I wonder, if Apple releases a smaller iPad, assuming it will look like a mini iPad, will they then sue Samsung over the Tab 7 and or Tab 8.9????? These two tablets look exactly like the 10.1 which has been found to infringe. I honestly can see Apple doing this.
Even better, Samsung sues Apple. If the 10.1 copies the iPad and the 7 and 8.9 copy the 10.1, then a mini iPad that looks like the 10.1 will be copying the 7 and or 8.9. Now that would be irony at its finest.
They can hate apple, but look up Phones and Tablets in May 2007 and see what was out there....CRAP....Competition is a good thing...Stealing NOT SO MUCH....
not really. this is just a prelim. It's possible that the final call could still go against Apple's arguments and they might be forced to pay damages to Samsung over this injunction
That would be absolutely hilarious. I hope Apple gets seriously burned over this.
Apple is winning the competition in the market, and they do have a better product, but antics like this just make me angry at Apple for not playing fair.
Apple has had a smaller Ipad in Samsung's factories for years. Samsung stole the 7 inch from apple too. Just because Apple doesn't sell it doesn't mean Apple hasn't made one. Remember the Ipad was designed before the Iphone but not released first.
Apple has had a smaller Ipad in Samsung's factories for years. Samsung stole the 7 inch from apple too. Just because Apple doesn't sell it doesn't mean Apple hasn't made one. Remember the Ipad was designed before the Iphone but not released first.
Yet somehow, after all these years no pictures leaked? Ooooooohkkkkkkk.
I hope Apple gets seriously burned over this. Apple is winning the competition in the market, and they do have a better product, but antics like this just make me angry at Apple for not playing fair.
Samsung copied Apple's products and made counterfeits, but you blames Apple. lol.
$2.6 million bond. That tells you all you need to know - the Galaxy has such dismal sales that if the decision gets overturned that's all Apple has to pay for damages.
The Galaxy tab(original version) was a blatant copy and well deserve to be banned. The tab 2 actually does not look like iPad at all, it is so ugly and cheap plastic looking, I doubt they would sell many, ban or no ban. Did you see that giant "Samsung" on the side of the tab 2, i am sure noe their lawyers would have no trouble to tell which is not iPad , and looks like they are telling you not to hold it in portrait mode, Btw I think ICS on tablet is just incredibly cumbersome, that is the weakest point of Tab 2.
$2.6 million bond. That tells you all you need to know - the Galaxy has such dismal sales that if the decision gets overturned that's all Apple has to pay for damages.
what the losses actually are, and what hte judge allows are not always the same thing.
Apple pioneered the modern phone and the modern tablet as we know it. While everybody else was stuck in the previous century, making crap products, hideous looking devices, and not very user friendly phones, Apple was busy innovating and developing revolutionary multi touch screen devices which would eventually disrupt and change the entire industry. Apple spent years on research and development that went into these products.
As soon as these amazing and revolutionary new Apple devices came out, some other companies said, holy fucking shit, we're going to have to come out with our own versions of those, otherwise we're so doomed! And one after another, most of the other companies started to ape Apple's breakthrough devices, and it wasn't long until virtually all phones and tablets on the market were based on Apple's initial breakthrough design and technology. Those companies that foolishly ignored how significant Apple's innovations were are in deep shit today. Just ask Nokia or RIM about that, or even better, ask one of the many thousands who have gotten laid off.
When you come out with a new product or a new idea that is unlike anything that came before, you patent those ideas, so that all of the time, money and research that went into it is not lost. People should be rewarded for their hard work and their willingness to take bold risks and to go where no other tech company has gone before. And Apple has done just that.
So in conclusion, go suck it Fandroids. I wouldn't even buy an Android tablet for my dog, if I had a dog.
Where are all the gloating Fandroids from the past couple of weeks who had it in for Apple, and how it had never won in court, and why it should give up defending its IP, and why Apple's lawyer Sewell should be fired, etc. etc?
This is merely getting started, folks. The third-rate copycats have it coming. One by one.
Heh, this is like winning an injunction against iPad 1, as the 10.1 is almost 1 year old. Samsung is selling the new version with the same modifications they did in Germany to thwart that injunction.
That's not the point. First, Apple can easily file to extend the injunction to cover products that did not exist at the time of the original filing.
More importantly, it sends a message to Samsung and others that slavish copying will not be tolerated.
In fact, Samsung appears to have already gotten that message. After years of making such close copies of Apple products that even their attorneys couldn't tell the difference, Samsung appears to have changed their tune - and the Galaxy SIII is not such a close copy of Apple's products. And that is Apple's ultimate goal in this litigation. Stopping Samsung from selling a few thousand Tabs is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. Stopping Samsung from making slavish copies is a massive win.
Comments
Your boyfriend has some serious quality concern issues then, and I'm not just talking about the tablet... (>_<)
Even better, Samsung sues Apple. If the 10.1 copies the iPad and the 7 and 8.9 copy the 10.1, then a mini iPad that looks like the 10.1 will be copying the 7 and or 8.9. Now that would be irony at its finest.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
not really. this is just a prelim. It's possible that the final call could still go against Apple's arguments and they might be forced to pay damages to Samsung over this injunction
That would be absolutely hilarious. I hope Apple gets seriously burned over this.
Apple is winning the competition in the market, and they do have a better product, but antics like this just make me angry at Apple for not playing fair.
Yet somehow, after all these years no pictures leaked? Ooooooohkkkkkkk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkVader
I hope Apple gets seriously burned over this. Apple is winning the competition in the market, and they do have a better product, but antics like this just make me angry at Apple for not playing fair.
Samsung copied Apple's products and made counterfeits, but you blames Apple. lol.
Apple keeps the secrets it wants to. Nobody had ever seen a Macbook Pro retina design until two weeks ago either.
$2.6 million bond. That tells you all you need to know - the Galaxy has such dismal sales that if the decision gets overturned that's all Apple has to pay for damages.
Did you see that giant "Samsung" on the side of the tab 2, i am sure noe their lawyers would have no trouble to tell which is not iPad
I am not sure that's terribly boast-worthy.
they got the big mac, i got the big mick. their buns have sesame seeds, my buns have no seeds.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wurm5150
An injunction on what? Like 5 Galaxy Tabs collecting dust at Best Buy? Hardly anyone is buying that thing anyway..
Being that Samsung have moved onto the Galaxy Tab 2, its a little bit of a pointless victory.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
$2.6 million bond. That tells you all you need to know - the Galaxy has such dismal sales that if the decision gets overturned that's all Apple has to pay for damages.
what the losses actually are, and what hte judge allows are not always the same thing.
Samsung will likely lose nothing.
Go suck it Fandroids. Go eat a Richard.
Apple pioneered the modern phone and the modern tablet as we know it. While everybody else was stuck in the previous century, making crap products, hideous looking devices, and not very user friendly phones, Apple was busy innovating and developing revolutionary multi touch screen devices which would eventually disrupt and change the entire industry. Apple spent years on research and development that went into these products.
As soon as these amazing and revolutionary new Apple devices came out, some other companies said, holy fucking shit, we're going to have to come out with our own versions of those, otherwise we're so doomed! And one after another, most of the other companies started to ape Apple's breakthrough devices, and it wasn't long until virtually all phones and tablets on the market were based on Apple's initial breakthrough design and technology. Those companies that foolishly ignored how significant Apple's innovations were are in deep shit today. Just ask Nokia or RIM about that, or even better, ask one of the many thousands who have gotten laid off.
When you come out with a new product or a new idea that is unlike anything that came before, you patent those ideas, so that all of the time, money and research that went into it is not lost. People should be rewarded for their hard work and their willingness to take bold risks and to go where no other tech company has gone before. And Apple has done just that.
So in conclusion, go suck it Fandroids. I wouldn't even buy an Android tablet for my dog, if I had a dog.
Where are all the gloating Fandroids from the past couple of weeks who had it in for Apple, and how it had never won in court, and why it should give up defending its IP, and why Apple's lawyer Sewell should be fired, etc. etc?
This is merely getting started, folks. The third-rate copycats have it coming. One by one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cycomiko
Being that Samsung have moved onto the Galaxy Tab 2, its a little bit of a pointless victory.
While you comfort yourself with that kind of pathetic rationalization, know that it's probably just getting started.
That's not the point. First, Apple can easily file to extend the injunction to cover products that did not exist at the time of the original filing.
More importantly, it sends a message to Samsung and others that slavish copying will not be tolerated.
In fact, Samsung appears to have already gotten that message. After years of making such close copies of Apple products that even their attorneys couldn't tell the difference, Samsung appears to have changed their tune - and the Galaxy SIII is not such a close copy of Apple's products. And that is Apple's ultimate goal in this litigation. Stopping Samsung from selling a few thousand Tabs is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. Stopping Samsung from making slavish copies is a massive win.