Another moronic comment. When intellectual property rights are violated, they have to be protected. Apple has already lost millions in legal fees. If you can't see the identical nature of the two devices, then you are living under a rock.
Another moronic comment from from the Apple-blind fanatics. If you have absolutely no idea what the word 'identical' means, Then Don't Use it!
Another moronic comment from from the Apple-blind fanatics. If you have absolutely no idea what the word 'identical' means, Then Don't Use it!
Retail sales injunctions were granted against Samsung in Australia and Germany, so I would presume that those courts of law understand what identical means. Maybe you should invest in a dictionary yourself, or at the very least, a reading comprehension class.
...and that's certainly your choice, and having 'choices' is nice. Enjoy!
Not only my choice, but hard based facts. Android will slowly open source itself to death. I welcome competition, as its good competition, but making promises that the software can't keep is ingenious.
I happen to own both the Galaxy Tab 10.1 and 8.9 (as well as a dozen or so other tablet devices), and of all the non-Apple ones, the Galaxy Tab 8.9 is by far my favorite.
Apologies if you have explained before, but I have often wondered why you own so many different tablets, phones etc.. Just a hobby, or professional interest?
Apologies if you have explained before, but I have often wondered why you own so many different tablets, phones etc.. Just a hobby, or professional interest?
OK - so you have had the chance to use them and study them up close. Do you think that the copying accusations leveled against Samsung are completely unfounded, that they have copied to some extent but within the boundaries of common practice, or that they have actually overstepped the mark in some areas?
To put it another way - are you just trying to balance the other side of the argument in threads like this, or do you fundamentally disagree that Apple should be trying to defend any of these patents, trade dress etc.?
OK - so you have had the chance to use them and study them up close. Do you think that the copying accusations leveled against Samsung are completely unfounded, that they have copied to some extent but within the boundaries of common practice, or that they have actually overstepped the mark in some areas?
To put it another way - are you just trying to balance the other side of the argument in threads like this, or do you fundamentally disagree that Apple should be trying to defend any of these patents, trade dress etc.?
The biggest problem with all of this is that Apple should never have been granted such general/generic patents, and chances are the legal system will make sure that no one ever does again.
The biggest problem with all of this is that Apple should never have been granted such general/generic patents, and chances are the legal system will make sure that no one ever does again.
Umm, that was a glaring non-answer.
I'm curious what your view is too as well as your rationale, since you're one on the very few here who have extensive experience with both OS's on so many devices.
I'm curious what your view is too as well as your rationale, since you're one on the very few here who have extensive experience with both OS's on so many devices.
Disappointed, but, on reflection, not that surprised. DaHarder's posts tend to hammer on repetitively with very narrow talking points, rather than engage the wider questions. That answer came across as simply evasive, which is a shame because I'd really like to hear his honest opinion.
Disappointed, but, on reflection, not that surprised. DaHarder's posts tend to hammer on repetitively with very narrow talking points, rather than engage the wider questions. That answer came across as simply evasive, which is a shame because I'd really like to hear his honest opinion.
Honestly... I really don't care if you're 'disappointed' or not, as I feel absolutely zero obligation to any of you hostile, closed-minded, brand-biased, talking-point-spewing cronies that likely just received your first iPod Touch 8gb for your 12th birthday and all of a sudden think that you're gadget experts.
FACT: I merely offered a brief answer to the questions to be reflective of the fact that I don't care which company behaves in the manner that Apple has, It's Wrong, and I find it Anti-Compeptive... which mirrors my position throughout this article's comment section.
Anyway... To answer your specific questions:
-- Do you think that the copying accusations leveled against Samsung are completely unfounded:
No, and I never said as much, only that Apple should never have been granted the rights to such general/generic design elements in the first place.
-- That they (Samsung) have copied to some extent but within the boundaries of common practice:
Absolutely Not... Samsung had numerous devices, as did other companies, that had the general design characteristic of the iPad/iPad2 long before (many years in most cases) either device was ever seen/released.
-- That they (Samsung) have actually overstepped the mark in some areas:
No.. They haven't, given that the majority of the allegations are (again) so general/generic that essentially ALL modern touch-screen devices share them.
What a strange response. You join a discussion group and then get offended when I ask your opinion? While you certainly shouldn't feel obligated to anyone, if you are just here to pontificate, rather than interacting, then your contributions really are as pointless as your critics keep saying. I thought there might be more to it - my apologies for being interested. I don't care if you care whether I'm disappointed any more than you care what I think. Mutual disregard is fine if that's what you want.
There are definitely some closed-minded contributors on this site, but two observations: (1) not everyone is, as the range of posts attests to, and (2) you don't help your argument by appearing completely closed-minded yourself much of the time. Sorry - disregard - as you keep saying, you don't care.
Thanks, though, for trying to elaborate, although your apparent assumption that I was trying to put words in your mouth was incorrect - I was trying to get you to say what you thought. It didn't really help anyway, since you appear to claim contradictory positions in your answers: no - you don't think the copying claims are unfounded, and no, you don't think that they have copied at all.
Probably not worth continuing this conversation as the thread is old and you have already answered my more fundamental question.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHarder
Honestly... I really don't care if you're 'disappointed' or not, as I feel absolutely zero obligation to any of you hostile, closed-minded, brand-biased, talking-point-spewing cronies that likely just received your first iPod Touch 8gb for your 12th birthday and all of a sudden think that you're gadget experts.
FACT: I merely offered a brief answer to the questions to be reflective of the fact that I don't care which company behaves in the manner that Apple has, It's Wrong, and I find it Anti-Compeptive... which mirrors my position throughout this article's comment section.
Anyway... To answer your specific questions:
-- Do you think that the copying accusations leveled against Samsung are completely unfounded:
No, and I never said as much, only that Apple should never have been granted the rights to such general/generic design elements in the first place.
-- That they (Samsung) have copied to some extent but within the boundaries of common practice:
Absolutely Not... Samsung had numerous devices, as did other companies, that had the general design characteristic of the iPad/iPad2 long before (many years in most cases) either device was ever seen/released.
-- That they (Samsung) have actually overstepped the mark in some areas:
No.. They haven't, given that the majority of the allegations are (again) so general/generic that essentially ALL modern touch-screen devices share them.
What a strange response. You join a discussion group and then get offended when I ask your opinion? While you certainly shouldn't feel obligated to anyone, if you are just here to pontificate, rather than interacting, then your contributions really are as pointless as your critics keep saying. I thought there might be more to it - my apologies for being interested. I don't care if you care whether I'm disappointed any more than you care what I think. Mutual disregard is fine if that's what you want.
There are definitely some closed-minded contributors on this site, but two observations: (1) not everyone is, as the range of posts attests to, and (2) you don't help your argument by appearing completely closed-minded yourself much of the time. Sorry - disregard - as you keep saying, you don't care.
Thanks, though, for trying to elaborate, although your apparent assumption that I was trying to put words in your mouth was incorrect - I was trying to get you to say what you thought. It didn't really help anyway, since you appear to claim contradictory positions in your answers: no - you don't think the copying claims are unfounded, and no, you don't think that they have copied at all.
Probably not worth continuing this conversation as the thread is old and you have already answered my more fundamental question.
Given that I'd essentially addressed your various inquiries throughout this thread/article, I simply felt no need to reiterate every single point simply because you failed to do your own research.
Of anyone on AI, I am likely the least 'closed minded' of them all as I do own/use/appreciate dozens-upon-dozens of Apple products but in no, way, shape or form conform the the 'Cult of Apple' mentality so pervasive on Apple sites which dictates that no unkind word be spoken of their 'beloved' Apple - even when warranted.
My answer is what it is, and I stand behind it 100%... e.g. Yes, there are similarities between all of these touch-screen devices, and NO - Apple should never have been granted rights to such general/generic design elements in the first place.
If those responses are not to your liking... TOUGH! The world does not revolve around your every thought, and belief on these matters - No matter how much you (subtly) try to denigrate and belittle said responses.
Better, but I still don't get what you are attacking me for. I haven't even expressed my opinion on the subject, let alone implied that I regard my opinion as important, so what's with your aggressive last paragraph when all I did was ask for your opinion on a couple of specific questions? Are you just assuming that I will disagree with you? Or are you offended that I suggested that you don't engage much - is that the "belittling and denigrating" that you referred to? Or just over-sensitive because you think everyone is against you here? You claim to be open-minded - owning and appreciating Apple products, but I can't recall a single pro-Apple post of yours. Can you? It's hard to maintain that credibility if your posts are uniformly one-sided. And anyway - given your very low opinion of the inhabitants of this site, why are you even posting here? A little introspection might help.
Anyway - I had read the entire thread before I posted, and no, you had not addressed those questions in my opinion, which is why I posed them. The content of nearly all your posts comprised (as usual) photos or references to products or concepts that you think constitute prior art or design separation on quite specific aspects of the copying debate, or complaints about the granting of over-broad rights. That's fine. I understand your position on the legal/rights issues. What I had never seen you post, here, or before for that matter, was an actual simple opinion on whether you thought Samsung/Google had in any way copied Apple, legally addressable or not. Whether the hardware or hardware/software combination was too close or not. Basically whether you think there is any merit in the accusations of copying (as opposed to the lawsuits and patent disputes). I view those as questions as distinctly different questions.
So now you have answered half the question, sort of. You think there are similarities. No surprise there. But the basic question remains - "do you think Samsung copied Apple"? - not "should Apple have been granted those rights"? I'm still curious, but coming to the realization that you don't want to answer that one. No problem.
I'm with you to some extent on the over-broadness of the rights. However, if Apple believe, as obviously they do, that Samsung copied Apple's products to an unreasonable degree in order to try to capitalize on some of Apple's success, it would probably be foolish of them, if not downright negligent, as a publicly traded company, not to use the legal avenues that are open to them to protect their product identities. Different issue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHarder
Given that I'd essentially addressed your various inquiries throughout this thread/article, I simply felt no need to reiterate every single point simply because you failed to do your own research.
Of anyone on AI, I am likely the least 'closed minded' of them all as I do own/use/appreciate dozens-upon-dozens of Apple products but in no, way, shape or form conform the the 'Cult of Apple' mentality so pervasive on Apple sites which dictates that no unkind word be spoken of their 'beloved' Apple - even when warranted.
My answer is what it is, and I stand behind it 100%... e.g. Yes, there are similarities between all of these touch-screen devices, and NO - Apple should never have been granted rights to such general/generic design elements in the first place.
If those responses are not to your liking... TOUGH! The world does not revolve around your every thought, and belief on these matters - No matter how much you (subtly) try to denigrate and belittle said responses.
Comments
Another moronic comment. When intellectual property rights are violated, they have to be protected. Apple has already lost millions in legal fees. If you can't see the identical nature of the two devices, then you are living under a rock.
Another moronic comment from from the Apple-blind fanatics. If you have absolutely no idea what the word 'identical' means, Then Don't Use it!
Another moronic comment from from the Apple-blind fanatics. If you have absolutely no idea what the word 'identical' means, Then Don't Use it!
Retail sales injunctions were granted against Samsung in Australia and Germany, so I would presume that those courts of law understand what identical means. Maybe you should invest in a dictionary yourself, or at the very least, a reading comprehension class.
...and that's certainly your choice, and having 'choices' is nice. Enjoy!
Not only my choice, but hard based facts. Android will slowly open source itself to death. I welcome competition, as its good competition, but making promises that the software can't keep is ingenious.
I happen to own both the Galaxy Tab 10.1 and 8.9 (as well as a dozen or so other tablet devices), and of all the non-Apple ones, the Galaxy Tab 8.9 is by far my favorite.
Apologies if you have explained before, but I have often wondered why you own so many different tablets, phones etc.. Just a hobby, or professional interest?
Apologies if you have explained before, but I have often wondered why you own so many different tablets, phones etc.. Just a hobby, or professional interest?
One of many, many hobbies...
One of many, many hobbies...
OK - so you have had the chance to use them and study them up close. Do you think that the copying accusations leveled against Samsung are completely unfounded, that they have copied to some extent but within the boundaries of common practice, or that they have actually overstepped the mark in some areas?
To put it another way - are you just trying to balance the other side of the argument in threads like this, or do you fundamentally disagree that Apple should be trying to defend any of these patents, trade dress etc.?
OK - so you have had the chance to use them and study them up close. Do you think that the copying accusations leveled against Samsung are completely unfounded, that they have copied to some extent but within the boundaries of common practice, or that they have actually overstepped the mark in some areas?
To put it another way - are you just trying to balance the other side of the argument in threads like this, or do you fundamentally disagree that Apple should be trying to defend any of these patents, trade dress etc.?
The biggest problem with all of this is that Apple should never have been granted such general/generic patents, and chances are the legal system will make sure that no one ever does again.
The biggest problem with all of this is that Apple should never have been granted such general/generic patents, and chances are the legal system will make sure that no one ever does again.
Umm, that was a glaring non-answer.
I'm curious what your view is too as well as your rationale, since you're one on the very few here who have extensive experience with both OS's on so many devices.
They were? They sell it in Australia now?
Yes they do. Pay attention. http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...to_appeal.html
No they don't (not yet)..
Pay attention.
Australian High Court Justice Dyson Heydon on Thursday announced the nationwide ban of Samsung's tablet will remain in effect until Dec. 9,
Umm, that was a glaring non-answer.
I'm curious what your view is too as well as your rationale, since you're one on the very few here who have extensive experience with both OS's on so many devices.
Disappointed, but, on reflection, not that surprised. DaHarder's posts tend to hammer on repetitively with very narrow talking points, rather than engage the wider questions. That answer came across as simply evasive, which is a shame because I'd really like to hear his honest opinion.
Disappointed, but, on reflection, not that surprised. DaHarder's posts tend to hammer on repetitively with very narrow talking points, rather than engage the wider questions. That answer came across as simply evasive, which is a shame because I'd really like to hear his honest opinion.
Honestly... I really don't care if you're 'disappointed' or not, as I feel absolutely zero obligation to any of you hostile, closed-minded, brand-biased, talking-point-spewing cronies that likely just received your first iPod Touch 8gb for your 12th birthday and all of a sudden think that you're gadget experts.
FACT: I merely offered a brief answer to the questions to be reflective of the fact that I don't care which company behaves in the manner that Apple has, It's Wrong, and I find it Anti-Compeptive... which mirrors my position throughout this article's comment section.
Anyway... To answer your specific questions:
-- Do you think that the copying accusations leveled against Samsung are completely unfounded:
No, and I never said as much, only that Apple should never have been granted the rights to such general/generic design elements in the first place.
-- That they (Samsung) have copied to some extent but within the boundaries of common practice:
Absolutely Not... Samsung had numerous devices, as did other companies, that had the general design characteristic of the iPad/iPad2 long before (many years in most cases) either device was ever seen/released.
-- That they (Samsung) have actually overstepped the mark in some areas:
No.. They haven't, given that the majority of the allegations are (again) so general/generic that essentially ALL modern touch-screen devices share them.
Have A Nice Day... or not (I really don't care).
There are definitely some closed-minded contributors on this site, but two observations: (1) not everyone is, as the range of posts attests to, and (2) you don't help your argument by appearing completely closed-minded yourself much of the time. Sorry - disregard - as you keep saying, you don't care.
Thanks, though, for trying to elaborate, although your apparent assumption that I was trying to put words in your mouth was incorrect - I was trying to get you to say what you thought. It didn't really help anyway, since you appear to claim contradictory positions in your answers: no - you don't think the copying claims are unfounded, and no, you don't think that they have copied at all.
Probably not worth continuing this conversation as the thread is old and you have already answered my more fundamental question.
Honestly... I really don't care if you're 'disappointed' or not, as I feel absolutely zero obligation to any of you hostile, closed-minded, brand-biased, talking-point-spewing cronies that likely just received your first iPod Touch 8gb for your 12th birthday and all of a sudden think that you're gadget experts.
FACT: I merely offered a brief answer to the questions to be reflective of the fact that I don't care which company behaves in the manner that Apple has, It's Wrong, and I find it Anti-Compeptive... which mirrors my position throughout this article's comment section.
Anyway... To answer your specific questions:
-- Do you think that the copying accusations leveled against Samsung are completely unfounded:
No, and I never said as much, only that Apple should never have been granted the rights to such general/generic design elements in the first place.
-- That they (Samsung) have copied to some extent but within the boundaries of common practice:
Absolutely Not... Samsung had numerous devices, as did other companies, that had the general design characteristic of the iPad/iPad2 long before (many years in most cases) either device was ever seen/released.
-- That they (Samsung) have actually overstepped the mark in some areas:
No.. They haven't, given that the majority of the allegations are (again) so general/generic that essentially ALL modern touch-screen devices share them.
Have A Nice Day... or not (I really don't care).
What a strange response. You join a discussion group and then get offended when I ask your opinion? While you certainly shouldn't feel obligated to anyone, if you are just here to pontificate, rather than interacting, then your contributions really are as pointless as your critics keep saying. I thought there might be more to it - my apologies for being interested. I don't care if you care whether I'm disappointed any more than you care what I think. Mutual disregard is fine if that's what you want.
There are definitely some closed-minded contributors on this site, but two observations: (1) not everyone is, as the range of posts attests to, and (2) you don't help your argument by appearing completely closed-minded yourself much of the time. Sorry - disregard - as you keep saying, you don't care.
Thanks, though, for trying to elaborate, although your apparent assumption that I was trying to put words in your mouth was incorrect - I was trying to get you to say what you thought. It didn't really help anyway, since you appear to claim contradictory positions in your answers: no - you don't think the copying claims are unfounded, and no, you don't think that they have copied at all.
Probably not worth continuing this conversation as the thread is old and you have already answered my more fundamental question.
Given that I'd essentially addressed your various inquiries throughout this thread/article, I simply felt no need to reiterate every single point simply because you failed to do your own research.
Of anyone on AI, I am likely the least 'closed minded' of them all as I do own/use/appreciate dozens-upon-dozens of Apple products but in no, way, shape or form conform the the 'Cult of Apple' mentality so pervasive on Apple sites which dictates that no unkind word be spoken of their 'beloved' Apple - even when warranted.
My answer is what it is, and I stand behind it 100%... e.g. Yes, there are similarities between all of these touch-screen devices, and NO - Apple should never have been granted rights to such general/generic design elements in the first place.
If those responses are not to your liking... TOUGH! The world does not revolve around your every thought, and belief on these matters - No matter how much you (subtly) try to denigrate and belittle said responses.
Anyway - I had read the entire thread before I posted, and no, you had not addressed those questions in my opinion, which is why I posed them. The content of nearly all your posts comprised (as usual) photos or references to products or concepts that you think constitute prior art or design separation on quite specific aspects of the copying debate, or complaints about the granting of over-broad rights. That's fine. I understand your position on the legal/rights issues. What I had never seen you post, here, or before for that matter, was an actual simple opinion on whether you thought Samsung/Google had in any way copied Apple, legally addressable or not. Whether the hardware or hardware/software combination was too close or not. Basically whether you think there is any merit in the accusations of copying (as opposed to the lawsuits and patent disputes). I view those as questions as distinctly different questions.
So now you have answered half the question, sort of. You think there are similarities. No surprise there. But the basic question remains - "do you think Samsung copied Apple"? - not "should Apple have been granted those rights"? I'm still curious, but coming to the realization that you don't want to answer that one. No problem.
I'm with you to some extent on the over-broadness of the rights. However, if Apple believe, as obviously they do, that Samsung copied Apple's products to an unreasonable degree in order to try to capitalize on some of Apple's success, it would probably be foolish of them, if not downright negligent, as a publicly traded company, not to use the legal avenues that are open to them to protect their product identities. Different issue.
Given that I'd essentially addressed your various inquiries throughout this thread/article, I simply felt no need to reiterate every single point simply because you failed to do your own research.
Of anyone on AI, I am likely the least 'closed minded' of them all as I do own/use/appreciate dozens-upon-dozens of Apple products but in no, way, shape or form conform the the 'Cult of Apple' mentality so pervasive on Apple sites which dictates that no unkind word be spoken of their 'beloved' Apple - even when warranted.
My answer is what it is, and I stand behind it 100%... e.g. Yes, there are similarities between all of these touch-screen devices, and NO - Apple should never have been granted rights to such general/generic design elements in the first place.
If those responses are not to your liking... TOUGH! The world does not revolve around your every thought, and belief on these matters - No matter how much you (subtly) try to denigrate and belittle said responses.