If people aren't buying it, then apple wouldn't need an injunction.
I've played around with android phones from HTC and Samsung. IMHO they're as good as my girlfriends iPhone.
Really? Based on what? Does it have the full Apple ecosystem? Of course not. So your statement is total BS as it is not a "phone" but a sophisticated computer that is an integral part of a total ecosystem. Not a platform for taking your user information without compensation and serving you up a world of ads.
Really? Based on what? Does it have the full Apple ecosystem? Of course not. So your statement is total BS as it is not a "phone" but a sophisticated computer that is an integral part of a total ecosystem. Not a platform for taking your user information without compensation and serving you up a world of ads.
Based on my humble opinion. (It's what IMHO means)
I'm sorry i offended you by comparing the iPhone to a phone.
Would smart phone be a better term?
And while android doesn't have a complete ecosystem like Apples iOS, you can still use an android device as a phone, media player. Take and view photos. Run various apps including games, banking apps, eReader apps, calenders and the like.
So you are a legal expert? This is nonsense - there is no conflict of interest as law firms make sure to isolate cases such as this from anyone in the firm that might have a conflict. She is a judge, he's a lawyer. So you think one of them needs to give up their job? Total BS.
Sure the judge should have declared it and made herself unavailable, if the allegation is true. No that does not mean she would give up her job, but the job. If you not understand this, then surely you are a diehard Apple fan who supports whatever Apple does or whoever sided with Apple. I can not beleive this.
So it is clear to me that dMavo is run by criminals. I wouldn't buy from them knowing how they feel about breaking laws. They probably don't treat their employees well either.
Are they breaking the law? It sounds like they found a clever loophole to have a company in China, with servers in China ship directly to customers from China.
If people aren't buying it, then apple wouldn't need an injunction.
That's a fallacious argument. Check out the Spanish tablet startup —*who I think has yet to ship a product — that Apple sued (and lost against).
Quote:
I've played around with android phones from HTC and Samsung. IMHO they're as good as my girlfriends iPhone.
Which iPhone? If it's the original iPhone there is a lot that has changed on this front in performance, something the iPhone excels in. And by performance I don't mean the clockspeed listed on a spec sheet, I mean how the device performs when doing similar tasks.
Which version of the OS? This is also important and something harder to pin down than with Android-based devices which don't get 3 years of updates from the vendor.
And define "as good." Surely you have plenty of criteria to determine is something is overall better or worse than another product and scenarios where the bar changes depending on each one. I can surely name dozens of areas the iPhone isn't the best yet I think the iPhone is the best overall device.
That's a fallacious argument. Check out the Spanish tablet startup ?*who I think has yet to ship a product ? that Apple sued (and lost against).
Which iPhone? If it's the original iPhone there is a lot that has changed on this front in performance, something the iPhone excels in. And by performance I don't mean the clockspeed listed on a spec sheet, I mean how the device performs when doing similar tasks.
Which version of the OS? This is also important and something harder to pin down than with Android-based devices which don't get 3 years of updates from the vendor.
And define "as good." Surely you have plenty of criteria to determine is something is overall better or worse than another product and scenarios where the bar changes depending on each one. I can surely name dozens of areas the iPhone isn't the best yet I think the iPhone is the best overall device.
I'll admit I was being snarky with the first comment.
But from the SMH article linked in the above story, Wojtek Czarnocki claims that the Galaxy Tab is selling well. Seems that there's a market for it.
I'm comparing the iPhone 3Gs to a HTC Desire HD (don't know which OS, but I doubt she'd have upgraded). Yes, the iPhone is a year older, but the standard telcos contract lasts two years.
As good is a subjective term and is based on my personal experience.
After using both phones for several months, I don't feel that the iPhone is any better in terms of ease of use, browsing the internet or availability of apps.
I'll admit I was being snarky with the first comment.
But from the SMH article linked in the above story, Wojtek Czarnocki claims that the Galaxy Tab is selling well. Seems that there's a market for it.
I'm comparing the iPhone 3Gs to a HTC Desire HD (don't know which OS, but I doubt she'd have upgraded). Yes, the iPhone is a year older, but the standard telcos contract lasts two years.
As good is a subjective term and is based on my personal experience.
After using both phones for several months, I don't feel that the iPhone is any better in terms of ease of use, browsing the internet or availability of apps.
For overall battery life, for reliability, ease of use, refinement, and peace-of-mind if I do have a HW issue I find the iPhone much better than the competition, but you are entitled to your opinion and there are certainly cases where different devices will suit different needs better.
As for the Galaxy Tab, I think it's doing well for a tablet that isn't compared to the iPad in sales. Remember that Apple sells more tablets per quarter than all the tablets ever sold for the decade before it. Part of that is the high price of entry for the Windows-based tablets, but you can't deny the iPad is a runaway success. I think within a few years the iPad could seriously hinder PC sales -and- best the iPhone in revenue and profit per quarter.
But I don't think the Galaxy Tab is selling very well in comparison to the iPad. I'm certain Samsung phones sell better in comparison to the iPhone and not a single model seems to come close. This quarter Apple is likely to sell about 1.5-2x as many iPhone 4Ses than all the Samsung handsets combined.
On top of that, Apple is selling as many iPads as they can make. This makes the real threat from Samsung one that is anticipated which is mainly why they are going so hard after Samsung. Clearly Samsung did a lot of blatant copying of Apple's HW and SW, but I'm not sure how much look and feel can hold up in court, I just don't think they would be going after them so hard if they weren't getting an ill-gotten hold from Apple's efforts.
They are making out like it's them vs Apple, but it's really them vs the courts. And I don't think the courts will be amused at attempts to "get around" a ruling.
- The injunction against Samsung stands on one product and one product only. Samsung is free to sell any of its upcoming tablets.
- The judge that granted an injunction is married to one of the senior counsel members of Wentworth 5- the barrister firm representing Apple in the court case. Conflict of interest? "
If what he said true about the Judge, of course there has been conflict of interest. Now I my curiousity why the Australian Judge awarded the injunction would be solved, if this is confirmed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez
Got a better source than "someone in an Internet forum said it?"
You'd think something like this woud be both easily documented and of wide interest, yet I can't turn up anything in Google beyond your words.
I understand what you are saying. That person, as you could read, were not expressing an opinion, it was like stating a fact. Sure, I should have reseached it myself before I post that here.
Now I have done that research and I beleive what that person in MacRumours site said.
First, I googled 'Wentworth 5'. Click the first result that leads to Wentworth 5 website, and click 'People'. Among the first 6 senior council members, you could see Stephen Burley SC and David Bennett AC QC
Stephen Burley SC was the barrister representing Apple in the Annabelle Bennett's court. See, bellow link.
I understand what you are saying. That person, as you could read, were not expressing an opinion, it was like stating a fact. Sure, I should have reseached it myself before I post that here.
Now I have done that research and I beleive what that person in MacRumours site said.
First, I googled 'Wentworth 5'. Click the first result that leads to Wentworth 5 website, and click 'People'. Among the first 6 senior council members, you could see Stephen Burley SC and David Bennett AC QC
Stephen Burley SC was the barrister representing Apple in the Annabelle Bennett's court. See, bellow link.
Apple, as big as their pockets may be, cannot, as of right now, stop us, or anyone else not associated with Samsung Australia, from selling the Samsung Galaxy 10.1 tablets to the Australian consumers.
So as much as some of you Apple fanboys think otherwise, we need to disappoint you.
Here's the crux of the matter:
1. The Samsung Galaxy 10.1 tablets are not banned in OZ
2. Apple, whilst trying to use its intimidation tactics, has no legal right to make the demands they had made
So take a chill pill and stay tuned. We pick our battles well
So you can say that if Apple wanted to bribe the judge, there is a legal channel for it. Brilliant!
No, what I am saying is that conflict of interest existed in the injunction decision, as someone questioned. So, you are saying there is no issue there?
I think Apple maybe ok, although the connection may have played in Apple heading to Wentworth 5. But the judge should have declared it and made herself unavailable, IMHO.
They are making out like it's them vs Apple, but it's really them vs the courts. And I don't think the courts will be amused at attempts to "get around" a ruling.
The ruling does not stop an individual or a company from buying the device, but stops Australian based retailers from selling the Galaxy tab. If the sub company is set up properly, then it is totally legal to ship devices from overseas to Australian customers.
One of the big gripes of Australian retailers is precisely this fact. Australians are going on line and legally buying a product from overseas which is costing the local retailers turnover.
But I don't think the Galaxy Tab is selling very well in comparison to the iPad. I'm certain Samsung phones sell better in comparison to the iPhone and not a single model seems to come close. This quarter Apple is likely to sell about 1.5-2x as many iPhone 4Ses than all the Samsung handsets combined.
All the Samsung handsets, or all the Samsung smartphones? To sell 2x as many iPhone 4Ses as all Samsung handsets - that's a lot. Samsung sold (or shipped?) 80M handsets a year ago. Can Apple sell 160M iPhones in total, never mind iP4S alone?
Oh, come on, be logical. The iPad is so much better, less expensive etc etc. Why would Apple want to bar an unworthy competitor from competing, nobody will buy an Android anyway... Oh, wait.
Apple, as big as their pockets may be, cannot, as of right now, stop us, or anyone else not associated with Samsung Australia, from selling the Samsung Galaxy 10.1 tablets to the Australian consumers.
So as much as some of you Apple fanboys think otherwise, we need to disappoint you.
Here's the crux of the matter:
1. The Samsung Galaxy 10.1 tablets are not banned in OZ
2. Apple, whilst trying to use its intimidation tactics, has no legal right to make the demands they had made
So take a chill pill and stay tuned. We pick our battles well
Cheers,
dMavo
Some guy once had a pirate flag with an Apple on it flying over his company.
Comments
If people aren't buying it, then apple wouldn't need an injunction.
I've played around with android phones from HTC and Samsung. IMHO they're as good as my girlfriends iPhone.
Really? Based on what? Does it have the full Apple ecosystem? Of course not. So your statement is total BS as it is not a "phone" but a sophisticated computer that is an integral part of a total ecosystem. Not a platform for taking your user information without compensation and serving you up a world of ads.
Really? Based on what? Does it have the full Apple ecosystem? Of course not. So your statement is total BS as it is not a "phone" but a sophisticated computer that is an integral part of a total ecosystem. Not a platform for taking your user information without compensation and serving you up a world of ads.
Based on my humble opinion. (It's what IMHO means)
I'm sorry i offended you by comparing the iPhone to a phone.
Would smart phone be a better term?
And while android doesn't have a complete ecosystem like Apples iOS, you can still use an android device as a phone, media player. Take and view photos. Run various apps including games, banking apps, eReader apps, calenders and the like.
So you are a legal expert? This is nonsense - there is no conflict of interest as law firms make sure to isolate cases such as this from anyone in the firm that might have a conflict. She is a judge, he's a lawyer. So you think one of them needs to give up their job? Total BS.
Sure the judge should have declared it and made herself unavailable, if the allegation is true. No that does not mean she would give up her job, but the job. If you not understand this, then surely you are a diehard Apple fan who supports whatever Apple does or whoever sided with Apple. I can not beleive this.
So it is clear to me that dMavo is run by criminals. I wouldn't buy from them knowing how they feel about breaking laws. They probably don't treat their employees well either.
Are they breaking the law? It sounds like they found a clever loophole to have a company in China, with servers in China ship directly to customers from China.
If people aren't buying it, then apple wouldn't need an injunction.
That's a fallacious argument. Check out the Spanish tablet startup —*who I think has yet to ship a product — that Apple sued (and lost against).
I've played around with android phones from HTC and Samsung. IMHO they're as good as my girlfriends iPhone.
Which iPhone? If it's the original iPhone there is a lot that has changed on this front in performance, something the iPhone excels in. And by performance I don't mean the clockspeed listed on a spec sheet, I mean how the device performs when doing similar tasks.
Which version of the OS? This is also important and something harder to pin down than with Android-based devices which don't get 3 years of updates from the vendor.
And define "as good." Surely you have plenty of criteria to determine is something is overall better or worse than another product and scenarios where the bar changes depending on each one. I can surely name dozens of areas the iPhone isn't the best yet I think the iPhone is the best overall device.
I gotta say shipping from asia is a smart idea, but they should have kept it on the DL, and not challenged apple in such direct way.
That's a fallacious argument. Check out the Spanish tablet startup ?*who I think has yet to ship a product ? that Apple sued (and lost against).
Which iPhone? If it's the original iPhone there is a lot that has changed on this front in performance, something the iPhone excels in. And by performance I don't mean the clockspeed listed on a spec sheet, I mean how the device performs when doing similar tasks.
Which version of the OS? This is also important and something harder to pin down than with Android-based devices which don't get 3 years of updates from the vendor.
And define "as good." Surely you have plenty of criteria to determine is something is overall better or worse than another product and scenarios where the bar changes depending on each one. I can surely name dozens of areas the iPhone isn't the best yet I think the iPhone is the best overall device.
I'll admit I was being snarky with the first comment.
But from the SMH article linked in the above story, Wojtek Czarnocki claims that the Galaxy Tab is selling well. Seems that there's a market for it.
I'm comparing the iPhone 3Gs to a HTC Desire HD (don't know which OS, but I doubt she'd have upgraded). Yes, the iPhone is a year older, but the standard telcos contract lasts two years.
As good is a subjective term and is based on my personal experience.
After using both phones for several months, I don't feel that the iPhone is any better in terms of ease of use, browsing the internet or availability of apps.
I'll admit I was being snarky with the first comment.
But from the SMH article linked in the above story, Wojtek Czarnocki claims that the Galaxy Tab is selling well. Seems that there's a market for it.
I'm comparing the iPhone 3Gs to a HTC Desire HD (don't know which OS, but I doubt she'd have upgraded). Yes, the iPhone is a year older, but the standard telcos contract lasts two years.
As good is a subjective term and is based on my personal experience.
After using both phones for several months, I don't feel that the iPhone is any better in terms of ease of use, browsing the internet or availability of apps.
For overall battery life, for reliability, ease of use, refinement, and peace-of-mind if I do have a HW issue I find the iPhone much better than the competition, but you are entitled to your opinion and there are certainly cases where different devices will suit different needs better.
As for the Galaxy Tab, I think it's doing well for a tablet that isn't compared to the iPad in sales. Remember that Apple sells more tablets per quarter than all the tablets ever sold for the decade before it. Part of that is the high price of entry for the Windows-based tablets, but you can't deny the iPad is a runaway success. I think within a few years the iPad could seriously hinder PC sales -and- best the iPhone in revenue and profit per quarter.
But I don't think the Galaxy Tab is selling very well in comparison to the iPad. I'm certain Samsung phones sell better in comparison to the iPhone and not a single model seems to come close. This quarter Apple is likely to sell about 1.5-2x as many iPhone 4Ses than all the Samsung handsets combined.
On top of that, Apple is selling as many iPads as they can make. This makes the real threat from Samsung one that is anticipated which is mainly why they are going so hard after Samsung. Clearly Samsung did a lot of blatant copying of Apple's HW and SW, but I'm not sure how much look and feel can hold up in court, I just don't think they would be going after them so hard if they weren't getting an ill-gotten hold from Apple's efforts.
Juicy stuff.
URLs to the criminal record, and records of Moses receiving payments from Google?
Drug use, parking in handicapped zones, driving without license plates, speeding, ...
I bet he doesn't believe in paying child support either.
Someone in Macrumors said
"Things to note:
- The injunction against Samsung stands on one product and one product only. Samsung is free to sell any of its upcoming tablets.
- The judge that granted an injunction is married to one of the senior counsel members of Wentworth 5- the barrister firm representing Apple in the court case. Conflict of interest? "
If what he said true about the Judge, of course there has been conflict of interest. Now I my curiousity why the Australian Judge awarded the injunction would be solved, if this is confirmed.
Got a better source than "someone in an Internet forum said it?"
You'd think something like this woud be both easily documented and of wide interest, yet I can't turn up anything in Google beyond your words.
I understand what you are saying. That person, as you could read, were not expressing an opinion, it was like stating a fact. Sure, I should have reseached it myself before I post that here.
Now I have done that research and I beleive what that person in MacRumours site said.
First, I googled 'Wentworth 5'. Click the first result that leads to Wentworth 5 website, and click 'People'. Among the first 6 senior council members, you could see Stephen Burley SC and David Bennett AC QC
Stephen Burley SC was the barrister representing Apple in the Annabelle Bennett's court. See, bellow link.
http://news.yahoo.com/apple-may-reve...060010455.html
David Bennett AC QC is the husband of Australia Federal judge Annabelle Bennett. See bellow link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Bennett_(barrister)
What do you think?
MacRulez,
I understand what you are saying. That person, as you could read, were not expressing an opinion, it was like stating a fact. Sure, I should have reseached it myself before I post that here.
Now I have done that research and I beleive what that person in MacRumours site said.
First, I googled 'Wentworth 5'. Click the first result that leads to Wentworth 5 website, and click 'People'. Among the first 6 senior council members, you could see Stephen Burley SC and David Bennett AC QC
Stephen Burley SC was the barrister representing Apple in the Annabelle Bennett's court. See, bellow link.
http://news.yahoo.com/apple-may-reve...060010455.html
David Bennett AC QC is the husband of Australia Federal judge Annabelle Bennett. See bellow link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Bennett_(barrister)
What do you think?
So you can say that if Apple wanted to bribe the judge, there is a legal channel for it. Brilliant!
Drug use, parking in handicapped zones, driving without license plates, speeding, ...
I bet he doesn't believe in paying child support either.
You are obviously talking about Steve Jobs there.
We respect everyone's views even if we don't agree with them.
However, before stating that:
1. we are breaking the law
2. we sell an illegal/banned product
3. we will kneel down to Apple etc etc
try to take some time out and read the facts surrounding the current Court proceedings in Australia.
The below link should help:
https://www.comcourts.gov.au/file/Fe...3/2011/actions
Apple, as big as their pockets may be, cannot, as of right now, stop us, or anyone else not associated with Samsung Australia, from selling the Samsung Galaxy 10.1 tablets to the Australian consumers.
So as much as some of you Apple fanboys think otherwise, we need to disappoint you.
Here's the crux of the matter:
1. The Samsung Galaxy 10.1 tablets are not banned in OZ
2. Apple, whilst trying to use its intimidation tactics, has no legal right to make the demands they had made
So take a chill pill and stay tuned. We pick our battles well
Cheers,
dMavo
So you can say that if Apple wanted to bribe the judge, there is a legal channel for it. Brilliant!
No, what I am saying is that conflict of interest existed in the injunction decision, as someone questioned. So, you are saying there is no issue there?
I think Apple maybe ok, although the connection may have played in Apple heading to Wentworth 5. But the judge should have declared it and made herself unavailable, IMHO.
They are making out like it's them vs Apple, but it's really them vs the courts. And I don't think the courts will be amused at attempts to "get around" a ruling.
The ruling does not stop an individual or a company from buying the device, but stops Australian based retailers from selling the Galaxy tab. If the sub company is set up properly, then it is totally legal to ship devices from overseas to Australian customers.
One of the big gripes of Australian retailers is precisely this fact. Australians are going on line and legally buying a product from overseas which is costing the local retailers turnover.
But I don't think the Galaxy Tab is selling very well in comparison to the iPad. I'm certain Samsung phones sell better in comparison to the iPhone and not a single model seems to come close. This quarter Apple is likely to sell about 1.5-2x as many iPhone 4Ses than all the Samsung handsets combined.
All the Samsung handsets, or all the Samsung smartphones? To sell 2x as many iPhone 4Ses as all Samsung handsets - that's a lot. Samsung sold (or shipped?) 80M handsets a year ago. Can Apple sell 160M iPhones in total, never mind iP4S alone?
Why don't these people just get iPads?
Oh, come on, be logical. The iPad is so much better, less expensive etc etc. Why would Apple want to bar an unworthy competitor from competing, nobody will buy an Android anyway... Oh, wait.
Hi there,
We respect everyone's views even if we don't agree with them.
However, before stating that:
1. we are breaking the law
2. we sell an illegal/banned product
3. we will kneel down to Apple etc etc
try to take some time out and read the facts surrounding the current Court proceedings in Australia.
The below link should help:
https://www.comcourts.gov.au/file/Fe...3/2011/actions
Apple, as big as their pockets may be, cannot, as of right now, stop us, or anyone else not associated with Samsung Australia, from selling the Samsung Galaxy 10.1 tablets to the Australian consumers.
So as much as some of you Apple fanboys think otherwise, we need to disappoint you.
Here's the crux of the matter:
1. The Samsung Galaxy 10.1 tablets are not banned in OZ
2. Apple, whilst trying to use its intimidation tactics, has no legal right to make the demands they had made
So take a chill pill and stay tuned. We pick our battles well
Cheers,
dMavo
Some guy once had a pirate flag with an Apple on it flying over his company.