I originally thought Apple was concerned with Samsung copying look and feel too closely. Now it looks like simply producing a tablet may attract Apple's lawyers.
Sorry, but in my view this looks more and more like Apple intends to litigate itself to an untouchable market presence. The bigger they're getting the more dangerous they're looking to me. Until they lose one or more of these ("look and feel"?) lawsuits, anyone who wants to build a smartphone or tablet needs to allow for lots of legal fees no matter how little it actually looks like an Apple product.
By way of example apple tried it on here in objecting to the registration of a mark for the supermarket chain Woolworth's. The similarities between apples and Woolworths marks were striking. Only the most hardened apple fan could have conceived that objection to have been reasonable.
Except for the main point, they are litigating instead of innovating. They are the only ones innovating. There has not been any innovation in any of these tablets since the iPad. The most innovative tablet released since the iPad is the iPad 2. Do you care to think what tablet will come next on that list?
What is your definition of innovation. Seriously there has been alot of innovation outside of the ipad. Look at the asus transformer or the tablets that added things they believed consumers would like, such as full size usb, hdmi, workable flash in a mobile device? Or is your definition of innovation tied to the amount of tripsvto the patent Office?
Funny how tablets were made BEFORE Apple released the iPad and now all of a sudden this question starts popping up. Gee, I don't know maybe make them like before? Or spends some time and money and actually innovate and figure it out yourself instead of mimicking someone else's work?
Funny how tablets were made BEFORE Apple released the iPad and now all of a sudden this question starts popping up. Gee, I don't know maybe make them like before? Or spends some time and money and actually innovate and figure it out yourself instead of mimicking someone else's work?
Isn't that funny? Tablets were made for years before the "Giant iPod Touch". The were months of jokes and all of a sudden, those jokes don't see so funny any more.
Why not make something like that Dell Flip or one of those numerous Tablet PCs? I know why.
Except for the main point, they are litigating instead of innovating. They are the only ones innovating. There has not been any innovation in any of these tablets since the iPad. The most innovative tablet released since the iPad is the iPad 2. Do you care to think what tablet will come next on that list?
What is the innovation in iPad 2 vis-a-vis the original?
What device are you thinking of here? The TC1000? Significantly different design, like pretty much every other pre iPad tablet it had a bezel.
Hey, I had one of those, actually, I had the TC1100. I loved it. Just wished for a lighter version and for an instant on OS. Years later, the iPad showed up and I knew that's what I wanted.
Isn't that funny? Tablets were made for years before the "Giant iPod Touch". The were months of jokes and all of a sudden, those jokes don't see so funny any more.
Why not make something like that Dell Flip or one of those numerous Tablet PCs? I know why.
Only the Giant iPod Touch is selling.
Exactly. This talk about "stifling innovation" is pretty much bunk because there is very little innovation in mimicry. Jumping on a successful bandwagon to save a couple bucks doesn't look like innovation to me.
I totally understand the suite against the Samsung Galaxy S, but more because of the software than the hardware.
IMO Samsung modeled the TouchWiz UI off iOS in order to profit off the iPhones goodwill (i.e. a customer walks into a store, looks at the TouchWiz UI and thinks "that's just like my friends iPhone only cheaper... I'll get that one").
The Galaxy Tab is more of a stretch. If you were dumb, and I mean really really dumb bordering on mentally deficient you *might* confuse a Galaxy Tab for an iPad as long as you didn't turn it on or turn it to the side or back.
There is no way someone is going to think a Xoom is an iPad though, regardless of how stupid they are.
The Galaxy Tab is more of a stretch. If you were dumb, and I mean really really dumb bordering on mentally deficient you *might* confuse a Galaxy Tab for an iPad as long as you didn't turn it on or turn it to the side or back.
There is no way someone is going to think a Xoom is an iPad though, regardless of how stupid they are.
It's not just about confusion, though that's part of it. It's about copying the major aesthetic choices in such a way that a very distinctive product starts to become a commodity.
This is a particular problem for Apple because their aesthetic is so minimal, as a result once it's copied by everybody else they don't have a lot of options for changing it while staying within their existing design language.
Apple is trying to push the other OEMs into developing their own distinctive design languages. Some elements may be the same, but when almost all of the elements are the same for almost all the vendors something is clearly wrong.
It's not just about confusion, though that's part of it. It's about copying the major aesthetic choices in such a way that a very distinctive product starts to become a commodity.
The Xoom doesn't copy any major aesthetic choices that are unique to the iPad.
It's doesn't have a unibody design. If you look at the back the camera/speaker are in their own cutout area with the power button. It's also missing the Apple's unique single round button.
Not only is the screen ratio different but the screen rotation is different. The iPad is geared around portrait mode (dock and "Apple" button at the bottom, power button on top) where the Xoom is totally geared to be landscape (dock is on the "side", power button at the back and all the labeling is all landscape).
The Xoom is as unique an entry in the tablet market as the iPad is.
Completely agree. Apple uses lawsuits rather than fairly competing. Maybe
Define "fair". Is not defending your IP fair if you believe it has been infringed on? Or should Apple let everyone walk in and use their IP without licensing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaroonMushroom
Even though I expect Apple to lose the suit, I still think it's incredibly low of them. Apple is backing up shipments of a competitive product.
I don't know why Apple loves giving themselves bad PR.
Competitive? Or did you mean "competing"? (It's only "competitive" in your mind, Sanja ).
As for "bad PR," that's just your spin. Haters gonna hate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaroonMushroom
Maybe motorola should sue Apple because the Xoom came out before the iPad 2. I mean, the ipad 2 has rounded corners, and a camera. Must be a knockoff.
F*ck you apple. You're bad for consumers.
If Motorola thinks they got a case against the iPad 2, then bring it, and let the courts decide. Except for the fact that THEY DON'T. Motorola knows which way ideas flow.
What device are you thinking of here? The TC1000? Significantly different design, like pretty much every other pre iPad tablet it had a bezel.
Edge to Edge glass isn't unique to apple, it's not unique to Tablets. I don't know who came up with the idea to go edge to edge, but I know the concept existed before the iphone, even if a device didn't ship with it yet (though it might've)
Also, most tablets pre-ipad were Resistive Screens, not capacitive, which heavily influences design choices. Having a bezel with that kinda screen is practically a requirement.
Yes, it has a bezel. again, Resistive screen. Edge to edge glass is a new development but it's not something that's "unique" to the ipad. (side note, the video is amazing with how forward thinking that video is). It's a black thin slab, with rounded corners with a huge screen on the front.
the xoom has a totally different form factor, different screen resolution, different texture, non-unibody design, different LCD tech, but because it doesn't have a bezel it's copying the ipad?
Comments
I originally thought Apple was concerned with Samsung copying look and feel too closely. Now it looks like simply producing a tablet may attract Apple's lawyers.
Sorry, but in my view this looks more and more like Apple intends to litigate itself to an untouchable market presence. The bigger they're getting the more dangerous they're looking to me. Until they lose one or more of these ("look and feel"?) lawsuits, anyone who wants to build a smartphone or tablet needs to allow for lots of legal fees no matter how little it actually looks like an Apple product.
By way of example apple tried it on here in objecting to the registration of a mark for the supermarket chain Woolworth's. The similarities between apples and Woolworths marks were striking. Only the most hardened apple fan could have conceived that objection to have been reasonable.
Apple the patent troll is at it again...how sad. The xoom looks nothing like an iPad.
Completely agree. Apple uses lawsuits rather than fairly competing. Maybe
Even though I expect Apple to lose the suit, I still think it's incredibly low of them. Apple is backing up shipments of a competitive product.
I don't know why Apple loves giving themselves bad PR.
Maybe motorola should sue Apple because the Xoom came out before the iPad 2. I mean, the ipad 2 has rounded corners, and a camera. Must be a knockoff.
F*ck you apple. You're bad for consumers.
Except for the main point, they are litigating instead of innovating. They are the only ones innovating. There has not been any innovation in any of these tablets since the iPad. The most innovative tablet released since the iPad is the iPad 2. Do you care to think what tablet will come next on that list?
What is your definition of innovation. Seriously there has been alot of innovation outside of the ipad. Look at the asus transformer or the tablets that added things they believed consumers would like, such as full size usb, hdmi, workable flash in a mobile device? Or is your definition of innovation tied to the amount of tripsvto the patent Office?
Yep.....
How the hell else can you make a tablet????????
Here's a simple way to build a tablet that doesn't infringe without in any way changing the functionality.
Add a bezel.
Completely agree. Apple uses lawsuits rather than fairly competing. Maybe
Even though I expect Apple to lose the suit, I still think it's incredibly low of them. Apple is backing up shipments of a competitive product.
I don't know why Apple loves giving themselves bad PR.
Maybe motorola should sue Apple because the Xoom came out before the iPad 2. I mean, the ipad 2 has rounded corners, and a camera. Must be a knockoff.
F*ck you apple. You're bad for consumers.
Troll alert. Check post history.
Yep.....
How the hell else can you make a tablet????????
Funny how tablets were made BEFORE Apple released the iPad and now all of a sudden this question starts popping up. Gee, I don't know maybe make them like before? Or spends some time and money and actually innovate and figure it out yourself instead of mimicking someone else's work?
Funny how tablets were made BEFORE Apple released the iPad and now all of a sudden this question starts popping up. Gee, I don't know maybe make them like before? Or spends some time and money and actually innovate and figure it out yourself instead of mimicking someone else's work?
Isn't that funny? Tablets were made for years before the "Giant iPod Touch". The were months of jokes and all of a sudden, those jokes don't see so funny any more.
Why not make something like that Dell Flip or one of those numerous Tablet PCs? I know why.
Only the Giant iPod Touch is selling.
Same form factor. in HP's case, far more alike than either the 10.1 or the Xoom. I think Google might be right - in part.
At a guess it's probably because Compaq released a similar shaped device in 2002?
At a guess it's probably because Compaq released a similar shaped device in 2002?
What device are you thinking of here? The TC1000? Significantly different design, like pretty much every other pre iPad tablet it had a bezel.
Except for the main point, they are litigating instead of innovating. They are the only ones innovating. There has not been any innovation in any of these tablets since the iPad. The most innovative tablet released since the iPad is the iPad 2. Do you care to think what tablet will come next on that list?
What is the innovation in iPad 2 vis-a-vis the original?
What device are you thinking of here? The TC1000? Significantly different design, like pretty much every other pre iPad tablet it had a bezel.
Hey, I had one of those, actually, I had the TC1100. I loved it. Just wished for a lighter version and for an instant on OS. Years later, the iPad showed up and I knew that's what I wanted.
Isn't that funny? Tablets were made for years before the "Giant iPod Touch". The were months of jokes and all of a sudden, those jokes don't see so funny any more.
Why not make something like that Dell Flip or one of those numerous Tablet PCs? I know why.
Only the Giant iPod Touch is selling.
Exactly. This talk about "stifling innovation" is pretty much bunk because there is very little innovation in mimicry. Jumping on a successful bandwagon to save a couple bucks doesn't look like innovation to me.
I totally understand the suite against the Samsung Galaxy S, but more because of the software than the hardware.
IMO Samsung modeled the TouchWiz UI off iOS in order to profit off the iPhones goodwill (i.e. a customer walks into a store, looks at the TouchWiz UI and thinks "that's just like my friends iPhone only cheaper... I'll get that one").
The Galaxy Tab is more of a stretch. If you were dumb, and I mean really really dumb bordering on mentally deficient you *might* confuse a Galaxy Tab for an iPad as long as you didn't turn it on or turn it to the side or back.
There is no way someone is going to think a Xoom is an iPad though, regardless of how stupid they are.
What device are you thinking of here? The TC1000? Significantly different design, like pretty much every other pre iPad tablet it had a bezel.
Yep the TC1000 it has a bezel like the TouchPad.
The Galaxy Tab is more of a stretch. If you were dumb, and I mean really really dumb bordering on mentally deficient you *might* confuse a Galaxy Tab for an iPad as long as you didn't turn it on or turn it to the side or back.
There is no way someone is going to think a Xoom is an iPad though, regardless of how stupid they are.
It's not just about confusion, though that's part of it. It's about copying the major aesthetic choices in such a way that a very distinctive product starts to become a commodity.
This is a particular problem for Apple because their aesthetic is so minimal, as a result once it's copied by everybody else they don't have a lot of options for changing it while staying within their existing design language.
Apple is trying to push the other OEMs into developing their own distinctive design languages. Some elements may be the same, but when almost all of the elements are the same for almost all the vendors something is clearly wrong.
It's not just about confusion, though that's part of it. It's about copying the major aesthetic choices in such a way that a very distinctive product starts to become a commodity.
The Xoom doesn't copy any major aesthetic choices that are unique to the iPad.
It's doesn't have a unibody design. If you look at the back the camera/speaker are in their own cutout area with the power button. It's also missing the Apple's unique single round button.
Not only is the screen ratio different but the screen rotation is different. The iPad is geared around portrait mode (dock and "Apple" button at the bottom, power button on top) where the Xoom is totally geared to be landscape (dock is on the "side", power button at the back and all the labeling is all landscape).
The Xoom is as unique an entry in the tablet market as the iPad is.
Completely agree. Apple uses lawsuits rather than fairly competing. Maybe
Define "fair". Is not defending your IP fair if you believe it has been infringed on? Or should Apple let everyone walk in and use their IP without licensing?
Even though I expect Apple to lose the suit, I still think it's incredibly low of them. Apple is backing up shipments of a competitive product.
I don't know why Apple loves giving themselves bad PR.
Competitive? Or did you mean "competing"? (It's only "competitive" in your mind, Sanja
As for "bad PR," that's just your spin. Haters gonna hate.
Maybe motorola should sue Apple because the Xoom came out before the iPad 2. I mean, the ipad 2 has rounded corners, and a camera. Must be a knockoff.
F*ck you apple. You're bad for consumers.
If Motorola thinks they got a case against the iPad 2, then bring it, and let the courts decide. Except for the fact that THEY DON'T. Motorola knows which way ideas flow.
What device are you thinking of here? The TC1000? Significantly different design, like pretty much every other pre iPad tablet it had a bezel.
Edge to Edge glass isn't unique to apple, it's not unique to Tablets. I don't know who came up with the idea to go edge to edge, but I know the concept existed before the iphone, even if a device didn't ship with it yet (though it might've)
Also, most tablets pre-ipad were Resistive Screens, not capacitive, which heavily influences design choices. Having a bezel with that kinda screen is practically a requirement.
Here's a tablet prototype idea from 1994: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBEtPQDQNcI
Yes, it has a bezel. again, Resistive screen. Edge to edge glass is a new development but it's not something that's "unique" to the ipad. (side note, the video is amazing with how forward thinking that video is). It's a black thin slab, with rounded corners with a huge screen on the front.
the xoom has a totally different form factor, different screen resolution, different texture, non-unibody design, different LCD tech, but because it doesn't have a bezel it's copying the ipad?