then something's wrong.

- Windows RT (which also uses Tegra 3) benchmarks faster than Android devices also using the same Tegra 3. So Win RT is also better optimized than Android. Imagine that, MS's first tablet OS is better optmized than Android which has been going through revisions for several years now.

- Apple has always placed an emphasis on GPU over CPU in their SoC's. And iOS devices have always run better (smoother) than Android devices have. It's not hard to put 2 & 2 together.

- Android requires more processing power to achieve the same performance as iOS. That means an Android device is at an immediate dis-advantage in terms of cost of the more expensive SoC and in terms of how much battery power it will consume to supply that SoC.

- With Android devices using so many different SoC's with different GPU's, Android never gets fully optimized to work with a specific SoC. Android OEM's can't even bother to get updates out for older devices, so why should they bother to spend more time than necessary to get their product released?

Quote:

Originally Posted by aBeliefSystem 

Self centred or what?

An apt description of your post, seeing as the javascript discussion was brought up pages ago.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil 

 

I love how browser "benchmarks" are the only ones in which Apple isn't leagues faster than absolutely everything else on the market, and so the trolls latch onto them as though they mean anything at all. 

That, and we know it's all about GPU nowadays.

J.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nathillien 

WOW. Do I see 7 "different" tests here? You could post some more pictures .
This all is ONLY one benchmark and it ONLY measures the GPU performance of OpenGL ES implementations.
Apple has always performed better in GLBench. than the other devices, probably that's why Anandtech focuses on this particular benchmark when reviewing Apple devices so much .

CPU? Now that what I'm talking about.
Geekbench: iPad (4th gen)   -   1755
Geekbench: Nexus 10         -    2345

Does this mean that iPad shows more potential in playing 3D games, while Nexus 10 shows more potential in being actually productive?


 

Actually no, iOS can offload calculation intensive tasks to its GPU(s), its called OpenCL.

So the iPad is in fact a much better device to be 'productive'.

By the way, did you notice that the iPad 4 is almost twice as fast as the N10 if you look at the GPU and only 25% 'slower' if you look at the CPU.

J.

What was the topic of this thread again?

'iWeasels':

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/05/apple_apology_take_2/

Originally Posted by Nathillien 
WOW. Do I see 7 "different" tests here?

Sounds like you don't understand what benchmarks are.

Originally Posted by Gatorguy 
What was the topic of this thread again?

Some whiny British people demanding the same thing twice. It's not important. 

Originally Posted by stike vomit 
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/05/apple_apology_take_2/

Other than Apple doing it right both times, yeah. 

It's hilarious that no one commenting on this thing seems to have a clue what actually went on at the end, much less the beginning, or even before it. If they're not going to take the time to find out the truth, there's not really any reason to listen to them at all.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil 

Other than Apple doing it right both times, yeah. 

 

It's hilarious that no one commenting on this thing seems to have a clue what actually went on at the end, much less the beginning, or even before it. If they're not going to take the time to find out the truth, there's not really any reason to listen to them at all.

Please do enlighten us then.

Originally Posted by stike vomit 
Please do enlighten us then.

No. We've had four threads about that already. If you can't read the existing explanations across them (while even being in one of them), I don't think doing it again will be of any use.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil 

 

No. We've had four threads about that already. If you can't read the existing explanations across them (while even being in one of them), I don't think doing it again will be of any use.

I have read plenty about all of this and I am confident that I have a firm grasp of the facts. However, we appear to have come to very different conclusions. Maybe I didn't drink enough Kool-Aid first?

Originally Posted by stike vomit 
Maybe I didn't drink enough Kool-Aid first?

Just not the right kind, it seems.

deleted

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil 

<...>

 

It's hilarious that no one commenting on this thing seems to have a clue what actually went on at the end, much less the beginning, or even before it. If they're not going to take the time to find out the truth, there's not really any reason to listen to them at all.

if you checked the facts, you'd know better, but regular readers will know that you don't let the facts bother you

unlike what i suspect to be representative of the whining fanboys that infest this site, i've been an apple user since the last century and own a pleasant mound of their shares

apple's senior management acted like spoiled brats when the orginal judgement went against it, the pr statement after they lost had to be approved, it was a blatant insult to the court and a denial of the facts, let's be clear it was lies, apple lied

the judge, rightly, directed them to state the facts, not apple newspeak

they repeated their childish behaviour with the initial web page, which anyone but a fanboy blinded by zealotry can see was a deliberate and calculated insult to the court

now they barely scrape in, with yet another pathetic attempt to look clever, the fanboys cheer, a great day for apple!

but all it does is reinforce the impression of an arrogant and insular management team, taking time to play infantile games, rather than ensuring that their products work properly when released and that they continue to innovate, rather than recapitulate, which seems to be the way they are heading

yet another sad day for apple, ever closer to what it once rebelled against

Originally Posted by umumum 
if you checked the facts, you'd know better, but regular readers will know that you don't let the facts bother you…

So enlighten me, because I know them already.

This old schtick again?

Spoiled brats who… posted the judgement verbatim.

A denial of the facts… by posting exactly what the judge told them to post. "Denying the facts" would be saying the British judgement isn't a complete farce.

Yes! Let's be clear! About what did Apple lie? The judgement? NOPE. They did what the court said. That Samsung lost cases in Germany and the US? NOPE. That's true, too.

And so Apple posted THE EXACT SAME WORDS AGAIN. So they were lies the first time but not the second?

Is this really the right website for you?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil 

 

And so Apple posted THE EXACT SAME WORDS AGAIN. So they were lies the first time but not the second?

 

On what planet is a statement containing 360 words the EXACT same words as one containing 105 words?

Oh, I see, you mean the court mandated text.  So you're conveniently forgetting the extra stuff they added to the original statement which is the WHOLE REASON they had to republish.

Jeez, your Apple blindness knows no bounds.

Originally Posted by reefoid 
On what planet is a statement containing 360 words the EXACT same words as one containing 105 words?

When the words posted the second time were the words directly relevant to the legal ruling.  Something you acknowledge.

No, I'm ignoring it because the court had no right to prevent Apple from posting that as well. Apple did exactly what the court demanded, twice, and they're probably going to go after Apple again. 

Your argument is that since Apple says any words about the iPad anywhere on their website that were not limited to what the court said Apple could say about the iPad, they're in violation of whatever blah de blah of the blah de blah. Nonsense.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil 

 

When the words posted the second time were the words directly relevant to the legal ruling.  Something you acknowledge.

 

 

No, I'm ignoring it because the court had no right to prevent Apple from posting that as well. Apple did exactly what the court demanded, twice, and they're probably going to go after Apple again. 

 

Your argument is that since Apple says any words about the iPad anywhere on their website that were not limited to what the court said Apple could say about the iPad, they're in violation of whatever blah de blah of the blah de blah. Nonsense.

As usual TS, your arguments are full of smoke and mirrors.

Clearly the court did have a right to prevent Apple posting inaccurate stuff (yes, yes, I know you don't agree it was inaccurate), because the court told them to republish and Apple did.  If the court had no right, why didn't Apple go back to court and tell the judge where he went wrong with his ruling?

Not sure what you mean by your last paragraph.  Where have I argued anything about Apple using words about the iPad anywhere on their site?  Are you confusing me with someone else?  In fact, I've never mentioned the iPad in any of this nonsense, because the case was never about the iPad but a registered design from 2004.

Like I say, smoke and mirrors.

Originally Posted by reefoid 
(yes, yes, I know you don't agree it was inaccurate)

Yes, I disagree that the text demanded of Apple by the court to post and which Apple posted was inaccurate within the extent of what the court is allowed to state is inaccurate. 

Simply because they posted, word for word, what they were told by the court to post. It is unfathomable that people can still defend the nonsense of claiming that what they said to do was not what they said to do.

My personal belief of the inaccuracy of the content extends beyond what the court is allowed to state, but that's presently a different matter.

THEY DID. TWICE.

Right here:

But you knew that already, so I'm not sure why you're pretending to have worse memory than even me.

OK, more smoke and mirrors.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil 

 

THEY DID. TWICE.

 

And were ruled against each time.  Seriously, take the hint.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil 

 

Right here:

 

But you knew that already, so I'm not sure why you're pretending to have worse memory than even me.

I didn't mention  anything against Apple using words about iPad ANYWHERE on their site, which is what you stated.  I talked about the extra paragraphs they added in their statement on ONE page..  At no point did I mention the iPad, which is what you implied.  Smoke and mirrors, round and round we go.  I'm outta here.

OMG...I cannot believe the hypocrisy, rudeness, lack of consideration for others, and general nastiness of many of the members here on AI. 

Apple lost the case. Period. Apple tried to push the view (to the public) that Samsung copied their tablets and that consumers cannot tell them apart. The court decided to force Apple to reverse that statement in a public venue. The deed is done. Get.Over.It.(Apple).People

Apple won in the U.S. and Samsung may have to pay over a billion dollars in damages. Again. The deed is done. Get.Over.It.(Samsung).People.

I have watched this forum become less and less relevant towards Apple products and instead about CONSTANT, freaking bickering between people who act like they are in elementary school. This includes the moderators as well!!! 

I really wish AI would separate into two websites: one dealing with Apple computers and OS X... and the other dealing with iOS devices. Most of the garbage that is written on AI has to do with iOS and such. I am so tired of wading through worthless posts trying to find ANY relevant information. :(

Am I the only one who feels this way or has everyone who is not an over-the-top Apple fanboy already left AI?

Originally Posted by reefoid 

I'm outta here.

Please do leave, as everyone does when their argument is destroyed.

Originally Posted by lamewing 
Apple tried to push the view (to the public) that Samsung copied their tablets and that consumers cannot tell them apart. 

And it worked.

Except no, try again.

Actually, at this point, stop trying. You clearly will never understand, by your own choice.

Given the sheer number of anti-Apple trolls here, no, they would all agree with you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by stike vomit 

'iWeasels':

 

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/05/apple_apology_take_2/

An apt description of "the Register", hey you idiots at the register, the UK site contains the same Javascript AS MANY OTHER of Apple's international sites, a fact you seem to have missed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by umumum 

it was a blatant insult to the court and a denial of the facts, let's be clear it was lies, apple lied

 

So the remarks of Birss, about "coolness" were "lies"?

So why is Apple still required to provide a link to the judgement containing those remarks by Birss?

Then there were the references to the other rulings, so was Samsung found to have copied in Germany or not?

Did an American jury decide Samsung copied Apple or not?

See, these were Apple's statements, along with the one that remains.

Time to dump your shares, sell your gear and go shopping at a "principled" company like Samsung, whatever you want from Apple Samsung has a reasonably passable copy.

Originally Posted by lamewing 
(with 40% profit for Apple -Yikes!)

Nope.

Quote:

Originally Posted by reefoid 

 

On what planet is a statement containing 360 words the EXACT same words as one containing 105 words?

 

The planet where UK judge's clarify one of their peers initial requirements as to precisely what they want to be published.

So where are the charges of contempt, if Apple has done what you are stating they have done?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil 

Please do leave, as everyone does when their argument is destroyed.

 

Yeah, nice try, but no.  I'm out of here because when all you have left is to put words into my mouth, its a sure sign your argument is destroyed.

Laters.

Originally Posted by reefed 
…all you have left is to put words into my mouth…

When I quote your posts, it tends to sound a lot like what you say.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lamewing 

 

Apple lost the case. Period. Apple tried to push the view (to the public) that Samsung copied their tablets and that consumers cannot tell them apart. The court decided to force Apple to reverse that statement in a public venue. The deed is done. Get.Over.It.(Apple).People

 

To get you up to speed, as you seem to have lost the way, this statement has nothing whatsoever to do with Samsung "copying" Apple, the statement is based on Samsung not infringing a specific Apple design patent.

The court states they require this to clear up any confusion the "general public" may have.

Going on your remarks and the remarks of others who mention "copying" they have obviously failed.

Originally Posted by lamewing 
If they wish to post personal views they should use a non-moderator account.

And get whined after for "hiding" behind a second account like AI's writers do? I don't think so.