Take a look at tablets designs BEFORE the Ipad and you will see how your little reasoning there makes NO sense.
Hello earth? Before the Ipad there was no tablet market to speak off, nothing looked remotely close to the Ipad. And now? Samsung did a 360 on their own old designs to clone a successful product. Who is "abusing" the patent system ? How is that "innovation" ? Which company should be protected and encouraged to continue bringing NEW products out?
you were saying?
and Samsung didn't do a 360 (I'm sure you meant 180) they made a thinner model to compete with the iPad...why is that wrong?
why is it that now that Apple is the market leader any company adapting their model and products to better compete with Apple is "STEALING" ?
First people are shocked Android changed it's looks (not it's function btw as it could always work on full touch devices even while it look blackberryish) to compete with the iPhone despite all the signs that that was the future of smartphones
And now people are shocked when people use the age old rounded rectangle design when they make tablets (or phones)
It's crazy.
PS. the Galaxy Tab wasn't banned in Australia due to looking like anything...there were 2 software patents it violated...so your argument is flawed from the start
Can you say monopoly? Nice try. Can you say samsung? I knew you could. Any one care for a macintosh apple? The world loves apples. One a day keeps the teacher away.
and Samsung didn't do a 360 (I'm sure you meant 180) they made a thinner model to compete with the iPad...why is that wrong?
why is it that now that Apple is the market leader any company adapting their model and products to better compete with Apple is "STEALING" ?
First people are shocked Android changed it's looks (not it's function btw as it could always work on full touch devices even while it look blackberryish) to compete with the iPhone despite all the signs that that was the future of smartphones
And now people are shocked when people use the age old rounded rectangle design when they make tablets (or phones)
It's crazy.
PS. the Galaxy Tab wasn't banned in Australia due to looking like anything...there were 2 software patents it violated...so your argument is flawed from the start
What are those two software patents? It seems too harsh to ban the GT just before holiday season over software related patents. Absurd software patents over monopoly? Poor Ausies, they got screwed again.
What are those two software patents? It seems too harsh to ban the GT just before holiday season over software related patents. Absurd software patents over monopoly? Poor Ausies, they got screwed again.
Australia the land of the $2 Galaxy S 2 about as good as a $3 watch.
The Galaxy Tab 10.1v was sold here with no problems, that was the model Samsung did a 180 on as soon as they saw the iPad 2.
Samsung's paid shills seem to be popping up everywhere, their astroturfing budget must be huge.
What are those two software patents? It seems too harsh to ban the GT just before holiday season over software related patents. Absurd software patents over monopoly? Poor Ausies, they got screwed again.
I'm about to check groklaw and Foss. No one I read yet specified them.
Can you say monopoly? Nice try. Can you say samsung? I knew you could. Any one care for a macintosh apple? The world loves apples. One a day keeps the teacher away.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
Your post is by far the best example of what uninformed whining looks like. You can say monopoly, but can you provide evidence that you know what the definition of the word is, in the legal sense?
I must hand it to you Newton. I just could not understand anything tyler was saying, but obviously you did! Was that pro-Apple? Anti-Apple? I don't know. Why can't we just have straightforward trolls?
I must hand it to you Newton. I just could not understand anything tyler was saying, but obviously you did! Was that pro-Apple? Anti-Apple? I don't know. Why can't we just have straightforward trolls?
lol...I didn't even see that...it's like he threw up on his keyboard and that's what came out while he was wiping it up
Take a look at tablets designs BEFORE the Ipad and you will see how your little reasoning there makes NO sense.
Hello earth? Before the Ipad there was no tablet market to speak off, nothing looked remotely close to the Ipad. And now? Samsung did a 360 on their own old designs to clone a successful product. Who is "abusing" the patent system ? How is that "innovation" ? Which company should be protected and encouraged to continue bringing NEW products out?
Wrong.
I think you need to learn what is a trend.
I can prop as much as you'd be pleased about the fact that Apple leads a trend in industrial design: minimalistic and yet premium look and feel.
And that fact itself gives them competitive advantages.
People already know what Apple creates, how Apple products look like, and who is KIRF-ing.
Sure, they were the first manufacturer that actually created a tablet that looks like prototypes/concept designs that were introduced long before in movies and tv shows.
Just because they did so first, Apple claims that they should have exclusive control over the design and the trend.
WTF?
Hey a Tablet is still a Tablet. Looking good Tablet is one thing, and the other manufacturers can follow the good looking tablet design cues and that creates a tablet design trend.
and let's be honest.
Apple INVENTED NO SHIT. A Patent right is for protecting Innovations.
What Apple wanted to protect from their design is their trademark.
And Apple should've registered their design as a trademark which would be much more reluctantly give preliminary injunctions for infringements.
Again, Apple VASTLY IMPROVED already existing tablets, I give that, but NOT INNOVATED.
and a great loss for consumers. and thinking again what Apple did with iOS5's notification system, oh and think again what invention means in dictionary.
You should really stop playing that 'Apple copied the iOS5 notification system from xyz' crap, because it's really a stupid poor man's excuse for anything. There is nothing special about the iOS 5 notification system, but there wasn't anything special about it when every other phone or desktop OS implemented it before. I have had Linux distro's from 1999 on my PC that have a notification tray that works exactly the same. Android copied it from someone, WebOS did, WM did, and so on and so forth.
The only thing you can say about the iOS 5 notification system is that it was long overdue, and Apple really should have improved iOS notfications long ago, but they screwed up there. That's it. Fortunately there's a million other things in iOS that are a million times better than they are in Android, which have always compensated for the crappy notification system by a large margin.
Obsessively trying to point out how Android already had notifications sorted out long ago makes it look like Android must otherwise be extremely crappy, if the best you can come up with is 'OMFG iOS now has a feature that works just like Android, Apple is copying Android'. Doesn't Android have any other strong points where it beats iOS or have all the advantages it ever had been sorted out and we can leave the platform to die now?
1)Great. Samsung backstabbed Apple. Apple is Samsungs biggest customer with about 8 billion in sales. Is that enough for Samsung? No. They use the same parts that they fab to Apple to put into their own copied design.
2) Samsung knows that they have done a patent infringement. Why would they otherwise sing a licensing deal with Microsoft about Android. Just like almost all other Android OEMs Samsung pays a protection tax to MSFT.
3) I can't wait for the big showdown. Now that Google made the stupid mistake by buying Motorola Mobile, Apple can finally sue Google about Android.
All this could have been solved easily:
Samsung could have licensed or design its own GUI for its products.
Android could have used licensed Unix instead of "free" Linux
Samsung should have respected its largest customer.
No one is complaining about WebOS. Palm at least tried to innovate.
Android in other hand is a flawed system. Google have so far almost spent 20 billion on a "free" system. Instead of buying things: try to build your own. It would have been much cheaper.
And Google. Please stop lying about the market share. The "activation" bull that analyst believes is just misleading. Who cares if 30% of all shipped Tablets are Android. We want to know how many that are sold. Who cares that 130+ million Android phones have been activated, since the same phone is activated 2-10 times during its lifetime. Just tell us how many phone have been sold.
The best? selling Android phone (and the best Android phone) Galaxy 2 have sold 3 million. I will laugh all day when Apple sells as many Iphone4s in between 1 day-7days depending on how fast Apple can ship the phones.
Isn't it strange that all web traffic data gives Android such a low market share? They should be much bigger then iOS, but they aren't. (but Fandroids will say its because no Android user use the default browser. I understand that now since Android 2.3 browser just support 1 core. Why have dual core phones when your operating system can't handle it? Fandroid: Just wait until 4.0. Then everything will be multithreaded. O and Apple copied message center!!!!)
and Samsung didn't do a 360 (I'm sure you meant 180) they made a thinner model to compete with the iPad...why is that wrong?
why is it that now that Apple is the market leader any company adapting their model and products to better compete with Apple is "STEALING" ?
First people are shocked Android changed it's looks (not it's function btw as it could always work on full touch devices even while it look blackberryish) to compete with the iPhone despite all the signs that that was the future of smartphones
And now people are shocked when people use the age old rounded rectangle design when they make tablets (or phones)
It's crazy.
PS. the Galaxy Tab wasn't banned in Australia due to looking like anything...there were 2 software patents it violated...so your argument is flawed from the start
The picture you provide is just evidence for Apple.
Every single Tablet before Apple had a stylus. I think you know that Samsung does not use stylus on their tablets.
Apple releases a tablet without Stylus. Somehow all competitors decide to do the same.
The multitouch/touch patent is something that Apple have. Just build your beloved Samsung's without these features, and there would not be a problem. (beside all the patent infringements that Linux have. But Apple does not care about that. Other companies will sue for that)
1)Great. Samsung backstabbed Apple. Apple is Samsungs biggest customer with about 8 billion in sales. Is that enough for Samsung? No. They use the same parts that they fab to Apple to put into their own copied design.
2) Samsung knows that they have done a patent infringement. Why would they otherwise sing a licensing deal with Microsoft about Android. Just like almost all other Android OEMs Samsung pays a protection tax to MSFT.
3) I can't wait for the big showdown. Now that Google made the stupid mistake by buying Motorola Mobile, Apple can finally sue Google about Android.
All this could have been solved easily:
Samsung could have licensed or design its own GUI for its products.
Android could have used licensed Unix instead of "free" Linux
Samsung should have respected its largest customer.
No one is complaining about WebOS. Palm at least tried to innovate.
Android in other hand is a flawed system. Google have so far almost spent 20 billion on a "free" system. Instead of buying things: try to build your own. It would have been much cheaper.
And Google. Please stop lying about the market share. The "activation" bull that analyst believes is just misleading. Who cares if 30% of all shipped Tablets are Android. We want to know how many that are sold. Who cares that 130+ million Android phones have been activated, since the same phone is activated 2-10 times during its lifetime. Just tell us how many phone have been sold.
The best? selling Android phone (and the best Android phone) Galaxy 2 have sold 3 million. I will laugh all day when Apple sells as many Iphone4s in between 1 day-7days depending on how fast Apple can ship the phones.
Isn't it strange that all web traffic data gives Android such a low market share? They should be much bigger then iOS, but they aren't. (but Fandroids will say its because no Android user use the default browser. I understand that now since Android 2.3 browser just support 1 core. Why have dual core phones when your operating system can't handle it? Fandroid: Just wait until 4.0. Then everything will be multithreaded. O and Apple copied message center!!!!)
Consumers may benefit in the short term from blatant copying, but they lose in the long term because companies like Apple lose the inceptive to spend hundreds of millions in research. It costs much less to copy somebody else's designs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loptimist
and a great loss for consumers. and thinking again what Apple did with iOS5's notification system, oh and think again what invention means in dictionary.
The picture you provide is just evidence for Apple.
Every single Tablet before Apple had a stylus. I think you know that Samsung does not use stylus on their tablets.
Apple releases a tablet without Stylus. Somehow all competitors decide to do the same.
The multitouch/touch patent is something that Apple have. Just build your beloved Samsung's without these features, and there would not be a problem. (beside all the patent infringements that Linux have. But Apple does not care about that. Other companies will sue for that)
The stylus doesn't matter. The fact that a design patent was granted based on a design that already existed does.
my point was simply to rebut his claim that tablets didn't have that shape beforehand. This really has no bearing on this case as the two patents that are allegedly violated are not based on design.
And no, I don't think anyone should be able to patent multitouch specifically, maybe certain gestures sure, but not the tech.
Comments
Take a look at tablets designs BEFORE the Ipad and you will see how your little reasoning there makes NO sense.
Hello earth? Before the Ipad there was no tablet market to speak off, nothing looked remotely close to the Ipad. And now? Samsung did a 360 on their own old designs to clone a successful product. Who is "abusing" the patent system ? How is that "innovation" ? Which company should be protected and encouraged to continue bringing NEW products out?
you were saying?
and Samsung didn't do a 360 (I'm sure you meant 180) they made a thinner model to compete with the iPad...why is that wrong?
why is it that now that Apple is the market leader any company adapting their model and products to better compete with Apple is "STEALING" ?
First people are shocked Android changed it's looks (not it's function btw as it could always work on full touch devices even while it look blackberryish) to compete with the iPhone despite all the signs that that was the future of smartphones
And now people are shocked when people use the age old rounded rectangle design when they make tablets (or phones)
It's crazy.
PS. the Galaxy Tab wasn't banned in Australia due to looking like anything...there were 2 software patents it violated...so your argument is flawed from the start
Can you say monopoly? Nice try. Can you say samsung? I knew you could. Any one care for a macintosh apple? The world loves apples. One a day keeps the teacher away.
I wonder what Steve Jobs said..
http://jonathanischwartz.wordpress.c...artists-steal/
you were saying?
and Samsung didn't do a 360 (I'm sure you meant 180) they made a thinner model to compete with the iPad...why is that wrong?
why is it that now that Apple is the market leader any company adapting their model and products to better compete with Apple is "STEALING" ?
First people are shocked Android changed it's looks (not it's function btw as it could always work on full touch devices even while it look blackberryish) to compete with the iPhone despite all the signs that that was the future of smartphones
And now people are shocked when people use the age old rounded rectangle design when they make tablets (or phones)
It's crazy.
PS. the Galaxy Tab wasn't banned in Australia due to looking like anything...there were 2 software patents it violated...so your argument is flawed from the start
What are those two software patents? It seems too harsh to ban the GT just before holiday season over software related patents. Absurd software patents over monopoly? Poor Ausies, they got screwed again.
What are those two software patents? It seems too harsh to ban the GT just before holiday season over software related patents. Absurd software patents over monopoly? Poor Ausies, they got screwed again.
Australia the land of the $2 Galaxy S 2 about as good as a $3 watch.
The Galaxy Tab 10.1v was sold here with no problems, that was the model Samsung did a 180 on as soon as they saw the iPad 2.
Samsung's paid shills seem to be popping up everywhere, their astroturfing budget must be huge.
It's really getting...
...quite
...boring.
What are those two software patents? It seems too harsh to ban the GT just before holiday season over software related patents. Absurd software patents over monopoly? Poor Ausies, they got screwed again.
I'm about to check groklaw and Foss. No one I read yet specified them.
Australia the land of the $2 Galaxy S 2 about as good as a $3 watch.
The Galaxy Tab 10.1v was sold here with no problems, that was the model Samsung did a 180 on as soon as they saw the iPad 2.
Samsung's paid shills seem to be popping up everywhere, their astroturfing budget must be huge.
It's really getting...
...quite
...boring.
A) the tabs weren't banned for hardware.
C) changing the design of something to better compete in the market is not wrong ever. Ever.
D) unlike the galaxy S phones the UI of the Tab does not resemble any iOS device.
E) stop being a conspiracy theorist.
I've only skimmed it.
http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011...e-to-shut.html
Can someone translate the patents linked further down the article?
edit: more skimming...
are these two patents on a) a multitouch screen and b) using a multitouch screen to controll a user interface?????
wow if that's the case.
Can you say monopoly? Nice try. Can you say samsung? I knew you could. Any one care for a macintosh apple? The world loves apples. One a day keeps the teacher away.
Your post is by far the best example of what uninformed whining looks like. You can say monopoly, but can you provide evidence that you know what the definition of the word is, in the legal sense?
I must hand it to you Newton. I just could not understand anything tyler was saying, but obviously you did! Was that pro-Apple? Anti-Apple? I don't know. Why can't we just have straightforward trolls?
I must hand it to you Newton. I just could not understand anything tyler was saying, but obviously you did! Was that pro-Apple? Anti-Apple? I don't know. Why can't we just have straightforward trolls?
lol...I didn't even see that...it's like he threw up on his keyboard and that's what came out while he was wiping it up
So if anyone can find a true explanation of the patents in question feel free to post them. Thank you.
http://socialmediatoday.com/SMC/174157
http://techrights.org/2010/05/13/sam...ing-columnist/
Take a look at tablets designs BEFORE the Ipad and you will see how your little reasoning there makes NO sense.
Hello earth? Before the Ipad there was no tablet market to speak off, nothing looked remotely close to the Ipad. And now? Samsung did a 360 on their own old designs to clone a successful product. Who is "abusing" the patent system ? How is that "innovation" ? Which company should be protected and encouraged to continue bringing NEW products out?
Wrong.
I think you need to learn what is a trend.
I can prop as much as you'd be pleased about the fact that Apple leads a trend in industrial design: minimalistic and yet premium look and feel.
And that fact itself gives them competitive advantages.
People already know what Apple creates, how Apple products look like, and who is KIRF-ing.
Sure, they were the first manufacturer that actually created a tablet that looks like prototypes/concept designs that were introduced long before in movies and tv shows.
Just because they did so first, Apple claims that they should have exclusive control over the design and the trend.
WTF?
Hey a Tablet is still a Tablet. Looking good Tablet is one thing, and the other manufacturers can follow the good looking tablet design cues and that creates a tablet design trend.
and let's be honest.
Apple INVENTED NO SHIT. A Patent right is for protecting Innovations.
What Apple wanted to protect from their design is their trademark.
And Apple should've registered their design as a trademark which would be much more reluctantly give preliminary injunctions for infringements.
Again, Apple VASTLY IMPROVED already existing tablets, I give that, but NOT INNOVATED.
also, it's an interim ban...we'll see how this holds up.
Who cares. A ban is a ban, and it hurts where it should.
Ouch. Don't copy, don't steal.
and a great loss for consumers. and thinking again what Apple did with iOS5's notification system, oh and think again what invention means in dictionary.
You should really stop playing that 'Apple copied the iOS5 notification system from xyz' crap, because it's really a stupid poor man's excuse for anything. There is nothing special about the iOS 5 notification system, but there wasn't anything special about it when every other phone or desktop OS implemented it before. I have had Linux distro's from 1999 on my PC that have a notification tray that works exactly the same. Android copied it from someone, WebOS did, WM did, and so on and so forth.
The only thing you can say about the iOS 5 notification system is that it was long overdue, and Apple really should have improved iOS notfications long ago, but they screwed up there. That's it. Fortunately there's a million other things in iOS that are a million times better than they are in Android, which have always compensated for the crappy notification system by a large margin.
Obsessively trying to point out how Android already had notifications sorted out long ago makes it look like Android must otherwise be extremely crappy, if the best you can come up with is 'OMFG iOS now has a feature that works just like Android, Apple is copying Android'. Doesn't Android have any other strong points where it beats iOS or have all the advantages it ever had been sorted out and we can leave the platform to die now?
2) Samsung knows that they have done a patent infringement. Why would they otherwise sing a licensing deal with Microsoft about Android. Just like almost all other Android OEMs Samsung pays a protection tax to MSFT.
3) I can't wait for the big showdown. Now that Google made the stupid mistake by buying Motorola Mobile, Apple can finally sue Google about Android.
All this could have been solved easily:
Samsung could have licensed or design its own GUI for its products.
Android could have used licensed Unix instead of "free" Linux
Samsung should have respected its largest customer.
No one is complaining about WebOS. Palm at least tried to innovate.
Android in other hand is a flawed system. Google have so far almost spent 20 billion on a "free" system. Instead of buying things: try to build your own. It would have been much cheaper.
And Google. Please stop lying about the market share. The "activation" bull that analyst believes is just misleading. Who cares if 30% of all shipped Tablets are Android. We want to know how many that are sold. Who cares that 130+ million Android phones have been activated, since the same phone is activated 2-10 times during its lifetime. Just tell us how many phone have been sold.
The best? selling Android phone (and the best Android phone) Galaxy 2 have sold 3 million. I will laugh all day when Apple sells as many Iphone4s in between 1 day-7days depending on how fast Apple can ship the phones.
Isn't it strange that all web traffic data gives Android such a low market share? They should be much bigger then iOS, but they aren't. (but Fandroids will say its because no Android user use the default browser. I understand that now since Android 2.3 browser just support 1 core. Why have dual core phones when your operating system can't handle it? Fandroid: Just wait until 4.0. Then everything will be multithreaded. O and Apple copied message center!!!!)
you were saying?
and Samsung didn't do a 360 (I'm sure you meant 180) they made a thinner model to compete with the iPad...why is that wrong?
why is it that now that Apple is the market leader any company adapting their model and products to better compete with Apple is "STEALING" ?
First people are shocked Android changed it's looks (not it's function btw as it could always work on full touch devices even while it look blackberryish) to compete with the iPhone despite all the signs that that was the future of smartphones
And now people are shocked when people use the age old rounded rectangle design when they make tablets (or phones)
It's crazy.
PS. the Galaxy Tab wasn't banned in Australia due to looking like anything...there were 2 software patents it violated...so your argument is flawed from the start
The picture you provide is just evidence for Apple.
Every single Tablet before Apple had a stylus. I think you know that Samsung does not use stylus on their tablets.
Apple releases a tablet without Stylus. Somehow all competitors decide to do the same.
The multitouch/touch patent is something that Apple have. Just build your beloved Samsung's without these features, and there would not be a problem. (beside all the patent infringements that Linux have. But Apple does not care about that. Other companies will sue for that)
1)Great. Samsung backstabbed Apple. Apple is Samsungs biggest customer with about 8 billion in sales. Is that enough for Samsung? No. They use the same parts that they fab to Apple to put into their own copied design.
2) Samsung knows that they have done a patent infringement. Why would they otherwise sing a licensing deal with Microsoft about Android. Just like almost all other Android OEMs Samsung pays a protection tax to MSFT.
3) I can't wait for the big showdown. Now that Google made the stupid mistake by buying Motorola Mobile, Apple can finally sue Google about Android.
All this could have been solved easily:
Samsung could have licensed or design its own GUI for its products.
Android could have used licensed Unix instead of "free" Linux
Samsung should have respected its largest customer.
No one is complaining about WebOS. Palm at least tried to innovate.
Android in other hand is a flawed system. Google have so far almost spent 20 billion on a "free" system. Instead of buying things: try to build your own. It would have been much cheaper.
And Google. Please stop lying about the market share. The "activation" bull that analyst believes is just misleading. Who cares if 30% of all shipped Tablets are Android. We want to know how many that are sold. Who cares that 130+ million Android phones have been activated, since the same phone is activated 2-10 times during its lifetime. Just tell us how many phone have been sold.
The best? selling Android phone (and the best Android phone) Galaxy 2 have sold 3 million. I will laugh all day when Apple sells as many Iphone4s in between 1 day-7days depending on how fast Apple can ship the phones.
Isn't it strange that all web traffic data gives Android such a low market share? They should be much bigger then iOS, but they aren't. (but Fandroids will say its because no Android user use the default browser. I understand that now since Android 2.3 browser just support 1 core. Why have dual core phones when your operating system can't handle it? Fandroid: Just wait until 4.0. Then everything will be multithreaded. O and Apple copied message center!!!!)
lol, okay...whatever you say spazzy mc spaz boy.
and a great loss for consumers. and thinking again what Apple did with iOS5's notification system, oh and think again what invention means in dictionary.
The picture you provide is just evidence for Apple.
Every single Tablet before Apple had a stylus. I think you know that Samsung does not use stylus on their tablets.
Apple releases a tablet without Stylus. Somehow all competitors decide to do the same.
The multitouch/touch patent is something that Apple have. Just build your beloved Samsung's without these features, and there would not be a problem. (beside all the patent infringements that Linux have. But Apple does not care about that. Other companies will sue for that)
The stylus doesn't matter. The fact that a design patent was granted based on a design that already existed does.
my point was simply to rebut his claim that tablets didn't have that shape beforehand. This really has no bearing on this case as the two patents that are allegedly violated are not based on design.
And no, I don't think anyone should be able to patent multitouch specifically, maybe certain gestures sure, but not the tech.