The article is a reasonably detailed and researched convincing argument as to how Samsung didn't actually have a product in the same shape and form factor as an iPhone before the iPhone came out. Further, the article explicitly shows you what Samsung's "look" was previous to the iPhone and how they completely changed it just after the iPhone came out to an "iPhone look." There are even statements on the record of Samsung execs talking about how they need to make their phones "look more like the iPhone."
How can you possibly just reply that it's the other way around? You can argue the points, but you aren't entitled to just make up your own facts.
Facts are ... well, facts.
The "article" clearly points out that the phone was shown a MONTH after the initial iphone announcement, and that Samsung was working on a new phone in 2006 (though no images were given at that time).
Do you honestly think a company can rework an entire phone design and UI in a MONTH? Tweak it, maybe. but build it from scratch?
And as the "article" also clearly pointed out, there were devices announced and displayed previous to the iphone that had similarities as well.
But the BIGGEST problem with this "article" is that it's built up around what people are posting on FORUMS and in comments, and not off of any article or actual claim. It's like writing a front page news article for the NYT based off of what you heard your grandmother gossiping about at her weekly Bridge party.
This image would most likely have faded out of the limelight as quickly as it appeared, but thanks to the article here, it most likely won't.
The "article" clearly points out that the phone was shown a MONTH after the initial iphone announcement, and that Samsung was working on a new phone in 2006 (though no images were given at that time).
So what happened to the claim that the Samsung F700 was demoed in 2006 and released the month after the iPhone was introduced? What happen to the iPhone copying Samsung? That’s the claim that was made. That’s what he debunked in this article.
You guys move your position so fucking fast you’re like troll ninjas.
The important message here is that the claim that Apple copied Samsung and that F700 was demoed and released before the iPhone is a lie. A lie you perpetuated and stood behind. I claim you have yet to admit was wrong.
A claim that NO official source is making, not even Android Blogs. This was an image posted on TWITTER, on FORUMS, and in comments to articles. You know, like the pictures from here: http://chickswithstevebuscemeyes.tumblr.com/.
Do Android Police, or Droid Life, or Android Central need to run an article debunking the "claim" made by comments here that the ipod touch pre-dates the iphone?
Does Steve Jobs need to make an official press release to deal with Jim TinFoilHead who claims his mac can read his thoughts? If the Weekly World news runs an article tomorrow that Google is run by reptiles who live in our (actually) hollow moon, does mountain view (or Android Central) really need to respond?
So what happened to the claim that the Samsung F700 was demoed in 2006 and released the month after the iPhone was introduced? What happen to the iPhone copying Samsung? That?s the claim that was made. That?s what he debunked in this article.
You guys move your position so fucking fast you?re like troll ninjas.
And again, please tell me where ANY site was making that claim?
Or more specifically, please tell me where I (personally) claimed that Apple was copying Samsung? In fact, I've been pretty clear through this whole thing that The whole "Copying" thing is bullshit when it comes to the DESIGN of a phone with rounded corners and a border around a touchscreen.
I've also been clear, since the start, that Apple DOES have a valid case with touchwiz and that they also have a case with certain phones like the Vibrant.
But they're claiming the SAME infractions for devices like the GEM, Galaxy S, and Transform.
Funny, you seem to post comments on every DED article... often the first to do so. I really think deep down inside, you love DED.
You're also really annoying -- at least some of the other fandroids occasionally have something constructive to add to the discussion. Not you, though. I'm blocking you -- congrats, you're the first.
Please tell me it's true I can also block these crazy nutters who attack DED every article that goes up...
His blog will satisfy your thirst for kool aid very well, young apprentice. Soon you will learn to hate thine enemies and love the apple so young.
hmmm...good example of the logic you use. Draw conclusions from insufficient evidence or evidence you make up much? Wait, I know - you're part of a dancing group at Radio DItty Musique Hell.
I was an adult when I got an Apple //c as my first computer.
After I'd read 'The Whole Earth Software Catalog 2.0' - edited by Stewart Brand.
(i)Pad(2go)wans aren't necessarily what they look like.
Oh. I've been reading DED/RDM for quite awhile as standalone. I've been shocked amazed and awed at the vitriol spewed here when his byline comes up - no matter how trenchant his observations or points.
Please tell me it's true I can also block these crazy nutters who attack DED every article that goes up...
I don't see where or how to block him though?!
User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Add whoever you want to your ignore list and their posts will be collapsed in any thread they post in. You will have the option to display the post if you want to but why. Trolls like sprockets, DaHarder have been on my ignore list for a long time now.
I love to sit back and watch as Jobs assumes the fetal position and sucks his thumb when he hears the word Android. LOL. You will never catch up to Android Jobs, Your new iPhone 5 is outdated before its even out.
Android rules.
And they say Steve has a reality distortion field.
Its fairly amazing the revisionist history being undertaken by Google and the Fandroids. I get a laugh out of these people saying Apple copied them when you can look at preliminary Android UI and hardware designs and see that Blackberry and Nokia were the intended copy victims. After Apple revealed their first iPhone, then Android quickly morphed into something else. Samsung obviously copied Apple. I reckon it will be up to a judge and jury to decide if and to what extent Samsung is liable for their infringements. I think it should be intuitively obvious to the most casual observer, but IANAL.
you want to talk about "revisionist history"? and i'll throw in "confirmation bias" too.
Android was revealed 5th November 2007 together with the formation of the Open Handset Alliance.
here's one of the earliest articles about Andoid's "coming-out party. note that this is not Andoid's RELEASE , that would be October 21st 2008 with it's first retail hardware design: the T-Mobile G1 (HTC Dream).
note that the two main design ideas for Android's hardware were the typical hardware designs of the time:
the candy-bar with full keyboard,
and the big-screen with function buttons at the bottom.
these represent the common designs of most of the phones that had been available for MANY years before the Android platform took off, and also before Apple even REVEALED the iPhone in January 2007 and later RELEASED it in June 2007.
shall we be bold and claim the Apple iPhone clearly copies the "big-screen with function button at bottom" previous designs ?
today the " smartphone with function buttons at the bottom" is still popular, as seen in image two of the CNET article, compared to current devices that also have up to 4 buttons at the bottom like most Android's today.
Android did not "copy Nokia and Rim first, then copy iPhone later", Android early development hardware was based on the two most popular designs for ALL phones of the time:
candybar-full-keyboard
large-screen with function buttons on bottom.
those designs were prevalent in phones YEARS before the iphone was even announced.
to say that a full-screen smartphone with function buttons at the bottom today copies iPhone's design is an gross display of ignorance that clearly demonstrates an immature knowledge of the history of phone design.
Comments
WTF?!
Did you even read the article?
The article is a reasonably detailed and researched convincing argument as to how Samsung didn't actually have a product in the same shape and form factor as an iPhone before the iPhone came out. Further, the article explicitly shows you what Samsung's "look" was previous to the iPhone and how they completely changed it just after the iPhone came out to an "iPhone look." There are even statements on the record of Samsung execs talking about how they need to make their phones "look more like the iPhone."
How can you possibly just reply that it's the other way around? You can argue the points, but you aren't entitled to just make up your own facts.
Facts are ... well, facts.
The "article" clearly points out that the phone was shown a MONTH after the initial iphone announcement, and that Samsung was working on a new phone in 2006 (though no images were given at that time).
Do you honestly think a company can rework an entire phone design and UI in a MONTH? Tweak it, maybe. but build it from scratch?
And as the "article" also clearly pointed out, there were devices announced and displayed previous to the iphone that had similarities as well.
But the BIGGEST problem with this "article" is that it's built up around what people are posting on FORUMS and in comments, and not off of any article or actual claim. It's like writing a front page news article for the NYT based off of what you heard your grandmother gossiping about at her weekly Bridge party.
This image would most likely have faded out of the limelight as quickly as it appeared, but thanks to the article here, it most likely won't.
The fandroids are right, the iPhone 1 to 3 design did copy something else that had been around for some time, they copied iPod Touch!
The iPod touch was not released until Sep 2007, three months after the iPhone 1 was released!
The "article" clearly points out that the phone was shown a MONTH after the initial iphone announcement, and that Samsung was working on a new phone in 2006 (though no images were given at that time).
So what happened to the claim that the Samsung F700 was demoed in 2006 and released the month after the iPhone was introduced? What happen to the iPhone copying Samsung? That’s the claim that was made. That’s what he debunked in this article.
You guys move your position so fucking fast you’re like troll ninjas.
You are selling record phones.
You are selling record tablets.
You own the mp3 player market.
You probably will own the tablet market.
You own your accessories and 3rd party accessory makers.
You make more off each device you sell than any other.
You make more on apps than any other.
You are set to own the print market.
You are set to take over the portable gaming market.
And you still find it necessary to sue everyone on the planet.
That's a whiny bitch if I ever saw one.
No wait, that's a ball breaking bitch.
Now that's real whining
I registered today after lurking for a loooonnnnggg while just to add my voice in support of DED and his journalism and 'takes'.
Go Daniel!
You entertain and inform me with every word. Plus, you drive the Fandroid base krazee! Imma lovin' it!
The important message here is that the claim that Apple copied Samsung and that F700 was demoed and released before the iPhone is a lie. A lie you perpetuated and stood behind. I claim you have yet to admit was wrong.
A claim that NO official source is making, not even Android Blogs. This was an image posted on TWITTER, on FORUMS, and in comments to articles. You know, like the pictures from here: http://chickswithstevebuscemeyes.tumblr.com/.
Do Android Police, or Droid Life, or Android Central need to run an article debunking the "claim" made by comments here that the ipod touch pre-dates the iphone?
Does Steve Jobs need to make an official press release to deal with Jim TinFoilHead who claims his mac can read his thoughts? If the Weekly World news runs an article tomorrow that Google is run by reptiles who live in our (actually) hollow moon, does mountain view (or Android Central) really need to respond?
It's shocking how right DED is. Witness the proportion of people posting with an Android-fan bias on an Apple-centric board.
I registered today after lurking for a loooonnnnggg while just to add my voice in support of DED and his journalism and 'takes'.
Go Daniel!
You entertain and inform me with every word. Plus, you drive the Fandroid base krazee! Imma lovin' it!
His blog will satisfy your thirst for kool aid very well, young apprentice. Soon you will learn to hate thine enemies and love the apple so young.
So what happened to the claim that the Samsung F700 was demoed in 2006 and released the month after the iPhone was introduced? What happen to the iPhone copying Samsung? That?s the claim that was made. That?s what he debunked in this article.
You guys move your position so fucking fast you?re like troll ninjas.
And again, please tell me where ANY site was making that claim?
Or more specifically, please tell me where I (personally) claimed that Apple was copying Samsung? In fact, I've been pretty clear through this whole thing that The whole "Copying" thing is bullshit when it comes to the DESIGN of a phone with rounded corners and a border around a touchscreen.
I've also been clear, since the start, that Apple DOES have a valid case with touchwiz and that they also have a case with certain phones like the Vibrant.
But they're claiming the SAME infractions for devices like the GEM, Galaxy S, and Transform.
So where, exactly, am I changing my claim?
Feel free to repost the graphics. Spread the truth!!!
I have updated the graphic to reflect the truth
Feel free to repost the graphics. Spread the truth!!!
Then you should probably take the time to correct 2008 to the proper 2007
Funny, you seem to post comments on every DED article... often the first to do so. I really think deep down inside, you love DED.
You're also really annoying -- at least some of the other fandroids occasionally have something constructive to add to the discussion. Not you, though. I'm blocking you -- congrats, you're the first.
Please tell me it's true I can also block these crazy nutters who attack DED every article that goes up...
I don't see where or how to block him though?!
His blog will satisfy your thirst for kool aid very well, young apprentice. Soon you will learn to hate thine enemies and love the apple so young.
hmmm...good example of the logic you use. Draw conclusions from insufficient evidence or evidence you make up much? Wait, I know - you're part of a dancing group at Radio DItty Musique Hell.
I was an adult when I got an Apple //c as my first computer.
After I'd read 'The Whole Earth Software Catalog 2.0' - edited by Stewart Brand.
He was here:
http://www.wired.com/thisdayintech/2...-of-all-demos/
(i)Pad(2go)wans aren't necessarily what they look like.
Oh. I've been reading DED/RDM for quite awhile as standalone. I've been shocked amazed and awed at the vitriol spewed here when his byline comes up - no matter how trenchant his observations or points.
Then you should probably take the time to correct 2008 to the proper 2007
Sorry my bad. It's corrected now.. Thank you!!!!
Please tell me it's true I can also block these crazy nutters who attack DED every article that goes up...
I don't see where or how to block him though?!
User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Add whoever you want to your ignore list and their posts will be collapsed in any thread they post in. You will have the option to display the post if you want to but why. Trolls like sprockets, DaHarder have been on my ignore list for a long time now.
I love to sit back and watch as Jobs assumes the fetal position and sucks his thumb when he hears the word Android. LOL. You will never catch up to Android Jobs, Your new iPhone 5 is outdated before its even out.
Android rules.
And they say Steve has a reality distortion field.
Not so fast?
Nice..This is the type of high-quality post we're here for. Often the best posts have the least words.
Its fairly amazing the revisionist history being undertaken by Google and the Fandroids. I get a laugh out of these people saying Apple copied them when you can look at preliminary Android UI and hardware designs and see that Blackberry and Nokia were the intended copy victims. After Apple revealed their first iPhone, then Android quickly morphed into something else. Samsung obviously copied Apple. I reckon it will be up to a judge and jury to decide if and to what extent Samsung is liable for their infringements. I think it should be intuitively obvious to the most casual observer, but IANAL.
you want to talk about "revisionist history"? and i'll throw in "confirmation bias" too.
Android was revealed 5th November 2007 together with the formation of the Open Handset Alliance.
here's one of the earliest articles about Andoid's "coming-out party. note that this is not Andoid's RELEASE , that would be October 21st 2008 with it's first retail hardware design: the T-Mobile G1 (HTC Dream).
note that the two main design ideas for Android's hardware were the typical hardware designs of the time:
- the candy-bar with full keyboard,
- and the big-screen with function buttons at the bottom.
these represent the common designs of most of the phones that had been available for MANY years before the Android platform took off, and also before Apple even REVEALED the iPhone in January 2007 and later RELEASED it in June 2007.shall we be bold and claim the Apple iPhone clearly copies the "big-screen with function button at bottom" previous designs ?
today the " smartphone with function buttons at the bottom" is still popular, as seen in image two of the CNET article, compared to current devices that also have up to 4 buttons at the bottom like most Android's today.
Android did not "copy Nokia and Rim first, then copy iPhone later", Android early development hardware was based on the two most popular designs for ALL phones of the time:
- candybar-full-keyboard
- large-screen with function buttons on bottom.
those designs were prevalent in phones YEARS before the iphone was even announced.to say that a full-screen smartphone with function buttons at the bottom today copies iPhone's design is an gross display of ignorance that clearly demonstrates an immature knowledge of the history of phone design.