or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple unlocks new Copy Cat docs as evidence Samsung pilfered iPhone unlock
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple unlocks new Copy Cat docs as evidence Samsung pilfered iPhone unlock - Page 3

post #81 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by RadarTheKat View Post



My comment wasn't on the validity of Apple's slide to unlock patent. It was a comment on the applicability of the 1991 video as prior art. I am not aware of what countries Outside the U.S.have tested Apple's slide to unlock patent other than Germany where the patent rules differ. Not sure what your point is. Samsung needs to follow the rules of each country in which they sell their Sam-kit. This patent trial will determine whether they broke the rules here in the U.S.

Fair enough. Samsung could certainly either find a different way to initiate a similar function, or worst case modify the UX for the US while staying with what they had for the rest of the world. It's certainly an avoidable issue in any case. At least until the next lawsuit anyway.

By the way, nice patent claim research. You're just the kind of member AI benefits from. Thanks for the time and effort. 1smile.gif
Edited by Gatorguy - 4/6/14 at 7:25am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #82 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post


I disagree. If anything the media paints Apple as a bully and Samsung gets off scott free.

"the media"?

 

I read much of the same media you do and I don't see that at all; just partisan sites that are taking sides. It's ignored for the most part in mainstream media. 500 million iPhones sold, and how many users follow tech sites? 1 in 10? 1 in 20?

 

Disagree all you want, but there just isn't a problem with Apple going after Samsung in court for infringement, and the court of public opinion doesn't care.

post #83 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Are current Samsung phones still ripping off slide to unlock or the rubber banding patent? What's the end result? That Samsung pays Apple for what they infringed and then life goes on? I don't think anything in this trial is going to stop Samsung from being a fast follower.

Repeating the same point many times in the same thread doesn't make it any less nihilistic.
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
post #84 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by tmay View Post

"the media"?

I read much of the same media you do and I don't see that at all; just partisan sites that are taking sides. It's ignored for the most part in mainstream media. 500 million iPhones sold, and how many users follow tech sites? 1 in 10? 1 in 20?

Disagree all you want, but there just isn't a problem with Apple going after Samsung in court for infringement, and the court of public opinion doesn't care.
Apple can do whatever it wants, I'm just not convinced its time well spent and don't think it will matter in the long run. Apple may win this battle but the war is far from over.
post #85 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

How exactly does Apple win? So Samsung pays a fine. It's a drop in the bucket. And doesn't mean anything. Meanwhile the media meme/public mindshare is that Apple is spending all their time on silly lawsuits over things that should never have been granted a patent in the first place. As far as I'm concerned there's nothing for Apple to win at this point and and all these confidential memos/emails being leaked do more harm than good.

I haven't read the whole thread, but I hope you get chewed out thoroughly for this shallow comment. As jungmark says, it's about a very practical principle: steal our hard work, get sued and shamed before the world. And yes, it does cause Apple to be more despised, and more misunderstood by those who like yourself should know better. Sometimes I wonder about your lack of consistency.
post #86 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by d4NjvRzf View Post

Wait, are we talking about the older Samsung implementations that used an iOS style left-to-right slider, or the current implementation of slide-to-unlock as found in, say, the Galaxy Nexus? Since ICS, Android's slide-to-unlock has allowed the user to swipe along any path from the center of a circle to any point on the circle; neither the endpoint nor the path are "predefined." 

Older Samsung models. Newer methods used by Samsung likely don't infringe.
I have enough money to last the rest of my life. Unless I buy something. - Jackie Mason
Never own anything that poops. - RadarTheKat
Reply
I have enough money to last the rest of my life. Unless I buy something. - Jackie Mason
Never own anything that poops. - RadarTheKat
Reply
post #87 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post

Repeating the same point many times in the same thread doesn't make it any less nihilistic.
fine, let Apple waste their time over principle. Let Samsung be punished with a fine that's a drop in the bucket for them so DED can come herd and crow about how Apple won. Except he'll never be able to tell us what, exactly, Apple won.
post #88 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post

I haven't read the whole thread, but I hope you get chewed out thoroughly for this shallow comment. As jungmark says, it's about a very practical principle: steal our hard work, get sued and shamed before the world. And yes, it does cause Apple to be more despised, and more misunderstood by those who like yourself should know better. Sometimes I wonder about your lack of consistency.
Samsung is being shamed before the world? You serious? I think released trial documents about Apple sales execs fretting over growth of Android handsets is more embarrassing than whatever shame might befall Samsung should Apple win this trial. I still question whether it was worth it, especially with all the confidential memos, emails, designs that came out as result of it. That Steve Jobs top 100 email from 2010 has f*ck all to do with this trial yet that's what every tech site was talking about. Of course Samsung knows this and will do whatever they can, whatever is allowed to change the subject and make the trial not about patent infringement but about Apple fretting over the competition and trying to stop it via the courts. I know I'll get murdered for saying this but basically I think Apple is cutting off its nose to spite its face.
post #89 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post

I haven't read the whole thread, but I hope you get chewed out thoroughly for this shallow comment. As jungmark says, it's about a very practical principle: steal our hard work, get sued and shamed before the world. And yes, it does cause Apple to be more despised, and more misunderstood by those who like yourself should know better. Sometimes I wonder about your lack of consistency.

I agree. Rogifan sometimes makes some really astute comments; in fact, I read one today. But he seems to have a blind spot on the very basic principles underlying this trial. I don't understand why.
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
post #90 of 231
Honestly, I think the main thing Apple is after is making close copies of Apple's products a painful proposition. Samsung has already opened another non-android avenue of Tizen, which I doubt they would have pursued seriously if they had been able to keep using Android painlessly.

In this viewpoint, it doesn't matter how much time effort and money Apple has to put into the lawsuit, as long as it's equally or more painful for Samsung. Which I think it will be.
post #91 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

All interesting points and probably valid. I was simply pointing out to those that seem to gleefully anticipate an Apple comeuppance, that suing Apple for infringing on a patent that Google gives away would be more than normally difficult.
post #92 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post

I agree. Rogifan sometimes makes some really astute comments; in fact, I read one today. But he seems to have a blind spot on the very basic principles underlying this trial. I don't understand why.
Just a clarification: I'm a she, not a he. 1smile.gif
post #93 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Now that you explain it that way it makes total sense. I still think the trouble Apple runs into (at least in the PR or media meme sense) is people will say slide to unlock is something completely obvious that should never have been granted a patent. So even if the jury decided Samsung violated that patent the public at large will say it was ridiculous that it ever received a patent in the first place and ridiculous that Apple sued over it. I'm not saying I agree, but that's what will happen IMO.

Well, then, stop agreeing with this dumb view and start arguing for the smart view, like RadartheKat does, or others who are saying the opposite of what you are saying.

Against, I'm still reading through the thread, so I don't know if others are trying to change your mind.
post #94 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post

Well, then, stop agreeing with this dumb view and start arguing for the smart view, like RadartheKat does, or others who are saying the opposite of what you are saying.

Against, I'm still reading through the thread, so I don't know if others are trying to change your mind.
my mind is that Apple cut off its nose to spite its face and no one is going to change that. 1smile.gif
post #95 of 231

Great work, Daniel. Consider a response to Mueller's item today; he mentions this article: "... all that those docs show is the perfectly lawful process of benchmarking: Samsung was looking at the way the iPhone did it (you don't need a license from Apple to look at its products), compared them to its own, conducted an analysis of what could enhance customer satisfaction, and then improved its products."

post #96 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Samsung is being shamed before the world? You serious? I think released trial documents about Apple sales execs fretting over growth of Android handsets is more embarrassing than whatever shame might befall Samsung should Apple win this trial. I still question whether it was worth it, especially with all the confidential memos, emails, designs that came out as result of it. That Steve Jobs top 100 email from 2010 has f*ck all to do with this trial yet that's what every tech site was talking about. Of course Samsung knows this and will do whatever they can, whatever is allowed to change the subject and make the trial not about patent infringement but about Apple fretting over the competition and trying to stop it via the courts. I know I'll get murdered for saying this but basically I think Apple is cutting off its nose to spite its face.

Shamed before the tech world, I should say, an engineering level of which I'm sure Samsung's engineers are interested in feeling on a par with.

Apple wins by not being the victim of theft by this or any other company that cares for its professional reputation. Why they're going for a second round is an interesting question. I don't have a worthwhile opinion, but I'm sure they did a complete PR cost-benefit calculus.
post #97 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stef View Post

Great work, Daniel. Consider a response to Mueller's item today; he mentions this article: "... all that those docs show is the perfectly lawful process of benchmarking: Samsung was looking at the way the iPhone did it (you don't need a license from Apple to look at its products), compared them to its own, conducted an analysis of what could enhance customer satisfaction, and then improved its products."

Sounds like Mueller's arguing with only half the facts. Those documents show the progression of Samsung's thinking that directly led to thrm infringing Apple's patent. They show intent. A separate fact, the fact that Apple's patented method for unlocking a phone, is present in the disputed handsets, is the evidence Samsung infringed Apple's patent. A lie by omission is still a lie. I have to wonder about all the sources, seen and unseen, of Mueller's income these days.
I have enough money to last the rest of my life. Unless I buy something. - Jackie Mason
Never own anything that poops. - RadarTheKat
Reply
I have enough money to last the rest of my life. Unless I buy something. - Jackie Mason
Never own anything that poops. - RadarTheKat
Reply
post #98 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon Powell View Post
 

I want to know what you apple people think about this entire patent trial. Do you think Samsung is wrong to steal something patented, but it ok for Apple to steal something that's not? Should you be able to patent these type of things?

 

And I want to know how much Samsung pays you to shill for them.

 

post #99 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post

Shamed before the tech world, I should say, an engineering level of which I'm sure Samsung's engineers are interested in feeling on a par with.

Apple wins by not being the victim of theft by this or any other company that cares for its professional reputation. Why they're going for a second round is an interesting question. I don't have a worthwhile opinion, but I'm sure they did a complete PR cost-benefit calculus.

There will be a third round, and a fourth. Apple would bring all of the patents it feels Samsung infringed in one trial, but the courts will not allow that so they must bring as many as the court will allow in each lawsuit. The courts don't want a long, drawn out trial that consumes taxpayer dollars and takes jury members away from their lives for an extended period, so Apple must litigate multiple times, with each action covering a new set of infringed patents.
I have enough money to last the rest of my life. Unless I buy something. - Jackie Mason
Never own anything that poops. - RadarTheKat
Reply
I have enough money to last the rest of my life. Unless I buy something. - Jackie Mason
Never own anything that poops. - RadarTheKat
Reply
post #100 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stef View Post

Great work, Daniel. Consider a response to Mueller's item today; he mentions this article: "... all that those docs show is the perfectly lawful process of benchmarking: Samsung was looking at the way the iPhone did it (you don't need a license from Apple to look at its products), compared them to its own, conducted an analysis of what could enhance customer satisfaction, and then improved its products."
This. The real issue is not benchmarking, but that after all the benchmarking two things happened:

- Samsung discovered Apple's method was actually superior.
- Samsung used Apple's method instead of one of their own methods.

If Samsung tested five ways of doing unlock, and used the one that was closest to Apple in terms of usability, then that would be considered benchmarking. Choosing Apple's method after benchmarking s copying.

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #101 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

my mind is that Apple cut off its nose to spite its face and no one is going to change that. 1smile.gif

Ok, fine. Truth to tell, I had you filed under a different hormonal paradigm, i.e., left-brain male geek limited-picture lockdown. Now I see you're under corpus callosum wave-action thinking. Explains what is perceived as inconsistency, but then "consistency is the hob-goblin of . . . small minds?" I forget the rest, I think it was Emerson.

Just to add, Emerson might be on your side. Me, not so much, because the PR problem you speak of is solvable, just as the thieving problem is solvable.
Edited by Flaneur - 4/6/14 at 9:22am
post #102 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post


Samsung is being shamed before the world? You serious? I think released trial documents about Apple sales execs fretting over growth of Android handsets is more embarrassing than whatever shame might befall Samsung should Apple win this trial. I still question whether it was worth it, especially with all the confidential memos, emails, designs that came out as result of it. That Steve Jobs top 100 email from 2010 has f*ck all to do with this trial yet that's what every tech site was talking about. Of course Samsung knows this and will do whatever they can, whatever is allowed to change the subject and make the trial not about patent infringement but about Apple fretting over the competition and trying to stop it via the courts. I know I'll get murdered for saying this but basically I think Apple is cutting off its nose to spite its face.

I gave you an uprate for continuing to dig the hole your in. But realize that you are in a hole of your own making.

 

If Apple wins anything from this, then whatever tactic you ascribe to Samsung will have been a failure; Samsung will this time be a known as a legally sanctioned serial infringer. If Apple loses, then you can return for your pound of flesh, and your victory lap.

 

Either way, Apple will still have its nose attached.

post #103 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by RadarTheKat View Post


Sounds like Mueller's arguing with only half the facts. Those documents show the progression of Samsung's thinking that directly led to thrm infringing Apple's patent. They show intent. A separate fact, the fact that Apple's patented method for unlocking a phone, is present in the disputed handsets, is the evidence Samsung infringed Apple's patent. A lie by omission is still a lie. I have to wonder about all the sources, seen and unseen, of Mueller's income these days.

Mueller has turned. He is now biased Samsung/Android, driven by Apple's "irrational" quest for $40 per infringing unit for the five patents. I'm done with him.

 

Apple values the infringements at $40/unit, but in the Android world where everything if free or cheap, that value can't possibly be reasonable in Flourian's eyes, and so it isn't and hence his rant.

post #104 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by tmay View Post

Mueller has turned. He is now biased Samsung/Android, driven by Apple's "irrational" quest for $40 per infringing unit for the five patents. I'm done with him.

Apple values the infringements at $40/unit, but in the Android world where everything if free or cheap, that value can't possibly be reasonable in Flourian's eyes, and so it isn't and hence his rant.

You'd think Mueller would be sufficiently intelligent to grok Apple's strategy with respect to its $40/unit demand; it anchors a high value in the minds of jurors and it's sufficiently objectionable to Samsung that they would reject it out of hand, which aligns perfectly with Apple's stated goal that "everyone should just invent their own stuff." And I think Mueller's past work shows he is sufficiently intelligent, thus adding more evidence to the suspicion that he is, in some manner, accepting compensation from a biased source.
I have enough money to last the rest of my life. Unless I buy something. - Jackie Mason
Never own anything that poops. - RadarTheKat
Reply
I have enough money to last the rest of my life. Unless I buy something. - Jackie Mason
Never own anything that poops. - RadarTheKat
Reply
post #105 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

my mind is that Apple cut off its nose to spite its face and no one is going to change that. 1smile.gif

I disagree. The gen pop doesn't care about the minute details of the trial.
post #106 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by RadarTheKat View Post

There will be a third round, and a fourth. Apple would bring all of the patents it feels Samsung infringed in one trial, but the courts will not allow that so they must bring as many as the court will allow in each lawsuit. The courts don't want a long, drawn out trial that consumes taxpayer dollars and takes jury members away from their lives for an extended period, so Apple must litigate multiple times, with each action covering a new set of infringed patents.

Interesting. So the defense of the patents really requires that they pursue it to the end? Is that the principle here?
post #107 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post


What recent phone from Samsung is copying Apple? Is the GS4 or 5 copying the iPhone? Are pull down notifications on the iPhone not copying Android?

 

 

#1 Android did not invent pull down notifications. These have been around at least since WebOS, and incidentally, Apple hired the engineer who came up with it.

 

#2 Are you really going to compare the few features in iOS that might resemble similar ones on Android to the blatant, well-documented and comprehensive copying that Samsung has done?

 

 

 

 

post #108 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by RadarTheKat View Post

Sounds like Mueller's arguing with only half the facts. I have to wonder about all the sources, seen and unseen, of Mueller's income these days.
Most AI commenters have been pretty comfortable with his sources of income and saw no need to question his objectivity....

until now. IMO the only thing that's factually changed recently is his tone. So now there's questioning about who he answers to? 1rolleyes.gif
Edited by Gatorguy - 4/6/14 at 9:37am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #109 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemyNX View Post

I'm not worried about Apple. I've noticed that other companies just can't stop themselves from making hard to understand UIs. They try but can never keep for long. It's in their genes.
I tried the S5 a few days ago. I tried to be objective in my head and...well... I didn't like it. First thing I did is open the news feed and amazingly it lagged swiping to the feed and scrolling through it.

 

Android is built on Java which is inherently slower than Apple's Objective-C. Writing Java code is easier (despite the terrible Eclipse IDE) and app developers don't have to worry about managing memory. But the smoothness and performance of iOS clearly justify the added development effort.

 

I think it's going to be a while before an Android phone can match the smoothness of the iOS UI, especially if they try to copy iOS7's animated transitions.

post #110 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Most AI commenters have been pretty comfortable with his sources of income and saw no need to question his objectivity....

until now. IMO the only thing that's factually changed recently is his tone. So now there's questioning about who he answers to? 1rolleyes.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by RadarTheKat View Post

You'd think Mueller would be sufficiently intelligent to grok Apple's strategy with respect to its $40/unit demand; it anchors a high value in the minds of jurors and it's sufficiently objectionable to Samsung that they would reject it out of hand, which aligns perfectly with Apple's stated goal that "everyone should just invent their own stuff." And I think Mueller's past work shows he is sufficiently intelligent, thus adding more evidence to the suspicion that he is, in some manner, accepting compensation from a biased source.

Have you considered you might have it backwards? Perhaps the contract with "a biased source" wasn't renewed and he's now saying how he really felt all along. Are you familiar with his past, how he got in this patent blogging area in the first place? His current stated opinions on Apple's courtroom strategies seem less at odds with his background than what he's written the past four years.
Edited by Gatorguy - 4/6/14 at 9:50am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #111 of 231
I remember flip phones that was a cool feature

So why would you copy Apple that's ridiculous

If you're not sure that sarcasm
post #112 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post


I disagree. If anything the media paints Apple as a bully and Samsung gets off scott free.

 

Seriously, next time you are at the coffee shop and waiting in line, ask the person next to you what he or she thinks about the Apple/Samsung trial.

 

I mean, something like 40% of Americans believe the sun rotates around the Earth.  I SERIOUSLY doubt that many people are aware of some patent trial between two tech companies.

post #113 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post

Interesting. So the defense of the patents really requires that they pursue it to the end? Is that the principle here?

Yes, but for more than a mere stand on principal. It's Apple's determination to force those who would infringe its patents and thus steal its intellectual property to "invent their own stuff." To force this issue, Apple apparently feels it needs to pursue litigation against each and every instance of patent infringement. It's the fact that the court doesn't allow Apple to bring all its complaints of Samsung infringement at one time that forces Apple to bring a handful at-a-time and thus bring multiple lawsuits over an extended period of time. The damage awards are what will persuade Samsung it's better to work around Apple's patents than infringe them.

These lawsuits cost Apple in terms of distraction and legal fees but reward Apple in terms of compensation for past infringements and a greater level of assurance its competition will be more hesitant in the future to infringe its patents. Apple also wins by ensuring its own workforce doesn't become discouraged seeing all their efforts to innovate being blatantly ripped off. This morale issue alone is reason to "go thermonuclear", reflecting the sentiment of the company's founder.

These lawsuits cost Samsung in terms of legal fees, judgement awards, and future R&D when it makes the determination that it might be cheaper to innovate on its own rather than outright copy its competition. As to any rewards Samsung attains, those are doubtful. Some might say that Samsung wins in the court of public opinion, but my view is that Samsung's huge (+$11 billion) marketing budget and distasteful competitive practices (paid blogging, spreading of mistruths, paid sponsorships like the recent Ellen selfie and David Ortiz selfie), etc are what is driving the anti-Apple bias, only some of which touches on the issue of intellectual property battles. Of course Samsung, and Google, would promote the notion that these patents shouldn't exist, but that meme is no reason for Apple not to defend its intellectual property and the hard work that went into creating it.
Edited by RadarTheKat - 4/6/14 at 10:09am
I have enough money to last the rest of my life. Unless I buy something. - Jackie Mason
Never own anything that poops. - RadarTheKat
Reply
I have enough money to last the rest of my life. Unless I buy something. - Jackie Mason
Never own anything that poops. - RadarTheKat
Reply
post #114 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


Have you considered you might have it backwards? Perhaps the contract with "a biased source" wasn't renewed and he's now saying how he really felt all along. Are you familiar with his past, how he got in this patent blogging area in the first place? His current stated opinions on Apple's courtroom strategies seem less at odds with his background than what he's written the past four years.

So you're suggesting that Apple had Mueller on its payroll secretly. Yeah, that fits with what we know of Apple's ethics, right?
post #115 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post

I disagree. The gen pop doesn't care about the minute details of the trial.
No one will they care who "wins". And what is winning anyway? It's not like the GS4/5 or Galaxy Note will be pulled from shelves. IF Apple wins, Samsung pays a fine (big deal they're swimming in cash) and then goes to the media playing the sympathy card and whining about a biased court. And the anti-Apple and financial media will dutifully paint Samsung as the victim and Apple the big bully. Mark my words.
post #116 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronJ View Post

Seriously, next time you are at the coffee shop and waiting in line, ask the person next to you what he or she thinks about the Apple/Samsung trial.

I mean, something like 40% of Americans believe the sun rotates around the Earth.  I SERIOUSLY doubt that many people are aware of some patent trial between two tech companies.

I don't know what to attribute it to but there's been at least two surveys lately showing Americans look more favorably on Samsung than Apple. This is one of them. I'll link the other when I stumble on it again.
http://www.kellerfay.com/beyond-oscars-selfie-samsungs-chase-displace-apple-americas-talked-brand/

Here's one from a few weeks ago that I hadn't seen before

Edited by Gatorguy - 4/6/14 at 10:13am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #117 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronJ View Post

Seriously, next time you are at the coffee shop and waiting in line, ask the person next to you what he or she thinks about the Apple/Samsung trial.

I mean, something like 40% of Americans believe the sun rotates around the Earth.  I SERIOUSLY doubt that many people are aware of some patent trial between two tech companies.
I'm just speaking from my own orbit where people I know who are tech ignoramus tell me how Apple is starting to lose to companies like Samsung. It has nothing to do with this trial. But they've seen enough Samsung adverts on TV or in shopping malls (next big thing and all) and have stumbled across enough painting FUD and D&G with regards to Apple and how Samsung is allegedly beating Apple. Doesn't matter if it's a bunch of horse manure or not, they're still seeing it and hearing it from other friends, co workers, etc. So I'm not sure how beneficial this trial will be to Apple unless there is specific technology that Samsung is using RIGHT NOW that they will be forced to stop using, assuming the jury rules in Apple's favor.
post #118 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


Have you considered you might have it backwards? Perhaps the contract with "a biased source" wasn't renewed and he's now saying how he really felt all along. Are you familiar with his past, how he got in this patent blogging area in the first place? His current stated opinions on Apple's courtroom strategies seem less at odds with his background than what he's written the past four years.

Look at the evidence. He states that these documents are nothing illegal, then let's that fact alone carry the implication that Samsung did nothing wrong. While he left off the fact that, after creating these documents, Samsung then went on to implement Apple's patented method for unlocking a phone. How could a patent expert not make that point? It shows clear bias and intent to mislead his audience. How is that representative of a reduction in bias on his part? Please tell me you comprehend this!
I have enough money to last the rest of my life. Unless I buy something. - Jackie Mason
Never own anything that poops. - RadarTheKat
Reply
I have enough money to last the rest of my life. Unless I buy something. - Jackie Mason
Never own anything that poops. - RadarTheKat
Reply
post #119 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post


Apple can do whatever it wants, I'm just not convinced its time well spent and don't think it will matter in the long run. Apple may win this battle but the war is far from over.

 


Which war is that? The one for customer loyalty and profits, or the one for meaningless marketshare based on sales of low end, low profit toys that aren't used for web browsing or shopping?

post #120 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post


No one will they care who "wins". And what is winning anyway? It's not like the GS4/5 or Galaxy Note will be pulled from shelves. IF Apple wins, Samsung pays a fine (big deal they're swimming in cash) and then goes to the media playing the sympathy card and whining about a biased court. And the anti-Apple and financial media will dutifully paint Samsung as the victim and Apple the big bully. Mark my words.

 

No one reads the news, though!  

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


I don't know what to attribute it to but there's been at least two surveys lately showing Americans look more favorably on Samsung than Apple. This is one of them. I'll link the other when I stumble on it again.
http://www.kellerfay.com/beyond-oscars-selfie-samsungs-chase-displace-apple-americas-talked-brand/

Here's one from a few weeks ago that I hadn't seen before

 

Totally irrelevant.  These sorts of "surveys" remind me of Cinemascore.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post


I'm just speaking from my own orbit where people I know who are tech ignoramus tell me how Apple is starting to lose to companies like Samsung. It has nothing to do with this trial. But they've seen enough Samsung adverts on TV or in shopping malls (next big thing and all) and have stumbled across enough painting FUD and D&G with regards to Apple and how Samsung is allegedly beating Apple. Doesn't matter if it's a bunch of horse manure or not, they're still seeing it and hearing it from other friends, co workers, etc. So I'm not sure how beneficial this trial will be to Apple unless there is specific technology that Samsung is using RIGHT NOW that they will be forced to stop using, assuming the jury rules in Apple's favor.

 

And none of this has any real effect on anything.  Real world effect equals zero.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Apple unlocks new Copy Cat docs as evidence Samsung pilfered iPhone unlock
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple unlocks new Copy Cat docs as evidence Samsung pilfered iPhone unlock