guys - why do you think this is funny? This is scary monopolistic behaviour.
Is everyone on this board seriously that stupid that they don't want any choice in electronics apart from apple?
I think a good number of them are that stupid.
To claim infringement on the "look and feel" of the iPhone and iPad seems rather questionable. Why?
The "Look": a tablet is a flat slate-like device with a touchable screen. How else is it really going to look?
The "Feel": this is SO subjective it isn't even funny. What part of the feel is being copied? The icons? The app layout? What?
If this idea of copying the "look and feel" of a product were to have merit isn't Apple just a guilty? Their laptops look like all the other laptops out there; screen, keyboard, trackball, folds up. And remember the Apple laptops came after the PC laptops. I remember looking over the first Apple laptop (not the suitcase monstrosity, the little Powerbook 100 built by Sony) and thinking "nice laptop". But I sure as hell didn't think that the other laptop manufacturers should sue Apple because they designed a laptop.
If you people want to beat the war drums and dance yourselves into further stupidity, go for it. But at least try an explain what it is that Samsung has copied.
To claim infringement on the "look and feel" of the iPhone and iPad seems rather questionable. Why?
The "Look": a tablet is a flat slate-like device with a touchable screen. How else is it really going to look?
The "Feel": this is SO subjective it isn't even funny. What part of the feel is being copied? The icons? The app layout? What?
If this idea of copying the "look and feel" of a product were to have merit isn't Apple just a guilty? Their laptops look like all the other laptops out there; screen, keyboard, trackball, folds up. And remember the Apple laptops came after the PC laptops. I remember looking over the first Apple laptop (not the suitcase monstrosity, the little Powerbook 100 built by Sony) and thinking "nice laptop". But I sure as hell didn't think that the other laptop manufacturers should sue Apple because they designed a laptop.
If you people want to beat the war drums and dance yourselves into further stupidity, go for it. But at least try an explain what it is that Samsung has copied.
Makes you wonder why Samsung didn't continue with the rollout of the Galaxy Tab 10.1v opting instead to launch the hurridely revised, thinner Galaxy Tab 10.1 IMMEDIATELY AFTER the launch of the iPad 2.
Incidentally , Australia became one of the dumping grounds of the original 10.1v's.
What would you call all the patent suits against Apple, including the one by Samsung. They claim Apple is using patented tech without proper licenses, which in effect is stealing same as this look and feel copying
It's a little different as for most of those patents Apple has said they stand ready to pay FRAND licensing fees - the patents being included in UMTS and the like.
To claim infringement on the "look and feel" of the iPhone and iPad seems rather questionable. Why?
The "Look": a tablet is a flat slate-like device with a touchable screen. How else is it really going to look?
The "Feel": this is SO subjective it isn't even funny. What part of the feel is being copied? The icons? The app layout? What?
If this idea of copying the "look and feel" of a product were to have merit isn't Apple just a guilty? Their laptops look like all the other laptops out there; screen, keyboard, trackball, folds up. And remember the Apple laptops came after the PC laptops. I remember looking over the first Apple laptop (not the suitcase monstrosity, the little Powerbook 100 built by Sony) and thinking "nice laptop". But I sure as hell didn't think that the other laptop manufacturers should sue Apple because they designed a laptop.
If you people want to beat the war drums and dance yourselves into further stupidity, go for it. But at least try an explain what it is that Samsung has copied.
I'm not sure why you would want to undermine your own argument by resulting to insults like "stupid" but "look and feel" isn't entirely subjective. "Look and feel" is a cumulative sum of parts. I won't list all of the alleged Samsung infringements but contrary to popular belief it isn't "a grid of icons." In the case, it is icon placement in the menu bar, graphic effects of icons in the "dock", iconography used for the icons among several other things. Here's a non-tech example. David LaChapelle (a photographer) published a coffee table book that included a certain photo. Pop singer, Rhianna, apparently liked the photo and decided to use it in her video without permission. Mr. La Chapelle saw said video and tried to negotiate payment from Rhianna. Her management refused so he took her to court. The court has just recently decided that there were enough elements in the music video that were the same as the photo to warrant a trial to proceed. That is what "look and feel" means legally.
As for the laptops, possibly there are/were apple laptops that infringed but I don't recal any apple laptops with similar cases. Having a keyboard, a screen and folding up is not enough.
You're displaying tremendous ignorance here. First off the issue isn't 'a 10inch tablet with a black bezel', because neither the iPad nor the 10.1 tablet have a bezel of any kind. They have black margins.
If you want to see what a bezel looks like, take a gander at the MacBook Air.
Anyway given your complete cluelessness about design it's not surprising that you don't realize that there are indeed hundreds of ways that Samsung could have designed the 10.1 so that the hardware patents, design patents and trade dress complaints that Apple is asserting wouldn't apply.
They chose not to.
Oh come one, even Apple Insider is talking about bezel when they are meaning "margins". Are they ignorant too ?
Because you are such a smart guy, you should know that proportions of the Samsung Tab are different (16:10 vs 4:3), the back is completely different design, not to say the material used.
They're free to buy a Xoom, or a Toshiba Thrive, or the forthcoming Sony S1 or either of the lenovo 10.1inch androids. It's not like they don't have plenty of choices of 10inch tablet. Heck they could go wild and buy an HP touchpad.
This isn't scary monopolistic behaviour, this is standard enforcement of IP rights.
BS. Some of the claimed infringements are inherent in Android itself.
Apple is trying to set a precedent with Samsung before going after the other companies.
THAT, my friend, is monopolistic tactic and hampering competition.
The "Look": a tablet is a flat slate-like device with a touchable screen. How else is it really going to look?
It could look like
or any of the Lenovo offerings
There's a lot of detailed design in how the enclosure looks. The shape of the edges, corners, back etc. How wide are the margins, are they symmetric or asymmetric? What do the connectors look like even. Samsung did their utmost with all of those design decisions to make a device that resembled the iPad-2 as closely as they could - they even went from using a micro USB connector to an iPod-style proprietary connector.
Apple is even accusing them of copying the multi-fulcrum volume rocker which seems completely unnecessary - why couldn't they just have used two buttons or an old style rocker? Obviously because that wouldn't be sufficiently similar to an iPad.
They can't buy the product which is the most flagrant copy of the iPad-2. Actually I would say that slight build quality issues aside the Sony-S1 looks the most interesting of the android tablets.
They can't buy the product which is the most flagrant copy of the iPad-2. Actually I would say that slight build quality issues aside the Sony-S1 looks the most interesting of the android tablets
Apple is even accusing them of copying the multi-fulcrum volume rocker which seems completely unnecessary - why couldn't they just have used two buttons or an old style rocker? Obviously because that wouldn't be sufficiently similar to an iPad.
Samsung has been using the "volume rocker" button FOR YEARS ON THEIR MOBILE DEVICES.
BS. Some of the claimed infringements are inherent in Android itself.
Apple is trying to set a precedent with Samsung before going after the other companies.
THAT, my friend, is monopolistic tactic and hampering competition.
So you'll be able to complain as and when they assert those patents against Lenovo. When you get into a patent fight with a firm you assert all your strongest patents - Samsung certainly is doing so against Apple.
Except you won't complain then, because you only get paid to cheer for Samsung.
To claim infringement on the "look and feel" of the iPhone and iPad seems rather questionable.
It's about more than the physical appearance of the device. The UI is also part of it. And when the two are taken together the notion of copying becomes less stupid and more possible. Particularly when you look at the elements that aren't in the realm of totally obvious like putting a keyboard on a laptop would be
Quote:
Originally Posted by FriedLobster
How do you put a dollar amount on missing out on the critical a launch of a brand new product that nobody's going to buy?
ZERO
It's likely they already have settled on an amount that is left sealed until the judgement is made
So you'll be able to complain as and when they assert those patents against Lenovo. When you get into a patent fight with a firm you assert all your strongest patents - Samsung certainly is doing so against Apple.
Except you won't complain then, because you only get paid to cheer for Samsung.
Look who is talking? You get paid to cheer for Apple yourself.
Haha - yeh - of course as a samsung paid shill you hate any sony products. Can't bear that they still out design Samsung eh?
Sony is crap. Their golden design days are over. They lost their top designers to competing firms back in the beginning of the 21th century. I should know I have relatives who used to work there.
But Lenovo tabs also look like the iPad (except the first one), and what about the HP TouchPad ? Put some glasses.
Quote:
Apple is even accusing them of copying the multi-fulcrum volume rocker which seems completely unnecessary - why couldn't they just have used two buttons or an old style rocker? Obviously because that wouldn't be sufficiently similar to an iPad.
BS. Some of the claimed infringements are inherent in Android itself.
Apple is trying to set a precedent with Samsung before going after the other companies.
THAT, my friend, is monopolistic tactic and hampering competition.
Apple's claims against Samsung are focused on trade dress and not android. You must be thinking of the HTC case which involves patented technology and can/will definitely affect android.
Either way, neither is a monopolistic tactic (since you first have to be a monopoly which Apple is not) and doesn't hinder competition since infringing on another person or company's work isn't actually competitive.
Comments
guys - why do you think this is funny? This is scary monopolistic behaviour.
Is everyone on this board seriously that stupid that they don't want any choice in electronics apart from apple?
I think a good number of them are that stupid.
To claim infringement on the "look and feel" of the iPhone and iPad seems rather questionable. Why?
The "Look": a tablet is a flat slate-like device with a touchable screen. How else is it really going to look?
The "Feel": this is SO subjective it isn't even funny. What part of the feel is being copied? The icons? The app layout? What?
If this idea of copying the "look and feel" of a product were to have merit isn't Apple just a guilty? Their laptops look like all the other laptops out there; screen, keyboard, trackball, folds up. And remember the Apple laptops came after the PC laptops. I remember looking over the first Apple laptop (not the suitcase monstrosity, the little Powerbook 100 built by Sony) and thinking "nice laptop". But I sure as hell didn't think that the other laptop manufacturers should sue Apple because they designed a laptop.
If you people want to beat the war drums and dance yourselves into further stupidity, go for it. But at least try an explain what it is that Samsung has copied.
Nah, it's an indicator of how sure the court is that Apple will win the suit. That's how injunctions are granted.
It's standard practice in Australia that loser pays costs and agrees to do so as a condition of having their case heard.
Yes, they have that choice. But they can't buy the product which is arguably the next best after the iPad 2.
yeah, maybe it's the next best because they copied the look and feel like apple claims.
(i wouldn't know because i have never used either tablet)
I think a good number of them are that stupid.
To claim infringement on the "look and feel" of the iPhone and iPad seems rather questionable. Why?
The "Look": a tablet is a flat slate-like device with a touchable screen. How else is it really going to look?
The "Feel": this is SO subjective it isn't even funny. What part of the feel is being copied? The icons? The app layout? What?
If this idea of copying the "look and feel" of a product were to have merit isn't Apple just a guilty? Their laptops look like all the other laptops out there; screen, keyboard, trackball, folds up. And remember the Apple laptops came after the PC laptops. I remember looking over the first Apple laptop (not the suitcase monstrosity, the little Powerbook 100 built by Sony) and thinking "nice laptop". But I sure as hell didn't think that the other laptop manufacturers should sue Apple because they designed a laptop.
If you people want to beat the war drums and dance yourselves into further stupidity, go for it. But at least try an explain what it is that Samsung has copied.
Makes you wonder why Samsung didn't continue with the rollout of the Galaxy Tab 10.1v opting instead to launch the hurridely revised, thinner Galaxy Tab 10.1 IMMEDIATELY AFTER the launch of the iPad 2.
Incidentally , Australia became one of the dumping grounds of the original 10.1v's.
What would you call all the patent suits against Apple, including the one by Samsung. They claim Apple is using patented tech without proper licenses, which in effect is stealing same as this look and feel copying
It's a little different as for most of those patents Apple has said they stand ready to pay FRAND licensing fees - the patents being included in UMTS and the like.
I think a good number of them are that stupid.
To claim infringement on the "look and feel" of the iPhone and iPad seems rather questionable. Why?
The "Look": a tablet is a flat slate-like device with a touchable screen. How else is it really going to look?
The "Feel": this is SO subjective it isn't even funny. What part of the feel is being copied? The icons? The app layout? What?
If this idea of copying the "look and feel" of a product were to have merit isn't Apple just a guilty? Their laptops look like all the other laptops out there; screen, keyboard, trackball, folds up. And remember the Apple laptops came after the PC laptops. I remember looking over the first Apple laptop (not the suitcase monstrosity, the little Powerbook 100 built by Sony) and thinking "nice laptop". But I sure as hell didn't think that the other laptop manufacturers should sue Apple because they designed a laptop.
If you people want to beat the war drums and dance yourselves into further stupidity, go for it. But at least try an explain what it is that Samsung has copied.
I'm not sure why you would want to undermine your own argument by resulting to insults like "stupid" but "look and feel" isn't entirely subjective. "Look and feel" is a cumulative sum of parts. I won't list all of the alleged Samsung infringements but contrary to popular belief it isn't "a grid of icons." In the case, it is icon placement in the menu bar, graphic effects of icons in the "dock", iconography used for the icons among several other things. Here's a non-tech example. David LaChapelle (a photographer) published a coffee table book that included a certain photo. Pop singer, Rhianna, apparently liked the photo and decided to use it in her video without permission. Mr. La Chapelle saw said video and tried to negotiate payment from Rhianna. Her management refused so he took her to court. The court has just recently decided that there were enough elements in the music video that were the same as the photo to warrant a trial to proceed. That is what "look and feel" means legally.
As for the laptops, possibly there are/were apple laptops that infringed but I don't recal any apple laptops with similar cases. Having a keyboard, a screen and folding up is not enough.
You're displaying tremendous ignorance here. First off the issue isn't 'a 10inch tablet with a black bezel', because neither the iPad nor the 10.1 tablet have a bezel of any kind. They have black margins.
If you want to see what a bezel looks like, take a gander at the MacBook Air.
Anyway given your complete cluelessness about design it's not surprising that you don't realize that there are indeed hundreds of ways that Samsung could have designed the 10.1 so that the hardware patents, design patents and trade dress complaints that Apple is asserting wouldn't apply.
They chose not to.
Oh come one, even Apple Insider is talking about bezel when they are meaning "margins". Are they ignorant too ?
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles..._to_bezel.html
Because you are such a smart guy, you should know that proportions of the Samsung Tab are different (16:10 vs 4:3), the back is completely different design, not to say the material used.
They're free to buy a Xoom, or a Toshiba Thrive, or the forthcoming Sony S1 or either of the lenovo 10.1inch androids. It's not like they don't have plenty of choices of 10inch tablet. Heck they could go wild and buy an HP touchpad.
This isn't scary monopolistic behaviour, this is standard enforcement of IP rights.
BS. Some of the claimed infringements are inherent in Android itself.
Apple is trying to set a precedent with Samsung before going after the other companies.
THAT, my friend, is monopolistic tactic and hampering competition.
The "Look": a tablet is a flat slate-like device with a touchable screen. How else is it really going to look?
It could look like
or any of the Lenovo offerings
There's a lot of detailed design in how the enclosure looks. The shape of the edges, corners, back etc. How wide are the margins, are they symmetric or asymmetric? What do the connectors look like even. Samsung did their utmost with all of those design decisions to make a device that resembled the iPad-2 as closely as they could - they even went from using a micro USB connector to an iPod-style proprietary connector.
Apple is even accusing them of copying the multi-fulcrum volume rocker which seems completely unnecessary - why couldn't they just have used two buttons or an old style rocker? Obviously because that wouldn't be sufficiently similar to an iPad.
They can't buy the product which is the most flagrant copy of the iPad-2. Actually I would say that slight build quality issues aside the Sony-S1 looks the most interesting of the android tablets.
It looks like the most useless.
They can't buy the product which is the most flagrant copy of the iPad-2. Actually I would say that slight build quality issues aside the Sony-S1 looks the most interesting of the android tablets
Apple is even accusing them of copying the multi-fulcrum volume rocker which seems completely unnecessary - why couldn't they just have used two buttons or an old style rocker? Obviously because that wouldn't be sufficiently similar to an iPad.
Samsung has been using the "volume rocker" button FOR YEARS ON THEIR MOBILE DEVICES.
BS. Some of the claimed infringements are inherent in Android itself.
Apple is trying to set a precedent with Samsung before going after the other companies.
THAT, my friend, is monopolistic tactic and hampering competition.
So you'll be able to complain as and when they assert those patents against Lenovo. When you get into a patent fight with a firm you assert all your strongest patents - Samsung certainly is doing so against Apple.
Except you won't complain then, because you only get paid to cheer for Samsung.
Samsung has been using the "volume rocker" button FOR YEARS ON THEIR MOBILE DEVICES.
A multi-fulcrum one? Really? Predating Apple's patent? Then they'll have plenty of prior art won't they? Should be an easy win for them.
I think a good number of them are that stupid.
To claim infringement on the "look and feel" of the iPhone and iPad seems rather questionable.
It's about more than the physical appearance of the device. The UI is also part of it. And when the two are taken together the notion of copying becomes less stupid and more possible. Particularly when you look at the elements that aren't in the realm of totally obvious like putting a keyboard on a laptop would be
How do you put a dollar amount on missing out on the critical a launch of a brand new product that nobody's going to buy?
ZERO
It's likely they already have settled on an amount that is left sealed until the judgement is made
It looks like the most useless.
Haha - yeh - of course as a samsung paid shill you hate any sony products. Can't bear that they still out design Samsung eh?
So you'll be able to complain as and when they assert those patents against Lenovo. When you get into a patent fight with a firm you assert all your strongest patents - Samsung certainly is doing so against Apple.
Except you won't complain then, because you only get paid to cheer for Samsung.
Look who is talking? You get paid to cheer for Apple yourself.
A multi-fulcrum one? Really? Predating Apple's patent? Then they'll have plenty of prior art won't they? Should be an easy win for them.
Samsung isnt as self-conscious of their property as Apple.
Haha - yeh - of course as a samsung paid shill you hate any sony products. Can't bear that they still out design Samsung eh?
Sony is crap. Their golden design days are over. They lost their top designers to competing firms back in the beginning of the 21th century. I should know I have relatives who used to work there.
It could look like
or any of the Lenovo offerings
Ha ha ha ha
But Lenovo tabs also look like the iPad (except the first one), and what about the HP TouchPad ? Put some glasses.
Apple is even accusing them of copying the multi-fulcrum volume rocker which seems completely unnecessary - why couldn't they just have used two buttons or an old style rocker? Obviously because that wouldn't be sufficiently similar to an iPad.
Yeah, sure, they look EXACTLY the same
BS. Some of the claimed infringements are inherent in Android itself.
Apple is trying to set a precedent with Samsung before going after the other companies.
THAT, my friend, is monopolistic tactic and hampering competition.
Apple's claims against Samsung are focused on trade dress and not android. You must be thinking of the HTC case which involves patented technology and can/will definitely affect android.
Either way, neither is a monopolistic tactic (since you first have to be a monopoly which Apple is not) and doesn't hinder competition since infringing on another person or company's work isn't actually competitive.