1) You really think a digital photo frame is the same device as the iPad?
I doubt he does, but apple's suing over community design, and their community design was a basic rectangle. Even the Bezel wasn't part of this design (screen size wasn't part of the award) They received the injunction over this SINGLE hardware community design (so software shouldn't be considered).
The Community design in the EU hinges on the fact that an "informed" user would have difficulty telling the products apart. I don't really see that with the tab. I've had people mistake it for an ipad at first glance, it's true, but WITHOUT EXCEPTION every single one of them says something like "Oh, that's not an ipad, what is that?" and that's before I turn it on.
And Apple is levying the SAME design against the XOOM and apparently the new 7.7, two devices that NO ONE would confuse with an ipad, let alone an "informed" user. There's a reason Apple filed this in the EU's version of the "east district of texas."
Quote:
2) Do you know by how many decades the black framed photo predates any digital photo frames? I'd say it's at least several.
So? Samsung's not claiming they invented the photo frame. Apple IS claiming that they invented the "black slab" style device. I don't think the picture frame is really be best defense of this personally, but it does show that the concept of "minimalist" design isn't something that's brand new. The concept of a slab style button less tablet also isn't new. a newspaper designer pitched it back in 2004 (and that's not even counting Sci-fi)
That's why the Dutch Judge said he didn't consider apple's claims in those areas valid because their design is SO minimalistic. They're levying the attack on anything that even has a passing resemblance, which is quite easy since everyone's going to make their tablet into a rectangle (a few daring companies, like Sony, might mess with the back but the front is unchanged)
The history of tech is that products tend to become thinner, lighter, more streamlined. Flares common in older tech tend to fade out of importance with time as the manufacturers seek to streamline the process. With Display tech, you have the added fact that "flare" and unique design.. ANYTHING that distracts from the screen (no matter how amazing the functions it offers) is undesirable. You want to hide it behind the screen, or with touch devices, ON the screen, but only when it's needed. (the designer who came up with LCARS mentioned this as well)
Do I think Samsung crossed a line with Touchwiz (at least as it's seen on galaxy S line devices) and with the galaxy S line? Of course. But Apple's going after all their android devices, but NOT all their touchwiz devices (no bada phones listed). Then they're using the community design patent to go after 7 inch devices, or devices like the Xoom. Implying that if you put a galaxy 7.7 prototype up against an ipad, an INFORMED user wouldn't know the ipad from the galaxy.
Mergers create a market close to that of a monopoly (aka oligopoly if it is with a few companies).
Both monopolies and oligopolies stifles competition and increases prices.
That is what the government is trying to protect, to keep competition flowing.
Perhaps, it is you who cant put 1 and 1 together.
The government protects competition. That is orthogonal to the existence of a monopoly. Once again, there is nothing illegal about having a monopoly. It IS illegal to stifle competition via mergers or other activity (and it does not require a monopoly to be convicted of illegally stifling competition).
You really ought to learn something about topics before posting.
I doubt he does, but apple's suing over community design, and their community design was a basic rectangle. Even the Bezel wasn't part of this design (screen size wasn't part of the award) They received the injunction over this SINGLE hardware community design (so software shouldn't be considered).
The Community design in the EU hinges on the fact that an "informed" user would have difficulty telling the products apart. I don't really see that with the tab. I've had people mistake it for an ipad at first glance, it's true, but WITHOUT EXCEPTION every single one of them says something like "Oh, that's not an ipad, what is that?" and that's before I turn it on.
And Apple is levying the SAME design against the XOOM and apparently the new 7.7, two devices that NO ONE would confuse with an ipad, let alone an "informed" user. There's a reason Apple filed this in the EU's version of the "east district of texas."
So what is it? Is Apple suing everyone that has ever created a digital picture frame with a black border or aren't they? From what I can tell they are suing zero, zip, zilch for digital picture frames. If that is the case then why is being brought up in the context of a tablet.
Quote:
So? Samsung's not claiming they invented the photo frame. Apple IS claiming that they invented the "black slab" style device. I don't think the picture frame is really be best defense of this personally, but it does show that the concept of "minimalist" design isn't something that's brand new. The concept of a slab style button less tablet also isn't new. a newspaper designer pitched it back in 2004 (and that's not even counting Sci-fi)
That's why the Dutch Judge said he didn't consider apple's claims in those areas valid because their design is SO minimalistic. They're levying the attack on anything that even has a passing resemblance, which is quite easy since everyone's going to make their tablet into a rectangle (a few daring companies, like Sony, might mess with the back but the front is unchanged)
The history of tech is that products tend to become thinner, lighter, more streamlined. Flares common in older tech tend to fade out of importance with time as the manufacturers seek to streamline the process. With Display tech, you have the added fact that "flare" and unique design.. ANYTHING that distracts from the screen (no matter how amazing the functions it offers) is undesirable. You want to hide it behind the screen, or with touch devices, ON the screen, but only when it's needed. (the designer who came up with LCARS mentioned this as well)
Do I think Samsung crossed a line with Touchwiz (at least as it's seen on galaxy S line devices) and with the galaxy S line? Of course. But Apple's going after all their android devices, but NOT all their touchwiz devices (no bada phones listed). Then they're using the community design patent to go after 7 inch devices, or devices like the Xoom. Implying that if you put a galaxy 7.7 prototype up against an ipad, an INFORMED user wouldn't know the ipad from the galaxy.
Apple's has actually stated that all rectangles that are black slabs are owned by them? If so then that is a foolish position for them to take, which is why I seriously doubt that is the case.
Is that really the only reason Apple would have to sue Samsung for their tablets and phones or are there other reasons that copy the overall look and feel of the design on multiple levels? From what I can tell Samsung's design are far too similar to be a coincidence and many of them are well outside the argument that they are "obvious" when they clearly didn't exist before Apple created them.
So what is it? Is Apple suing everyone that has ever created a digital picture frame with a black border or aren't they? From what I can tell they are suing zero, zip, zilch for digital picture frames. If that is the case then why is being brought up in the context of a tablet.
Apple's has actually stated that all rectangles that are black slabs are owned by them? If so then that is a foolish position for them to take, which is why I seriously doubt that is the case.
Is that really the only reason Apple would have to sue Samsung for their tablets and phones or are there other reasons that copy the overall look and feel of the design on multiple levels? From what I can tell Samsung's design are far too similar to be a coincidence and many of them are well outside the argument that they are "obvious" when they clearly didn't exist before Apple created them.
The reason people bring up picture frames is because Apple shouldn't get a claim (no company should) because they were the first ones to port an EXISTING design concept to a new platform. The idea already existed. Apple was the first to fully realize that design in the tablet market, but that doesn't mean they should be the only ones allowed to use it.
They are asserting the SAME community design against the XOOM and the 7.7 inch tablets.
NO INFORMED USER would EVER confuse those with the ipad (or even the 10.1)
And yes, the concept of a "slab tablet" existed before the ipad. Apple was the first to achieve such a level of minimalism and market it, but they weren't the first ones to imagine the idea, and NOTHING about the ipad design screams "it's unique" other than how few buttons there are. IT's the SOFTWARE that makes the ipad, something that is not considered in community design.
Again, the history of tech is that things trend THINNER, LIGHTER, and SIMPLER.
Or this: http://youtu.be/JBEtPQDQNcI (from 1994) Seriously, watch this. They even use some of the SAME arguments apple does in their recent ads.
Again, you might have an argument IF apple was only going after the 10.1 with the community design (since it is the closest to the ipad) but Apple's going after the XOOM, and after a device that's almost 1/2 the size.
I guess your not familiar with Google's business model.
Google's main source of revenue is advertising.
The more Android devices that are out there (aka more market share), the increase revenue they will generate due to sheer number of mobile products accessing its main search business.
Market share is the key to Google's business model.
That's true!
But that's not exactly what Apple is going after. They are primarily a hardware seller... selling their own hardware.
People often forget that when they discuss Apple vs. Android(Google)
Sorry I forgot Apple fan has not idea (neither enjoy) about good wireless connectivity...
You're nothing but a sad little troll with nothing better to do with his life than complain about products he will never by from companies he hates on a website that isn't even in his first language, for heaven's sake.
In other words, sorry, I forgot that not everyone who doesn't like Apple products is intelligent enough to have a mature conversation about them. Nearly everyone here that doesn't like Apple is smart enough to have real opinions, a legitimate position, and isn't a spec whore.
When the competition, most recently Sammy, copies Apple -- Ask yourself these questions:
1) Why don't they copy the R&D and investment in design and market research?
2) Why don't they copy the integration of hardware and applications?
3) Why don't they copy the investment in infrastructure and ecosystem?
4) What are their objectives?
The answer is simple: They aren't interested in those things -- they are in it for the "fast buck", riding on the skirts of the true innovators/delivers of technology.
As soon as the next big thing comes along, they will abandon their customers to chase the next ephemeral rainbow -- after all, they have nothing [else] to lose!
All I want, in terms of "competition", is for some company, other than Apple, to take the tablet idea and turn it on it's head again. Come up with some new radical idea for an interface, some new way to access data, find some new ways to use it.
Jeez you want competition? That would be it right there.
Copy-tition is not competition. Sammy and the rest deserve to be flushed down the toilet unless they come up with their own way of presenting it. Fuck them.
Honestly, I think that Android 3.x is more different from iOS than Windows, OSX, Linux... are different between each other.
Android 2.x, hell yeah - iOS copy and then some. But 3.x? No.
So... I think Apple will end up with some small victories, like scroll rubber-banding etc., but it will fail to stop Android tablet in a long run.
Same for the design. Samsung's front side looks a lot like iPad, but it also looks even more like Samsung's own digital photo frame. I think Samsung will have a case by explaining their own photo frame was used as visual inspiration for their tablet design.
You're being harsh to Psych_guy . That has been Apple's MO many times over. The difference with the iPad is that they are looking to have an iPod-like domination right out of the gate. If they get HiDPI display on the next iPad I don't see how competitors will be able to catch up in the foreseeable future, but as of right now there is a chance for them to get a healthy chunk of the tablet market Apple created.
Why do you think so? That screen will be made by Samsung or LG, likely. Can't see why would they not be able to use same technology on their products.
Samsung abused its position as a supplier to Apple and copied design elements. Samsung is greedy here. Apple buys components from Samsung for over 7 billion. This is Samsungs largest customer. Still Samsung have to release exact clones of Apple products.
And the Android mess.
Google management lives in the "free" internet world.
Instead of inventing something own, they bought Android. They chose to use Linux instead of Unix that leaves them open for litigation. Free software is not free.
Somehow Google and Android vendors know that they are doing something wrong. Why would 6 of 18 Android cell phone makers pay MSFT 5-15 dollar per Android device if they didn't believe that they needed the protection? Why is Google desperate and buys Motorola mobile for over 12 billion just to find some patent to swap with Apple?
Palm managed to make a legal system in WebOS.
MSFT also did it with WinMo 7x.
Why can't Google do it?
So far Android is the most expensive free OS in the world. Billions in protection fees to MSFT and tens of billions in patent hunting for Google.
I keep hearing about "Android is mess".
While I am happy that I have purchased iPad for my mum (who is, well, IT challenged), I don't think that Android would be a challenge for most people. In fact, number of Android users I know - both phones and tablets - is reaching number of iOS users I know, and I'm yet to see a user on either side being unhappy with device he/she owns.
In my opinion, thy both have their weak spots and advantages. While I'd never replace my mom's iPad with Android - in fact, I'm already quietly planning to upgrade her to iPad 3 this time next year - I will get Android tablet for me, if I ever decide to own tablet.
Unless I find Windows 8 tablets even more suitable for my needs.
Of course there is always chance next iOS will cover my needs better, but I doubt that a bit.
When the competition, most recently Sammy, copies Apple -- Ask yourself these questions:
1) Why don't they copy the R&D and investment in design and market research?
2) Why don't they copy the integration of hardware and applications?
3) Why don't they copy the investment in infrastructure and ecosystem?
4) What are their objectives?
The answer is simple: They aren't interested in those things -- they are in it for the "fast buck", riding on the skirts of the true innovators/delivers of technology.
As soon as the next big thing comes along, they will abandon their customers to chase the next ephemeral rainbow -- after all, they have nothing [else] to lose!
And also, they don't have the Engineering, Industrial Design, Management to pull it off.
While I am happy that I have purchased iPad for my mum (who is, well, IT challenged), I don't think that Android would be a challenge for most people. In fact, number of Android users I know - both phones and tablets - is reaching number of iOS users I know, and I'm yet to see a user on either side being unhappy with device he/she owns.
In my opinion, thy both have their weak spots and advantages. While I'd never replace my mom's iPad with Android - in fact, I'm already quietly planning to upgrade her to iPad 3 this time next year - I will get Android tablet for me, if I ever decide to own tablet.
Unless I find Windows 8 tablets even more suitable for my needs.
Of course there is always chance next iOS will cover my needs better, but I doubt that a bit.
If the number of Android tablet users you know is reaching the number of iPad users you know you travel in unusual circles.
Comments
1) You really think a digital photo frame is the same device as the iPad?
Apple Sues Samsung Over Look & Feel.
2) Do you know by how many decades the black framed photo predates any digital photo frames? I'd say it's at least several.
LOL. Oh, I know you're iLobotomized but please
The "Look and Feel of a Tablet computer and a Smart Phone" -- not some picture frame or etch-a-sketch! (or clay slab, for that matter)
People with common sense realize that these are different devices.
Summarian Tablet - 4th Millenium B.C.
Etch-A Sketch - ca 1950.
Samsung Digital Photo Frame cebit 2006
Apple iPad 2010
...and so on and so on... LOL. ROFL. ROFLMAO.
Yeah, I keep trying to surf the web, edit videos, and play some games on that "SammySlab" -- all I get are these pictures of some people I don't know
...Now, if it could do a little Karaoke -- then, we'd really have sumpin'...
...Maybe even:
http://web.me.com/dicklacara/ForWeb/...The%20Wind.mp3
Edit: I'm through, now!
http://www.technobuffalo.com/compani...-gone-too-far/
1) You really think a digital photo frame is the same device as the iPad?
I doubt he does, but apple's suing over community design, and their community design was a basic rectangle. Even the Bezel wasn't part of this design (screen size wasn't part of the award) They received the injunction over this SINGLE hardware community design (so software shouldn't be considered).
The Community design in the EU hinges on the fact that an "informed" user would have difficulty telling the products apart. I don't really see that with the tab. I've had people mistake it for an ipad at first glance, it's true, but WITHOUT EXCEPTION every single one of them says something like "Oh, that's not an ipad, what is that?" and that's before I turn it on.
And Apple is levying the SAME design against the XOOM and apparently the new 7.7, two devices that NO ONE would confuse with an ipad, let alone an "informed" user. There's a reason Apple filed this in the EU's version of the "east district of texas."
2) Do you know by how many decades the black framed photo predates any digital photo frames? I'd say it's at least several.
So? Samsung's not claiming they invented the photo frame. Apple IS claiming that they invented the "black slab" style device. I don't think the picture frame is really be best defense of this personally, but it does show that the concept of "minimalist" design isn't something that's brand new. The concept of a slab style button less tablet also isn't new. a newspaper designer pitched it back in 2004 (and that's not even counting Sci-fi)
That's why the Dutch Judge said he didn't consider apple's claims in those areas valid because their design is SO minimalistic. They're levying the attack on anything that even has a passing resemblance, which is quite easy since everyone's going to make their tablet into a rectangle (a few daring companies, like Sony, might mess with the back but the front is unchanged)
The history of tech is that products tend to become thinner, lighter, more streamlined. Flares common in older tech tend to fade out of importance with time as the manufacturers seek to streamline the process. With Display tech, you have the added fact that "flare" and unique design.. ANYTHING that distracts from the screen (no matter how amazing the functions it offers) is undesirable. You want to hide it behind the screen, or with touch devices, ON the screen, but only when it's needed. (the designer who came up with LCARS mentioned this as well)
Do I think Samsung crossed a line with Touchwiz (at least as it's seen on galaxy S line devices) and with the galaxy S line? Of course. But Apple's going after all their android devices, but NOT all their touchwiz devices (no bada phones listed). Then they're using the community design patent to go after 7 inch devices, or devices like the Xoom. Implying that if you put a galaxy 7.7 prototype up against an ipad, an INFORMED user wouldn't know the ipad from the galaxy.
EDIT: And I'll link to this article a second time, because it should be read: http://www.technobuffalo.com/compani...-gone-too-far/
Mergers create a market close to that of a monopoly (aka oligopoly if it is with a few companies).
Both monopolies and oligopolies stifles competition and increases prices.
That is what the government is trying to protect, to keep competition flowing.
Perhaps, it is you who cant put 1 and 1 together.
The government protects competition. That is orthogonal to the existence of a monopoly. Once again, there is nothing illegal about having a monopoly. It IS illegal to stifle competition via mergers or other activity (and it does not require a monopoly to be convicted of illegally stifling competition).
You really ought to learn something about topics before posting.
Apple will win some battles but will ultimately lose the war
Didn't you hear? They already "lost" the PC Wars and the Smartphone Wars. Next, they'll "lose" the Tablet Wars.
I doubt he does, but apple's suing over community design, and their community design was a basic rectangle. Even the Bezel wasn't part of this design (screen size wasn't part of the award) They received the injunction over this SINGLE hardware community design (so software shouldn't be considered).
The Community design in the EU hinges on the fact that an "informed" user would have difficulty telling the products apart. I don't really see that with the tab. I've had people mistake it for an ipad at first glance, it's true, but WITHOUT EXCEPTION every single one of them says something like "Oh, that's not an ipad, what is that?" and that's before I turn it on.
And Apple is levying the SAME design against the XOOM and apparently the new 7.7, two devices that NO ONE would confuse with an ipad, let alone an "informed" user. There's a reason Apple filed this in the EU's version of the "east district of texas."
So what is it? Is Apple suing everyone that has ever created a digital picture frame with a black border or aren't they? From what I can tell they are suing zero, zip, zilch for digital picture frames. If that is the case then why is being brought up in the context of a tablet.
So? Samsung's not claiming they invented the photo frame. Apple IS claiming that they invented the "black slab" style device. I don't think the picture frame is really be best defense of this personally, but it does show that the concept of "minimalist" design isn't something that's brand new. The concept of a slab style button less tablet also isn't new. a newspaper designer pitched it back in 2004 (and that's not even counting Sci-fi)
That's why the Dutch Judge said he didn't consider apple's claims in those areas valid because their design is SO minimalistic. They're levying the attack on anything that even has a passing resemblance, which is quite easy since everyone's going to make their tablet into a rectangle (a few daring companies, like Sony, might mess with the back but the front is unchanged)
The history of tech is that products tend to become thinner, lighter, more streamlined. Flares common in older tech tend to fade out of importance with time as the manufacturers seek to streamline the process. With Display tech, you have the added fact that "flare" and unique design.. ANYTHING that distracts from the screen (no matter how amazing the functions it offers) is undesirable. You want to hide it behind the screen, or with touch devices, ON the screen, but only when it's needed. (the designer who came up with LCARS mentioned this as well)
Do I think Samsung crossed a line with Touchwiz (at least as it's seen on galaxy S line devices) and with the galaxy S line? Of course. But Apple's going after all their android devices, but NOT all their touchwiz devices (no bada phones listed). Then they're using the community design patent to go after 7 inch devices, or devices like the Xoom. Implying that if you put a galaxy 7.7 prototype up against an ipad, an INFORMED user wouldn't know the ipad from the galaxy.
Apple's has actually stated that all rectangles that are black slabs are owned by them? If so then that is a foolish position for them to take, which is why I seriously doubt that is the case.
Is that really the only reason Apple would have to sue Samsung for their tablets and phones or are there other reasons that copy the overall look and feel of the design on multiple levels? From what I can tell Samsung's design are far too similar to be a coincidence and many of them are well outside the argument that they are "obvious" when they clearly didn't exist before Apple created them.
Samsung Digital Photo Frame cebit 2006
Apple iPad 2010
...and so on and so on... LOL. ROFL. ROFLMAO.
Did Samsung have a mole at Apple in 2006? What a frigging ripoff!
So what is it? Is Apple suing everyone that has ever created a digital picture frame with a black border or aren't they? From what I can tell they are suing zero, zip, zilch for digital picture frames. If that is the case then why is being brought up in the context of a tablet.
Apple's has actually stated that all rectangles that are black slabs are owned by them? If so then that is a foolish position for them to take, which is why I seriously doubt that is the case.
Is that really the only reason Apple would have to sue Samsung for their tablets and phones or are there other reasons that copy the overall look and feel of the design on multiple levels? From what I can tell Samsung's design are far too similar to be a coincidence and many of them are well outside the argument that they are "obvious" when they clearly didn't exist before Apple created them.
The reason people bring up picture frames is because Apple shouldn't get a claim (no company should) because they were the first ones to port an EXISTING design concept to a new platform. The idea already existed. Apple was the first to fully realize that design in the tablet market, but that doesn't mean they should be the only ones allowed to use it.
They are asserting the SAME community design against the XOOM and the 7.7 inch tablets.
NO INFORMED USER would EVER confuse those with the ipad (or even the 10.1)
And yes, the concept of a "slab tablet" existed before the ipad. Apple was the first to achieve such a level of minimalism and market it, but they weren't the first ones to imagine the idea, and NOTHING about the ipad design screams "it's unique" other than how few buttons there are. IT's the SOFTWARE that makes the ipad, something that is not considered in community design.
Again, the history of tech is that things trend THINNER, LIGHTER, and SIMPLER.
Or this: http://youtu.be/JBEtPQDQNcI (from 1994) Seriously, watch this. They even use some of the SAME arguments apple does in their recent ads.
Again, you might have an argument IF apple was only going after the 10.1 with the community design (since it is the closest to the ipad) but Apple's going after the XOOM, and after a device that's almost 1/2 the size.
I guess your not familiar with Google's business model.
Google's main source of revenue is advertising.
The more Android devices that are out there (aka more market share), the increase revenue they will generate due to sheer number of mobile products accessing its main search business.
Market share is the key to Google's business model.
That's true!
But that's not exactly what Apple is going after. They are primarily a hardware seller... selling their own hardware.
People often forget that when they discuss Apple vs. Android(Google)
Sorry I forgot Apple fan has not idea (neither enjoy) about good wireless connectivity...
You're nothing but a sad little troll with nothing better to do with his life than complain about products he will never by from companies he hates on a website that isn't even in his first language, for heaven's sake.
In other words, sorry, I forgot that not everyone who doesn't like Apple products is intelligent enough to have a mature conversation about them. Nearly everyone here that doesn't like Apple is smart enough to have real opinions, a legitimate position, and isn't a spec whore.
You, on the other hand.
Apple has gone too far. Indeed.
http://www.technobuffalo.com/compani...-gone-too-far/
Hardly.
1) Why don't they copy the R&D and investment in design and market research?
2) Why don't they copy the integration of hardware and applications?
3) Why don't they copy the investment in infrastructure and ecosystem?
4) What are their objectives?
The answer is simple: They aren't interested in those things -- they are in it for the "fast buck", riding on the skirts of the true innovators/delivers of technology.
As soon as the next big thing comes along, they will abandon their customers to chase the next ephemeral rainbow -- after all, they have nothing [else] to lose!
All I want, in terms of "competition", is for some company, other than Apple, to take the tablet idea and turn it on it's head again. Come up with some new radical idea for an interface, some new way to access data, find some new ways to use it.
Jeez you want competition? That would be it right there.
Copy-tition is not competition. Sammy and the rest deserve to be flushed down the toilet unless they come up with their own way of presenting it. Fuck them.
Honestly, I think that Android 3.x is more different from iOS than Windows, OSX, Linux... are different between each other.
Android 2.x, hell yeah - iOS copy and then some. But 3.x? No.
So... I think Apple will end up with some small victories, like scroll rubber-banding etc., but it will fail to stop Android tablet in a long run.
Same for the design. Samsung's front side looks a lot like iPad, but it also looks even more like Samsung's own digital photo frame. I think Samsung will have a case by explaining their own photo frame was used as visual inspiration for their tablet design.
You're being harsh to Psych_guy . That has been Apple's MO many times over. The difference with the iPad is that they are looking to have an iPod-like domination right out of the gate. If they get HiDPI display on the next iPad I don't see how competitors will be able to catch up in the foreseeable future, but as of right now there is a chance for them to get a healthy chunk of the tablet market Apple created.
Why do you think so? That screen will be made by Samsung or LG, likely. Can't see why would they not be able to use same technology on their products.
yes. Competition is good if its free.
But do something own and follow the law.
Samsung abused its position as a supplier to Apple and copied design elements. Samsung is greedy here. Apple buys components from Samsung for over 7 billion. This is Samsungs largest customer. Still Samsung have to release exact clones of Apple products.
And the Android mess.
Google management lives in the "free" internet world.
Instead of inventing something own, they bought Android. They chose to use Linux instead of Unix that leaves them open for litigation. Free software is not free.
Somehow Google and Android vendors know that they are doing something wrong. Why would 6 of 18 Android cell phone makers pay MSFT 5-15 dollar per Android device if they didn't believe that they needed the protection? Why is Google desperate and buys Motorola mobile for over 12 billion just to find some patent to swap with Apple?
Palm managed to make a legal system in WebOS.
MSFT also did it with WinMo 7x.
Why can't Google do it?
So far Android is the most expensive free OS in the world. Billions in protection fees to MSFT and tens of billions in patent hunting for Google.
I keep hearing about "Android is mess".
While I am happy that I have purchased iPad for my mum (who is, well, IT challenged), I don't think that Android would be a challenge for most people. In fact, number of Android users I know - both phones and tablets - is reaching number of iOS users I know, and I'm yet to see a user on either side being unhappy with device he/she owns.
In my opinion, thy both have their weak spots and advantages. While I'd never replace my mom's iPad with Android - in fact, I'm already quietly planning to upgrade her to iPad 3 this time next year - I will get Android tablet for me, if I ever decide to own tablet.
Unless I find Windows 8 tablets even more suitable for my needs.
Of course there is always chance next iOS will cover my needs better, but I doubt that a bit.
Sure, but at least we haven't been far even as decided to do want to go look more like.
+1
took the words right out of my mouth
When the competition, most recently Sammy, copies Apple -- Ask yourself these questions:
1) Why don't they copy the R&D and investment in design and market research?
2) Why don't they copy the integration of hardware and applications?
3) Why don't they copy the investment in infrastructure and ecosystem?
4) What are their objectives?
The answer is simple: They aren't interested in those things -- they are in it for the "fast buck", riding on the skirts of the true innovators/delivers of technology.
As soon as the next big thing comes along, they will abandon their customers to chase the next ephemeral rainbow -- after all, they have nothing [else] to lose!
And also, they don't have the Engineering, Industrial Design, Management to pull it off.
What else do you need it to do? It won't make you a cup of coffee.
He's just trolling, let him loose...
I keep hearing about "Android is mess".
While I am happy that I have purchased iPad for my mum (who is, well, IT challenged), I don't think that Android would be a challenge for most people. In fact, number of Android users I know - both phones and tablets - is reaching number of iOS users I know, and I'm yet to see a user on either side being unhappy with device he/she owns.
In my opinion, thy both have their weak spots and advantages. While I'd never replace my mom's iPad with Android - in fact, I'm already quietly planning to upgrade her to iPad 3 this time next year - I will get Android tablet for me, if I ever decide to own tablet.
Unless I find Windows 8 tablets even more suitable for my needs.
Of course there is always chance next iOS will cover my needs better, but I doubt that a bit.
If the number of Android tablet users you know is reaching the number of iPad users you know you travel in unusual circles.
If the number of Android tablet users you know is reaching the number of iPad users you know you travel in unusual circles.
Might I venture that he travels in rounded rectangles?