Apple's latest patent suit against Samsung seen as its strongest case yet

123468

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 144
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,733member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Shidell View Post


    The comical part of this forum is that if the reverse was in gear, and Google (or any of Android's manufacturers) were suing Apple, you would all cry foul.



    If Apple had done to them what they are doing to Apple, sure.



    But they aren't.



    I refer you back to the post that was just three before yours:



    Quote:

    You see how different and interesting phones and tablets were before the iPhone and iPad, respectively?



    THEY WERE ALL INNOVATING BACK THEN. ALL OF THEM. As much as all of those devices sucked, that was the golden age of innovation.



    Now ONE company is. ONE. And people still whine that Apple should "focus on innovating instead of suing".



    If you still don't get it, go find the post - there are pictures. If you still don't get it.......
  • Reply 102 of 144
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Shidell View Post


    I've already proven how slide to unlock was done before Apple did it.



    I love how the fandroids present things that aren't even close to being true - and don't understand the difference.



    The link you sited did show a side to side sweep, but it did not have slide to unlock.



    Apple didn't patent a sidewards slide like your video showed. They patented a very specific unlocking mechanism - which your video didn't show.



    Better luck next time.
  • Reply 103 of 144
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Galbi View Post


    Stop trying to carry this argument away from design and into the functionality. They are two completely different things. The pictures are comparing the designs of the devices, NOT functions or capabilities.



    Both, actually. Granted, the phone image does not, but in the case of the tablets, the argument can easily be made for both UI and hardware design.
  • Reply 104 of 144
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,733member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Shidell View Post


    You just validated my point. You are so emotionally attached to Apple that you feel they're always right, and everyone else is always wrong.



    Perhaps your so religious in your you can't possibly acknowledge that Apple is right - other manufacturers are blatantly ripping them off?



    Sometimes the simplest explanation is actually the correct one.



    Scratch that, the vast majority of the time the simplest explanation is the correct one!



    Quote:

    Litigation like this is nonsense.



    Having the ability to defend your inventions is nonsense? Wow - what a sucky world we would live in if you had your way...



    Quote:

    Slide to unlock has been around forever.

    Patenting a method of transferring bits in order to relay data? Yes, that is absolutely every digital device in existence.



    Thank you Mr. Expert. You should post your contact information so Samsung can take advantage of your obvious knowledge.



    Quote:

    Everyone knows these types of patents (and patent cases) are bogus.



    Yes - everyone knows
  • Reply 105 of 144
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,733member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DrDoppio View Post


    Do you understand that correlation does not imply causation?



    Sure. I also understand "damn convenient" - and apparently so do at least some courts with the injunctions Apple has won. If Apple's complaints were completely bogus as some would have us believe, they wouldn't have made the headway they have so far...
  • Reply 106 of 144
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,733member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Braden99 View Post


    Yeah but their are definately design elements from earlier Windows slates, that suggest this HP slate could have evoved from them, irrespective whether the iPhone and iPad came out



    Yeah, but theres an inconvenient rub - the iPad shipped!



    Oh snap...
  • Reply 107 of 144
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Galbi View Post


    A person is lying when he/she believes one truth to be true yet consistently makes statements that are otherwise. However, in this case, I'm not lying. I firmly believe that Samsung was the first to launch a screen-is-the-main interface device in the mobile communication market.



    You don't believe that the buttons were secondary input options to the pathetic single-touch resistive touchscreen you are just trying to create an argument ? and poorly ? regarding your hatred for Apple. Therefore you are lying. You aren't even lying to yourself as you know full well what you're doing.



    You chose that pic because a finger is touching the screen yet you could have picked plenty of other Palm-based devices that have less buttons on the front. Of course they won't help you make you split tongue argument so why bother, right?



    You keep saying that design is the only important aspect, that functionality has no barring yet it's the functionality that forms the design that made the iPhone and Apple the success they are today. Hate all you want but you're just fighting a battle you can't win.
  • Reply 108 of 144
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post


    Sure. I also understand "damn convenient" - and apparently so do at least some courts with the injunctions Apple has won. If Apple's complaints were completely bogus as some would have us believe, they wouldn't have made the headway they have so far...



    What headway? For all the cases they've won, they've lost enough too. I think you'd be hard pressed to say Apple is making a return on the money they're investing in these suits--and that's just in terms of the cases they're winning.



    Then factor in the cases they're losing.



    The litigation is out of control, and nobody's benefiting from it.
  • Reply 109 of 144
    neo42neo42 Posts: 287member
    oh hai look it's another AI android trolling article.



    Want iPad 3 news.

    Do not want preemptive celebration of Apple's patent trolling.
  • Reply 110 of 144
    I think this should be added as relative to this discussion: http://www.businessweek.com/news/201...medium=twitter
  • Reply 111 of 144
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,733member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Braden99 View Post


    It's funny how defensive Apple fans (or possibly shareholders) are of the almighty Apple.



    It couldn't possibly have anything to do with since day one of owning my first Mac in the 80's, being told that Apple was going to fail. From the beleaguered '90s to today when the same idiots are predicting Apple's imminent doom as Apple's stock hits $500.



    Honestly I'm surprised most long time Apple users like myself are as calm as we are!



    Quote:

    I love a range of different devices across the years, from a vareity of manufactuers, but I understand the process of design, nothing is created in a perfectly insulated vacuum chamber - including the iPhone and iPad.



    Theres a difference between creating in a vacuum, creating and building on others and outright theft.



    Thankfully we don't have to rely on pundits or Internet forums to sort out the differences - we have these things called "courts". Pontification is cheap.



    Prime example - the myth Apple stole from Xerox. They didn't - they paid Xerox for access the technology. Indeed, as we found out more detail through the biography, Steve Jobs berated Xerox management for sitting on the GUI and mouse and not developing it!



    So yes, creating is important - but creation without execution is pretty meaningless.



    Apple excels at execution - as many of their competitors, especially those who were new to competing with them and overly dismissive of them, are finding out.
  • Reply 112 of 144
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,733member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Shidell View Post


    As for my second argument, you'll see that I'm pushing for a paradigm change, where you can install the OS of your choice, and are no longer locked into an OS by carrier or vendor.



    Good for you. I'm pushing for retaining the Apple model as a choice. I like the stability, predictability and reliability of Apple's "walled garden".



    If you don't then fine - but stop trying to remove my choice simply because you don't agree with it.
  • Reply 113 of 144
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,733member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    Apple just happened to be the first one to do both of those things, but at that time, that's what EVERYONE was just about to do.



    I don't know why I bother to participate in these threads - just masochistic I suppose. Don't bother hoping he'll grasp it. His type couldn't grok objectivity if it bit 'em in the ass.



    Link to a wikipedia article - sure. Comprehend? Doubtful
  • Reply 114 of 144
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post


    Good for you. I'm pushing for retaining the Apple model as a choice. I like the stability, predictability and reliability of Apple's "walled garden".



    If you don't then fine - but stop trying to remove my choice simply because you don't agree with it.



    I think you've got that backwards. I don't want to remove Apple. I want Apple to try to stop removing it's competition for the wrong reasons.
  • Reply 115 of 144
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


    Samsung had a multi-touch capacitance touchscreen phone in 2002? It's a wonder why they had to copy Apple then¡



    The keyword is touchscreen, it existed before the iPhone. No it wasn't capacitive nor multitouch but nonetheless a touchscreen. Apple took the touchscreen to another level. Apple has led technology in the smartphone/tablet market and companies followed suit. Look at TVs, they're all flat panel now, no company was stupid enough to say "screw that, we're sticking with CRTs" no because they'd be out of business.



    I'll be surprised if they are granted the injunction, it'll essentially kill the Nexus. The people not running a custom ROM will likely return them.
  • Reply 116 of 144
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,733member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by thataveragejoe View Post


    Continual denial and acting like Google never thought of a touch phone until Steve rolled one out on stage is simply ridiculous.



    Yes it is since they more than likely got the idea when a certain Google CEO who also happened to be an Apple board member got a sneak peak. It's obvious they were working on it way before Steven came on stage with it because they didn't have to wait!
  • Reply 117 of 144
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post


    I don't know why I bother to participate in these threads - just masochistic I suppose. Don't bother hoping he'll grasp it. His type couldn't grok objectivity if it bit 'em in the ass.



    I see that you're attempting to be objective. In a situation less clear-cut, I'd agree with you in a heartbeat over taking a side.



    But when it's so blindingly obvious that what I've said is the case, it's difficult to call anything else objectivity.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Shidell View Post


    I want Apple to try to stop removing it's competition for the wrong reasons.



    If 'everyone is copying our stuff instead of making their own' isn't the right reason, what is?
  • Reply 118 of 144
    gordygordy Posts: 1,004member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post


    Er, did the 3 to 5 year timeline referenced in the article totally fly over....



    No need for the arrogance. I said traction, not a be all end all win for Apple. There has been nothing here, despite traction being gained in other parts of the world.
  • Reply 119 of 144
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    If 'everyone is copying our stuff instead of making their own' isn't the right reason, what is?



    Essentially, this is correct. In the industry, everyone oversteps their boundaries and infringes on other companies.



    The caveat however has been that it's generally accepted, as progress would literally grind to a halt if all the litigation that was possible was suddenly presented.



    Litigation this way is relatively new; it's been propagated by Apple and now other manufacturers are forced to litigate in return, and now we're seeing an offensive by those once targeted by Apple now attacking Apple directly (case in point, Samsung).



    If the major technology players litigated all at once--MS, Apple, Google, IBM, Motorola, Samsung, HTC, RIM, Nortel (even though their patents were approved as sold today), etc., we'd have court cases booked for hundreds of years with simultaneous arguments that patents are infringing all over the place.



    If this pace continues, I fear this is what we'll see.



    And if that's what happens, then it's basically going to wreak havoc on the industry and then we all lose.



    Apple's already under fire in return in Germany. Certainly that isn't what you want to see, is it? Maybe you don't care if you don't live in Germany, but I think it's stupid.



    Companies aren't crawling out of the woodwork to litigate Apple, so why does Apple feel the need to go on the offensive? What happens when companies do go on the offensive?
  • Reply 120 of 144
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by umrk_lab View Post


    you forgot the Star Trek Next Generation thing !











    Wow. I didn't know that they had iPads on the USS Enterprise!
Sign In or Register to comment.