With all due respect, I have to disagree on the UI layer. Sure, on the Galaxy S with touchwiz 3, it mimic iOS a little too closely, but, from my limited experience with the tab 10.1, those customizations are not present. It is running, for the most part, stock honeycomb.
I'm talking about TouchWiz, not every Samsung product. They have more products that aren't a rip of Apple products than they don't for comparable categories, but that doesn't excuse them from the ones that are HW and SW copies.
ICS looks pretty good. It's the first version of Android that looks like it might be a decent user experience. The problem there is very little real world info on it at this point. The SDK only came out October 19th.
PS: It's also been announced that Gingerbread (2.3.x) now accounts for just over 50% of Android-baed devices. At first this sounds like Google has figured out how to keep Android intact but then I realized that Honeycomb (3.x) was closed and only for tablets, and Gingerbread has been the only version for a year now. ICS is technically out but I think the Galaxy Nexus is the only device with it and I don't think that is even sold in the US at this time.
I can do one better. A bowl shape so my dog can eat her kibble out of. Maybe a tray shape so my cat can use the kitty litter box. A sloped face so that I can jump my mountain bike off of.
It will be harder and harder for Apple to get away with this king of "intellectual property protection". It is not an underdog anymore. They have lost the case in Australia. My feeling is that they will lose the appeal, and they will start losing more cases. Now Apple is the largest public company in the world. Governments always try to find a way how to break such companies apart (to improve competition) or how to restrict them from stiffing the competition in other ways. With such dumb-ass arguments like "rectangular shape" they are just asking for trouble.
I'm talking about TouchWiz, not every Samsung product. They have more products that aren't a rip of Apple products than they don't for comparable categories, but that doesn't excuse them from the ones that are HW and SW copies.
hm? I was speaking specifically of the tab 10.1, not all samsung products in general. sorry if I misunderstood. I agree though; there have been instances where Samsung mimic Apple too closely on the HW or SW side. However, I disagree that the tab 10.1 is one of those cases on the SW side
Quote:
ICS looks pretty good. It's the first version of Android that looks like it might be a decent user experience. The problem there is very little real world info on it at this point. The SDK only came out October 19th.
PS: It's also been announced that Gingerbread (2.3.x) now accounts for just over 50% of Android-baed devices. At first this sounds like Google has figured out how to keep Android intact but then I realized that Honeycomb (3.x) was closed and only for tablets, and Gingerbread has been the only version for a year now. ICS is technically out but I think the Galaxy Nexus is the only device with it and I don't think that is even sold in the US at this time.
AOSP for ICS has been released, so we can expect to see both custom ICS ROMS and official updates for older handsets released soon. This is one of the problems with Android. No one (except the current nexus-phone partner) has access to the code until google releases the AOSP source, so handsets based on ICS are JUST beginning development now.
so lets see..... apple patented the color black, rectangular shapes, rounded corners, flat screens, and bezel size, and thin stuff...... what a joke lol
Apple releases a new, amazing product that is unlike anything else that came before it. We could be talking about the original iMac, the iPod, the iPhone, the iPad, the new iMac, The Macbook Air etc. etc. etc.
Soon, other manufacturers employ some monkeys to copy Apple's devices and they start coming out with devices that heavily resemble what Apple released, both in appearance and every other imaginable way.
Apple haters and people off of their medication will suddenly claim that Apple's designs are so obvious and generic, that it is virtually impossible to make a product that doesn't rip off Apple's design. If it was so obvious, then why didn't they do it before Apple did it?
After the original iMac was released, why did cheap ripoffs and colorful computers start appearing all of a sudden? Was that obvious too?
Why are companies releasing all in one computers that look almost like a new iMac today? Don't answer that, let me guess. That's so obvious too, so there's no way to make an all in one computer that doesn't look like an iMac.
Why do some ultrabooks look almost exactly like a Macbook Air today? Is that so obvious too?
Apple is being ridiculous. There are plenty vendors with original smartphones and tablet designs that have every single one of those features. Of course Samsung isn't even close to being one of those vendors.
There is also one that isn't using one of them and it kind of proves their point about Samsung having choices. And that's Microsoft with their Metro UI.
That Samsung is using a near identical UI on top of a very similar shape, bezel width and so on to the iPad is Apple's point. It's a totality issue, not just any one line item
And we shall see what the various judges say. Fortunately for Apple, even if they lose it still counts as actively trying to protect their IP (a requirement in US trademark/dress laws)
so lets see..... apple patented the color black, rectangular shapes, rounded corners, flat screens, and bezel size, and thin stuff.
When combined in one item, yes.
Quote:
sounds like apple is afraid of Samsung.
Not at all. What they are afraid of is being rendered powerless against a blatant knockoff because they ignored Samsung if you understood US IP laws you wouldn't be surprised bony of this
Maybe Apple should have considered the same 'design alternatives' before they used each of those design elements AFTER numerous others manufactures had be using them for years?
Not sure what you're getting at. The other tablets in the picture are thick, have square edges, have a cluttered appearance, front surfaces that aren't flat and several of them aren't black. The only thing they all have in common is that they're essentially rectangular. Some of them have protrusions, though, so not quite.
so lets see..... apple patented the color black, rectangular shapes, rounded corners, flat screens, and bezel size, and thin stuff...... what a joke lol
sounds like apple is afraid of Samsung.
Sure seems that way, and it'll be interesting to see what happens when customers are allowed to make a choice between the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 and the Apple iPad 2, sans all of this anti-competive misuse of the legal system to block the sale of competing devices.
Apple devices do extremely well in other counties, so they really should have nothing to fear from competing wares. \
Maybe if Samsung hadn't come up with a device that's thinner, lighter, brighter, and higher resolution than the iPad 2, they wouldn't be so seemingly bitter and vindictive?
It will be harder and harder for Apple to get away with this king of "intellectual property protection". It is not an underdog anymore. They have lost the case in Australia. .
Not sure what you're getting at. The other tablets in the picture are thick, have square edges, have a cluttered appearance, front surfaces that aren't flat and several of them aren't black. The only thing they all have in common is that they're essentially rectangular. Some of them have protrusions, though, so not quite.
Sure... If that's what you need to believe - Have At It.
Sure... If that's what you need to believe - Have At It.
What do you mean, if that's what he needs to believe? He's right. Not one of those has the combined elements that make it look like an iPad. If what you need to believe is to ignore facts, then you won't see much success in argument.
Maybe if Samsung hadn't come up with a device that's thinner, lighter, brighter, and higher resolution than the iPad 2, they wouldn't be so seemingly bitter and vindictive?
Samsung changed their whole plans after they got terrified and nearly had a heart attack after they saw the iPad 2.
Their current tablet that they were developing at the time was a ripoff based on the iPad 1 design, so they had to quickly scrap those plans and do as best as they could to ripoff the iPad 2 design.
Samsung tablets have been given away for free with certain TV's. That sounds real successful. It seems like the main way to move Android devices is to give them away for free.
Exactly, DaHarder! Samsung could have cloned one of those other designs that nobody would mistake for Apple?s product... or even come up with their own, so we?d have more real choice and competition! Instead, Samsung copied, right down to numerous small details, which were no accident and not ?inevitable."
Excellent summary. That's the entire point. Samsung could have made an infinite variety of tablet designs, but they just happened to end up with one that was so close to the iPad that their own attorney couldn't tell them apart.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
If Apple has some bigger plan in mind I can't see it. These suggestions are in the same class as the crazy trolls that post here. They either have to be crazy or they are making a funny.
No, they're simply highlighting their patents and trade dress issues. As shown above, there are plenty of ways to make a tablet that don't look like an iPad. All Samsung had to do was change one of those items and it wouldn't have been infringing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA
Perhaps Apple should submit actual designs instead of a few generic ideas for Samsung to use?
That's it. Apple should design the entire product for Samsung.
Oh, wait. They already did.
Quote:
Originally Posted by majjo
Well, allow me to play devil's advocate here--
While samsung may not have had a tablet like the ipad prior to the... ipad, they DID have a device that incorporated many of the design elements Apple is claiming against them. We all know what device I'm hinting at here *cough* digital photos *cough*
So, can samsung claim that they based their design of the galaxy tab 10.1 off said device, and not the iPad? Can they claim the resulting thinness to be a natural evolution of the progress of technology?
It doesn't matter. "Many of the same design elements" is not the same as "so close in appearance that their own attorneys can't tell the difference. In order to infringe Apple's design patent, the device had to duplicate ALL of the design elements. "Many" won't get them off the hook.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jgriner
so lets see..... apple patented the color black, rectangular shapes, rounded corners, flat screens, and bezel size, and thin stuff...... what a joke lol
No. Apple's design patent is for a device that has ALL of those features. Please show a previous device that had ALL of those features. (Hint: you can't). All Samsung had to do was change one of the items and they'd have been OK. Look at the photos above for a few examples of how it was possible to design a product without infringing Apple's design. Instead, Samsung made a near-identical product -- so close that their own attorney couldn't tell the difference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jgriner
sounds like apple is afraid of Samsung.
Ridiculous. If someone breaks into your home and you call the police, that doesn't mean that you're afraid - just that you're not going to sit by and let someone rob you blind.
Sure seems that way, and it'll be interesting to see what happens when customers are allowed to make a choice between the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 and the Apple iPad 2, sans all of this anti-competive misuse of the legal system to block the sale of competing devices.
Apple devices do extremely well in other counties, so they really should have nothing to fear from competing wares. \
Maybe if Samsung hadn't come up with a device that's thinner, lighter, brighter, and higher resolution than the iPad 2, they wouldn't be so seemingly bitter and vindictive?
All non-iPads combined sold less than 1.5 million tablets from Jan to Oct. Apple sold over 11 million in just theo last quater. Your an idiot if you think this has anything to do with Apple being afraid of "competitve" wares.
Sure seems that way, and it'll be interesting to see what happens when customers are allowed to make a choice between the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 and the Apple iPad 2, sans all of this anti-competive misuse of the legal system to block the sale of competing devices.
It doesn't matter. "Many of the same design elements" is not the same as "so close in appearance that their own attorneys can't tell the difference. In order to infringe Apple's design patent, the device had to duplicate ALL of the design elements. "Many" won't get them off the hook.
No. Apple's design patent is for a device that has ALL of those features. Please show a previous device that had ALL of those features. (Hint: you can't). All Samsung had to do was change one of the items and they'd have been OK. Look at the photos above for a few examples of how it was possible to design a product without infringing Apple's design. Instead, Samsung made a near-identical product -- so close that their own attorney couldn't tell the difference.
Do you think the tab 10.1N passes then?
It looks like it addresses:
A front surface that is not black.
Varying Bezel size.
and maybe:
Cluttered appearance.
Front surface that is not flat. (kind of hard to tell from the pictures, but it looks like the metal bezel isn't leveled with the glass)
Comments
With all due respect, I have to disagree on the UI layer. Sure, on the Galaxy S with touchwiz 3, it mimic iOS a little too closely, but, from my limited experience with the tab 10.1, those customizations are not present. It is running, for the most part, stock honeycomb.
I'm talking about TouchWiz, not every Samsung product. They have more products that aren't a rip of Apple products than they don't for comparable categories, but that doesn't excuse them from the ones that are HW and SW copies.
ICS looks pretty good. It's the first version of Android that looks like it might be a decent user experience. The problem there is very little real world info on it at this point. The SDK only came out October 19th.
PS: It's also been announced that Gingerbread (2.3.x) now accounts for just over 50% of Android-baed devices. At first this sounds like Google has figured out how to keep Android intact but then I realized that Honeycomb (3.x) was closed and only for tablets, and Gingerbread has been the only version for a year now. ICS is technically out but I think the Galaxy Nexus is the only device with it and I don't think that is even sold in the US at this time.
I'm talking about TouchWiz, not every Samsung product. They have more products that aren't a rip of Apple products than they don't for comparable categories, but that doesn't excuse them from the ones that are HW and SW copies.
hm? I was speaking specifically of the tab 10.1, not all samsung products in general. sorry if I misunderstood. I agree though; there have been instances where Samsung mimic Apple too closely on the HW or SW side. However, I disagree that the tab 10.1 is one of those cases on the SW side
ICS looks pretty good. It's the first version of Android that looks like it might be a decent user experience. The problem there is very little real world info on it at this point. The SDK only came out October 19th.
PS: It's also been announced that Gingerbread (2.3.x) now accounts for just over 50% of Android-baed devices. At first this sounds like Google has figured out how to keep Android intact but then I realized that Honeycomb (3.x) was closed and only for tablets, and Gingerbread has been the only version for a year now. ICS is technically out but I think the Galaxy Nexus is the only device with it and I don't think that is even sold in the US at this time.
AOSP for ICS has been released, so we can expect to see both custom ICS ROMS and official updates for older handsets released soon. This is one of the problems with Android. No one (except the current nexus-phone partner) has access to the code until google releases the AOSP source, so handsets based on ICS are JUST beginning development now.
sounds like apple is afraid of Samsung.
Apple releases a new, amazing product that is unlike anything else that came before it. We could be talking about the original iMac, the iPod, the iPhone, the iPad, the new iMac, The Macbook Air etc. etc. etc.
Soon, other manufacturers employ some monkeys to copy Apple's devices and they start coming out with devices that heavily resemble what Apple released, both in appearance and every other imaginable way.
Apple haters and people off of their medication will suddenly claim that Apple's designs are so obvious and generic, that it is virtually impossible to make a product that doesn't rip off Apple's design. If it was so obvious, then why didn't they do it before Apple did it?
After the original iMac was released, why did cheap ripoffs and colorful computers start appearing all of a sudden? Was that obvious too?
Why are companies releasing all in one computers that look almost like a new iMac today? Don't answer that, let me guess. That's so obvious too, so there's no way to make an all in one computer that doesn't look like an iMac.
Why do some ultrabooks look almost exactly like a Macbook Air today? Is that so obvious too?
Apple is being ridiculous. There are plenty vendors with original smartphones and tablet designs that have every single one of those features. Of course Samsung isn't even close to being one of those vendors.
There is also one that isn't using one of them and it kind of proves their point about Samsung having choices. And that's Microsoft with their Metro UI.
That Samsung is using a near identical UI on top of a very similar shape, bezel width and so on to the iPad is Apple's point. It's a totality issue, not just any one line item
And we shall see what the various judges say. Fortunately for Apple, even if they lose it still counts as actively trying to protect their IP (a requirement in US trademark/dress laws)
so lets see..... apple patented the color black, rectangular shapes, rounded corners, flat screens, and bezel size, and thin stuff.
When combined in one item, yes.
sounds like apple is afraid of Samsung.
Not at all. What they are afraid of is being rendered powerless against a blatant knockoff because they ignored Samsung if you understood US IP laws you wouldn't be surprised bony of this
Maybe Apple should have considered the same 'design alternatives' before they used each of those design elements AFTER numerous others manufactures had be using them for years?
Not sure what you're getting at. The other tablets in the picture are thick, have square edges, have a cluttered appearance, front surfaces that aren't flat and several of them aren't black. The only thing they all have in common is that they're essentially rectangular. Some of them have protrusions, though, so not quite.
so lets see..... apple patented the color black, rectangular shapes, rounded corners, flat screens, and bezel size, and thin stuff...... what a joke lol
sounds like apple is afraid of Samsung.
Sure seems that way, and it'll be interesting to see what happens when customers are allowed to make a choice between the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 and the Apple iPad 2, sans all of this anti-competive misuse of the legal system to block the sale of competing devices.
Apple devices do extremely well in other counties, so they really should have nothing to fear from competing wares.
Maybe if Samsung hadn't come up with a device that's thinner, lighter, brighter, and higher resolution than the iPad 2, they wouldn't be so seemingly bitter and vindictive?
It will be harder and harder for Apple to get away with this king of "intellectual property protection". It is not an underdog anymore. They have lost the case in Australia. .
No they haven't. The case hasn't been tried.
Not sure what you're getting at. The other tablets in the picture are thick, have square edges, have a cluttered appearance, front surfaces that aren't flat and several of them aren't black. The only thing they all have in common is that they're essentially rectangular. Some of them have protrusions, though, so not quite.
Sure... If that's what you need to believe - Have At It.
Sure... If that's what you need to believe - Have At It.
What do you mean, if that's what he needs to believe? He's right. Not one of those has the combined elements that make it look like an iPad. If what you need to believe is to ignore facts, then you won't see much success in argument.
Maybe if Samsung hadn't come up with a device that's thinner, lighter, brighter, and higher resolution than the iPad 2, they wouldn't be so seemingly bitter and vindictive?
Samsung changed their whole plans after they got terrified and nearly had a heart attack after they saw the iPad 2.
Their current tablet that they were developing at the time was a ripoff based on the iPad 1 design, so they had to quickly scrap those plans and do as best as they could to ripoff the iPad 2 design.
Samsung tablets have been given away for free with certain TV's. That sounds real successful. It seems like the main way to move Android devices is to give them away for free.
Exactly, DaHarder! Samsung could have cloned one of those other designs that nobody would mistake for Apple?s product... or even come up with their own, so we?d have more real choice and competition! Instead, Samsung copied, right down to numerous small details, which were no accident and not ?inevitable."
Forget those hypotheticals and that list of vague ?elements"... there have been tons of other companies' tablet designs that look different from the iPad (to say nothing of Samsung?s cloned Apple packaging, charger design, ?smart cover?/colors, cable-ends, etc. etc.):
There we have lots of variety: past, present, and over-hyped future.
And then here?s what Samsung did.
Excellent summary. That's the entire point. Samsung could have made an infinite variety of tablet designs, but they just happened to end up with one that was so close to the iPad that their own attorney couldn't tell them apart.
If Apple has some bigger plan in mind I can't see it. These suggestions are in the same class as the crazy trolls that post here. They either have to be crazy or they are making a funny.
No, they're simply highlighting their patents and trade dress issues. As shown above, there are plenty of ways to make a tablet that don't look like an iPad. All Samsung had to do was change one of those items and it wouldn't have been infringing.
Perhaps Apple should submit actual designs instead of a few generic ideas for Samsung to use?
That's it. Apple should design the entire product for Samsung.
Oh, wait. They already did.
Well, allow me to play devil's advocate here--
While samsung may not have had a tablet like the ipad prior to the... ipad, they DID have a device that incorporated many of the design elements Apple is claiming against them. We all know what device I'm hinting at here *cough* digital photos *cough*
So, can samsung claim that they based their design of the galaxy tab 10.1 off said device, and not the iPad? Can they claim the resulting thinness to be a natural evolution of the progress of technology?
It doesn't matter. "Many of the same design elements" is not the same as "so close in appearance that their own attorneys can't tell the difference. In order to infringe Apple's design patent, the device had to duplicate ALL of the design elements. "Many" won't get them off the hook.
so lets see..... apple patented the color black, rectangular shapes, rounded corners, flat screens, and bezel size, and thin stuff...... what a joke lol
No. Apple's design patent is for a device that has ALL of those features. Please show a previous device that had ALL of those features. (Hint: you can't). All Samsung had to do was change one of the items and they'd have been OK. Look at the photos above for a few examples of how it was possible to design a product without infringing Apple's design. Instead, Samsung made a near-identical product -- so close that their own attorney couldn't tell the difference.
sounds like apple is afraid of Samsung.
Ridiculous. If someone breaks into your home and you call the police, that doesn't mean that you're afraid - just that you're not going to sit by and let someone rob you blind.
Sure seems that way, and it'll be interesting to see what happens when customers are allowed to make a choice between the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 and the Apple iPad 2, sans all of this anti-competive misuse of the legal system to block the sale of competing devices.
Apple devices do extremely well in other counties, so they really should have nothing to fear from competing wares.
Maybe if Samsung hadn't come up with a device that's thinner, lighter, brighter, and higher resolution than the iPad 2, they wouldn't be so seemingly bitter and vindictive?
All non-iPads combined sold less than 1.5 million tablets from Jan to Oct. Apple sold over 11 million in just theo last quater. Your an idiot if you think this has anything to do with Apple being afraid of "competitve" wares.
Sure seems that way, and it'll be interesting to see what happens when customers are allowed to make a choice between the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 and the Apple iPad 2, sans all of this anti-competive misuse of the legal system to block the sale of competing devices.
Can't you order one right now in the US?
How have they been selling?
She has denied Apple's request for injunction, another win for Samsung
It doesn't matter. "Many of the same design elements" is not the same as "so close in appearance that their own attorneys can't tell the difference. In order to infringe Apple's design patent, the device had to duplicate ALL of the design elements. "Many" won't get them off the hook.
No. Apple's design patent is for a device that has ALL of those features. Please show a previous device that had ALL of those features. (Hint: you can't). All Samsung had to do was change one of the items and they'd have been OK. Look at the photos above for a few examples of how it was possible to design a product without infringing Apple's design. Instead, Samsung made a near-identical product -- so close that their own attorney couldn't tell the difference.
Do you think the tab 10.1N passes then?
It looks like it addresses:
A front surface that is not black.
Varying Bezel size.
and maybe:
Cluttered appearance.
Front surface that is not flat. (kind of hard to tell from the pictures, but it looks like the metal bezel isn't leveled with the glass)